89 Audi 100 - No Start, Battery OK, What next?
#141
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
I think you are misunderstanding the situation, tripper. First of all, I am
not your son.
Secondly, I was not aware that other newsreaders may be proliferating
threads, as I have explained.
Thirdly, I apologized for it, even though I wasn't aware I was doing it. The
idiotic behavior of others is not under my control.
And, lastly, I am not acting like a petulant child. Just tell me what I need
to do to correct the misunderstanding about threading, and I will gladly
adapt. I don't mean to offend anyone in this group intentionally, so please
stop implying that I did something on purpose.
Perhaps you are having a bad day today?
"daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ig2163t8qrdct6isblqai8bj8fpgdjlsnl@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 15:42:37 -0500, "Stephen Clark" <noone@nothing.not>
> wrote:
>>
>>"Tony" <tshimi@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:ROGdnWUY1MvM5f3bnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.co m...
>>>
>>> "daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:j7r0639u2oh8g2ja1ehgupa571rcagj6kg@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> When you come back again....please consider *not* proliferating so many
>>>> different threads about your problem. Not only is it obnoxious, but in
>>>> the
>>>> (somewhat unlikely?) event that you actually figure out what was wrong,
>>>> it'd
>>>> be helpful for the answer to be in the same thread as the original
>>>> question,
>>>> the debugging advise, incremental evidence, etc, etc, etc....
>>>>
>>>> /daytripper
>>>> '00 s4 6spd
>>>
>>> I agree with daytripper; this problem morphed into so many different
>>> threads and consumed way too much bandwidth. This is a NG not a chat
>>> room.
>>>
>>> P.S. I'm the original Tony (over 10 years with this NG) not the Audi
>>> super
>>> Guru.
>>>
>>
>>I have seen many longer threads in this NG that fritter on forever about
>>nothing....isn't this NG for helping people solve problems and have others
>>benefit from the ensuing information? If I am misusing it, then I
>>apologize,
>>but I thought that is what a newsgroup of this type is for.
>>
>>stc
>
> Listen up, son. The group exists for folks to share information. But
> there's a
> right way to do everything in life. Acting like a petulant child won't
> make up
> for the fact that you've been abusing the group by thread proliferation,
> and
> claiming a defense based on the idiotic behavior of others is unlikely to
> prove successful.
>
> It's a simple request that benefits the group.
>
> Cheers
>
> /daytripper
> '00 s4 6spd
not your son.
Secondly, I was not aware that other newsreaders may be proliferating
threads, as I have explained.
Thirdly, I apologized for it, even though I wasn't aware I was doing it. The
idiotic behavior of others is not under my control.
And, lastly, I am not acting like a petulant child. Just tell me what I need
to do to correct the misunderstanding about threading, and I will gladly
adapt. I don't mean to offend anyone in this group intentionally, so please
stop implying that I did something on purpose.
Perhaps you are having a bad day today?
"daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ig2163t8qrdct6isblqai8bj8fpgdjlsnl@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 15:42:37 -0500, "Stephen Clark" <noone@nothing.not>
> wrote:
>>
>>"Tony" <tshimi@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>news:ROGdnWUY1MvM5f3bnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.co m...
>>>
>>> "daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:j7r0639u2oh8g2ja1ehgupa571rcagj6kg@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> When you come back again....please consider *not* proliferating so many
>>>> different threads about your problem. Not only is it obnoxious, but in
>>>> the
>>>> (somewhat unlikely?) event that you actually figure out what was wrong,
>>>> it'd
>>>> be helpful for the answer to be in the same thread as the original
>>>> question,
>>>> the debugging advise, incremental evidence, etc, etc, etc....
>>>>
>>>> /daytripper
>>>> '00 s4 6spd
>>>
>>> I agree with daytripper; this problem morphed into so many different
>>> threads and consumed way too much bandwidth. This is a NG not a chat
>>> room.
>>>
>>> P.S. I'm the original Tony (over 10 years with this NG) not the Audi
>>> super
>>> Guru.
>>>
>>
>>I have seen many longer threads in this NG that fritter on forever about
>>nothing....isn't this NG for helping people solve problems and have others
>>benefit from the ensuing information? If I am misusing it, then I
>>apologize,
>>but I thought that is what a newsgroup of this type is for.
>>
>>stc
>
> Listen up, son. The group exists for folks to share information. But
> there's a
> right way to do everything in life. Acting like a petulant child won't
> make up
> for the fact that you've been abusing the group by thread proliferation,
> and
> claiming a defense based on the idiotic behavior of others is unlikely to
> prove successful.
>
> It's a simple request that benefits the group.
>
> Cheers
>
> /daytripper
> '00 s4 6spd
#142
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#143
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#144
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#145
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
<noone@nothing.not> writes
>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>different in others?
