Repair Install and bypassing Activation

[Santa]

Read the answer Before u know the Question !!!

You dumb ****.




HTH, you dumb ****.

 

[Brian S. Craigie]

Hmmm...

A somewhat ambiguous answer. Relic, you're not asking me to leave this
NG are you? ;-) Very funny.

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic here.
Seeing the person's response immediately "in your face" must surely be
preferable to scrolling down to the bottom of a long post to find the
answer? Perhaps bottom posters are using a different newsreader that
jumps to the bottom of the post? Or some special technique?

Warmest Regards,

Brian

 

[relic]

Brian S. Craigie wrote:


??? A blank post? Nothing to say, not even Bye.

 

[Pierre Asselin]

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic
[ of bottom posting ] here. Seeing the person's response immediately
"in your face" must surely be preferable [ ... ]

No, it's worse. No context. You're supposed to trim the original
and respond *after* the original points are made.

[ ... ] to scrolling down to the bottom of a long post to find the
answer?

Nah, if they're too lazy to trim the quoted material I just skip to
the next article. See, bottom posting is superior in every way

 

[Brian S. Craigie]

Thanks Pierre,

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic
[ of bottom posting ] here. Seeing the person's response immediately
"in your face" must surely be preferable [ ... ]

No, it's worse. No context. You're supposed to trim the original
and respond *after* the original points are made.

I understand about the context, but can anyone point me to the document
that says top posting is not allowed?

Thanks Pierre!

Brian

 

[Duane Arnold]

Thanks Pierre,

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic
[ of bottom posting ] here. Seeing the person's response immediately
"in your face" must surely be preferable [ ... ]

No, it's worse. No context. You're supposed to trim the original
and respond *after* the original points are made.

I understand about the context, but can anyone point me to the
document that says top posting is not allowed?

Thanks Pierre!

Brian

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

They only top-post in the ****ed-up microsoft.public groups.

 

[Terry]

On 12/30/2004 5:36 PM On a whim, Brian S. Craigie pounded out on the
keyboard

Thanks Pierre,

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic
[ of bottom posting ] here. Seeing the person's response immediately
"in your face" must surely be preferable [ ... ]

No, it's worse. No context. You're supposed to trim the original
and respond *after* the original points are made.

I understand about the context, but can anyone point me to the document
that says top posting is not allowed?

Thanks Pierre!

Brian

I think the point is that you do what is being done in a particular
group. If everyone top posts, then top post. It just makes a mess when
one person top posts and the next bottom posts. After a few threads you
can't tell who said what. So it's just to keep continuity.

I don't even think trimming should be done a lot of times. That's
leaving it up to each individual as to what they feel is important. Most
posts don't go on for extreme amounts of time, so leaving everything
really doesn't hurt. But a thread of over 15 or so responses might be
cause for some discreet trimming. JMO...

--
Terry

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

[Art]

Yes, you are right. People who post at the bottom are a real pain.
Posting at the top is the majority preferred default worldwide.

Warmest Felicitations,

Brian

Felicity & Brian (and others):
From http://bruce.pennypacker.org/nanaefaq.html
" Do not post your answer at the top of the quoted posting. Most viewers
read from top to bottom and will miss the flow and context of the discussion
if they read your answer before they read the previous poster's question. If
you do add your comments to the very top of a quoted message, you will be
razzed as a "Top Poster" and you might be razzed as a Microsoft-centric
lemming since Microsoft products encourage non-standard top-posting."

See http://web.presby.edu/~nnqadmin/nnq/nquote.html in particular, Q9 which
recommends bottom posting for responses.

See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html for the article "Why is
Bottom-posting better than Top-posting"

See http://mailformat.dan.info/quoting/bottom-posting.html for another
article on the advantages of bottom posting.

http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Top-posting_or_bottom-posting for an article
also recommending bottom posting as opposed to top posting.

http://www.html-faq.com/etiquette/?toppost for an article on "Why should I
not top-post".

The list goes on and on. There are dozens more of similar articles, nearly
all of which recommend bottom posting for a variety of reasons. Admittedly,
bottom posters are in the minority. More's the pity. And unfortunately when
the subject is raised it sometimes takes on a religious fervor pitting the
top-posters vs. the bottom-posters.

To my mind a more important issue re newsgroup posting is the rather common
failure of writers to trim preceding posts to include only the relevant
material that the writer is responding to. Isn't it a misery to wade through
gobs and gobs of quoted prior posts that have little or no relevancy to that
which the current writer is responding to? And where the thread has
continued for some time it's nearly impossible to make out who said what,
since it's a rare event where the current poster makes an effort to ensure
some sort of orderly and rational chronology of the prior posts in the
thread.

