Too funny!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jack D. Russell, Sr.
  • Start date Start date
J

Jack D. Russell, Sr.

Talk about trying to change the furniture around...somebody's got way too much free time. Long live USENET!!
<Shakes head while muttering, "Damned newbies."> ;)
 
Talk about trying to change the furniture around...somebody's got way too much free time. Long live USENET!!
<Shakes head while muttering, "Damned newbies."> ;)
Click to expand...

??

what post are you referring to ?

puzzled....
 
Alastair said:
??

what post are you referring to ?

puzzled....
Click to expand...

Can't find the post straight off. It's by Blinky and makes reference to
a particular newbie who started posting about how the whole group ought
to be restructured, blah, blah, blah. It was a rather good turn of
phrase - coming in from nowhere and immediately wanting to rearrange all
the furniture.
 
[JMHO] No...I'm not specifically referring to a particular post by anyone. I've seen the term mentioned several times in the group. I don't recall who coined the phrase, but it fits in a sense with what has been happening in the group lately. It struck me as a good, descriptive phrase for the way some posters lately are trying to impose their thoughts, principles, way of doing things, rules, bylaws, posting guidelines, definitions, _______________ (Place your own adjectives here) on others, when it is an exercise in futility from the get go. The FACT is, this is USENET..."The Autobahn of the internet" (like it or not). The regulars that post here are a very small percentage of the regulars that use this group. On any given day, hundreds of people use this group totally transparent to most of the participants here, and each of those people use it just how they want to use it. They take from the group what they want and they give to the group what they want. They don't want anything specifically from the group, except what they want, be it software, reading entertainment, technical advice, etc. If they want to become part of a group or community, they act according to whatever group or community guidelines the given group or community that they wish to be accepted into accepts and subscribes to. This group, just like every other NG on the net, is made up of many different types of people and many different groups, be it the strict ____________ people (put your own group) or the lenient______________people. The name of this group might as well be alt.freeware.argument, as that's what it's become. It doesn't matter which side of the argument a person thinks is the right side. They're all wrong to somebody, somewhere depending on their viewpoint. Wake up! There are countless UBB forums, covering any subject that one can think, want or dream of, that are moderated and run under strict guidelines and definitions. If that's what someone wants, that's where they should be. Not here in USENET where it's always been survival of the fittest and just about anything goes. Stealing the group's name and placing it on an unendorsed web ring is going a little overboard, but in the end, what good is arguing about it? See it as you see fit, endorse it or don't endorse it, use it or don't use it, recommend it or don't recommend it, voice your opinion about it or don't voice an opinion about it, but realize that in the grand scheme of things, it just doesn't matter one way or the other. Jeeze, people...life's too short to get all worked up over something that you can't have any control over and can't change one way or the other (whether it's right or wrong). Go outside and smell the roses, take a walk, feed the birds, sweep the walk, talk to your neighbor, etc, but drop the arguing...you'll be a better, happier person for it and then maybe the group can get back to its intended purpose. [/JMHO]



;)
--
Jack

A> Alastair Smeaton wrote:
??>> On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:43:38 -0500, "Jack D. Russell, Sr."
A> Can't find the post straight off. It's by Blinky and makes reference
A> to a particular newbie who started posting about how the whole group
A> ought to be restructured, blah, blah, blah. It was a rather good
A> turn of phrase - coming in from nowhere and immediately wanting to
A> rearrange all the furniture.
 
