On Mon, 17 Sep 2018 11:43:10 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


THis from the guy who routinely deletes text when replying to posts
and justifies it by saying that if you want to know what was
previously there you should look up the thread.

i *always* quote the relevant context in my replies.

Your version of 'relevant'.

yep. i'm the one commenting so i get to decide what parts i respond to,
which are always quoted.

i delete what is superfluous. in other words, noise.

Once again your version of 'superfluous' or 'noise'. To make matters
worse you _never_ indicate that you have made such deletions.

that is complete bull****.

Are you claiming that you have at some time indicated your snipping or
deleting text in an article you are responding to? Can you point to an
example?

every post.

I must have missed that you have snipped text. Can you show me how you
indicate that you have done that?


better yet, ignore it.

Refuge of someone who's lost an argument.

nope.

like that part that you didn't snip. you didn't comment on it and there
is no need to include it. it's noise.

once again, you didn't snip superfluous text.

you on the other hand, do *not* snip when appropriate.


But when I do, I mark it e.g. "--- snip ---"
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens