Endless lists of software. in a.c.f

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve Stevenson
  • Start date Start date
Of course I do, you however seem to be lacking on information about the
software you use.
Click to expand...

Why did you say "Agent only downloads bodies when you click on the
header." if you knew it wasn't true?
Then you try to weasel out of your mistake by not replying to what I
said, instead you accuse me of lacking information about the software,
which you just demonstrated a lack of knowledge about.
Sure I do, I am a registered Agent user since it was created. I have a
VERY low seriel number.
Click to expand...

So why do you say that Agent only downloads the bodies when one clicks
on the message?
Once again you do not reply to what I said, instead you try to weasel
out of it by referring to your status as a long time registered Agent
user.
Check the stats I posted earlier, your crying over less then 3 megs per
week.
Click to expand...

When the volume of a newsgroup grows considerably, for no good reason,
I do not like it.

The people who are prepared to start their browsers to follow Tramps
links, and download the programs, and check out the web sites, could
just as well use their browsers to check out his lists to begin with
too. They would be equally well served by just a link to the new list.

The people who cannot afford that kind of explorations, or do not have
time for it, have no interest in loads of links to untried programs.
They wait for more information and descriptions from people who have
really tried the programs and can recommend them.
Such readers should not download and read the posts they don't want.
Click to expand...

Don't you understand, it is not possible to filter those out so that
they are not downloaded.
You've made it clear that you download all messages to the group,
complete with bodies. Why you continue to do so and then complain
about it is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Because it is more tedious to download the headers first, try to
decide which ones are valuable or not, mark some of them, dialup again
and download the valuable ones.
That is not an efficient way to work. It is also more expensive.

I have been active in usenet for many years, and before that in
fidonet. I have tried all kinds of newsreaders and I work as
effectively as it is possible already. I know that the suggestions
about downloading just the headers first, etc.. are not useful advice
to me. People who use such methods are inexperienced and inefficient
low volume readers.

A high percentage of usenet users will be on dialup connections for
many years to come, so we should not accept un-necessary waste of
bandwidth.
Even if a billion new users will get cable access within the next 10
years there will also be one or two billions of new users on dialup
connections too.

Posting lots of messages with one link per message is such a waste.
In this case it is not even necessary to post few but very long
messages. It would be very easy to just post a link to the newest list
instead, and just as useful to the people who are interested in trying
out new programs.

When these "freeware explorers" find a program which is really a
keeper, a really valuable program, they could write about it in a.c.f,
with details about its features, its size, its freeware status, a
download link, etc.. so other people who wait for such detailed
descriptions and a strong recommendation can download it.
 
Essentially we both do the same thing - we dial up, download the
headers, select what we want, then download the bodies.
Click to expand...

No, you have not understood how I work at all.

I download all messages, with bodies. And close the dialup connection.

I do not even look closely at the headers, I click on the headers, one
after the other, look at the messages, and I do it offline.
In your case the selection is automatic and all-inclusive ( and online
),
Click to expand...

No, offline.
I'd have thought that someone who reads a clearly impressive and
certainly phenomenal 2000 messages a day would benefit from being a
tad more selective -
Click to expand...

I am selective. Many messages show by their formatting, lots of quoted
lines for example, that they are not worth reading.
But I don't waste more time by downloading all messages than I would
waste on reading headers, marking messages and downloading twice.
 
Roger Johansson Wrote in alt.comp.freeware, on Tue, 29 Jul 2003 17:59:55 +0200:
So why do you say that Agent only downloads the bodies when one clicks
on the message?
Click to expand...

Because it does? Agent by default does not download every header and
every message body for every article in the newsgroup. It CAN if so
configured but should not be done on dialup.
Once again you do not reply to what I said, instead you try to weasel
out of it by referring to your status as a long time registered Agent
user.
Click to expand...

How so, you are wrong. Agent has an ONLINE mode and offline mode, you
want it to be an offline reader yet you don't use it as you should.
When the volume of a newsgroup grows considerably, for no good reason,
I do not like it.
Click to expand...

Life is a bitch, unsubscribe. 3.5 megs a week is not a lot. even on a
dialup.
The people who are prepared to start their browsers to follow Tramps
links, and download the programs, and check out the web sites, could
just as well use their browsers to check out his lists to begin with
too. They would be equally well served by just a link to the new list.
Click to expand...

