On Saturday 26 February 2005 09:00, Duncan Lithgow wrote: > Good to see some suggested list etiquette - good work James. I have to agree :-) <snip> > >... Preface any text to be replied to with a > > character, most folks use a greater than sign '>' but any special > > printable character will suffice. > > I don't understand this bit about the '>' sign. If we use that for > something it shows up as 'replied to' text. It could also benefit from > being a seperate point perhaps. Nope, that was exactly the point - a message you reply to should have the original text (or better an edited version of it, to leave only the relevant parts) clearly marked by a character at the beginning of each line. The majority of mail clients do this automatically (here it is being done by kmail). The reasoning behind this is to make it clear what *you* are saying and what the previous poster wrote. It also makes it far easier to find replies to any questions you post... -- Stuart Sears RHCE, RHCX, RTFM, ASAP If a subordinate asks you a pertinent question, look at him as if he had lost his senses. When he looks down, paraphrase the question back at him.