And let's not talk of the posts that state something like "Thanks guys for
your help in finally getting my 250 GB HD to boot." with no other
information in this less-than-enlightening posting.
Art

 

[William J. Burlingame]

It should be obvious that some are just yanking the chains of those
who are so uptight about such an unimportant thing as how a response
in posed. The NG police would probably be upset if a surgeon saved
their life with open heart surgery, but failed to have the sutures
spaced uniformly. Get a life! The purpose of the NG is to exchange
technical information, form should be way down the list of importance.

On 12/30/2004 5:36 PM On a whim, Brian S. Craigie pounded out on the
keyboard

Thanks Pierre,

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic
[ of bottom posting ] here. Seeing the person's response immediately
"in your face" must surely be preferable [ ... ]


No, it's worse. No context. You're supposed to trim the original
and respond *after* the original points are made.

I understand about the context, but can anyone point me to the document
that says top posting is not allowed?

Thanks Pierre!

Brian

I think the point is that you do what is being done in a particular
group. If everyone top posts, then top post. It just makes a mess when
one person top posts and the next bottom posts. After a few threads you
can't tell who said what. So it's just to keep continuity.

I don't even think trimming should be done a lot of times. That's
leaving it up to each individual as to what they feel is important. Most
posts don't go on for extreme amounts of time, so leaving everything
really doesn't hurt. But a thread of over 15 or so responses might be
cause for some discreet trimming. JMO...

---------------------------------------------------------------

bs has been included as part of my e-mail address to reduce the
amount of spam mail. Change the 'bs'in my address to 'bellsouth'
to send me a message.

Bill Burlingame

 

[Kadaitcha Man]

William J. Burlingame, <[email protected]>, the ravening, horizontally enhanced
fishmonger, and official recorder of events of historical unimportance,
fussed:

The purpose of the NG is to exchange
technical information

There are three newsgroups in the headers and one of them certainly does not
have the purpose of "exchang[ing] technical information". The next time you
decide to take someone to task, get your facts right first, you ****headed
cuntwipe.

 

[Kadaitcha Man]

Terry, <[email protected]>, the over-reactive, faeces-encrusted goober,
and dealer in ferrets, effused:

I think

****ing liar.

the point is that you do what is being done in a particular
group. If everyone top posts, then top post. It just makes a mess when
one person top posts and the next bottom posts. After a few threads
you can't tell who said what. So it's just to keep continuity.

Shut the **** up with your bitching, you ****. It's a ****ing free world,
mostly. If you don't like people making choices, **** off to North Korea.

I don't even think trimming should be done a lot of times.

Who, apart from yourself, gives a solitary **** what you think about
anything at all, you brain-dead bowel polyp?

That's
leaving it up to each individual as to what they feel is important.

So why the **** are you bleating like a stuck pig, you woronic cuntwart?

Most posts don't go on for extreme amounts of time,

****ing bullshit. You're going on and and on like some ****ing mad-arsed
lunatic about how people should conform to your way of posting. Get ****ed.
**** off and die. Drop dead. Piss off. get ****ed again. Capice, dickscab?

so leaving
everything really doesn't hurt. But a thread of over 15 or so
responses might be cause for some discreet trimming. JMO...

Learn to use a krillfile, you ****ing mewling bitch.

 

[Kadaitcha Man]

Pierre Asselin, <[email protected]>, the steamy, mingy dodo, and
person employed to repair holes in the ozone layer using invisible mending
techniques, blubbed:


Top-posted and untrimmed for the reading displeasure of usenet nazis.

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic
[ of bottom posting ] here. Seeing the person's response immediately
"in your face" must surely be preferable [ ... ]

No, it's worse. No context. You're supposed to trim the original
and respond *after* the original points are made.

[ ... ] to scrolling down to the bottom of a long post to find the
answer?

Nah, if they're too lazy to trim the quoted material I just skip to
the next article. See, bottom posting is superior in every way

 

[Kadaitcha Man]

Yes, you are right. People who post at the bottom are a real pain.
Posting at the top is the majority preferred default worldwide.

Warmest Felicitations,

Brian

**** off, you bleating idiot.

 

[Cyclops]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

A somewhat ambiguous answer. Relic, you're not asking me to leave this
NG are you? ;-) Very funny.

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic here. Seeing
the person's response immediately "in your face" must surely be
preferable to scrolling down to the bottom of a long post to find the
answer? Perhaps bottom posters are using a different newsreader that
jumps to the bottom of the post? Or some special technique?