>
>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because
it uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
caused major problems for users of such software.
Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles
after the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the
body and it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have
looked and discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject.
I find that one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where
the body merely says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a
sentence started in the subject line, and those are the posters I
consciously avoid reading any further.
Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to
be prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context
of the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to
understand let alone correct their error.
--
Dave N
N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#146
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
Thanks, Dave, now I understand what I did wrong. And, now that I know that,
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#147
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
Thanks, Dave, now I understand what I did wrong. And, now that I know that,
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#148
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
Thanks, Dave, now I understand what I did wrong. And, now that I know that,
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#149
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
Thanks, Dave, now I understand what I did wrong. And, now that I know that,
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
I'll be aware of the effect of changing the subject line. Although I do
disagree with they way OE top posts, and I understand that this is an
on-going controversy, I prefer to read a top post because I don't have to
scroll all the way to the bottom of the message to read the latest comments.
In other groups where the convention is bottom posting, and the subject line
never changes, I often skip long threads without reading them, because it is
simply too much trouble to scroll through all the repeated text. I often
deleted repeated text in my replies for this very reason.
"Dave N" <nospam@charlecote.org.uk> wrote in message
news:8GgN4tB7UKYGFwEW@charlecote.org.uk...
> In message <13610omn4mrfh44@corp.supernews.com>, Stephen Clark
> <noone@nothing.not> writes
>>Everything is in the same thread in my newsreader, Outlook Express, is it
>>different in others?
>>
>>I wasn't aware I was creating a problem, please excuse me.
>
> All the posts are in a single thread in my newsreader as well, because it
> uses the Message IDs for threading purposes. You should be aware,
> however, that other newsreader software uses only the subject line for
> threading, and your frequent changes of subject in this thread will have
> caused major problems for users of such software.
>
> Once a thread has been started, the subject line should remain constant
> IMHO. The subject is not the correct place to add new comments, which
> belong in the body alone. Changing the subject frequently is like
> continually revising the title of a book. I usually overlook titles after
> the first posting in a thread in order to get to the meat in the body and
> it is only now that this issue has been raised that I have looked and
> discovered quite how many times you have changed the subject. I find that
> one of the most irritating kinds of posts are those where the body merely
> says, "subject says it all" or is a continuation of a sentence started in
> the subject line, and those are the posters I consciously avoid reading
> any further.
>
> Another highly irritating form of behaviour in my view, which seems to be
> prevalent amongst users of Microsoft Outlook Express, is to add new
> comments at the top of previous comments thereby losing all the context of
> the discussion. It is like reading a newspaper article from the end
> backwards. This arises because Microsoft, in their poverty of good
> software design, place the cursor at the top of the message whenever a
> reply posting is being edited and the users often fail even to understand
> let alone correct their error.
>
> --
> Dave N
>
> N.B. Mail to nospam is rejected. Reply-To does work.
#150
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Never mind.. I must be hearing things
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 16:26:24 -0500, "Stephen Clark" <noone@nothing.not> wrote:
>"daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:ig2163t8qrdct6isblqai8bj8fpgdjlsnl@4ax.com.. .
>> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 15:42:37 -0500, "Stephen Clark" <noone@nothing.not>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Tony" <tshimi@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:ROGdnWUY1MvM5f3bnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.c om...
>>>>
>>>> "daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:j7r0639u2oh8g2ja1ehgupa571rcagj6kg@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>> When you come back again....please consider *not* proliferating so many
>>>>> different threads about your problem. Not only is it obnoxious, but in
>>>>> the
>>>>> (somewhat unlikely?) event that you actually figure out what was wrong,
>>>>> it'd
>>>>> be helpful for the answer to be in the same thread as the original
>>>>> question,
>>>>> the debugging advise, incremental evidence, etc, etc, etc....
>>>>>
>>>>> /daytripper
>>>>> '00 s4 6spd
>>>>
>>>> I agree with daytripper; this problem morphed into so many different
>>>> threads and consumed way too much bandwidth. This is a NG not a chat
>>>> room.
>>>>
>>>> P.S. I'm the original Tony (over 10 years with this NG) not the Audi
>>>> super
>>>> Guru.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I have seen many longer threads in this NG that fritter on forever about
>>>nothing....isn't this NG for helping people solve problems and have others
>>>benefit from the ensuing information? If I am misusing it, then I
>>>apologize,
>>>but I thought that is what a newsgroup of this type is for.
>>>
>>>stc
>>
>> Listen up, son. The group exists for folks to share information. But
>> there's a
>> right way to do everything in life. Acting like a petulant child won't
>> make up
>> for the fact that you've been abusing the group by thread proliferation,
>> and
>> claiming a defense based on the idiotic behavior of others is unlikely to
>> prove successful.
