Re: howto drop a corrupt database ?

"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:<3fb2dd78$0$13673$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "Joel Garry" <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote in message
> news:91884734.0311121703.31012312_at_posting.google.com...
> > Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:<1068583129.594017_at_yasure>...
> > > Howard J. Rogers wrote:
> > >
> > > >"Daniel Morgan" damorgan_at_x.washington.edu wrote in HTML yet again
> despite
> > > >constant pleadings for him not to:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > And with regard to the comment above, from whoever wrote it, I have yet
> > > to write a single
> > > line of HTML in any posting. I am posting with Netscape 7.1 via a local
> > > ISP's usenet group
> > > access and it is what it is. The HTML isn't mine. The only thing you'll
> > > get from me in brackets
> > > is RANT and /RANT and then only rarely.
> >
> > Well, your .sig has an http: which is interpreted by many readers as
> > html, but it did seem awfully strange to complain about that. I just
> > assumed he confused you with someone else.
>
> I wrote that comment (and didn't see Daniel's original reply, either). Many
> (but not all) of Daniel's postings appear as HTML documents in my newsreader
> (currently back to Outlook, not outlook express).
>
> I have to switch it back to plain text format, which then removes all the
> indentations, reply characters and so on, meaning that I am reduced to
> inserting lines of "=======" to delineate what's mine and what's not, and
> completely stuffing up the thread layout accordingly.
>
> But an apology is in order to Daniel, since I believe him when he says it's
> not him to blame but (as you point out) my newsreader is.

Apologies 2U, now that I see other posts saying he did in the past. But really, wouldn't the correct response be a polite email to the html poster? Maybe a gentle reminder pointing out how to set a particular newsreader not to write html in a followup to a specific offending post, so others can avoid a similar mistake.   

>
> So, to Daniel: sorry for the false accusation.
>
> Anyway: if in future, you see "=========" in my replies, that's what's
> happening.

Gawd, that's worse. Understand now why the MS crowd top-posts? NOT that I'm advocating it, it just explains a lot. And what was with Anurag's post in this thread, I could barely decipher it?

Can't you go into Tools --> Options --> E-Mail Options --> When Replying To A Message --> Prefix Each Line Of Original Message and set the Prefix each line with: to > ? I dunno, I never post with it, but I thought the email was the same on purpose. Of course, when I use that email, I piss people off who don't use outlook because I like to use HTML with that bizarro old Boomerang stationery that looks so much like my kitchen counter where I th^H^Hgrew up.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.  I hate supporting things I don't like but am
forced to use.  Like most MS software.