I'm a qualified doctor.

lonelytraveller wrote:
I'm a qualified doctor.

Who can't work out how to properly quote using Google Groups? Well,
**** me, but I've just managed it, which I guess - yet again - makes me
much smarter that you.

If you had worked out how to use google groups properly, you would
understand why they decided NOT to include the original in the reply by
default.

In message .com,
lonelytraveller writes
If you had worked out how to use google groups properly, you would
understand why they decided NOT to include the original in the reply by
default.
But as has already been pointed out to you more than once, you can
reconfigure it to do so.

Alternatively, as I tried to point out in my other posting, you can use
other methods of showing context.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

On 12 May 2005 13:03:34 -0700, "lonelytraveller"
wrote:

If you had worked out how to use google groups properly, you would
understand why they decided NOT to include the original in the reply by
default.

If you're as smart as you think you are, you know that Google doesn't
set the accepted standard of manners for Usenet. You'd also know that
Google's arbitrary change is a recent meausre, and that previously it
did adhere to accepted standards.
--
Nick Cooper

[Carefully remove the detonators from my e-mail address to reply!]

The London Underground at War:
http://www.cwgcuser.org.uk/personal/...ra/lu/tuaw.htm
625-Online - classic British television:
http://www.625.org.uk
'Things to Come' - An Incomplete Classic:
http://www.thingstocome.org.uk

If you were as smart as you think, you would know that you don't set
the accepted standard of manners, so **** off.

lonelytraveller wrote to uk.transport.london on Fri, 13 May 2005:

If you were as smart as you think, you would know that you don't set
the accepted standard of manners, so **** off.

"Everybody's out of step except my Johnnie", is that it? Usenet
convention has been worked out over the past ten years, so why does a
newbie like you know better?
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 3 April 2005

"Nick Cooper" wrote in
message ...
Midway between BG and Liverpool Street, although it's acquired the
former name, presumably because it was either closer to that station,
or to differentiate it from the tunnels already in use as shelters at
Liverpool Street.

Do you have any further info on this? I know about the Bishopsgate shaft,
the "mysterious" floodgates at Bishopsgate, and the complex of tunnels at
Hollybush Gardens, just west of Bethnal Green, but I've never heard of
anything else on this section.

There was (and is) an intermediate shaft at Carlton Square, mid-way between
Bethnal Green and Mile End, that was associated with a war-time shelter.


'London's Secret Tubes' (Emmerson & Beard, 2004) attributes it to
flooding and quotes extensively from official reports at the time
detailing the problems encountered, and the measures that would need
to be taken to complete the shelter as planned. The only mention of
labour is in the context of the manpower being diverted to Camden
Town, where completion was of a higher priority.

I believe the brick building on the corner of Kennington Park Road/Brixton
Road/Camberwell New Road is a relic of the aborted Oval shelter.

Annabel Smyth:
Usenet convention has been worked out over the past ten years...

Getting on for 25 years now, actually. These bloody newbies, think
they know everything... :-)
--
Mark Brader, "It is impossible. Solution follows..."
Toronto, -- Richard Heathfield

JRS: In article , dated Fri, 13 May
2005 08:08:28, seen in news:uk.transport.london, Nick Cooper
posted :
On 12 May 2005 13:03:34 -0700, "lonelytraveller"
wrote:

If you had worked out how to use google groups properly, you would
understand why they decided NOT to include the original in the reply by
default.

If you're as smart as you think you are, you know that Google doesn't
set the accepted standard of manners for Usenet. You'd also know that
Google's arbitrary change is a recent meausre, and that previously it
did adhere to accepted standards.


Be fair to Google - they are, as far as News is concerned, catering to
the moron market; and meaningless no-quote articles can be ignored more
efficiently than meaningless full top-quote ones, so their decision may
on the whole be an advantage to us.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. Turnpike v4.00 MIME ©
Web URL:http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/tsfaq.html - Timo Salmi: Usenet Q&A.
Web URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/news-use.htm : about usage of News.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.