[lit-ideas] Re: deleting/culling messages
- From: John Wager <john.wager1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 22:21:56 -0500
JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx wrote:
One thing that I find somewhat troublesome about sending a reply with
the text to which I'm replying truncated is ...
In my experience (daily) of e-mails which hit my in-box, so many have
very similar or even the same subject lines -- and then, when I read
the post, I have little if no clue, to what the person is responding.
If he/she tags along the message I sent along with their reply I have
a notion of what they're responding to.
You miss the main reason for "judicious" editing of the original in a
reply: It lets you pick and choose exactly the words to which you want
to call attention in the previous message. You can make the person look
like a complete idiot by picking the single bad sentence in your reply,
or you can completely mis-represent their position by leaving intact a
parenthetical digression. And yet it seems that the words you use are
not yours, but theirs! Their OWN words make them look like fools. What
power! What joy!
This is MUCH more fun than letting the original poster take YOUR
precious space in YOUR message; why should you share your cyber space
with the person you're responding to? Let him get his/her own message
space if he/she wants to send another message!
And if other people actually real ALL of the original message, they
might notice the flawless logic and sense of the original post rather
than agree with my chop job of the original.
The cyber pen may be mightier than the cyber sword, but the cyber ax is
mightier than the cyber pen!
--
-------------------------------------------------
"Never attribute to malice that which can be
explained by incompetence and ignorance."
-------------------------------------------------
John Wager john.wager1@xxxxxxxxxxx
Lisle, IL, USA
Other related posts:
