"Blair P. Houghton" > writes:

> >Let's think of it in terms of economics. There's only one of you, and
> >on the other side we have the (possibly dwindling) multitude...
>
> That's not economics, it's politics, which indicates that you
> either don't understand what you're saying or are dissembling
> for a purpose.

I was about to reply that my argument was economic because it (the
part you snipped) was about efficiency:

You could do the work yourself, or *each* of your readers could do
it. Which way is more efficient?

But, come to think of it, there *is* a political assumption in there.
I was assuming that the "normal" point of view, the one governing what
is to be optimized in an economic sense, was that of the whole
community following the thread. But of course, in the abstract,
there's nothing to recommend the community's interest as superior to
your own.

> >From an economic standpoint, I will quote as little as I desire,
> and you will understand as little as you desire. We'll see who
> loses the most.

Well, I think we understand each other now.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html