If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
What to carry by default.
On 9/2/2015 11:46 AM, Pablo wrote:
PeterN wrote: On 9/2/2015 10:16 AM, nospam wrote: In article , PeterN wrote: I have pointed out many times when your snipping shows me saying things I never said. you might think you have, but you haven't at all. the only attribution i leave is for the post to which i'm directly responding. everything else is *unattributed*. do you know what unattributed means? it means that anything beyond the first quote level has no attribution, therefore it *can't* ever show you saying things you did not say. it's simply not possible. You falsely claim to leave the false attributional in for context. nope. you're reading it wrong. And you are the only one who is in step. :-( The amazing thing is that according to the snip in this post, he had me saying something I never said. again, you need to learn how quoting works. nowhere did it say that you said something you didn't. stop blaming others for your own stupidity. Last time I looked when the top words say X said, followed by some language. The clear English meaning is that X said the words that follow From http://www.anta.net/misc/nnq/nquote.shtml: "Different numbers of "quote marks" () at the beginning of each line indicate different quoting levels. Following one level of quote marks upwards leads you to the attribution line for that level." Also some stuff he https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ie...ection-3.2.2.1 That is true. But nospam doesn't always follow conventions. When he claims I have never pointed that out, he is outright lying. On one hand he bleats that he doesn't capitalize because newsgroups are informal, then in a blatant act of inconsistency, he relies on formal rules when he snips to show misquoting. If there is an ambiguous method he does it. When he is asked for clarification of what he means, more times than not he either ignores the request, or falsely claims that he answered the question. If one is going to rely on clarity conventions, it is intellectually dishonest to pick and choose which convention he is going to rely on. As a linguist, you can appreciate that there are difficulties in communication between natives of different countries, and even sometimes , even between natives of the same country. Imagine the communication difficulties, if each communicator simply picks and chooses his own conventions. -- PeterN |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
What to carry by default.
In article , PeterN
wrote: You falsely claim to leave the false attributional in for context. nope. you're reading it wrong. And you are the only one who is in step. :-( The amazing thing is that according to the snip in this post, he had me saying something I never said. again, you need to learn how quoting works. nowhere did it say that you said something you didn't. stop blaming others for your own stupidity. Last time I looked when the top words say X said, followed by some language. The clear English meaning is that X said the words that follow From http://www.anta.net/misc/nnq/nquote.shtml: "Different numbers of "quote marks" () at the beginning of each line indicate different quoting levels. Following one level of quote marks upwards leads you to the attribution line for that level." Also some stuff he https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ie...ection-3.2.2.1 That is true. in other words, you're contradicting yourself. for it to be true means i'm not misquoting you. But nospam doesn't always follow conventions. maybe so, but this convention i do follow. When he claims I have never pointed that out, he is outright lying. wrong. it's you who is lying. either that or you're stupid. On one hand he bleats that he doesn't capitalize because newsgroups are informal, then in a blatant act of inconsistency, he relies on formal rules when he snips to show misquoting. i do not misquote. period. you misread posts because you do not understand how quoting works. worse, you refuse to learn, resulting in writing a lengthy paragraph that tries to blame me for your own stupidity. If there is an ambiguous method he does it. When he is asked for clarification of what he means, more times than not he either ignores the request, or falsely claims that he answered the question. more bull****. If one is going to rely on clarity conventions, it is intellectually dishonest to pick and choose which convention he is going to rely on. As a linguist, you can appreciate that there are difficulties in communication between natives of different countries, and even sometimes , even between natives of the same country. Imagine the communication difficulties, if each communicator simply picks and chooses his own conventions. imagine if someone could say "i learned how quoting works." |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
What to carry by default.
