Re: Why Do People Fall Down?

On Oct 29, 1:39 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
> I'll type slowly so you can follow along.
>
> First, it's customary and appropriate to quote /and attribute/ that to
which
> one replies.  Thus, my request of Mike to identify who wrote what is
> perfectly reasonable.  (When you add in things like kill-files, it makes
it
> even more understandable that your vaunted "tree display" doesn't always
> provide all relevant information.)

I don't know about kill-files, but I do know that some moderated NGs
even state that quoting is unnecessary due to thread-tree views and
googlegroups archives.

In this particular case, I think it was clear enough that we are
speaking about the utility of helmets in general, and being old
participants in the debate, I don't see why quoting was necessary.

> Sesond, it's dishonest to delete "inconvenient" material to hide context
and
> especially content.  In this little thread, Tom made a little crack
about
> helmets preventing traumatic brain injury and death.  Then in a
follow-up,
> he DELETED his own remark and only commented on the /death/ aspect,
leading
> someone reading only that post to think that I or someone else had
claimed
> that lids prevent fatalities when in fact no one had done any such
thing.
>
> I realize that you're incapable of being honest or even analytical
enough to
> admit or see that this is true, but there you go.

Wow, you're one ornery toad!  =)

It doesn't sound so "analytical" to me as "anal" (specifically, anal-
retentive).  Quite besides the point of the discussion...I mean, I can
allow that someone equally anal-retentive -- okay, anal-y-tical --
might make the assumption you fear, but such a moron really wasn't
paying attention anyway...who walks into the middle of a conversation
without checking the archives for a quick self-briefing, anyway?

I seriously doubt even a quarter of casual perusers of usenet would
mistake Tom's remark for yours.  In any case, you seem to have made
that the point of contention, like someone nit-picking typos, than the
original topic about helmets.  It's quite a digression.

> HTH (BKIW)