But your volume wont change, the number of headers might, but the overall
number of bytes would be very close. You are being unnecessarily
stubborn when you hold the cards to make it work the way you want.
The people who cannot afford that kind of explorations, or do not have
time for it, have no interest in loads of links to untried programs.
They wait for more information and descriptions from people who have
really tried the programs and can recommend them.
Click to expand...

Then do your own searches and unsubscribe. Tramps posts are the epitome
of what this newsgroup is for, and most seem to agree.

Don't you understand, it is not possible to filter those out so that
they are not downloaded.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is, use hamster or something with better filtering capabilities.
Because it is more tedious to download the headers first, try to
decide which ones are valuable or not, mark some of them, dialup again
and download the valuable ones.
That is not an efficient way to work. It is also more expensive.
Click to expand...

It is not more expensive and it IS more efficient, that way you only get
and see what you want.
I have been active in usenet for many years, and before that in
fidonet. I have tried all kinds of newsreaders and I work as
effectively as it is possible already. I know that the suggestions
about downloading just the headers first, etc.. are not useful advice
to me. People who use such methods are inexperienced and inefficient
low volume readers.
Click to expand...

Oh contrar mo frer. I have been on usenet for many years and until I got
broadband I only grabbed what I wanted to see.
A high percentage of usenet users will be on dialup connections for
many years to come, so we should not accept un-necessary waste of
bandwidth.
Even if a billion new users will get cable access within the next 10
years there will also be one or two billions of new users on dialup
connections too.
Click to expand...
Posting lots of messages with one link per message is such a waste.
In this case it is not even necessary to post few but very long
messages. It would be very easy to just post a link to the newest list
instead, and just as useful to the people who are interested in trying
out new programs.
Click to expand...
When these "freeware explorers" find a program which is really a
keeper, a really valuable program, they could write about it in a.c.f,
with details about its features, its size, its freeware status, a
download link, etc.. so other people who wait for such detailed
descriptions and a strong recommendation can download it.
Click to expand...

Sorry, most here disagree and like I said, your crying over 3.5 megs of
data over a 1 week period, get over it.
 
No, you have not understood how I work at all.

I download all messages, with bodies. And close the dialup
connection.
Click to expand...

And you blame others for the fact that your own system results in
downloading a bunch of articles that you don't want to have
downloaded.

Since your newsreader does not seem to have the automagic filtering
capabilities which would allow you to work in a more efficient way,
please reconsider the Hamster recommendations people have given you.
You can set Hamster up to connect to your server and download
messages /excluding/ the Tramp ones you find so onerous. Then you
can use Agent to read the ones that were downloaded. You would not
have to manually select which messages you want downloaded. John
Fitzsimons has written an excellent quick start guide/faq for using
Hamster with Agent, available at
<http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/hamster2.htm>. (Note the
cc tld; you should be able to connect tho that page without using
any of the dreaded US backbone at all.) With Hamster, simply
killfiling Tramp would be your simplest solution, though there are
much more powerful and elegant options for scoring and filtering.
The folks in the hamster.* hierarchy would be glad to help you work
efficiently with Hamster, if it turns out that you need any help.
 
Not true. Placing Tramp in your killfile will guarantee that neither
his message headers or bodies will be downloaded.
 
Placing Tramp in your killfile will guarantee that neither
his message headers or bodies will be downloaded.
Click to expand...

In order for the killfile to work, a few of his headers will have to be
downloaded, in particular the From headers.
 
While strolling through alt.comp.freeware, Roger Johansson was overheard
plotting:
I don't comment on the rest of your message, to reduce the volume of
this discussion, but you show the same lack of knowledge in those
parts too.
Click to expand...

Lack of knowledge? Your insane. All I have to say Which is 3.5 megs per
week. Your bitching over nothing. I cant imagine that any of the other
groups you read are any less. The LACK of understanding here is certainly
not on my side of the conversation.
 
Running a local newsserver like Hamster in addition to my
newsreader is a complicated system which would cost more in many
ways, first reading manuals to set it up, keeping it running would
steal resources, starting and stopping it takes extra time,
setting up new filters all the time, making the system work would
take time.
Click to expand...

For a guy who hasn't tried Hamster, you certainly make it sound bad.
In fact, it's pretty simple and does not hog resources, let alone
"steal" them. A click or a keystroke will start or stop it, and why
on earth would you be setting up new filters "all the time"?
In most newsgroups people do not waste bandwidth like Tramp
started to do, and if they do the other participants soon make
them stop and tell them to find a better solution.
Click to expand...

*sigh*
Tramp has not wasted any bandwidth. His posts are both on-topic and
useful.

