[Ti] humble request

[John Griffin]

On  Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:38:47 -0600 Loren Schooley <loren at flash.net> wrote:

> Let's put this into perspective, ma-an. That "netiquette" is outdated.
> In the "damn good ol' days" a few lines actually made some sort of
> difference. 9600, even 56k connections, geeks were quite aware of the
> bandwidth. Bandwidth was hi-dollar. Routers were sparse and fiber was
> still being patched in, and phone line time cost by the minute.
>
> But today, the old King Sized Net is dead, closed up, tightened down,
> boarded over, re-routed to the Pentagon, and sold out to a few lawyers
> and CEO's. Now it is full of corruption, greed, corporate invasion,
> evil, soft money, overvalued stock, V.D., laws for laws for laws, rules,
> POP ups, overly sensitive mom's, impedent but well-dressed lawyers,
> advertising, HTML mail, Flash, SPAM, jokes, Virtual Cards, Outlook
> Express mail, viruses, unaltered JPG's, did I say SPAM ten hundred
> times? The RIAA's tears alone take up 4 billion lines of code a day.

Actually it is not so much a bandwidth issue so much. What bugs me is having
to scroll through a lengthy message after lengthy message to get down
finally to the text of the reply. When I see a page full of quoted text and
no unquoted paragraphs I often say - to h#ll with it, dismiss it and just go
to the next message (which, I am sure, is not what the author was looking
for). Sorry, but I am sure that if the author just spent a minute of his
valuable time selecting the relevant items in the messages he is referring
to rather than throwing the kitchen sink in his message, we would all be
better off.

jg