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.

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