[JMHO] No...I'm not specifically referring to a particular post by
anyone. I've seen the term mentioned several times in the group. I don't
recall who coined the phrase, but it fits in a sense with what has been
happening in the group lately. It struck me as a good, descriptive
phrase for the way some posters lately are trying to impose their
thoughts, principles, way of doing things, rules, bylaws, posting
guidelines, definitions, _______________ (Place your own adjectives
here) on others, when it is an exercise in futility from the get go. The
FACT is, this is USENET..."The Autobahn of the internet" (like it or
not). The regulars that post here are a very small percentage of the
regulars that use this group. On any given day, hundreds of people use
this group totally transparent to most of the participants here, and
each of those people use it just how they want to use it. They take from
the group what they want and they give to the group what they want. They
don't want anything specifically from the group, except what they want,
be it software, reading entertainment, technical advice, etc. If they
want to become part of a group or community, they act according to
whatever group or community guidelines the given group or community that
they wish to be accepted into accepts and subscribes to. This group,
just like every other NG on the net, is made up of many different types
of people and many different groups, be it the strict ____________
people (put your own group) or the lenient______________people. The name
of this group might as well be alt.freeware.argument, as that's what
it's become. It doesn't matter which side of the argument a person
thinks is the right side. They're all wrong to somebody, somewhere
depending on their viewpoint. Wake up! There are countless UBB forums,
covering any subject that one can think, want or dream of, that are
moderated and run under strict guidelines and definitions. If that's
what someone wants, that's where they should be. Not here in USENET
where it's always been survival of the fittest and just about anything
goes. Stealing the group's name and placing it on an unendorsed web ring
is going a little overboard, but in the end, what good is arguing about
it? See it as you see fit, endorse it or don't endorse it, use it or
don't use it, recommend it or don't recommend it, voice your opinion
about it or don't voice an opinion about it, but realize that in the
grand scheme of things, it just doesn't matter one way or the other.
Jeeze, people...life's too short to get all worked up over something
that you can't have any control over and can't change one way or the
other (whether it's right or wrong). Go outside and smell the roses,
take a walk, feed the birds, sweep the walk, talk to your neighbor, etc,
but drop the arguing...you'll be a better, happier person for it and
then maybe the group can get back to its intended purpose. [/JMHO]



You top posted. You could have used paragraphs. ;-)

Seriously, there's only 3 options to this perpetual mess:

1.) A moderated freeware group where purists can control content,
leaving the regular group to the heathens.

2.) Do not name the web-ring acf. Simple. There's perhaps a billion
other names that would be as good if not better. Why create a false
impression and piss people off? Just to get at a few members you don't
like?

3.) If web-ring remains acf, simply put a line in the FAQ disavowing any
association with the web-ring whatsoever.

I think that just about covers it.
 
[JMHO] No...I'm not specifically referring to a particular post by anyone.
Click to expand...

lots snipped

what struck me was your comment about "newbies" when you did not have
the sense or experience to reply to a thread or previous comment, and
quote it

You may have made good points, but it was impossible to judge that
because you gave no context - and in your second post here, I could
not be bothered to read it, due to the lack of formatting.

BTW - maybe it is just my reader, but your post came out way over 80
characters width - making it even more difficult to read.
 
--
Jack

AS> lots snipped

AS> what struck me was your comment about "newbies" when you did not have
AS> the sense or experience to reply to a thread or previous comment, and
AS> quote it

Maybe because I wasn't quoting/replying to any thread or specific comment. I was making an observation based on my own observations. What does sense or experience have to do with that?

AS> You may have made good points, but it was impossible to judge that
AS> because you gave no context - and in your second post here, I could
AS> not be bothered to read it, due to the lack of formatting.

No context attempted or needed, as I was making a comment not replying to a comment. Whether you wanted to be bothered with reading my post or not is of no real concern. AFAIK, It was formatted the same as my news program always formats a "reply to news" message. The lines should wrap at the 72 characters that It's set at. If it didn't, well I don't know what happened or on who's end it happened.

AS> BTW - maybe it is just my reader, but your post came out way over 80
AS> characters width - making it even more difficult to read.

See my above comment on line wraps. I've done some recent required MS updates, so maybe one of them messed with the settings. I'll check when I get the time. Thanks for the info anyway.

AS> --
AS> Alastair Smeaton
 
Placing a sig delimiter at the very top of your post is not helping. I
wish you luck with the rest of your formatting problems.
 
