Endless lists of software. in a.c.f

  • Thread starter Thread starter Steve Stevenson
  • Start date Start date
It was a proud moment for all when Roger Johansson said:
The other example could be if I dig up a thousand links to swedish
freeware programs which I know little about. Some may be in
english, other only in swedish, some may be real freeware, other
may be timelimited or crippled versions, some may be very valuable
and some may be useless.
Click to expand...

The risk is always there. Not long ago I recommended what I thought was
a marvellous freeware folder and file hiding utility, mentioned on some
trusty freeware sites. Then the bloody thing expired. If Tramp (or
anyone) started posting links to shareware, adware etc. *on purpose*,
it would be another thing, but so far I've only found pure freeware
when followed his links.
Also I think it's OK to post a link to a site and write something like:
"Some programmes are shareware, but there is some freeware also." Then
it's up to you to be alert. Purists may disagree with me there.
We should allow people to choose their posting style as long as the
post is on-topic. You can't please everybody anyway.
I'd hate to see Tramp leave this group, because of all this bickering.
Would you like me to post a thousand messages with links to these
programs in a.c.f, or ten very long messages with links to these
programs, or would you prefer that I put these links on my web
site and post a message about it where I give a link to the list
on my web site so those who are interested can look them up,
download the ones that sounds interesting, and try them out?
Click to expand...

I'd like to see them posted here. Maybe I'm abnormal? A thousand links
a day is very far fetched anyway.
 
It was a proud moment for all when Roger Johansson said:
You don't seem to understand the difference between postings about
lists of untried, untested, unchecked programs, which may or may
not be valuable, may or may not really be freeware, and
recommendations from people who have found really good programs,
which they have checked that they really are freeware and have
features which make them better in some ways than other programs.
Click to expand...

People are different, they want and prefer different things, which is
good. You want reviews and recommendations of really good freeware (I
like those, too) but even if you read the most detailed discription of
a freeware programme, you can't be sure how it works until you try it
yourself. What works on my system, may crash yours. You always install
a programme at your own risk, untested by others or not. So, there is
no guarantee, ever.
The way I see it, Tramp has made many valuable posts. I've downloaded
some of the programmes, liked many, disliked some. It doesn't bother me
that he hasn't tested them himself, because (like I said above) I'll
have to test them myself sooner or later anyway. And even if Tramp
hasn't tried the programmes himself, someone else in this group may
have. So when you said:
I, and others, think it would be a good idea to publish
recommendations and descriptions of really good freeware programs
in the newsgroup. And links to lists of unknown programs which
those who have time and can afford it may want to explore.
Click to expand...

It should really be the other way around: the discussion should be kept
in this group to get as many opinions as possible. The "descriptions of
really good freeware programmes" (if such exist) could be listed on
some webpage. JIMO of course.
 
Also I think it's OK to post a link to a site and write something
like: "Some programmes are shareware, but there is some freeware
also." Then it's up to you to be alert. Purists may disagree with
me there.
Click to expand...

Once upon a time, he did do that. Now he makes a good-faith effort
only to post links to sites that at least make a distinction between
freeware and non-freeware, if they have both. It's very much
appreciated.
 
Oh that. Yeah, I see lots of that sort of stuff - the same sort of
stuff that goes 'BT? *puke*' But it's kinda like those 'scientific'
reports that come out every couple of week, telling you first that
something is bad for you - closely followed next week by another
report that says the same thing is good for you.
Click to expand...

I think those aren't necessarily contradictory -- the labs seem to issue
warnings every time they find out that the human equivalent of 300
gallons of X per day isn't healthy. D'oh. The other side is that an
ounce a day isn't problematic, and provides bits of Stuff That's Good
For You.
 
POKO said:
OOPS,
I thought I was quoting a Brit. Was he on the thread just above/below
you?
Click to expand...

Just above.
By the way, do not move to Manitoulin Island - there aint a damn Tim's
anywhere.
Click to expand...

I hadn't planned on it. But thanks for the heads-up all the same. }:O)
 
Peter Seiler Wrote in alt.comp.freeware, on Wed, 30 Jul 2003 15:42:33 +0200:
never seen before in any NGs such a huge thread.
Click to expand...

There is currently a thread in alt.2600 that is almost 2000 strong.
Interested? check the group on google and search for hacker beer in the
subject.
 
SINNER said:
There is currently a thread in alt.2600 that is almost 2000 strong.
Interested? check the group on google and search for hacker beer in the
subject.
Click to expand...

