Return to “Why Do So Many Repost The Original Post?”
There you go.sjfcontrol wrote:Very subtle...03Lightningrocks wrote:Put an angel on topsjfcontrol wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O_Tannenbaum" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;03Lightningrocks wrote:............................jmra wrote:03Lightningrocks wrote:..sjfcontrol wrote:.Ameer wrote:03Lightningrocks wrote:jmra wrote:
............................
............................
Rinse and repeat.Abraham wrote:Thanks to you all for proving my point.
You've done a Mah-Vell-Us job.
Gentlemen, we need to get back on track and answer the OP. . . . . .Abraham wrote:I can at times understand the re-posting of an original post with an accompanying response, but most of the time re-posting the original isn't necessary.
If a question is asked, why isn't a simple answer adequate? Most especially if the response is immediately responded to after the question.
I also see multiple re-posts ad nauseam in a single response.
Why do this?
Very few times do I see such re-posting help clarify, if anything, re-posting wily nily seems to muddy things up.
Rant off.
apostate wrote:sjfcontrol wrote:I have no idea what y'all are agreeing with...
Not at all. I was vastly amused.Abraham wrote:The Annoyed Man,
I was expecting someone to do what you did, berry, berry funnee and do you see what a waste re-posting is?
Just to annoy you.Abraham wrote:I can at times understand the re-posting of an original post with an accompanying response, but most of the time re-posting the original isn't necessary.
If a question is asked, why isn't a simple answer adequate? Most especially if the response is immediately responded to after the question.
I also see multiple re-posts ad nauseam in a single response.
Why do this?
Very few times do I see such re-posting help clarify, if anything, re-posting wily nily seems to muddy things up.
Rant off.