Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.c > #393393

Re: do { quit; } else { }

Show key headers only | View raw

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

> On 09/05/2025 15:25, Bonita Montero wrote:
>
>> Am 10.04.2025 um 00:07 schrieb Tim Rentsch:
>>
>>> When someone is responding to a post, they are responding ONLY to
>>> the content in the posting they are responing to;  not to some
>>> earlier posting in the same thread, not to a different posting
>>> submitted two weeks ago, not to what you meant to say but didn't,
>>> not to thoughts in your head but that you didn't say, but ONLY TO
>>> WHAT IS SAID IN THE POSTING BEING RESPONDED TO.
>>>
>>> If you can learn to follow this simple rule everyone in the
>>> newsgroup will be better off, including you.
>>
>> You're constantly overwhelmed by what people write here.  Both in
>> terms of content and the nature of the discussion.  Don't try to
>> constantly set rules;  that seems petty.
>
> Tim's not setting a draconian rule in stone.  He's presenting a
> perfectly sensible rule of thumb that is based on his decades of
> experience of posting to this group.  Usenet works best when you snip
> the bits you're not replying to, and reply only within the context you
> have retained.  Nearly all the leading experts in this group nearly
> always observe this rule of thumb, because it's simple common sense so
> to do.

Note that my remarks did not direct anyone to do anything.  The
first paragraph gives an observation -- which I think agrees with
the behavior of most posters in most cases -- about how responders
actually act.  The second paragraph gives a statement of opinion
(or perhaps a prediction, depending on how the paragraph is
interpreted) about what will happen if someone adopts the view
explained in the first paragraph.  There was no attempt to set
rules.

> On what basis do you justify laying down your law for Tim to follow?

I see no reason to care what Bonita Montero thinks.  ISTM that the
most common reaction among other responders is to say postings not
topical to comp.lang.c should be posted elsewhere.  So I don't
think there is much danger of my reaction being in the minority.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: do { quit; } else { } Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-05-09 16:25 +0200
  Re: do { quit; } else { } Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-09 15:38 +0100
    Re: do { quit; } else { } Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-05-09 16:42 +0200
      Re: do { quit; } else { } David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-09 17:43 +0200
    Re: do { quit; } else { } Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-13 19:34 -0700

csiph-web