A few years ago I spent a time in alt.revenge where one of the
objectives was to get threads so long that their posts exceeded 1000
lines.

My minimalist approach to posting was not wholly appreciated.
 
A few years ago I spent a time in alt.revenge where one of the
objectives was to get threads so long that their posts exceeded
1000 lines.

My minimalist approach to posting was not wholly appreciated.
Click to expand...

There's a troll in rec.sport.basketball.college (and other groups)
who insists on replying to posts line by line. In the off-season,
sometimes regulars mess with him. In 2002 one of them hit on the
idea of choking him with sheer volume, and reportedly the posts got
near 100,000 lines long. I had to filter them, and of course Google
didn't keep them. Here's a sample, weighing in at a mere 1700+
lines.
<http://groups.google.com/[email protected]>

Bringing us almost back on-topic (all the way back if one considers
OE to be freeware), there's a bug (feature?) of OE that prevents
people from replying once a thread has gotten sufficiently long.
Usenet posts cannot have lines longer than 1000 characters (998 plus
the CRLF), and that includes header lines. Long threads make for
long References headers. Most clients either fold a long References
header or remove a few of the references, but not OE. Servers
simply reject posts with lines too long.
 
It was a proud moment for all when Roger Johansson said:
Click to expand...

The way I see it, Tramp has made many valuable posts. I've downloaded
some of the programmes, liked many, disliked some. It doesn't bother me
that he hasn't tested them himself, because (like I said above) I'll
have to test them myself sooner or later anyway. And even if Tramp
hasn't tried the programmes himself, someone else in this group may
have.
Click to expand...

< snip >

With so many guys in newsgroups it is nice to see the ladies
contribute. Particularly as well as in the above example. :-)
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote in


Again, the client will have to download that info for each message in
order to know whether or not to get the full message.
Click to expand...

In general, yes. In order to filter out Tramp's posts, no.
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote in
In general, yes. In order to filter out Tramp's posts, no.
Click to expand...

In order to tell whether a message is from Tramp, the client must
download that message's From header. This is true of every Usenet
message. I don't know how to make this any clearer, and if you're
just going to say "no" again, I won't bother trying.
 
It was a proud moment for all when Blinky the Shark said:
I'm thinking you need to brush up on you skills, if clicking a
link or a bookmark seems complex.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking it's still more complicated than downloading newsgroup
messages automatically while sipping coffee and reading something
educational (like English grammar perhaps?).
When did he install the taxi-meter? How much is he charging per
minute?
Click to expand...

Broken English, the most widely spoken language. Get used to it.

Most of the discussion has been about the comparative merits of
one-big-post versus 50-little-posts. Not about not posting.
Click to expand...

And those "50-little-posts" are annoying, because *one* person has
posted them. Why?
 
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...

Ditch BT and go with Freeserve - Anytime actually means anytime there.
 
-½cut said:
Ditch BT and go with Freeserve - Anytime actually means anytime there.
Click to expand...

You sure? My experience is that they kick off users who 'abuse' the
system.

Quote from their 'terms of use':

6.4 You understand that as a flat rate Internet user, AnyTime is not
intended to be available on an "always on" basis and we may suspend
your access if we think that you are using AnyTime in a manner which,
in our opinion, makes abnormal demands on the network from a single
connection and/or amounts to unreasonably excessive use of AnyTime.
 
(e-mail address removed) wrote in


In order to tell whether a message is from Tramp, the client must
download that message's From header. This is true of every Usenet
message. I don't know how to make this any clearer, and if you're
just going to say "no" again, I won't bother trying.
Click to expand...

You're not understanding me. Agent downloads the Subject header and
the From header for every post. Unless "download bodies" has been
checked, if the person wants to be able to filter on someone in
particular, they only need to look at all the messages and pick *one*
that is from that person, in this instance, "Tramp" and download it. I
know this because I do it sometimes myself.

Therefore, only *one* full message needs to be downloaded in order to
create a filter. Now, if you insist on being a stubborn prick, that's
your problem, not mine. I don't tolerate idiots lightly.
 
Therefore, only *one* full message needs to be downloaded in order to
create a filter.
Click to expand...

Yes, but we are not talking about creating a filter now, we are
talking about what happens when new msaages are downloaded and filters
are applied.

When that filter is going to be used, every time new messages are
downloaded, then the news reader needs to download the headers of all
messages, and compare the headers with the filters, to decide what
messages to filter.
 
Back
Top