On 12 May 2005 13:03:34 -0700, "lonelytraveller"
wrote:

If you had worked out how to use google groups properly, you would
understand why they decided NOT to include the original in the reply by
default.

If you're as smart as you think you are, you know that Google doesn't
set the accepted standard of manners for Usenet. You'd also know that
Google's arbitrary change is a recent meausre, and that previously it
did adhere to accepted standards.
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

If you were as smart as you think, you would know that you don't set
the accepted standard of manners, so **** off.

lonelytraveller wrote to uk.transport.london on Fri, 13 May 2005:

If you were as smart as you think, you would know that you don't set
the accepted standard of manners, so **** off.

"Everybody's out of step except my Johnnie", is that it? Usenet
convention has been worked out over the past ten years, so why does a
newbie like you know better?
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 3 April 2005

Annabel Smyth:
Usenet convention has been worked out over the past ten years...

Getting on for 25 years now, actually. These bloody newbies, think
they know everything... :-)
--
Mark Brader, "It is impossible. Solution follows..."
Toronto, -- Richard Heathfield

Times change.
If you don't keep up, you will be left behind.

"lonelytraveller" wrote in
message ups.com...
If you were as smart as you think, you would know that you don't set
the accepted standard of manners, so **** off.


I'm sorry, but I have no idea what you're talking about. It is a newsgroup
convention to quote at least some of the preceding conversation: perhaps you
should consider doing this, if you want to be understood.
with respect
vellov

being understood "with respect" is secondary to the primary function of
being understood.
Respect is not required for the communication of information.
It is the idiot who disregards a truth because their enemy has said it.

Being understood "with respect" is secondary to being understood.
It is only the idiot who disregards a truth because an enemy has said
it.

Hmmm, google has posted this twice

In article .com,
lonelytraveller wrote:
Hmmm, google has posted this twice

But how could a perfect, modern news interface do that ...

Nick
--
http://www.leverton.org/ ... So express yourself