md5 wrote:
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> md5 wrote:
> [snip]
>
>>> I actually removed the parts I did not want in my response. So that is
>>> not really the same as loosing it, is that not so?
>
> [snip]
>
>> In the case of your reply to
>> Mike - out of the middle of a post - you do not show that Mike wrote
>> what you selected. That is a fault of OE, apparently, for a first-level
>> quote.
>>
> [snip]
>
>> The thing is, most people reading Usenet do not care for unattributed
>> quotes, so if your newsreader (OE) does not insert them, you should
>> attempt to do it manually.
>
> Beauregard, I can see you are a detail-oriented person.
That's probably right.
> So, I think you
> should go back to above-mentioned quote and look at what I herein am
> showing of it for you again. "I actually removed the parts I did not
> want...". In other words, OE inserts them just fine.
So then you are saying you actually snipped the attributes. Okay...
> You may want to
> get more familiar with other programs before attempting to make a
> comparison. I use several for different purposes as you can see.
Not to worry. I used to use OE6, prior to this century. I also used to
use Windows but gave that up as well about six years ago.
> Also, I think "most" persons posting regularly in usenet are savvy
> enough to follow a simple, start-up thread, such as the one that got you
> confused, to see who said what without needing it repeated.
The reason for maintaining attributes is primarily because news posts do
not necessarily propagate in the exact chronological order, nor
completely, that they were written. People use different NNTP servers;
sometimes posts are missed, held up, or simply disappear. Without the
attributes, you may not know who said what.
I was never confused.