On 2010-08-17, sf > wrote:

> perfectly acceptable and the norm in many companies due to the way my
> friends respond to email, which is reply at the top.

They top post cuz that's what M$ dictates and they are an obedient
flock of sheep.

nb

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:43:44 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> They top post cuz that's what M$ dictates and they are an obedient
> flock of sheep.

Yeah? Well it sure isn't M$ dictating in rfc. Bottom poster Nazis do
all the dictating here.

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On 2010-08-17, Wayne Boatwright > wrote:

> would be far easier just not to participate.

Let the door hit where the good lord split yah!

nb

On 2010-08-17, Wayne Boatwright > wrote:

> here are obsessive about it and I'm tired of hearing about it.

"would be far easier just not to participate. If people choose not to
read my posts, then that's fine too."

Seems I read that somewhere.

nb

On 2010-08-18, Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
> by the few who want to control the group...

I see. It's perfectly fine to voice YOUR opinion about it being "tiresome" and a
"PIA", but anyone else does and they want to "control the group".

> If the controllers have a decent newsreader, it will show the number
> lines in a post. They don't have to open it.

......as you know who will post on the subject but still choose to
respond while whining "if they don't like it".

I don't mind you having a different opinion, Wayne, but you can knock
off the bullshit hypocrisy, any time. Take a stand, you spineless
weasel.

nb

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:51:33 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

> Well, as I said, I will normally be quoting only the very last entry
> (or part of it), and if people have a problem with that then all hope
> is lost.

Sometimes the last entry isn't the last thing you've replied to if you
replied "in line", so I will caution to quote/attribute properly.
>
> It's either or with me...there is no middle ground. It's too time
> consuming to bother with.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I care about trimming, but when the
person/persons before me haven't quoted properly, I'm f*cked unless I
google. I used to do that, but frankly since the bottom posting Nazis
decided they would rearrange top posts - I don't bother anymore.
Screw them.

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 23:41:49 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

> <snip> or no posts from me at all.

HEY, hey, hey.... please don't go there. There are legions of people
who love reading what you have to say, so don't leave. He's just
being irascible. Challenge him to a duel and he'll say "pistols at
dawn". NB is a good guy at heart - believe it or not.


--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 00:08:35 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

> On Tue 17 Aug 2010 09:11:17a, cshenk told us...
>
> > Out sick from work today so lots of time! (Nothing serious, just a
> > stomach flu traveling around work)
>
> I'm home here today for the same reason.

OK, that explains everything. Feel better soon, Wayne (and Carol
too)!

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 03:04:34 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

> I will only reply to the last post in a thread and will only quote that
> portion.

That's fine with me.

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> Frankly, I find excessive trimming frustrating and a royal PITA. I
> don't want to have to read 10 posts upthread to find out what the
> hell was said.
>
There may be an assumption being made that if you're reading post #49,
you may have been reading the previous 48 too and can recall what was
said. If not, post #49 should be referring to whatever snippet of quote
it includes as reference, not everything in the previous 48 posts.

Also you can always just open it up via google and read it again from
the beginning.

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:18:35 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:10:30 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
>> On 2010-08-17, sf > wrote:
>>
>>> Non-trimming happens when top posters become bottom posters.
>>
>> Top posting has NEVER been acceptable posting form.
>>
>> A. No.
>> Q. Does top-posting make sense?
>>
>> OTOH, I little doubt you will argue the point.
>>
> You know I'll argue the point because I hate bottom posting. The
> simple fact that we have to go on and on about trimming is one reason
> not to bottom post and also shows you how acceptable top posting is in
> some environments. I've come to the conclusion that top posting is
> perfectly acceptable and the norm in many companies due to the way my
> friends respond to email, which is reply at the top.

but, once again, r.f.c. (and usenet in general) is not business e-mail.
the purpose is a little different.

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:27:09 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:43:44 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>
>> They top post cuz that's what M$ dictates and they are an obedient
>> flock of sheep.
>
> Yeah? Well it sure isn't M$ dictating in rfc. Bottom poster Nazis do
> all the dictating here.

nazis? really?

i think most folks who advocate bottom posting give fairly good reasons for
doing so.

