home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.quotations
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!rtech!sgiblab!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!acjbooks
- From: acjbooks@citr.uq.oz.au (ACJ Books (Chris))
- Subject: Re: Ground Rules for Adopting Quotes...?
- Message-ID: <acjbooks.728217354@citr.uq.oz.au>
- Sender: news@bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au (USENET News System)
- Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
- References: <27JAN199311115025@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:35:54 GMT
- Lines: 32
-
- ecaxron@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham) writes:
-
-
- >Specific questions:
-
- >(1) Do you need the reference from which the quote came?
- No.
- >(2) If not, under what conditions will the author's name be sufficient?
- If the quote stirs that indefinable something in me, then I keep it
- and regard it as a challenge to trace the source.
- >(3) Do you tend to ignore quotes for which the author's name is not given?
- No. vide above.
- >(4) How important is it to "nail down" the exact words?
- Pretty important - ultimately. But this is part of the fun of
- source tracing.
- >(5) Do you take quotes away from this newsgroup to entertain :-) others?
- Yes
- >(6) Which do you prefer - funny or serious quotes?
- Hard to answer. A quote must have that indefinable something that
- appeals to me. I think it is the ability to say pithily, in smart
- language a truism of life for me. The sort of thing which gets the
- response - "Hey, that's so true. I wish I'd said that." And if
- there is a touch of humour, and better still wit, then so much the
- better.
-
- >I am willing to summarize responses to this inquiry, but I wonder if it
- >might not be more fun to discuss openly. You decide.
-
- Good topic. Will look forward to the discussion.
-
- Chris.
-
-