You are obviously very unhappy with the thread to do this, FL.
100% incorrect. I just think there are too many articles posted each day with diminishing regard for quality.
My time, and that of others too, is valuable.
Since I don't read Scott, I don't give a damn
Fine, your loss in my opinion, but that's the way it works. I cannot please everyone at the same time so I err on the generous side, then it's up to you to fine tune your receiver.
but I think you are going to get a lot of resentment over this exemption of the worst offender.
Thanks for the heads up. I am aware that some have problems with ss but my issues are largely of a different nature.
FYI, 'offender' is not the word I would choose. I think ss has done some exceptional digging for the most part. It is "what he does" and has done it with some exceptional results for years on SI. I'd just like him to pare down the material he posts here by about 60% or so (and be a little more aware of my boundary conditions for suitability).
The way I read this, I can paste a paragraph or two from an article, but not the article.
Good point. OK, short 'pastes' are free. No problem.
The link reference is unclear.
Stand alone links are free too. But if you have several, try putting them into one post with intros.
Like I say, enlist others or wait until tomorrow, or link it only, or use some brief quotes--but please , I hope people are not going to play games with me on this.
--ken/fl |
