Peter H. Granzeau said: > At 15:53 12/01/2002 -0500, Thomas Yan wrote: > >>David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b at dd-b.net> writes: >> > >> > Heh. You're trying to argue that reply-munging is now the default. >> That won't, of course, make it right. >> >>I'm ambivalent about this question. If I were God Emperor, there would >> be no munging, and people who tried to inflict such blasphemies (and >> crap like AOL's quoting style) on the world would be punished. > > "Munging" is a term I am not familiar with. What's it mean? http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/m/munge.html (Those not believing Munge was established as a known term, please take note. *grin* ) "munge /muhnj/ vt. 1. [derogatory] To imperfectly transform information. 2. A comprehensive rewrite of a routine, data structure or the whole program. 3. To modify data in some way the speaker doesn't need to go into right now or cannot describe succinctly (compare mumble). 4. To add spamblock to an email address." We're using definition 1. Referenced in: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html -Rick