Placing a sig delimiter at the very top of your post is not helping. I
wish you luck with the rest of your formatting problems.
Click to expand...

yeah - just tried to reply to his post replying to me - sig delimiter
makes it impossible to use his post as context - maybe that'w the
problem for him too :-)
 
AS> lots snipped

AS> what struck me was your comment about "newbies" when you did not have
AS> the sense or experience to reply to a thread or previous comment, and
AS> quote it

Maybe because I wasn't quoting/replying to any thread or specific comment. I was making an observation based on my own observations. What does sense or experience have to do with that?
Click to expand...


Because I or anyone could make a post saying "I think this is shit" -
the reader then has to work out "what are you saying is shit ?" - this
is basic - a mistake a "newbie" might make - not someone who has the
sense learned through experience - who has therefore "earned" the
"right" to criticise "newbies"

AS> You may have made good points, but it was impossible to judge that
AS> because you gave no context - and in your second post here, I could
AS> not be bothered to read it, due to the lack of formatting.

No context attempted or needed, as I was making a comment not replying to a comment. Whether you wanted to be bothered with reading my post or not is of no real concern. AFAIK, It was formatted the same as my news program always formats a "reply to news" message. The lines should wrap at the 72 characters that It's set at. If it didn't, well I don't know what happened or on who's end it happened.
Click to expand...

See reply above - I had no idea what point you were making - and I was
not the only one who replied to that effect - and no-one replied
other than to try and find out what you were saying - a reasonable
test of whether your post made sense, i would have thought.

Your new thread was entitled "too funny" - in a group as busy as this,
you really need to tell folk what you think is funny. - Just my
opinion.
AS> BTW - maybe it is just my reader, but your post came out way over 80
AS> characters width - making it even more difficult to read.

See my above comment on line wraps. I've done some recent required MS updates, so maybe one of them messed with the settings. I'll check when I get the time. Thanks for the info anyway.
Click to expand...

I am no expert on Outlook Express- as I said, might be my problem. but
your's is the only post I can remember which does not wrap properly.

And see the other response - you have 2 dashes and a space(-- ) at the
start of your reply - which is the standard sign for a newsreader
programme to tell it that this is your signature, and therefore
anything after it should not be quoted - so when I click reply to you
- my news programme refuses to quote your message - had to pull some
tricks to get your message in my reply. Maybe something like that
happened to you the first time around ???

Glad to help
 
Alastair said:
<news:[email protected]>: Placing a sig delimiter at the very top of your post is not helping. I
wish you luck with the rest of your formatting problems.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
yeah - just tried to reply to his post replying to me - sig delimiter
makes it impossible to use his post as context - maybe that'w the
problem for him too :-)
Click to expand...

IIRC, others have tried to help him, but he's remained belligerently
proud of his incompetence. But long since plonked; not my problem.
 
Alastair Smeaton wrote:
I am no expert on Outlook Express- as I said, might be my problem. but
your's is the only post I can remember which does not wrap properly.

And see the other response - you have 2 dashes and a space(-- ) at the
start of your reply - which is the standard sign for a newsreader
programme to tell it that this is your signature, and therefore
anything after it should not be quoted - so when I click reply to you
- my news programme refuses to quote your message - had to pull some
tricks to get your message in my reply. Maybe something like that
happened to you the first time around ???
Click to expand...

LOL! This is the first instance I recall in ACF where MS software is
mentioned *after* some sort of broken sig/ compliance issue. Usually the
sig pedantics get tossed in out of desperation or futile last resort, by
someone whose ludicrous claim about MS's latest threat to world peace
has just been exposed/ shot down for the hype/ spin that it really is.

Thread subject is correct: "Too funny!"
 
Alastair Smeaton wrote:


LOL! This is the first instance I recall in ACF where MS software is
mentioned *after* some sort of broken sig/ compliance issue. Usually the
sig pedantics get tossed in out of desperation or futile last resort, by
someone whose ludicrous claim about MS's latest threat to world peace
has just been exposed/ shot down for the hype/ spin that it really is.

