Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ut-sally.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!ut-sally!bulko
From: bulko@ut-sally.UUCP (William C. Bulko)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.misc,net.flame
Subject: Re: USENET frowning upon graphics in signatures
Message-ID: <3251@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 23-Oct-85 11:03:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.3251
Posted: Wed Oct 23 11:03:49 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 24-Oct-85 08:30:56 EDT
References: <3220@ut-sally.UUCP> <910@abnji.UUCP>
Reply-To: bulko@sally.UUCP (William C. Bulko)
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 28
Xref: watmath net.news:4129 net.misc:8744 net.flame:12458
Summary: 

[The postman hits!  --More--]
[You have new mail.         ]

>>. . .I can see a better way to reduce the garbage-per-article rate:
>>eliminate the "F" command from the news programs!  . . .If the only way
>>to include quotes from other articles in one's own article would be to type
>>it all in by hand, character by character, I'm sure some people would think
>>twice about including 50 extra lines in every followup!
>
>This person would appear not to know how to use an editor...
>-- 
>James C. Armstrong, Jnr.	{ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa

(I am the original poster of the text preceded by ">>" above.)  James is on
the right track here, but seems to have missed the important point.  The fact
is, too many people on the net do *not* appear to know how to use an editor
on their outgoing articles, which results in entire articles being quoted
over and over again as references to it are made.  James edited my original
message appropriately before following up to it (although it was just to make
a one-line sarcastic comment), but an annoying number of people fail to
demonstrate the same good sense.  This is what, in my opinion, is the main
cause of the large garbage-per-article rate:  since there is no way to force
a person to edit his/her articles, I suggested an alternative -- making it
inconvenient for a person to include *lengthy* quotes.
     If you didn't mean for me to take you seriously, James, sorry:  you
should have included a ":-)" with your sarcasm.  I took it at face value.

					Bill