[FRIAM] Footnotes in email messages: WAS OK. That's funny.

[Steve Smith]

I agree with Glen, even though I am a likely example of half or more of
what he decries.   I find the footnote/endnote/sidebar structure to be
helpful in many/most cases, and acknowledge that I am both lazy and
underpracticed at doing either well.  

I find the ingenious and whimsical reference symbols a nice distraction
with a possible extra layer of crypto meaning?  I find both Glen and Jon
to be adept/astute enough to do this well, and have it not be nearly as
arbitrary as if *I* for example were to be so self-indulgent as to join
that particular fray.

> Dude! These are NOT footnotes. They're end notes. >8^D And, they're anything but lazy. It takes a lot of work to figure out what symbols to use, make sure they're in the right order, decide what content should remain in the text and what part is merely self-indulgent commentary that belongs in the note. Etc.
>
> I'd argue those of you who do NOT use end notes are lazy and stuffy, what with your unreadably long sentences and torturous vocabulary full of multi-syllable jargon implicitly citing whole libraries of the writings of old or dead people.
>
> On 8/5/20 12:24 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
>> Now Glen has contaminated Jon with the style of putting footnotes with reference symbols in email messages, I have to protest.  Footnoting as a sinful, lazy, nasty, indulgent, stuffy academic habit that should be stomped out wherever it emerges, no matter how ingenious and whimsical the reference symbols.