For the antecedent I'm looking at the previous subject, not the last word in the predicate.

I wasn't looking for the last word in the predicate. For the antecedent, I was looking for "3. (grammar) A word, phrase or clause referred to by a pronoun".

Meat the the sentence is what to use.

I see what you've done there: an excellent example of an unparseable sentence. ;)

If you imagine some rule where the antecedent for "it" must be the subject of the prior statement, and the subject of the prior statement is "you", then shouldn't you be asking "Is it me?!" not «"it" is "these rule?"?» ? ;)

How do you imagine the question fragment "there rules?" is the subject of the prior statement? If something other than said subject can be the antecedent, then why do you (by omission) reject the already offered antecedent of "your post"?

But enough fun.

Well, I believe the more basic problem is that "people very often don't read" (something I find completely understandable). A requirement of "looking below" certainly adds to that problem, but seems to be a secondary factor. So I'm not looking for "excellent prose" here. I want a blurb that is likely to get noticed and at least partially understood without requiring an attempt to actually read it as a sentence.

But, yes, trying to (also) convey "look out below" is certainly an excellent suggestion. In the particular case that motivated your thread, there wasn't anything "below" to look at, of course, so it isn't actually an appropriate choice yet.

But one of the main points that I believe Corion was trying to convey, was "Your post should be written in PerlMonks-approved HTML" and "The above examples are examples of PerlMonks-approved HTML". Your version does not convey that very strongly.

How about?

Use: ...
to format your post; use "PerlMonks-approved HTML" (see below).

I think that incorporates both points and does so much more clearly with close to a minimum of prose (after the "hints" are restored, of course).

Thanks for the suggestion.

- tye        

In reply to Re^7: Improved instructions (fixed) by tye
in thread Improved instructions by John M. Dlugosz

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.