Re: New Illuminati Group..

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 10:21:51 +0000, Halla
<halla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 14 Mar 2006 16:39:15 -0800, "J.Otis" <ehtouzjian@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
blethered:




" How were we supposed to know who you were replying to, when there
wasn't any quoted text? That message from Romauld was posted a
fortnight ago, it will be lost from some servers now. "


Now, who said that?

I did! It was me!

--

And Agent recognises this as a sig sep so it cut off your comments
when I hit reply.



It is easy to see who I was talking to when you view the messages as a
tree.

You can do that on the Google website (sometimes, if the original
message is there and doesn't have the "x-archive=no" header). But not
in a newsreader program, as they do not have the infinite storage that
Google does, so the messages "expire" after a few days, just as they
do on newsservers.

Not especially. The message to which you were replying may have
expired, and in any case it makes for tedious reading to jump between
messages all the time. Not everyone uses Google to read usenet, after
all, some of us use news servers and news readers. Quaint notion, I
know.

News servers? Looxury! When I were a lad, we used to DREAM of having a
news server. We used to have to have to read 5 bit paper tape by
candlelight ... etc etc.

Even though I suppose that is not too obvious, I though the
subject matter would make it clear I was not directing my reply towards
Dirk. While this certainly is a public forum, I was asking why he
jumped in when he did not actually have a comment to make.
Including above text certainly is more convenient, but there is no
reason for Dirk to get irritable simply because I forgot to include
quoted text.

Not just Dirk. It's polite, if nothing else, to include some quoted
text, along with an attribution, so we know who said it. This is not a
local foible, either.

Our FAQ contains something about this, I think (It has been a long
time since I actually read it). The important thing when posting on
USENET is to make things as simple as possible for the readers, not
just for the writer.

I think, if nothing else, this demonstrates one of the many vast
advantages yahoo groups have over Google.

If I wore a monocle, it would have fallen out just then. Yahoo groups?
Signup and get spammed for ever?

Well there's your answer then.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: usenet
    ... But NewsFleX did the job. ... I never see the 'trolls', not only do the news servers I use filter most of those out, ... What does not help in my view is people starting to use google groups, and thinking that is the only way to read news. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: usenet
    ... But NewsFleX did the job. ... I never see the 'trolls', not only do the news servers I use filter most of those out, ... What does not help in my view is people starting to use google groups, and thinking that is the only way to read news. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: iso image
    ... On Sun, 07 Oct 2007, in the Usenet newsgroup comp.os.linux, in article ... by google, and 'www.dejanews.com' is a CNAME for groups.google.com. ... There are also a large number of "low cost" news servers ... US Government warns against Internet Explorer: ...
    (comp.os.linux)
  • Re: Google News - The Good, Bad, and Ugly
    ... I found that some of my posts were not showing up. ... Google, and they were there, along with possibly some others that were not ... the left pane as a tree, and I tried to widen the pane. ... Don't worry too much if your posts don't show up on other news servers, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Google News - The Good, Bad, and Ugly
    ... I found that some of my posts were not showing up. ... Google, and they were there, along with possibly some others that were not ... the left pane as a tree, and I tried to widen the pane. ... Don't worry too much if your posts don't show up on other news servers, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)