Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: [GridSec] Spoiler space & quoting only the relevant bits
Date: Mon Feb 18 05:30:02 2002
According to Meph, on Mon, 18 Feb 2002 the word on the street was...

> >Thanks for deleting the spoiler space... NOT!!!!
>
> But I also thought that we were told to only quote the relevant part
> of the message! Oh well.

Yes, you were, but spoiler space is relevant -- it keeps those who
shouldn't read the rest of the message, from reading the rest of the
message. However, if you think the spoiler space is getting excessive (I'd
say that's when it's more than double-quoted) you could always remove it
and put in a new bunch of empty lines.

The reason we ask (tell?) everyone to only quote the relevant parts of a
message is because that way the post is easier to follow, and it also
wastes less bandwidth/memory. Spoiler space, though, does not take much
memory because it only consists of a bunch of line feeds, which are just
one character (one byte) each. That means that twenty lines of spoiler
space take up less memory than this whole sentence does...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Dat is de kip voor het ei spannen.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++@ UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--) O
V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t@ 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about [GridSec] Spoiler space & quoting only the relevant bits, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.