CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Sü Keith Chakotay von Carpati wrote:
> > Of course; however, how can someone talk about the C language
> > without having a working compiler? You tell me.
> > It's like going on a battlefield without a rifle.
>
> Please snip signatures.

That is...

> --
> Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
> <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

....not something _you_ should be telling him.

Richard

rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
[...]
>> Please snip signatures.
[...]
> ...not something _you_ should be telling him.

Why not? Sure, Chuck's signature is too long, and it happens to have
an embedded "-- "; that has no bearing on whether signatures should be
snipped when posting followups.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Keith Thompson said:

> rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [...]
>>> Please snip signatures.
> [...]
>> ...not something _you_ should be telling him.
>
> Why not? Sure, Chuck's signature is too long, and it happens to have
> an embedded "-- "; that has no bearing on whether signatures should be
> snipped when posting followups.

It's called "hypocrisy", Keith. Chuck is telling people to observe
netiquette conventions, even though his signature block violates those
same conventions.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:

> rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [...]
>>> Please snip signatures.
> [...]
>> ...not something _you_ should be telling him.
>
> Why not? Sure, Chuck's signature is too long, and it happens to have
> an embedded "-- "; that has no bearing on whether signatures should be
> snipped when posting followups.

How many times do you have to be reminded that "Chuck" posts with two
signatures thus not allowing some major newsreaders to correctly snip
the signature?

He is the ONLY person I know to do this and I must conclude that he is a
troll.

And yes we KNOW that teranews adds the second.

Richard <rgrdev@gmail.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>> rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
>>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Please snip signatures.
>> [...]
>>> ...not something _you_ should be telling him.
>>
>> Why not? Sure, Chuck's signature is too long, and it happens to have
>> an embedded "-- "; that has no bearing on whether signatures should be
>> snipped when posting followups.
>
> How many times do you have to be reminded that "Chuck" posts with two
> signatures thus not allowing some major newsreaders to correctly snip
> the signature?

Once was quite enough. Either snip it yourself or stop replying to
his articles.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

In article <47184f43.62341683@news.xs4all.nl>,
Richard Bos <rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl> wrote:
>CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Sü Keith Chakotay von Carpati wrote:
>> > Of course; however, how can someone talk about the C language
>> > without having a working compiler? You tell me.
>> > It's like going on a battlefield without a rifle.
>>
>> Please snip signatures.
>
>That is...
>
>> --
>> Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
>> Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
>> <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>>
>
>...not something _you_ should be telling him.
>
>Richard

Indeed. Welcome to the group of CLC posters who have realized what a
hypocritical turd CBF is. Hope you enjoy your stay.

In article <lnmyuffu1w.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
>rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>[...]
>>> Please snip signatures.
>[...]
>> ...not something _you_ should be telling him.
>
>Why not? Sure, Chuck's signature is too long, and it happens to have
>an embedded "-- "; that has no bearing on whether signatures should be
>snipped when posting followups.

And Larry Craig should be allowed to maintain his position as defender
of "family values" and "moral behavior".

There are some who agree with you on that position. But the rest of us
are entitled to call "hypocrite".

In article <_-ednSJFLcaR-4XaRVnyvwA@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
>Keith Thompson said:
>
>> rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
>>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Please snip signatures.
>> [...]
>>> ...not something _you_ should be telling him.
>>
>> Why not? Sure, Chuck's signature is too long, and it happens to have
>> an embedded "-- "; that has no bearing on whether signatures should be
>> snipped when posting followups.
>
>It's called "hypocrisy", Keith. Chuck is telling people to observe
>netiquette conventions, even though his signature block violates those
>same conventions.

And here I find myself (gasp!) agreeing with Heathfield.
Will wonders never cease.

P.S. I just *love* it when the two main CLC chicks (KT,RH) fight.