Thread subject is correct: "Too funny!"
Click to expand...

Look at the guys 2nd post under this thread, and try to reply to it -
no quotes.

I am no pedant - just trying to help
 
Hold on a sec here, someone got ACF via OE?, errr.... how? (I've been
trying for months and can't get ACF in OE at all).

Regards

Steven Burn
Ur I.T. Mate Group
www.it-mate.co.uk

Keeping it FREE!
 
Yeah, sure. ;) No weight coming from one of the groups worst control
freaks.
--
Jack

BtS> IIRC, others have tried to help him, but he's remained
BtS> belligerently proud of his incompetence. But long since plonked;
BtS> not my problem.
 
AS> Because I or anyone could make a post saying "I think this is shit"
AS> - the reader then has to work out "what are you saying is shit ?" -
AS> this is basic - a mistake a "newbie" might make - not someone who
AS> has the sense learned through experience - who has therefore
AS> "earned" the "right" to criticise "newbies"

Oh I get it. You're another of the group traffic guards. OK.


AS> See reply above - I had no idea what point you were making - and I
AS> was not the only one who replied to that effect - and no-one
AS> replied other than to try and find out what you were saying - a
AS> reasonable test of whether your post made sense, i would have
AS> thought.

The post wasn't meant to cause further dissension. I would have thought
that anyone that had been following the group in the recent past, would
have understood the implied meaning. Guess not.


AS> Your new thread was entitled "too funny" - in a group as busy as
AS> this, you really need to tell folk what you think is funny. - Just
AS> my opinion.

Your opinion noted. As I said, I wouldn't think that any explanation
would have been necessary. Again, guess not.

AS> I am no expert on Outlook Express- as I said, might be my problem.
AS> but your's is the only post I can remember which does not wrap
AS> properly.

I don't use OEx except in the strictest definition. I use the Outlook
Newsreader with Fidolook SL. I had installed Outlook Quote-fix to try it
out and didn't realize that it would play havoc with everything. I hope
that's what the problem is anyway.

AS> And see the other response - you have 2 dashes and a space(-- ) at
AS> the start of your reply - which is the standard sign for a
AS> newsreader programme to tell it that this is your signature, and
AS> therefore anything after it should not be quoted - so when I click
AS> reply to you - my news programme refuses to quote your message -
AS> had to pull some tricks to get your message in my reply. Maybe
AS> something like that happened to you the first time around ???

No, I am aware of what a proper sig delimiter is. Maybe your newsreader
isn't as versatile as it should be. The root of the problem (other than
my formatting problem) is that top posting is my preference. Since I
have no desire to join the current clique here, I will continue to
exercise my preference while using the group. It's OK if you prefer to
bottom post, even though it does cause some problems for those that
don't. We'll just adjust accordingly if we want to participate in a
conversation with you. It's really not that big of a deal. I do hope
that my formatting is working correctly for you. I posted some test
messages to see if the formatting was working as it should. As far as I
can tell, it should be now, but it's hard to tell as my newsreader lets
me set it for both composing a message and reading others messages any
way that I want.

AS> Glad to help

It really is appreciated, and I hope I've solved the problem. Have a
good one.
 
Glad that you liked it. Thanks.
--
Jack

A> Alastair Smeaton wrote:
A> <snip>
??>> I am no expert on Outlook Express- as I said, might be my problem.
A> LOL! This is the first instance I recall in ACF where MS software is
A> mentioned *after* some sort of broken sig/ compliance issue. Usually
A> the sig pedantics get tossed in out of desperation or futile last
A> resort, by someone whose ludicrous claim about MS's latest threat to
A> world peace has just been exposed/ shot down for the hype/ spin that
A> it really is.

A> Thread subject is correct: "Too funny!"
 
Back
Top