🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <9212142237@zuma.UUCP> sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic) writes:
>In article <8107@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) write\
s:
>>And another thing: Is there anyone else out there who finds Carl's
>>practice of including voluminous references in _every_ article he
>>posts as annoying as Hasan B Mutlu/Serdar Argic's similar practice?

Not having experienced the "Hasan B Mutlu/Serdar Argic" practice
before, I couldn't comment. I can now say that I _do_not_ find
Carl's practice of including "voluminous references" as annoying as
Serdar Argic's "similar" practice.

>I think that a succinct article containing useful timely information
>merits posting to the newsgroups. Perhaps it's too much to hope that
>you will open your mind to Muslim people's sufferings, but it's worth
>pointing out.

[ ... ]

If Serdar Argic's idea of a succinct article is a 200+ line submission
crossposted to six groups, I count myself lucky that we hang around
different parts of the Usenet. I can only hope this wasn't a
representative example of what he normally posts. He even seems to be a
subscriber to the how-to-win-friends-through-inflammatory-subject-lines
school of thought. On, well...

For the record, I don't really have a problem with Carl's posts. If
you don't want to read the references you can just move onto the next
post. It _is_ a little jarring to be following a discussion and suddenly
a post appears which doesn't really participate in the discussion. The
fact that it may provide background for the discussion (and, hopefully,
will help the discussion to build on what has already been discussed
rather than rehash old arguments) makes up for the jarring, IMHO.
Maybe Carl could work on his segue-ways into the references to make
then smoother. ;-)

Anyway, as long as your newsreader supports kill files, Carl's posts
shouldn't be any problem to you (as long as no one replies to them
anyway ;-) ), so let's put this one to bed, okay?

michael@afterlife.ncsc.mil