Many good freeware solutions to your problem have been put forward,
yet you insist on continuing to fully download all of Tramp's posts.
Either find a solution to your problem (which is in no way Tramp's
problem or the newsgroup's problem) or don't, but in either case
please stop whining about it here.

Here's another one of those links to freeware that you dislike,
without any explanation or discussion from me about it:
<http://www.40tude.com/dialog/features.htm>
 
In order for the killfile to work, a few of his headers will have
to be downloaded, in particular the From headers.
Click to expand...


Whakwhetainu, grazie mille and vielen Dank to both you and Blinky for
your help in setting up the filyters that have cleared out my acf.
Obrigado muito
 
»Q« said:
Here's another one of those links to freeware that you dislike,
without any explanation or discussion from me about it:
<http://www.40tude.com/dialog/features.htm>
Click to expand...

I tried downloading and istalling that earlier, when I had cable
internet, but there was some problem with it, it refused to install,
if I recall correctly.

Anyway, I cannot afford to download big programs, and I don't have to.
I already have a good offline newsreader.
 
Tramp,
If the above suggestion is to your liking and you do not have a web page,
I would be willing to put it up on my server only updating say once or
twice a week. I could set it up as "updated by date" and not in
alphabetical order - less work that way.
Lemme know,
POKO

--
POKO SAID THAT ...........
reply to (e-mail address removed) don't use VIAGARA
Pat Keenan - Webmaster, Keenan Consulting
http://www.keenanconsulting.on.ca
silly portal: www.keenanconsulting.on.ca/portal.html
 
Anne said:
I'd say that navigating to a web page is much more complicated than
downloading newsgroup messages automatically.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking you need to brush up on you skills, if clicking a link or a
bookmark seems complex.
But wouldn't it cost modem users a lot of *money* to go to his site and
read the list there?
Click to expand...

When did he install the taxi-meter? How much is he charging per minute?
Maybe some people are envious, because one person has found all that
freeware? That's the only way I can interpret this incredible
discussion.
Click to expand...

Most of the discussion has been about the comparative merits of
one-big-post versus 50-little-posts. Not about not posting.
 
I rather think it's based on the way most people access the newsgroups
- why else would such a popular newsreader such as Forte Agent include
a specific 'offline' browsing mode?
Click to expand...

Yeah, but, see, John has this "American thing" workin'. Anyone who
disagrees with him is acting American.

Back you your style of working offline -- were you saying that even with
unlimited access (which I *believe* you said you have), you still go
through all of that, rather than working online?
 
Filtering would not be a tedious experience if the posts were in a
single message.
Click to expand...

I in no way with Roger, and his method of reading groups is terribly
inefficient. But as to filtering Tramp, it's not tedious when they're
in small messages, either.
 
This is one of the high volume newsgroup i read, and it got even
bigger when Tramp started posting lots of messages every day.
Click to expand...

Why not just put Tramp in your filter file? Then you won't be have to
d/l any of message bodies.

Or are you saying that you do indeed want to read what Tramp posts,
but you want it formatted according to your preference?
 
No, you have not understood how I work at all.
Click to expand...

Yes I have, so has just about everyone else reading this thread.
Try reading it again ( or is this how you get through 2000 messages a
day? ).

I'm not sure, however, just what it is you understand - but the
download stuff has all been explained quite nicely. Yer on yer own.

Regards,
 
Yeah, but, see, John has this "American thing" workin'. Anyone who
disagrees with him is acting American.

Back you your style of working offline -- were you saying that even with
unlimited access (which I *believe* you said you have), you still go
through all of that, rather than working online?
Click to expand...

Well, 'unlimited' access over here often comes with a caveat - in my
case unlimited means 150 hours per month. They call it 'Anytime'.
Very British eh?

The reason I log off is that it takes as long to download the headers
and select the required bodies as it does to boil the kettle, make the
tea and roll a ciggy.
I can then log off, read and reply to the posts, ditto the emails, log
on and send the whole shebang off at once.
And in the meantime clients can call me ( single line, you see )

Regards,
 
Steve said:
Well, 'unlimited' access over here often comes with a caveat - in my
case unlimited means 150 hours per month. They call it 'Anytime'.
Very British eh?
Click to expand...

BTi? FS? *puke*

Overcome your prejudices and get AOL.

Same price as BTi/FS for 24/7 with no cut offs or restrictions. There
are work rounds for all the software limitations which AOL tries to
impose...

And AOL is reliable... none of the stop start nonsense of FS/BTi.
 
Back
Top