Re: I have a problem with this:

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Jenn, May 12, 2010.

  1. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    Sherm Pendley wrote:
    > Sherm Pendley <> writes:
    >
    >> (Doug Miller) writes:
    >>
    >>> In article <>, Sherm Pendley
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>> "Jonathan N. Little" <> writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> I think we can all understand that sherm-- is just being a jerk.
    >>>>
    >>>> No, I'm simply of the opinion that one word isn't enough to
    >>>> warrant a full delimited .sig block. It's the people who are
    >>>> barking orders and calling me names that are being rude here.
    >>>
    >>> You _already have_ a delimited sig block. The problem is that this
    >>> text
    >>>> sherm--
    >>> should be in it, but isn't.

    >>
    >> No, the problem is that you don't understand the difference between
    >> fact and opinion. "Sherm--" should be in my .sig block IN YOUR
    >> OPINION. I have my own opinion on that, and I'm just as entitled to
    >> it as you are to your own.

    >
    > Case in point, this thread from another group:
    >
    >
    > <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.perl.misc/browse_thread/thread/05fe89381987988e#>
    >
    > Four messages have been posted in it as of the time I'm writing this.
    > Of the three people who have a delimited signature block, two of them
    > write their name above the sig, same as I do. Neither of them is a
    > usenet newbie; one in particular has been a regular poster there for
    > at least fifteen years. This group is (in)famous for being harsh when
    > it comes to netiquette, and no one is saying a word about it.
    >
    > Clearly, this is not the black-and-white, good-and-evil, right-and-
    > wrong issue that y'all are trying to make it out to be. I happen to
    > think it's acceptable to write one's name outside of a .sig block.
    > It's a subjective matter of opinion, and mine differs from yours - get
    > over it.
    >
    > sherm--


    sherm... I've been reading this exchange and am a bit gun shy here myself.
    Anyway ... I think some things are just like you said ... I have no problem
    with the way you do your signature. You should do what you want to do.

    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
    http://pqlr.org/bbs/
    Jenn, May 12, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jenn

    Peter Guest

    In article <hsf28c$mms$-september.org>,
    areswhatthisemailisanyway says...
    > Sherm Pendley wrote:
    > > Sherm Pendley <> writes:
    > >
    > >> (Doug Miller) writes:
    > >>
    > >>> In article <>, Sherm Pendley
    > >>> <> wrote:
    > >>>> "Jonathan N. Little" <> writes:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>> I think we can all understand that sherm-- is just being a jerk.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> No, I'm simply of the opinion that one word isn't enough to
    > >>>> warrant a full delimited .sig block. It's the people who are
    > >>>> barking orders and calling me names that are being rude here.
    > >>>
    > >>> You _already have_ a delimited sig block. The problem is that this
    > >>> text
    > >>>> sherm--
    > >>> should be in it, but isn't.
    > >>
    > >> No, the problem is that you don't understand the difference between
    > >> fact and opinion. "Sherm--" should be in my .sig block IN YOUR
    > >> OPINION. I have my own opinion on that, and I'm just as entitled to
    > >> it as you are to your own.

    > >
    > > Case in point, this thread from another group:
    > >
    > >
    > > <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.perl.misc/browse_thread/thread/05fe89381987988e#>
    > >
    > > Four messages have been posted in it as of the time I'm writing this.
    > > Of the three people who have a delimited signature block, two of them
    > > write their name above the sig, same as I do. Neither of them is a
    > > usenet newbie; one in particular has been a regular poster there for
    > > at least fifteen years. This group is (in)famous for being harsh when
    > > it comes to netiquette, and no one is saying a word about it.
    > >
    > > Clearly, this is not the black-and-white, good-and-evil, right-and-
    > > wrong issue that y'all are trying to make it out to be. I happen to
    > > think it's acceptable to write one's name outside of a .sig block.
    > > It's a subjective matter of opinion, and mine differs from yours - get
    > > over it.
    > >
    > > sherm--

    >
    > sherm... I've been reading this exchange and am a bit gun shy here myself.
    > Anyway ... I think some things are just like you said ... I have no problem
    > with the way you do your signature. You should do what you want to do.
    >
    >


    Some 'correctly written' NG software used to be able to remove the sig
    block from a follow-up automatically. As long as the sig block was in
    the correct format, of course and thus saving the poster from having to
    do so. No biggy. However, that was in the days when people were more
    anal about these things. These days, I'm just glad we still have a
    usenet to post to.

    --
    Pete Ives
    Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email
    Peter, May 12, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jenn

    Jenn Guest

    Peter wrote:
    > In article <hsf28c$mms$-september.org>,
    > areswhatthisemailisanyway says...
    >>> Clearly, this is not the black-and-white, good-and-evil, right-and-
    >>> wrong issue that y'all are trying to make it out to be. I happen to
    >>> think it's acceptable to write one's name outside of a .sig block.
    >>> It's a subjective matter of opinion, and mine differs from yours -
    >>> get over it.
    >>>
    >>> sherm--

    >>
    >> sherm... I've been reading this exchange and am a bit gun shy here
    >> myself. Anyway ... I think some things are just like you said ... I
    >> have no problem with the way you do your signature. You should do
    >> what you want to do.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Some 'correctly written' NG software used to be able to remove the sig
    > block from a follow-up automatically. As long as the sig block was in
    > the correct format, of course and thus saving the poster from having
    > to do so. No biggy. However, that was in the days when people were
    > more anal about these things. These days, I'm just glad we still
    > have a usenet to post to.


    I'm enjoying Usenet since I've been here. It wasn't near as bad as some
    people painted it to be.
    You have been one of the more pleasant people I've encountered since I've
    been on this newsgroup, Peter. Thank you for that.

    --
    Jenn (from Oklahoma)
    Jenn, May 12, 2010
    #3
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?cmdyYW5kaWRpZXI=?=

    Can I have base class derived from System.Web.UI.Page have design

    =?Utf-8?B?cmdyYW5kaWRpZXI=?=, Jul 22, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    465
    Patrice
    Jul 22, 2005
  2. okaminer
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    294
    okaminer
    Aug 1, 2005
  3. =?Utf-8?B?ZGF2aWQ=?=
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    5,467
    Kevin Spencer
    Aug 18, 2005
  4. =?Utf-8?B?RGF2aWQgVGhpZWxlbg==?=

    Does a resource have to have all phrases in it?

    =?Utf-8?B?RGF2aWQgVGhpZWxlbg==?=, Jan 30, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    365
    Neil Ni
    Feb 3, 2006
  5. Mitch
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    859
    rySource
    Mar 18, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page