Dang, here I go again, being off-topic and all. Yet, it bugs me that I'm one of the few, maybe the only one, who tidies up the attribution lines by cutting out all the crap that some people put there.

Does it help in reducing the clutter in posts that have a number of attributions, or should I quit abbreviating them so that everyone can enjoy the supposedly clever remarks and other superfluous information that goes on and on until there's (sic) more attribution lines than used for what is being said?
Yours submissively,

Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
1 2 3 4 5 6
Dang, here I go again, being off-topic and all. Yet, it bugs me that I'm one of the few, maybe the only one, who tidies up the attribution lines by cutting out all the crap that some people put there.

Hey! Not only do I tidy up attributions, but I cite only the sections I'm responding to. Do you stil love me?

Dena Jo
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
Dang, here I go again, being off-topic and all. Yet, ... cutting out all the crap that some people put there.

Hey! Not only do I tidy up attributions, but I cite only the sections I'm responding to. Do you stil love me?

Ah, a girl after me own heart. Or are you?

Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Ah, a girl after me own heart. Or are you? Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/

Dunno. What happened to the "Yours submissively"? I like a man who submits...

Dena Jo
(Just kidding, guys!)
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
Ah, a girl after me own heart. Or are you?

Dunno. What happened to the "Yours submissively"? I like a man who submits...

Hah! No handcuffs on me, m'kay? I submit that you may have misinterpreted my intentions, but just ever so slightly.

Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Hey! Not only do I tidy up attributions, but I cite only the sections I'm responding to. Do you stil love me?

Ah, a girl after me own heart. Or are you?

You're slipping, Skitt, and missed two OY!able items. Dena Jo not only misspelled "still" but she also forgot "also" after "but I" (as in the standard "not only ... but also" construction). Looks like love does make one blind.
Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/

Still posting your URL? "Some" might consider it "out of order."

Reinhold (Rey) Aman
http://www.maledicta.org /
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
You're slipping, Skitt, and missed two OY!able items. Dena Jo not only misspelled "still" but she also forgot "also" after "but I" (as in the standard "not only ... but also" construction). Looks like love does make one blind.

I've no excuse for the "stil," but the "not only ... but also" got blown in the rewrite. Still (hehehe), I need someone to keep me on my toes around here! Thank God you're willing to take time out of your business schedule with Padraig to bring this to my attention.
Skitt (in Hayward, California) www.geocities.com/opus731/

Still posting your URL? "Some" might consider it "out of order."

Oh.

Dena Jo
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
} Dang, here I go again, being off-topic and all. Yet, it bugs me that I'm } one of the few, maybe the only one, who tidies up the attribution lines by } cutting out all the crap that some people put there.

You're "tidying up" other people's attribution lines? You're saying that they said something your way, rather than the way they said it? Do you at least give some indication that you have changed what they said (some dots or indicator)? I guess I'm not the one to ask, because I usually don't even reformat other people's text, not even the position of partial initial lines with respect to the following line, other than to shorten it to the part I'm responding to.
} Does it help in reducing the clutter in posts that have a number of } attributions, or should I quit abbreviating them so that everyone can enjoy } the supposedly clever remarks and other superfluous information that goes on } and on until there's (sic) more attribution lines than used for what is } being said?
Are deeply nested quotes really necessary? Can you quote just the last person's comments and wrestle only with the concept of modifying just the one attribution line?
Myself, I include just the date-time information and the name and e-mail address, and that rarely takes more than the one line. I like to see both of those in postings I'm reading, so I can tell when someone is picking up a months-old thread and so I can respond by e-mail wwithout a lot of poking around. I don't see any point to reproducing message-IDs in the attribution line, because that's usually information available in the headers. I also don't get too cute with the default "wrote".

But, sensitive as I am to accusations of being "poorly formatted", I make sure I have a well-formed sig flag and as few lines after that as the situation calls for (which is rarely more than the four that my newsreader program allows me without taunting).

R. J. Valentine
Warning: Your signature is longer than 4 lines. Since signatures usually do not transport any useful information, they should be as short as possible.
...
}>
}> Skitt (in Hayward, California)
}> www.geocities.com/opus731/
}
} Still posting your URL? "Some" might consider it "out of order."

Who? Why? It (at least originally) had a space after the two hyphens (though I notice that you say here that he wrote it without the space). There are no more than four lines of it. It seems fine to me. I think I looked at it a while ago, and I don't recall anything that would offend even the rumored few who might object to second-hand sig commerciality. Innocent as the driven snow, he is. Nearly canonizable.

}
} Reinhold (Rey) Aman
} http://www.maledicta.org /
"Sigs: the best place for angle brackets in message text."
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Show more