I see, still suffering from the ID10t syndrome.

Whatever. Consider yourself blocked - I don't have time for your foibles.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact.

After furious head scratching, VanguardLH asked:

| "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" wrote in message
| ...
|
|
| And I will keep calling you on usenet *rule* rather than usenet
| *suggestions* - see your precious RFCs for a hint.
|
|
| --- REPLY SEPARATOR ---
| Only required because above poster used QUOTED-PRINTABLE format.
| When posting to newsgroups, do NOT use quoted-printable format.
| * Not all NNTP clients handle quoted-printable format.
| - Some users still use console-mode (non-GUI) NNTP clients.
| - The long lines may not wrap properly.
| - Scrolling is needed if the long line does not get wrapped.
| - The long line may get truncated at the window's width.
| - Quoted-printable format uses special character sequences for
| logical formatting. View the raw source of your post. Text-
| only clients may show that encoding when viewing your post.
| * Quoting levels get mangled, especially for multiple replies.
| * In replies, there is no clear delineation of content.
| - Cannot tell what content is from the original poster and
| what is from the respondent.
| - Makes impossible to determine who said what when a reply
| inserts comments inline with the quoted content.
| ---[end of comments]---
|
|
| And as long as you use quoted-printable format, I will have to
| continue using a reply delimiter line to differentiate your content
| from mine in my reply. Otherwise, how do YOU suggest differentiating
| between the original content in quoted-printable format from someone
| replies? Guess maybe? My reply delimiter also includes the reasons
| why quoted-printable format is stupid and inconsiderate for Usenet
| posting.
|
| Regarding the RFCs, quoted-printable is defined how to use it when
| composing a message. There is no RFC regarding how newsreaders will
| handle it when replying to posts that use it.
|
| So why aren't you violating other Usenet standards (whether de facto,
| like a sigdash line for a signature which is NOT specified by RFC, or
| by RFC)? I see you aren't posting in HTML format. Why is that, huh?
|
| I can see that we will pretty much agree to disagree. However, when
| replying to quoted-printable formatted posts, some means most be used
| to differentiate between original and reply content. I use a reply
| separator line. Of course, that doesn't help when trying to insert
| the reply inline with the original content, so sometimes I have to add
| the quoting character that you and others like you, especially Google
| Groupers, omit because of using quoted-printable format. You really
| want to lump yourself in with the [lack of] netiquette exhibited by
| Google Groupers?

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
wrote in message
...
I see, still suffering from the ID10t syndrome.

Whatever. Consider yourself blocked - I don't have time for your
foibles.



--- REPLY SEPARATOR ---
Only required because above poster used QUOTED-PRINTABLE format.
When posting to newsgroups, do NOT use quoted-printable format.
* Not all NNTP clients handle quoted-printable format.
- Some users still use console-mode (non-GUI) NNTP clients.
- The long lines may not wrap properly.
- Scrolling is needed if the long line does not get wrapped.
- The long line may get truncated at the window's width.
- Quoted-printable format uses special character sequences for
logical formatting. View the raw source of your post. Text-
only clients may show that encoding when viewing your post.
* Quoting levels get mangled, especially for multiple replies.
* In replies, there is no clear delineation of content.
- Cannot tell what content is from the original poster and
what is from the respondent.
- Makes impossible to determine who said what when a reply
inserts comments inline with the quoted content.
---[end of comments]---


Resorted to female logic. If you cannot argue the point, use
diversion or leave in a huff.

Thank you very much.

--�
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

|
| Whatever. Consider yourself blocked - I don't have time for your
| foible

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" What@ever wrote in message
...
Thank you very much.

--�
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

|
| Whatever. Consider yourself blocked - I don't have time for your
| foible


--- Reply Separator ---

Ah HA!!! Another Alan Connor wannabe claiming they will plonk someone
they don't like but never doing so, as though the threat of being
killfiled is really going to have an effect on the other party. GOTCHA!