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:33:24 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:27:09 -0700, sf wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:43:44 GMT, notbob > wrote:
> >
> >> They top post cuz that's what M$ dictates and they are an obedient
> >> flock of sheep.
> >
> > Yeah? Well it sure isn't M$ dictating in rfc. Bottom poster Nazis do
> > all the dictating here.
>
> nazis? really?
>
> i think most folks who advocate bottom posting give fairly good reasons for
> doing so.
>
I disagree, but this is mob rule.

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

"Wayne Boatwright" wrote
> cshenk told us...

>> Yes. All valid IMHO. There simply is no 'perfect answer' for all
>> cases. I prefer 'middle posting' but that takes a bit more time
>> (and can be totally non-functional in a long thread in a technical
>> group).

> No there's no perfect answer, and I find middle posting tiresome and
> time consuming, not that there isn't a valid reason to do it.

It's ok, it works for me. On the social side, it's more like a conversation
but on the technical side, it's too hard to add up attributes to see who
said what.

>> They use the term BLUF at work. 'Bottom Line Up First' (aka,
>> summary). BLUF is 'If you seem to see a lack of responders you
>> expected, check if they are trimmers nad how much was in the front
>> of the message. We may have missed your comment'.

> I've not heard that term before, but interesting.

Conversely a non-trimmer may well find me irritating and not bother to
reply, knowning they get just part of the message of the thread.

> As I said, I will go forward with quoting only the last poster's
> entry (or part of it), whether the thread makes sense or not.

Probably not best. See, you have yahoos trying to make you change.
Understanding the differnt views is good. Taking one set as he be-all and
end-all, isn't.

On 2010-08-18, sf > wrote:

>> >> flock of sheep.
>> >
>> > Yeah? Well it sure isn't M$ dictating in rfc. Bottom poster Nazis do

..emit yna evael nac uoY .ycarcomed eurt a ,yllautcA

>> nazis? really?
>>

>> doing so.
>>
> I disagree, but this is mob rule.

nb (stealth inside out reverse posting)

