[WikiEN-l] Speaking of bad quote/reply formats...

[Steve Bennett]

On 4/5/06, Daniel R. Tobias <dan at tobias.name> wrote:
> How about Katefan0's format of 4 Apr 2006 18:30:44, which consisted
> of quoting back a paragraph from an earlier message without
> attribution line or quoting markers, followed immediately (with no
> indicator of where the quote ended and the reply began) with the
> reply... and then *that* was followed by a fullquote of the original
> message (including a second copy of the paragraph already quoted
> above it).  Can *anybody* come up with a coherent defense of such a
> quoting format as *that*?

Oh jeez. I just found the relevant message, and I don't see the issue.
Your explanation is complicated, but basically it was like this:

Quote
Newtext in response
Signature
Quote header
Quote with > signs

The formatting was certainly original, but all the original
attribution was retained, and there was no difficulty whatsoever
working out who wrote the text being replied to.

Now, as punishment for having this retarded conversation, I suggest we
all go and destubify an article related to lolicon or something.

Steve