Re: Thanks re assert/de-assert

Subject: Re: Thanks re assert/de-assert
From: Julie Gephart <jm_gephart -at- PNL -dot- GOV>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 19:58:22 GMT

In article <9411060856 -dot- AA06885 -at- tasu32 -dot- nsc -dot- com>, Marsha Wolicki
<cmawta -at- taux01 -dot- nsc -dot- com> wrote:

> ----- Begin Included Message -----
> A belated thanks to all who responded intelligently to my request
> for suggestions for dealing with "asserted and de-asserted",
> especially, Richard Mateosian, Erik Harris and Aahz.

> To those who made dumb comments, I recommend that you refrain from
> offering suggestions when you know nothing about a subject. I
> already knew that de-assert was not in any dictionary. I was trying
> to find out whether or not it had become accepted anyway.
snip

Sorry, if you make a request for suggestions to a list, I don't believe
you're entitled to preselect those who meet *your* criteria for an
*intelligent* answer. We all have to do a certain amount of sorting and
selecting when we ask for advice and help, and putting down those who
didn't do it to our liking is poor form. IMHO, of course!
__
Julie Gephart, practicing random acts of editing.


Previous by Author: Re: Contract Work
Next by Author: Re: Automatic Backups in FrameMaker
Previous by Thread: Thanks re assert/de-assert
Next by Thread: Re: *** Q: WHAT KIND OF PEOPL...


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads