Re: [OT] Re: (0 == foo), rather than (foo == 0)

[David Ford <david+challenge-response@blue-labs.org>]

Why don't you read the whole thread.  I'm not pushing any rules, and 
I've been replying "to the top" of emails on LKML for almost ten years.  
If your mailer wraps lines wrongly, that's the fault of your mailer.  I 
haven't had problems with mixed up quoting.  Not all software is created 
inferior..  I don't have to reply if someone else has already stated 
what needed to be said.  If you don't like my quote-above-reply, then 
filter my emails.

David
p.s. If you want to follow the 'rules' of RFC 1855, then there are 
several this list is 'breaking', this RFC is informational, a guide.  
Not law.  Your message violates RFC 1855.

Stefan Smietanowski wrote:

> You also don't have a clue what replying below is all about nor do you
> respond to anything regarding quotes. How many times haven't we seen
> stupid quotes like this :
>
> > blah blah long long line ..........................
> end of last line > here is the second line that's quoted
> end of second line......... > and here starts the third one.
>
> If you haven't - lucky you. But don't try to push your
> reply-above-and-don't-give-a-piss-about-others approach.
>
> This list replies below and uses manually wrapped lines.
>
> If you want to create your own linux kernel list with other
> rules - be free to do so, but if you want to continue talking
> on this one, follow the rules on it, don't try to push your own.
>
> // Stefan