Vg'f n qrzbpenpl sbe gur ybhqrfg naq n qvpgngbefuvc sbe gur erfg.
<ROT13>

`````````````````````````````````

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 22:38:47 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> On 2010-08-18, sf > wrote:
>
> >> >> flock of sheep.
> >> >
> >> > Yeah? Well it sure isn't M$ dictating in rfc. Bottom poster Nazis do
>
> .emit yna evael nac uoY .ycarcomed eurt a ,yllautcA
>
> >> nazis? really?
> >>
>
> >> doing so.
> >>
> > I disagree, but this is mob rule.
>
> nb (stealth inside out reverse posting)



--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On 2010-08-18, sf > wrote:
>
> Vg'f n qrzbpenpl sbe gur ybhqrfg naq n qvpgngbefuvc sbe gur erfg.
><ROT13>

THAT'S WHAT I SAID!!!

nb

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:09:26 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> On 2010-08-18, sf > wrote:
> >
> > Vg'f n qrzbpenpl sbe gur ybhqrfg naq n qvpgngbefuvc sbe gur erfg.
> ><ROT13>
>
> THAT'S WHAT I SAID!!!
>
LOL!


--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:38:31 -0700, sf wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:33:24 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:27:09 -0700, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 22:43:44 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>>>
>>>> They top post cuz that's what M$ dictates and they are an obedient
>>>> flock of sheep.
>>>
>>> Yeah? Well it sure isn't M$ dictating in rfc. Bottom poster Nazis do
>>> all the dictating here.
>>
>> nazis? really?
>>
>> i think most folks who advocate bottom posting give fairly good reasons for
>> doing so.
>>
> I disagree, but this is mob rule.

have there been any fatalities?

your pal,
blake

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:09:48 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>
> have there been any fatalities?

When they're gone, they're gone. Sometimes they leave by death;
sometimes they leave in disgust, but the result is the same.

--

Carrot cake counts as a serving of vegetables.

On Aug 15, 1:56*pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:20:27 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
>
> > wrote:
> >Lou wrote:
>
> >> If you want to see.
>
> >>http://i33.tinypic.com/21l6bgi.jpg
>
> >Gorgeous markings, and a nice accessory for the decor.
>
> It is pretty funny how he matches so well. *He thinks that's his
> chair.
>
> Lou

OK, that is one handsome cat!
I have a gorgeous brown tabby (with torti markings on her back) who
would make a nice girlfriend for him! LOL

On 8/11/2010 3:53 PM, sf wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 14:26:17 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>> i've only seen them at asian markets.
>
> ah, ok then. I'm not a big frequenter of asian markets. 99 ranch is
> as asian as I get and I don't go there very often. I doubt the mom&
> pop asian market a few blocks from me would carry them. They never
> seem to have what I'm looking for.

We've got an Asian supermarket here--next time I'm in there I'll have to
remember to see what they have.

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:18:35 -0700, sf wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:10:30 GMT, notbob > wrote:
> >
> >> On 2010-08-17, sf > wrote:
> >>
> >>> Non-trimming happens when top posters become bottom posters.
> >>
> >> Top posting has NEVER been acceptable posting form.
> >>
> >> A. No.
> >> Q. Does top-posting make sense?
> >>
> >> OTOH, I little doubt you will argue the point.
> >>
> > You know I'll argue the point because I hate bottom posting. The
> > simple fact that we have to go on and on about trimming is one reason
> > not to bottom post and also shows you how acceptable top posting is in
> > some environments. I've come to the conclusion that top posting is
> > perfectly acceptable and the norm in many companies due to the way my
> > friends respond to email, which is reply at the top.
>
> but, once again, r.f.c. (and usenet in general) is not business e-mail.
> the purpose is a little different.

But it's JUST LIKE business email, except it's not business and it's not
email.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 17:25:05 -0700, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:18:35 -0700, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:10:30 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2010-08-17, sf > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Non-trimming happens when top posters become bottom posters.
>>>>
>>>> Top posting has NEVER been acceptable posting form.
>>>>
>>>> A. No.
>>>> Q. Does top-posting make sense?
>>>>
>>>> OTOH, I little doubt you will argue the point.
>>>>
>>> You know I'll argue the point because I hate bottom posting. The
>>> simple fact that we have to go on and on about trimming is one reason
>>> not to bottom post and also shows you how acceptable top posting is in
>>> some environments. I've come to the conclusion that top posting is
>>> perfectly acceptable and the norm in many companies due to the way my
>>> friends respond to email, which is reply at the top.
>>