>>
>> It's a simple request that benefits the group.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> /daytripper
>> '00 s4 6spd
>
>I think you are misunderstanding the situation, tripper. First of all, I am
>not your son.
>
>Secondly, I was not aware that other newsreaders may be proliferating
>threads, as I have explained.
>
>Thirdly, I apologized for it, even though I wasn't aware I was doing it. The
>idiotic behavior of others is not under my control.
>
>And, lastly, I am not acting like a petulant child. Just tell me what I need
>to do to correct the misunderstanding about threading, and I will gladly
>adapt. I don't mean to offend anyone in this group intentionally, so please
>stop implying that I did something on purpose.
>
>Perhaps you are having a bad day today?
Moi? I've been having an awesome *year* - and today is just another day of it.
If it was about me - then why the hell did I go through the trouble of opening
my Bentley to provide the *definitive* solution to the guy with the sick 1.8T
this afternoon?
Besides, I've totally let pass the ignorant top-posting (thought I confess I
usually leave such trivialities to dizzy
No, it's about you. Simply put, it's about you changing subject lines every
time something new - no matter how trivial - is added to your sad story. Just
leave the subject line alone and post a follow-up to your own thread. I
promise, the very same people will read your post, you won't be effin' up
every other reader in the group, and if some other poor bastid ever finds
himself unluckily following your footsteps, he might have a fricken' prayer of
following all the way to the solution. Assuming you ever stumble upon same.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me...
/daytripper
'00 s4 6spd
>"daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:ig2163t8qrdct6isblqai8bj8fpgdjlsnl@4ax.com.. .
>> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 15:42:37 -0500, "Stephen Clark" <noone@nothing.not>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Tony" <tshimi@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:ROGdnWUY1MvM5f3bnZ2dnUVZ_v6tnZ2d@comcast.c om...
>>>>
>>>> "daytripper" <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:j7r0639u2oh8g2ja1ehgupa571rcagj6kg@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>> When you come back again....please consider *not* proliferating so many
>>>>> different threads about your problem. Not only is it obnoxious, but in
>>>>> the
>>>>> (somewhat unlikely?) event that you actually figure out what was wrong,
>>>>> it'd
>>>>> be helpful for the answer to be in the same thread as the original
>>>>> question,
>>>>> the debugging advise, incremental evidence, etc, etc, etc....
>>>>>
>>>>> /daytripper
>>>>> '00 s4 6spd
>>>>
>>>> I agree with daytripper; this problem morphed into so many different
>>>> threads and consumed way too much bandwidth. This is a NG not a chat
>>>> room.
>>>>
>>>> P.S. I'm the original Tony (over 10 years with this NG) not the Audi
>>>> super
>>>> Guru.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I have seen many longer threads in this NG that fritter on forever about
>>>nothing....isn't this NG for helping people solve problems and have others
>>>benefit from the ensuing information? If I am misusing it, then I
>>>apologize,
>>>but I thought that is what a newsgroup of this type is for.
>>>
>>>stc
>>
>> Listen up, son. The group exists for folks to share information. But
>> there's a
>> right way to do everything in life. Acting like a petulant child won't
>> make up
>> for the fact that you've been abusing the group by thread proliferation,
>> and
>> claiming a defense based on the idiotic behavior of others is unlikely to
>> prove successful.
>>
>> It's a simple request that benefits the group.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> /daytripper
>> '00 s4 6spd
>
>I think you are misunderstanding the situation, tripper. First of all, I am
>not your son.
>
>Secondly, I was not aware that other newsreaders may be proliferating
>threads, as I have explained.
>
>Thirdly, I apologized for it, even though I wasn't aware I was doing it. The
>idiotic behavior of others is not under my control.
>
>And, lastly, I am not acting like a petulant child. Just tell me what I need
>to do to correct the misunderstanding about threading, and I will gladly
>adapt. I don't mean to offend anyone in this group intentionally, so please
>stop implying that I did something on purpose.
>
>Perhaps you are having a bad day today?
Moi? I've been having an awesome *year* - and today is just another day of it.
If it was about me - then why the hell did I go through the trouble of opening
my Bentley to provide the *definitive* solution to the guy with the sick 1.8T
this afternoon?
Besides, I've totally let pass the ignorant top-posting (thought I confess I
usually leave such trivialities to dizzy
No, it's about you. Simply put, it's about you changing subject lines every
time something new - no matter how trivial - is added to your sad story. Just
leave the subject line alone and post a follow-up to your own thread. I
promise, the very same people will read your post, you won't be effin' up
every other reader in the group, and if some other poor bastid ever finds
himself unluckily following your footsteps, he might have a fricken' prayer of
following all the way to the solution. Assuming you ever stumble upon same.
Seems perfectly reasonable to me...
/daytripper
'00 s4 6spd