Re: Why reply at the bottom of posts?

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

>I wasn't and don't get upset about it. The thing that upsets me is that
>MS ruined a good thing by being sloppy.

I see now where your point of view comes from and you are clearly justified
to your comments. As for myself, I can definitely relate to not being nor
meeting standards, as by my nature.

Thinking back on it, who would have thought MS would support people writing
edits, scripts and utilities that they promote to change Windows code? :o)
--

All the Best,
Kelly (MS-MVP)

Troubleshooting Windows XP
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com



"Leythos" <void@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6addbb4408741f989bd4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In article <Oqv9lwdoFHA.2156@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> mike.hall.mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx says...
>> Leythos
>>
>> Sorry but I have way more important issues and worries than whether
>> bottom
>> posting should be enforced.. I just don't think that it is an issue worth
>> getting uptight about..
>
> I wasn't and don't get upset about it. The thing that upsets me is that
> MS ruined a good thing by being sloppy.
>
>> postulate as the last great Usenet purist if you
>> will, but I have little time for it.. all just elitist crap, and sounding
>> a
>> little like those who claim to have been in Yahoo chat forever.. who the
>> hell cares?.. just get a life, y'all..
>
> Elitist? You mean that following the rules and recommendations that go
> back as far as it's founding means that one is trying to be elitist? I
> could say the same, trying to change the way a system works, the norms,
> the recommendations, for no reason other than ones own personal self
> interest, that would be elitist - wouldn't it?
>
> --
>
> spam999free@xxxxxxxxxx
> remove 999 in order to email me


.