>> but, once again, r.f.c. (and usenet in general) is not business e-mail.
>> the purpose is a little different.
>
> But it's JUST LIKE business email, except it's not business and it's not
> email.

why is a raven like a writing desk? because there is a 'b' in both and an
'n' in neither.

your pal,
charles

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 14:09:54 +0000, Gorio
> wrote:

I've seen you quoted a few times and you seem unlike the other
foodbanter goofballs. I lifted the killfilter for now at least.

>My dog ain't going nowhere near where I make my mojo.
>
>Enjoy the cats, all two of them. Go beyond two, though, and I have yet
>to visit such a house that didn't stink or was unsanitary. Hoarders live
>in denial, and rationalize it with examples more extreme than their own.
>"Aunt Bea had 80 cats, so my 6 is pretty tame." DISgusting!!

The denial thing is what gets me.

>Yes, Shel, we should eliminate more people to make room for cats. We get
>it. The only people who should be retroactive abortion candidates are
>those who put animals above people. Now you know why you're alone. I'm
>sure you attribute human characteristics to each cat, though; making
>them your "friends."

LOL.. I think that sums it up with shemp the freak.

>Beautiful cat, Lou.

He says thank you.

>Looks well-taken-care-of.

Spoiled rotten.

>I'm sure he wouldn't want to live in a filthy, festering toilet of a home, either.

No they don't like filth either. That's why they don't like a dirty
litter box.

>That's what a responsible pet owner provides: a clean and caring home. Thanks for the
>voice of normalcy.

Most people have a rational point of view on this. It's just the few
who have gone to far that get the attention.

Lou

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 19:58:05 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>On Sun 15 Aug 2010 10:55:14a, Lou Decruss told us...

>> I doubt you will but do a google on "how many cats are too many."
>> You'll get over eight million hits. You might find you're a crazy
>> cat lady and even cat lovers think you and sheldon have taken
>> things too far. And everyone agrees the house stinks especially
>> to non pet owners.
>>
>> Lou
>>
>
>OH, **** off, Lou. We can duscuss food here, but obviously not cats.

LOLOL Food is much more interesting to talk about anyway.

Lou

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 00:33:56 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>On 2010-08-15, Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>
>> ....but obviously not cats.
>
>the only thing obvious is neither one of you can trim posts fer shit!

My post was interwoven but I guess I could have cleaned it up more. I
usually trim just fine.

Lou

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:31:35 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:18:35 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:10:30 GMT, notbob > wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-08-17, sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Non-trimming happens when top posters become bottom posters.
>>>
>>> Top posting has NEVER been acceptable posting form.
>>>
>>> A. No.
>>> Q. Does top-posting make sense?
>>>
>>> OTOH, I little doubt you will argue the point.
>>>
>> You know I'll argue the point because I hate bottom posting. The
>> simple fact that we have to go on and on about trimming is one reason
>> not to bottom post and also shows you how acceptable top posting is in
>> some environments. I've come to the conclusion that top posting is
>> perfectly acceptable and the norm in many companies due to the way my
>> friends respond to email, which is reply at the top.
>
>but, once again, r.f.c. (and usenet in general) is not business e-mail.
>the purpose is a little different.

A little different?

RFC has lots of story telling which makes it MUCH different than
business e-mail. Comparing the two is batshit-nuts. Every keystroke
you can save in business mail counts. I sent a letter off this
morning and the only response I got was being copied in on another
email sent to address the problem I'd identified.

Lou

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:11:36 -0700 (PDT), "Catmandy (Sheryl)"
> wrote:

>On Aug 15, 1:56*pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:20:27 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
>>
>> > wrote:
>> >Lou wrote:
>>
>> >> If you want to see.
>>
>> >>http://i33.tinypic.com/21l6bgi.jpg
>>
>> >Gorgeous markings, and a nice accessory for the decor.
>>
>> It is pretty funny how he matches so well. *He thinks that's his
>> chair.
>>
>> Lou
>
>OK, that is one handsome cat!

Thanks. His presence got rid of the mice problem, is good looking,
and pretty entertaining.

>I have a gorgeous brown tabby (with torti markings on her back) who
>would make a nice girlfriend for him! LOL

He could probably use a girlfriend about now. He has stuffed animals
as toys and he drags them around and does the deed with them. I
thought it was just innocent fun until mr. pinky showed up. Time for
the nuts to be snipped.

Lou

In article >,
Lou Decruss > wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:31:35 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:18:35 -0700, sf wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:10:30 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> >>> OTOH, I little doubt you will argue the point.
> >>>
> >> You know I'll argue the point because I hate bottom posting.

[snip]

> >> I've come to the conclusion that top posting is
> >> perfectly acceptable and the norm in many companies due to the way my
> >> friends respond to email, which is reply at the top.
> >
> >but, once again, r.f.c. (and usenet in general) is not business e-mail.
> >the purpose is a little different.
>
> A little different?

One thing I enjoy about Blake's replies, is that he is a master of
understatement. Not a good idea to take everything he posts, literally!

> RFC has lots of story telling which makes it MUCH different than
> business e-mail. Comparing the two is batshit-nuts. Every keystroke
> you can save in business mail counts. I sent a letter off this
> morning and the only response I got was being copied in on another
> email sent to address the problem I'd identified.

I'm retired now, but I used to be a computer jock. After I learned to
bottom post on newsgroups, I tried doing it at work. My boss let me
know *right away* that top posting is the standard for Email replies in
business. I generally bottom post in personal Email. I'm sure that's
wrong, but it just seems natural to me now. Of course, I top post when
that is more appropriate.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Use your favorite knife. I'm sure this is a big "no-no" in Sheldon's world. Watchit! he threatened my son's life just for some rabbits he hasn't even shot yet.

Thanks for the kind words, Lou. I never killfile anyone. Most of the dicks around here are way too hilarious to kill; unless I were to, perhaps, meet one.

Once again, nice to see what a responsible pet owner does. Just like hunting, pets are great so long as their owners take ownership.

On Aug 23, 12:42*pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:11:36 -0700 (PDT), "Catmandy (Sheryl)"
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >On Aug 15, 1:56*pm, Lou Decruss > wrote:
> >> On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:20:27 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >Lou wrote:
>
> >> >> If you want to see.
>
> >> >>http://i33.tinypic.com/21l6bgi.jpg
>
> >> >Gorgeous markings, and a nice accessory for the decor.
>
> >> It is pretty funny how he matches so well. *He thinks that's his
> >> chair.
>
> >> Lou
>
> >OK, that is one handsome cat!
>
> Thanks. *His presence got rid of the mice problem, is good looking,
> and pretty entertaining. * * * *
>
> >I have a gorgeous brown tabby (with torti markings on her back) who
> >would make a nice girlfriend for him! LOL
>
> He could probably use a girlfriend about now. *He has stuffed animals
> as toys and he drags them around and does the deed with them. *I
> thought it was just innocent fun until mr. pinky showed up. *Time for
> the nuts to be snipped.
>
> Lou *

Best to get that done ASAP. Otherwise, he will start "marking his
territory" and once he gets into that habit, it is VERY hard to break
them of it. Even once he's fixed, he will continue to spray if he's
gotten into the habit. It's not pleasant. My little girl was fixed
about 2 weeks after she came to live with me, about 6 months old.
Would have been done sooner but she went into heat the day after she
got here. Poor thing sat in the window (in February!) yowling. A
friend gave me a stuffed Sylvester ("sufferin' succotash") after Mandy
died. Ellie decided he was her boyfriend. I will spare you the
details but it was pretty funny!!!

Was he a rescue? If so, the organization where you adopted from should
be able to get you a reduced rate on the neutering. If that's not an
option, contact a locate organization that advocates what they call
"Trap-Neuter-Release". The people who run those groups tend to be
evangelical about neutering pets (and not in a bad way, they are good
people who care about limiting the animal population), and they should
be more than happy to hook you up with a reduced cost neuter for him.
The good news is, it is much less expensive to fix a boy cat than a
girl cat (the surgery is much simpler).

Good luck! He's a handsome boy!

On Aug 24, 6:14*pm, Gorio > wrote:
> Lou Decruss;1521736 Wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:11:36 -0700 (PDT), "Catmandy (Sheryl)"
> > wrote:
> > -
> > On Aug 15, 1:56*pm, Lou Decruss wrote:-
> > On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:20:27 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
>
> > wrote:-
> > Lou wrote:-
> > -
> > If you want to see.-
> > -
> >http://i33.tinypic.com/21l6bgi.jpg-
> > -
> > Gorgeous markings, and a nice accessory for the decor.-
>
> > It is pretty funny how he matches so well. *He thinks that's his
> > chair.
>
> > Lou-
>
> > OK, that is one handsome cat!-
>
> > Thanks. *His presence got rid of the mice problem, is good looking,
> > and pretty entertaining. * * * *
> > -
> > I have a gorgeous brown tabby (with torti markings on her back) who
