Subject | Re: Snit digest 123 / 2015-12-10 |
From | Sandman |
Date | 12/11/2015 07:23 (12/11/2015 07:23) |
Message-ID | <sandman-457d7b811c02bc4d87c765d64a55cb10@individual.net> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
Follows | Snit |
Followups | Snit (9h & 3m) > Sandman |
Yes, it does. Entourage will display new threads as new threads and since they lack the References header will not be displayed as a child to an earlier post.Sandman
The above is an outright and provable lie (hence the troll counter).This was owl's post: <ghj30.5ppihqh@rooftop.invalid>That was a new thread, no quoted material. It was not a response to an earlier post and as such had nothing "snipped".Your response: <D28F2200.669CB%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>Added quoted material to owl's post that wasn't there and shouldn't be there in the original. You quote-forged the post to show something that poster never intended.Violation of point 3:3) Not add or alter the content of quoted materials in any way other than to snipSnit
Ah, my news reader does not track such.
If this is the case then I was, in deed, in error to assume it was a response to my post. I stand corrected.The point is that you explicitly and manually copied content from another post into your reply as quoted material, which regardless of how your newsreader "displays" it for you is disingenuous.
Where is your apology to owl?Sandman
I hereby invoke point number 5:5) If someone goofs give them a chance and note where you think they went astray.You "goofed" and I expect an explicit apology to owl momentarily.Snit
As have you, as noted.