http://groups.google.com/group/alt.autos.nissan?hl=en
alt.autos.nissan@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Almost lost a socket - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.autos.nissan/t/d5bed8c3a936b40d?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Almost lost a socket
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.autos.nissan/t/d5bed8c3a936b40d?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Sep 5 2010 2:36 pm
From: Jim Yanik
"E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
news:C8A91B7E.1FEBA%epmeyer50@msn.com:
> On 9/3/10 8:27 AM, in article
> Xns9DE86055A560Ajyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44, "Jim Yanik"
><jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>
>> "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
>> news:C8A64D15.1FD2B%epmeyer50@msn.com:
>>> There are about 3 people left on earth that even use usenet anymore
>>> and I have to think that these anal retentive top posting/bottom
>>> posting tirades are a large part of the reason why.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> the main reason many have "deserted" Usenet is because few ISPs
>> provide the service anymore.
>
> Yeah, but that's a chicken and egg argument. Most of the ISPs are
> dropping it because the usage isn't there anymore.
>
>>
>> second might be bacause of the difficulty in following a thread when
>> coming in after a few MFFY top posters have screwed up the continuity
>> and readability of the thread. "anal-retentive",I think not.
>>
>
> Just keep on thinking that. I, and I suspect many others, roll our
> eyes and immediately ignore the thread as soon it degenerates into
> complaints about how its posted.
I fail to see how it's "anal-retentive" to read from top to bottom,the
NATURAL manner of reading. It's MFFY to top-post.It's egotistical people
who selfishly want to read their comments first,too lazy to scroll down to
the end.
>
>> Here's an example for ya;go to Townhall.com,pick an article with 50
>> or more posts and replies,and don't select the "oldest first" option.
>> They automatically post everything "newest first";why,I can't figure.
>> Now,try to read the posts and make sense of it in "newest first"
>> order.
>
> If you are actually following the thread this argument is moot. If
> there is a problem at all, it is only for someone trying to catch up
> with a thread (s)he has not been following.
Oh,so that makes it all right?
It IS a "problem". the longer the thread,the more difficult it gets for
anyone to follow,and top posting makes it FAR worse,and sooner.
AND,I suspect you didn't try my suggestion about trying one of Townhall's
fora.
It's a perfect example of top-posting screw-up. I dare you to TRY it,then
you will understand. Or maybe not.....but then there's no hope for you.
For one thing,you might only be able to come across the article -after-
there's been 100 posts and replies,and trying to read "newest first" is
impossible.Some of the articles originate at midnight,and by 7AM,there's a
slew of posts. That's the same as on the newsgroups.
>
>>
>> Third is probably the trolls who go looking for argument,or the
>> cross- posters who spam their crap across several NGs.
>
> No argument with this one. Most of the garbage landing in
> rec.autos.tech lately is being cross posted from various Toyota and
> Ford boards and I do find that irritating.
>
>
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Sep 6 2010 12:20 pm
From: "Striker"
"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote in message
news:Xns9DEAB32E24307jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44...
> "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
> news:C8A91B7E.1FEBA%epmeyer50@msn.com:
>
>> On 9/3/10 8:27 AM, in article
>> Xns9DE86055A560Ajyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44, "Jim Yanik"
>><jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>>
>>> "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
>>> news:C8A64D15.1FD2B%epmeyer50@msn.com:
>
>>>> There are about 3 people left on earth that even use usenet anymore
>>>> and I have to think that these anal retentive top posting/bottom
>>>> posting tirades are a large part of the reason why.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> the main reason many have "deserted" Usenet is because few ISPs
>>> provide the service anymore.
>>
>> Yeah, but that's a chicken and egg argument. Most of the ISPs are
>> dropping it because the usage isn't there anymore.
>>
>>>
>>> second might be bacause of the difficulty in following a thread when
>>> coming in after a few MFFY top posters have screwed up the continuity
>>> and readability of the thread. "anal-retentive",I think not.
>>>
>>
>> Just keep on thinking that. I, and I suspect many others, roll our
>> eyes and immediately ignore the thread as soon it degenerates into
>> complaints about how its posted.
>
> I fail to see how it's "anal-retentive" to read from top to bottom,the
> NATURAL manner of reading. It's MFFY to top-post.It's egotistical people
> who selfishly want to read their comments first,too lazy to scroll down to
> the end.
>>
>>> Here's an example for ya;go to Townhall.com,pick an article with 50
>>> or more posts and replies,and don't select the "oldest first" option.