> > would make a nice girlfriend for him! LOL-
>
> > He could probably use a girlfriend about now. *He has stuffed animals
> > as toys and he drags them around and does the deed with them. *I
> > thought it was just innocent fun until mr. pinky showed up. *Time for
> > the nuts to be snipped.
>
> > Lou
>
> Use your favorite knife. I'm sure this is a big "no-no" in Sheldon's
> world. Watchit! he threatened my son's life just for some rabbits he
> hasn't even shot yet.

I do hope you're kidding. That would be absolutely cruel. How would
he anesthetize the cat?
It is a simple procedure. But without anasthesia, it's just cruel.

>
> Once again, nice to see what a responsible pet owner does. Just like
> hunting, pets are great so long as their owners take ownership.
>
> --
> Gorio

any pet owner who doesn't take care of the health of their animals has
no business having them. I am a one-cat-person. One at a time. And
when I adopt one, it is a lifelong commitment. (their lifetime). I
have had 3 pets in my life. A dog when I was growing up (he lived with
us for 12 years) and I was so heartbroken after he died, it took me 15
years to get another pet. That cat lived with me also for 12 years,
the last 3 with chronic kidney failure, requiring me to help her along
with special foods, food additives, a pill every day and inject the
scruff of her neck with fluids 3x a week. Not to mention frequent vet
visits. The last 2 months of her life, it was daily injections. And I
gladly did it. Because she had a good quality of life until the last
week. And then I did the only thing you can do for a pet you love who
is suffering. And I was heartbroken for weeks. And then lo and behold,
2 months later, my friend told me of an older kitten she found outside
in the cold. No one claimed her. At that moment, I knew she was meant
to be my next cat, and had named her without even meeting her. When I
finally did meet her, she seemed to recognize me, came right over and
asked me to rub her belly, and I fell head over heels, madly in love
with her. A cat does not show their belly to anyone they don't trust
with their life. And I will do whatever I can to keep her alive and
happy for as long as she lives.
That's what you do for someone you love. Human. Canine. Feline.
Whatever.
Anyone who isn't prepared to do that should not have pets. They are
like kids in many ways. Except they never progress past the
intellectual age of 3. (which is a plus in many respects!) As aloof
as a cat likes to make you think they are, they are completely
dependent on their humans for everything.

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 12:03:11 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:

>In article >,
> Lou Decruss > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:31:35 -0400, blake murphy
>> > wrote:

>> >but, once again, r.f.c. (and usenet in general) is not business e-mail.
>> >the purpose is a little different.
>>
>> A little different?
>
>One thing I enjoy about Blake's replies, is that he is a master of
>understatement. Not a good idea to take everything he posts, literally!

Yeah..I know that.

>> RFC has lots of story telling which makes it MUCH different than
>> business e-mail. Comparing the two is batshit-nuts. Every keystroke
>> you can save in business mail counts. I sent a letter off this
>> morning and the only response I got was being copied in on another
>> email sent to address the problem I'd identified.
>
>I'm retired now, but I used to be a computer jock. After I learned to
>bottom post on newsgroups, I tried doing it at work. My boss let me
>know *right away* that top posting is the standard for Email replies in
>business. I generally bottom post in personal Email. I'm sure that's
>wrong, but it just seems natural to me now. Of course, I top post when
>that is more appropriate.

The pace of most of what I do is very fast and there's not enough time
to forget what was said so reviewing old text isn't necessary. And
most of it is one issue letters unlike here where many things are said
and responded to sometimes days later. For me it's top for work and
bottom for usenet.

Lou

Nice post. I agree. I have one dog, as I had to put my old (14.75 years)girl Abbey down in June. Man, that was tough. We thought we would have to do it last Easter, but she came around and lived well for that little while longer. Made it easier to cope; but I still miss that beautiful dog. I can't own a cat because my wife has major allergic reaction. Love playing with my friends' cats, though. One has a perfect Norwegian Forest cat that is just...the cats. Now, all I have is my blue tic/black lab (great dog, though), a guinea pig and a gecko. All in the family.

No, I didn't want Lou to do it himself. I do know farmers that take care of their own dogs, though. I don't see a cat as putting up with it quite so well. Just thought "favorite knife" was in the thread title, so I'd muse. I'm not into to hurting animals. I will kill and eat rabbits, raccoons, pheasants, turkeys and small game, though. Cats and dogs are quite safe, especially the one that gets the game out of hiding.