From: "lee gilliland" <leeandalexis at hotmail.com>
To: WSFAlist at keithlynch.net
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Interesting Inventions
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 21:49:02 -0500
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

So let's all TRY (no obligation) to snip all but the last two?

----Original Message Follows----
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at keithlynch.net>
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
To: WSFAlist at keithlynch.net
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Interesting Inventions
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 21:47:07 -0500 (EST)

"Erica VD Ginter" <eginter at klgai.com> wrote:
 > {irrelevant material rudely snipped by an editor}

There's been quite enough of that.  It has made this list increasingly
difficult to follow.  Correct netiquette is to include a complete copy
of all previous messages in one's reply.

So the second message on this list should have included a complete
copy of the first message.  And the third message should have included
a complete copy of the first message plus a complete copy of the
second message (which itself also contained a complete copy of the
first message).  The fourth message should have contained complete
copies of the first message, the second message (which included the
first), and the third message (which included the second (which
included the first)) (which included the first).  Etc.

Since many of us are getting toward the age where Alzheimer's is a
real concern, this simple courtesy is increasingly, umm, what was I
talking about again?
--
Keith F. Lynch - kfl at keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable.  Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.

_________________________________________________________________