>>> They automatically post everything "newest first";why,I can't figure.
>>> Now,try to read the posts and make sense of it in "newest first"
>>> order.
>>
>> If you are actually following the thread this argument is moot. If
>> there is a problem at all, it is only for someone trying to catch up
>> with a thread (s)he has not been following.
>
> Oh,so that makes it all right?
> It IS a "problem". the longer the thread,the more difficult it gets for
> anyone to follow,and top posting makes it FAR worse,and sooner.
>
> AND,I suspect you didn't try my suggestion about trying one of Townhall's
> fora.
> It's a perfect example of top-posting screw-up. I dare you to TRY it,then
> you will understand. Or maybe not.....but then there's no hope for you.
> For one thing,you might only be able to come across the article -after-
> there's been 100 posts and replies,and trying to read "newest first" is
> impossible.Some of the articles originate at midnight,and by 7AM,there's a
> slew of posts. That's the same as on the newsgroups.
>>
>>>
>>> Third is probably the trolls who go looking for argument,or the
>>> cross- posters who spam their crap across several NGs.
>>
>> No argument with this one. Most of the garbage landing in
>> rec.autos.tech lately is being cross posted from various Toyota and
>> Ford boards and I do find that irritating.
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Yanik
> jyanik
> at
> localnet
> dot com
Can we give it a break guys, I use outlook express and like email replies it
wants to top post all news group replies. Lets just drop it and get on with
our lives !
Striker
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Sep 6 2010 5:35 pm
From: "E. Meyer"
On 9/5/10 4:36 PM, in article
Xns9DEAB32E24307jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44, "Jim Yanik"
<jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
> "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
> news:C8A91B7E.1FEBA%epmeyer50@msn.com:
>
>> On 9/3/10 8:27 AM, in article
>> Xns9DE86055A560Ajyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44, "Jim Yanik"
>> <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:
>>
>>> "E. Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
>>> news:C8A64D15.1FD2B%epmeyer50@msn.com:
>
>>>> There are about 3 people left on earth that even use usenet anymore
>>>> and I have to think that these anal retentive top posting/bottom
>>>> posting tirades are a large part of the reason why.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> the main reason many have "deserted" Usenet is because few ISPs
>>> provide the service anymore.
>>
>> Yeah, but that's a chicken and egg argument. Most of the ISPs are
>> dropping it because the usage isn't there anymore.
>>
>>>
>>> second might be bacause of the difficulty in following a thread when
>>> coming in after a few MFFY top posters have screwed up the continuity
>>> and readability of the thread. "anal-retentive",I think not.
>>>
>>
>> Just keep on thinking that. I, and I suspect many others, roll our
>> eyes and immediately ignore the thread as soon it degenerates into
>> complaints about how its posted.
>
> I fail to see how it's "anal-retentive" to read from top to bottom,the
> NATURAL manner of reading. It's MFFY to top-post.It's egotistical people
> who selfishly want to read their comments first,too lazy to scroll down to
> the end.
>>
I revert to my original assertion - this anal retentive BS is becoming the
death of usenet. I have no use for anybody, business or pleasure, who
focuses on the jots and commas to the exclusion of the message, which is
part and partial what this amounts to.
>>> Here's an example for ya;go to Townhall.com,pick an article with 50
>>> or more posts and replies,and don't select the "oldest first" option.
>>> They automatically post everything "newest first";why,I can't figure.
>>> Now,try to read the posts and make sense of it in "newest first"
>>> order.
>>
>> If you are actually following the thread this argument is moot. If
>> there is a problem at all, it is only for someone trying to catch up
>> with a thread (s)he has not been following.
>
> Oh,so that makes it all right?
> It IS a "problem". the longer the thread,the more difficult it gets for
> anyone to follow,and top posting makes it FAR worse,and sooner.
>
> AND,I suspect you didn't try my suggestion about trying one of Townhall's
> fora.
> It's a perfect example of top-posting screw-up. I dare you to TRY it,then
> you will understand. Or maybe not.....but then there's no hope for you.
> For one thing,you might only be able to come across the article -after-
> there's been 100 posts and replies,and trying to read "newest first" is
> impossible.Some of the articles originate at midnight,and by 7AM,there's a
> slew of posts. That's the same as on the newsgroups.
I have been following these groups for about 15 years, and I have yet to
find a discussion I couldn't follow if I wanted to. Its just lame to assert
that oldest fist is ideal but newest first is impossible to read. Get real
No comments:
Post a Comment