I know! I already caught my mistake, but that was right after I sent it, and
I couldn't move my posting obviously.
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3b1f570b@news.povray.org...
> parasonic <par### [at] homecom> wrote:
> : thanks..works like a charm!!!
>
> : "parasonic" <par### [at] homecom> wrote in message
> : news:3b1ea3eb$1@news.povray.org...
> :> Can anyone tell me how I would make a bending tube? I am looking into
> : making
> :> a power cord for a pov'ed soldering iron.
> :>
> :> Thanks!
> :>
> :>
>
>
>   Sorry about preaching once more about correct news writing, but
> some recapitulation might not be bad. And this special article has
> several mistakes.
>   I'll tell you the mistakes in the form of questions:
>
>   1. If you were responding to Ron's article, why did you follow up to
your
> own original question instead of his answer? People will not know who
> are you talking to if you are responding to your own article but talking
> to someone else (specially if it's a longer thread).
>
>   2. Why did you quote the (=your) original article although you are not
> in any way responding to it? When you quote something it's because you
> are writing response to that specific quote.
>
>   3. Why did you write your text at the beginning of the article and left
> a useless quote at the end? You are not responding to the quote and you
are
> not using it in any way for your text. Why are you wasting server space
> and bandwidth for a completely useless quote?
>   (Of course the question in this particular case is not about physical
> server disk space and physical bandwidth as the whole article is so short,
> but people make the same mistake also with a lot larger articles and
> besides the useless quote adds visual noise.)
>
>   Why is it so common anyways that people write their answers at the
> beginning of the article and quote the whole original article untouched
> at the end? Don't they know how to delete a block of text?
>   There are other mistakes people often do (although not in this case,
> but I'll just list them as a reminder):
>
>   - Answer first to a specific question and quote whole original article
> after that. This makes no sense; people can't know what is the article
> answering specially if the quote is long.
>
>   - Too long quotes. It seems that some people don't know how to delete
> bigger blocks of text (or for some reason are unwilling to delete anything
> from the quote). Even when the answer is properly written after the quote
> it's responding to, the writer still makes this mistake and leaves
> unnecesarily huge blocks of quoted original text although he is answering
> to just a few lines of it.
>
>   - Not quoting anything although answering to a specific question.
Although
> this is not as bad as the previous ones, it's still better to quote at
least
> the original question and write the answer after the quote. This way
people
> will know what you are answering to.
>   The only case where no quotes are needed is when the original article is
> very long (more than 10 lines or so) and you are responding to the whole
> article, to the general idea in it and not to a specific question inside
it.
> In fact, in these cases the quote _should_ be left out if it's just too
long
> (else it will be the previous mistake, ie. too long quotes). Another
> possibility is to just quote few lines from the beginning and add a line
> like "[SNIP]" or similar where the quote was cut out.
>
>
> --
> #macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
> rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
> ],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
> 7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}//                     - Warp -

Post a reply to this message