Being OT on RCTN

On Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:36:19 -0400, Tia Mary muttered something like:

It's okay, Pat. Just hand Satan one of these.

-Bertha

Not to mention that attrocious typing I did! More haste, less speed, as they say! Good job I don`t believe in Hell, isn`t it?

Pat P

Oh, I love THAT one!

Pat P

ROFL!! Oh wait ... why am *I* laffing?? I'm SURE I'll need one of those!!!

Drives me insane!! Course, it's a pretty short drive ...

WISh we could get `em here. In fact I was going to order some, until I saw that there is a minimum subtotal required.

Easy enough to copy, though!

Pat P

Especially the part about third-person neuter possessives and the part about contractions.

You just lost me a second time. What am I missing here ???

Lucille

Hi Darla, I know adding to my own note is a no no, however, I'm doing it anyway.

I would greatly appreciate if you would include just a tiny clue about whatever you're answering so my poor widdle brain doesn't have to go into overdrive. Lucille

That the person complaining about grammar made a grammar error by using it's when she meant its.

Elizabeth

Now, is that clear?

Lucille

Yup. Would be clearer if you would space down before beginning to write so that it is clear where the quoted material stops and you begin. You'll notice above that part of what you've written is indicated as yours but part of it is indicated as mine. That's how it shows up from you and that may be part of the problem.

Elizabeth

I think Darla is answering a pretty old post but not leaving enough of it to refresh our memories lol

Now I have no idea what you're talking about either. My note is showing up under your name, so what is the problem?

I apologize for all this fuss over something so trivial and hope it will go away now.

Darla probably was right in correcting my grammar, which has deteriorated over the years, but she edited so efficiently that I didn't know what she was referring to. I believe most of those messages were at least a week old and I don't keep the threads on my computer for more than a few days because to my way of thinking old news is old news.

Lucille

The problem is that on most news readers there is a line or a series of >>>>s that indicate what someone else has written. You usually (you didn't this last time) post so close to what you are responding to that the line indicating quoted material shows up next to your new material. If you look above, for example the number of lines next to the paragraph beginning with "Now let me" is different than the number of lines next to the paragraph beginning with "Now is that clear." Since you wrote both, they should be the same. I was wondering if that was part of the issue, but perhaps not.

ELizabeth

I think that Darla is responding to something Lucille said, but since the post is old and she has edited it all away (maybe non-intentionally) we just don't recall what on earth it was all about.

I vaguely remember Lucille saying something about 'widdle' in connection with a snotty post by someone who was not going to read rctn or some such rot, because of OT posts - even though they were clearly marked as OT. Something like that anyway.

Here's hoping Darla soon comes along and clarifies this whole mess!

Thanks for this info. II never gave any thought to this before, but 'I'll try to be more careful in the future.

I have no idea whether it's my news reader, or my deep seated need to save space on the page. We'll see ;^)))

Lucille

That's an interesting observation. I get messages that feed through in just such a manner. The first quote is a single >, the second quoted material >>, etc.

However, I also get feeds that have a bar for quoted material. A single bar, double bar, etc.

Dianne