On 9/2/2015 4:01 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: You falsely claim to leave the false attributional in for context. nope. you're reading it wrong. And you are the only one who is in step. :-( The amazing thing is that according to the snip in this post, he had me saying something I never said. again, you need to learn how quoting works. nowhere did it say that you said something you didn't. stop blaming others for your own stupidity. Last time I looked when the top words say X said, followed by some language. The clear English meaning is that X said the words that follow From http://www.anta.net/misc/nnq/nquote.shtml: "Different numbers of "quote marks" () at the beginning of each line indicate different quoting levels. Following one level of quote marks upwards leads you to the attribution line for that level." Also some stuff he https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ie...ection-3.2.2.1 That is true. in other words, you're contradicting yourself. for it to be true means i'm not misquoting you. But nospam doesn't always follow conventions. maybe so, but this convention i do follow. When he claims I have never pointed that out, he is outright lying. wrong. it's you who is lying. either that or you're stupid. Another nospamism. (excuse me while I barf) On one hand he bleats that he doesn't capitalize because newsgroups are informal, then in a blatant act of inconsistency, he relies on formal rules when he snips to show misquoting. i do not misquote. period. you misread posts because you do not understand how quoting works. worse, you refuse to learn, resulting in writing a lengthy paragraph that tries to blame me for your own stupidity. Most would prefer ignorance to arrogance. If there is an ambiguous method he does it. When he is asked for clarification of what he means, more times than not he either ignores the request, or falsely claims that he answered the question. more bull****. Classic and well thought retort. If one is going to rely on clarity conventions, it is intellectually dishonest to pick and choose which convention he is going to rely on. As a linguist, you can appreciate that there are difficulties in communication between natives of different countries, and even sometimes , even between natives of the same country. Imagine the communication difficulties, if each communicator simply picks and chooses his own conventions. imagine if someone could say "i learned how quoting works." Except when it's misleading. EOD Troll -- PeterN |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
What to carry by default.
In article , PeterN
wrote: From http://www.anta.net/misc/nnq/nquote.shtml: "Different numbers of "quote marks" () at the beginning of each line indicate different quoting levels. Following one level of quote marks upwards leads you to the attribution line for that level." Also some stuff he https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ie...ection-3.2.2.1 That is true. in other words, you're contradicting yourself. for it to be true means i'm not misquoting you. But nospam doesn't always follow conventions. maybe so, but this convention i do follow. When he claims I have never pointed that out, he is outright lying. wrong. it's you who is lying. either that or you're stupid. Another nospamism. (excuse me while I barf) barfing is all you can manage. i noticed you didn't comment about you contradicting yourself. On one hand he bleats that he doesn't capitalize because newsgroups are informal, then in a blatant act of inconsistency, he relies on formal rules when he snips to show misquoting. i do not misquote. period. you misread posts because you do not understand how quoting works. worse, you refuse to learn, resulting in writing a lengthy paragraph that tries to blame me for your own stupidity. Most would prefer ignorance to arrogance. with you, they get both. If there is an ambiguous method he does it. When he is asked for clarification of what he means, more times than not he either ignores the request, or falsely claims that he answered the question. more bull****. Classic and well thought retort. and completely accurate. If one is going to rely on clarity conventions, it is intellectually dishonest to pick and choose which convention he is going to rely on. As a linguist, you can appreciate that there are difficulties in communication between natives of different countries, and even sometimes , even between natives of the same country. Imagine the communication difficulties, if each communicator simply picks and chooses his own conventions. imagine if someone could say "i learned how quoting works." Except when it's misleading. there's nothing misleading. EOD Troll translated: you know you're wrong and won't admit it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What to carry by default. | David Taylor | Digital Photography | 0 | August 28th 15 02:12 PM |
Nikon D70 Reset Default | Stephen Manaton | Digital Photography | 1 | April 18th 05 08:09 AM |
Nikon D70 Reset Default | Stephen Manaton | Digital Photography | 0 | April 18th 05 07:03 AM |
Sony Default Filenames | Matthew Bailey | Digital Photography | 7 | January 1st 05 10:28 PM |
Default dpi on Canon Rebel | RacerX | Digital Photography | 3 | October 19th 04 03:57 AM |