Borland C++-5.5 (free) compiler does not install(?)

[Charlie Gibbs]

In article <d7cla9.pg6.ln at thune.mrc-home.org> dalgoda at ix.netcom.com
(Mike Castle) writes:

>In article <9ajqdt$hdh$1 at sun27.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de>,
>Uwe Bonnes  <bon at elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de> wrote:
>
>>please quote first, editinig away unneeed parts, then put your text.
>
>Quoting first is not always appropriate.  It should NEVER be used as
>a rule of thumb.

Actually, it's quite a good rule of thumb (at least according to
my understanding of the term).  There may be exceptions to the
rule, but they're few and far between.

>If I see a post where the first screen is nothing but quoted
>material, I will assume that it is nothing more than a "Me too!"
>and ignore it.

So will I.  That's why Uwe Bonnes included "editing away unneeded
parts" in his message quoted above.  If I'm reading several messages
in a thread, I tend to skip over quoted text because I've just read
it in the previous message.  If the reply consists of a single line
followed by several screenfuls of quoted text, I'll usually wind up
at the bottom, having missed the reply.  At that point I'll assume
that either the message got away from the poster before he had a
chance to add his response (this does happen fairly frequently),
or his single line at the top is, once again, nothing more than
a "Me too!"  Either way, I'll ignore it.

That's why the accepted procedure has two parts: edit the quoted
text, then add your reply at the end.  Failure to edit the quoted
text does not in itself justify top posting.  Two wrongs do not
make a right.

--
cgibbs at sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs)
Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply.