On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:52:34 -0500, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:03:39 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:42:29 -0800, sf wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 12:56:10 -0500, blake murphy
>>>> > wrote:
>>
>>>>>in any case, people could edit better (including taking care with
>>>>>attributions), but it's not a major source of irritation for me.
>>>>
>>>> It's a major problem for me. Obviously they have no idea who said
>>>> what. If that's the case, then just cut out everything except what
>>>> you're responding to.
>>>
>>> well, all i can say is that you're swimming against the tide, here.
>>
>> I'm glad you understood what was being posted. I sure didn't. It
>> almost sounded like sf was saying that people should trim their posts so
>> that their replies make sense.
>>
>> "Sense" sounds like a good thing to me.
>
>i was referring to her advocacy of top-posting.
>
You starting to sound like a status quo conservative.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.