sameerds(a)it.iitb.ac.in wrote
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 06:50:34PM +0500, quasar(a)vsnl.net wrote:
>I just noticed that there is something really fishy about this
>particular paragraph. All the original newlines that were present in >my
>message are no longer there ... hand-edit quotes?
And I was a fool to think we could have a adult discussion... They /are/ hand edited quotes. So? Your implication that I was cheating is ... for a better word ... a childishly personal attack. I am having to use the VSNL webmail interface which does not 'quote' a reply. So I had to 'hand-edit' them instead of leaving them unquoted. Yeah so I am the Evil Person (tm) now I suppose?
>> pissed me off which resulted in more than necessary sarcasm. >>Sorry.
>I kinda never had any rules in mind ... I thought this was
>``discussion'' about The Right Thing (tm).
/you/ may not have any rules in mind... please refer to Philip's initial musings about implementing auto-wraping by the mailer. Yes and I suppose /you/ own the (tm) for The Right Thing?
>OT: Just discorvered something in vim ... pressed gq<down> at the >start
>of the earlier para, and it correctly broke and indented it for me!
Wow. But I suppose long lines are still 'evil'.
>> suppose we can ignore it.
>Aaah ... there goes gq<down> again! :-)
That was so very funny. I almost choked. But how conveniently you have not answered/ignored the part about webmail.
>The problem is in two parts - quoting somebody else's mail, which I >just
>discovered that vim can do very easily for me, and horizontal >scrolling
>... think of the column width that newspapers use instead continuing >a
>line from edge to edge ... its about readability.
yeah, you /think/ of a newspaper where we have a column on one side with the rest of the paper blank.
>And of course, the problem with webmail access remains.
you may consider rereading my previous post on this matter.