I don't know why this is so hard to understand, its not like its majorly
complicated. I've done both, usually I just do my mailer/news reader
default. With thunderbird its bottom posting. Its pretty much what a
person feels comfortable with. For one, some people don't mind
scrolling down, for two, if you're too lazy to scroll down then the
message probably wasn't overly important to you anyway.

I can see the logic in what you are saying, but the flow of a
conversation can be preserved by posting throughout the message or at
its bottom.

I don't think you should leave the NG, but I think you should stop
buggin others about it, same with the bottom posting nazi's out there.
- --
David Wade Hagar AKA Cyclops

http://members.cox.net/dwhagar
http://www.livejournal.com/users/dwhagar
http://genius-of-lunacy.blogspot.com/

"It's sick, but it serves a purpose." - Bill Cosby
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: http://members.cox.net/dwhagar/personal-key.asc
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkHVKgMACgkQbPwf4VgkRDvaiQCgrJ0svu8wCZxcwGdx15LtLd6s
LMoAoJLeoITYAMNfkZQbImiOrivkF8Y4
=xRdr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Brian S. Craigie]

I don't think you should leave the NG, but I think you should stop
buggin others about it, same with the bottom posting nazi's out there.
- --
David Wade Hagar AKA Cyclops

Sorry. :-( Will do.

Have a nice New Year everyone!

Brian

 

[Terry]

On 12/30/2004 7:52 PM On a whim, William J. Burlingame pounded out on
the keyboard

It should be obvious that some are just yanking the chains of those
who are so uptight about such an unimportant thing as how a response
in posed. The NG police would probably be upset if a surgeon saved
their life with open heart surgery, but failed to have the sutures
spaced uniformly. Get a life! The purpose of the NG is to exchange
technical information, form should be way down the list of importance.

On 12/30/2004 5:36 PM On a whim, Brian S. Craigie pounded out on the
keyboard

Thanks Pierre,

On 31/12/2004 01:23, Pierre Asselin wrote:







Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic
[ of bottom posting ] here. Seeing the person's response immediately
"in your face" must surely be preferable [ ... ]


No, it's worse. No context. You're supposed to trim the original
and respond *after* the original points are made.


I understand about the context, but can anyone point me to the document
that says top posting is not allowed?

Thanks Pierre!

Brian

I think the point is that you do what is being done in a particular
group. If everyone top posts, then top post. It just makes a mess when
one person top posts and the next bottom posts. After a few threads you
can't tell who said what. So it's just to keep continuity.

I don't even think trimming should be done a lot of times. That's
leaving it up to each individual as to what they feel is important. Most
posts don't go on for extreme amounts of time, so leaving everything
really doesn't hurt. But a thread of over 15 or so responses might be
cause for some discreet trimming. JMO...

---------------------------------------------------------------

bs has been included as part of my e-mail address to reduce the
amount of spam mail. Change the 'bs'in my address to 'bellsouth'
to send me a message.

Bill Burlingame

Yes and you top-posting while the context is bottom-posted would be more
akin to a heart surgeon going in through your rectum.

--
Terry

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

[Alias]

:
: Yes and you top-posting while the context is bottom-posted would be more
: akin to a heart surgeon going in through your rectum.
:
: --
: Terry

A heart surgeon can fit up a rectum? How so?

 

[Al Smith]

Hmmm...

A somewhat ambiguous answer. Relic, you're not asking me to leave this NG are you? ;-) Very funny.

Seriously though, I'd actually like to understand the logic here. Seeing the person's response immediately "in your face" must surely be preferable to scrolling down to the bottom of a long post to find the answer? Perhaps bottom posters are using a different newsreader that jumps to the bottom of the post? Or some special technique?

Warmest Regards,

Brian

Because, when you respond to a top-poster, the comment you are
responding to is not directly above your post, but is way at the
top of the thread tree, which (since many posters don't know how
to ship) can be a mile long. This means that your remarks and the
post you are remarking on appear unconnected. When you top-post,
it is discourteous to the *next* person who posts. That's the main
reason for not doing it.

 

[Jone Doe]

Because, when you respond to a top-poster, the comment you are responding
to is not directly above your post, but is way at the top of the thread
tree, which (since many posters don't know how to ship) can be a mile
long. This means that your remarks and the post you are remarking on
appear unconnected. When you top-post, it is discourteous to the *next*
person who posts. That's the main reason for not doing it.

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

If it's done right, with some snipping done to keep it lean, bottom posting
is what makes the most sense. Original question or comment at the top, and
the latest answer following. Unless of course you read the back page of the
book first, do you?

If so, I'm sure you can find a newsgroup that encourages top posting
somewhere.

 

[Duane Arnold]

A heart surgeon can fit up a rectum? How so?

He just needs to be limber because of the twists and turns.