Re: XNA redux



Steve Ackman wrote:

Here's his profile (posting history) as viewed by GG:
http://snipr.com/3qgg5

... thousands and thousands of posts in scores and scores of groups
including this one with no XNA.

Of course that covers the last 79 months, much of
which time I didn't have the XNA set as default.
The XNA rate for the last year might be higher.

I stand corrected by an informed source -- where the context of corrected
is my 'inference' that SA 'mostly' posts non-xna. Apparently you are more
XNA than you used to be. I encourage/recommend against that. See below.

Near as I can determine there are three basic views
of XNA:
a) You should never ever use XNA for any reason (because
that exposes you as a lamer/troll/loser with
something to hide).

b) You have the choice to XNA or not, post-by-post.
Why not exercise that choice.

c) You should always use XNA. (I'm not really sure of
the rationale behind that either, but I don't
denigrate, or even question, anyone for choosing to
do so.)

Other than the fact that viewpoint "a" is clearly
wrong, I don't see the controversy. ;-)

OK, here's the way I see it so far.

<mycite>
It seems reasonable to ask an XNAer what is the main 'reason' or intent
s/he chooses to do so
</mycite>

Some people don't (may not) care one way or the other whether or not
someone posts XNA.

Other people, such as those who rely on GG for useful research, /hate/ to
see XNA being used. Some other people hate seeing XNA for more obscure
reasons.

For various reasons some technical, XNA doesn't really work reliably, even
on GG or gmane where it works 'best'/worst.

Because XNA is going to be 'variously' interpreted both in the minds of
other newsers and by the 'processes', it is going to be offensive much
more often than not, it is going to be 'harmful'/negative sometimes, and
it is going to 'fail' more often than the XNAer can guess.

For all of those reasons, I think XNA shouldn't be used both on the basis
of netiquette offensiveness as well as its unpredictable fallibility.

It also presumptuously puts 'demands' or requirements on others which are
not justified.

"I see you put an XNA on your message. Sorry, that doesn't 'work' for me/
my archiver."

Another side of the argument is the issue of webforums which sponge from
usenet. What if I don't mind if my messages are propagated on
newsservers, but I don't like their 'publication' by a webserver or in a
book?


--
Mike Easter

.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: XNA redux
    ... xna post is preserved anyway. ... posts I was trying to recover had XNA's set (I could only at best locate ... OTOH I don't see the point (of setting XNA) because the post is available ... don't acknowledge XNA headers. ...
    (news.software.readers)
  • Re: Hiding originating IP when posting through CLOSED news servers
    ... >> original posts ends up in others' replies and that includes fully ... >> quoting all my message with headers. ... >we've already agreed are not archived using XNA? ... >your original post from the archives. ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: Troll thread; nothing to see here was: {Ping Blinky
    ... in how you conclude that posting with XNA is "hiding." ... e-mail address is really the one posting to Usenet. ... how do you think XNA hides people? ... Irrelevant, with new posts, as an archive isn't involved; ...
    (news.software.readers)
  • Re: Ping Mike Easter was Re: XNA redux
    ... The GG profile *does* include posts with XNA, ... Then the part of Ackerman's posting history that Mike Easter posted ...
    (news.software.readers)
  • Re: Ping Mike Easter was Re: XNA redux
    ... *display* them, as has been suggested here, then the profiles could ... The GG profile *does* include posts with XNA, ... on the "calendar" of posting history for a group. ... I posted a GG posting history link which included a *LOT* of SA posts from ...
    (news.software.readers)