Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

EP

This is different, than your escalated situations.

I hope you find a newsgrope that still posts to your liking. Perhaps
join in one of those societies that does historic recreations. Or
society for creative anachronisms?

Etiquette is making someone feel comfortable, but it does have
standards. Not pushing standards on people. When does society standards
change? They do as time goes by. As do the spelling of words. Such is a
philosphical discussion. We do live in interesting times as we get to be
witness to changes. Although this topic is idiotic.

Try and get some joy out of life.

Last night Higgy got to drive the red car, but like usual, it makes him
a target of some bad guy. He will go back to driving the Audi and leave
the red car to Magnum. Before when he drove the red car, the brakes
failed on him. Oh that Higgy-baby.

Top post, bottom post, there seems to be a logic in having the most
recent comment at the top.

React how you want. But I wouldn't do what you do.

Peace.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner
> <andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
>>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
>>gets on with it.
>
> Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and
> mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and
> you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post.
>
> I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That
> too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very
> simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o)
>

Little guideness (also in my sig):
http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post

--
/Arne

Top posters will be ignored. Quote the part you
are replying to, no more and no less! And don't
quote signatures, thank you.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner
> <andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
>>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
>>gets on with it.
>
> Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and
> mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and
> you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post.
>
> I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That
> too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very
> simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o)
>

Little guideness (also in my sig):
http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post

--
/Arne

Top posters will be ignored. Quote the part you
are replying to, no more and no less! And don't
quote signatures, thank you.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

Once upon a time *Dave LaCourse* wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 14:34:20 +0000 (UTC), Andy Turner
> <andyt@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Times have changed, they really have. It's only considered poor
>>netiquette by those who don't like it. Everyone else just uses it and
>>gets on with it.
>
> Times have NOT changed. Noticed I clipped all of your message and
> mine simply to reply to what is relevent. Go to other newsgroups and
> you will find a majority of the people do NOT top post.
>
> I agree with your estimation of quote after quote after quote. That
> too is impolite. Simply quote what you wish to talk about. Very
> simple. I bet you could do it without even trying. d;o)
>

Little guideness (also in my sig):
http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?How_to_post

--
/Arne

Top posters will be ignored. Quote the part you
are replying to, no more and no less! And don't
quote signatures, thank you.

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 8 Apr 2005 13:01:37 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Ronny wrote:
>> "charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
>> news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
>> > Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?
>>
>> This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.
>
>And what's even more humorous is that the meta-discussion couldn't just
>reside in the original thread - no, perish the thought - it had to
>spawn TWO new threads, including this one! On-topic, LOL.
>
>Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
>After all, any preference is valid, right?

If a preference works for a great many people (as top-posting does),
then it must be valid. I don't see thousands of people posting in
all-caps. Your analogy therefore is not valid.

Do you think all usenet posts should be in English, since that is your
preferred language?


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 8 Apr 2005 13:01:37 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Ronny wrote:
>> "charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
>> news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
>> > Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?
>>
>> This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.
>
>And what's even more humorous is that the meta-discussion couldn't just
>reside in the original thread - no, perish the thought - it had to
>spawn TWO new threads, including this one! On-topic, LOL.
>
>Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
>After all, any preference is valid, right?

If a preference works for a great many people (as top-posting does),
then it must be valid. I don't see thousands of people posting in
all-caps. Your analogy therefore is not valid.

Do you think all usenet posts should be in English, since that is your
preferred language?


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 8 Apr 2005 13:01:37 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Ronny wrote:
>> "charles blassberg" <blassberg@email.com> wrote in message
>> news:3bn87uF6hcd95U1@individual.net...
>> > Can we pls keep on topic within a thread?
>>
>> This is usenet, offtopic is part of the fun time, get used to it.
>
>And what's even more humorous is that the meta-discussion couldn't just
>reside in the original thread - no, perish the thought - it had to
>spawn TWO new threads, including this one! On-topic, LOL.
>
>Let's all start posting in all-caps, HTML, with attached binaries.
>After all, any preference is valid, right?

If a preference works for a great many people (as top-posting does),
then it must be valid. I don't see thousands of people posting in
all-caps. Your analogy therefore is not valid.

Do you think all usenet posts should be in English, since that is your
preferred language?


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 9 Apr 2005 08:57:18 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Andy Turner wrote:
>> On 8 Apr 2005 21:43:50 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed
>limit
>> >in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you
>could
>> >expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
>> >styles must be accomadated.
>>
>> Different styles of driving *are* accomodated, as are different modes
>> of transport and indeed different models of car.
>
>You mean like driving 5 under in a passing lane? Or those folks who
>swing wide for right turns, blocking two lanes? Folks who stop
>needlessly on on-ramps, because they can't figure out how to merge?
>Dream up some other legal, but discourteous traffic behavior that suits
>the scenario. There are probably thousands. But you get the point.

The only point I see is that you just *cannot* bring yourself to
appreciate that top-posting is a preferred and welcomed style by
thousands upon thousands of people. Your analogies are always wrong
because they are with practices which are either dangerous or entirely
unaccepted. Y'see those are not driving styles that are perfectly
accepted and welcomed by loads of other people. However top-posting
*is* perfectly accepted and welcomed by thousands of people.

Your analogy fails.

If you want to compare top-posting to something else, then you have to
compare it to something which is also preferred by a great many people
- such as motorbikes versus cars.


>Unlike you, I support courtesy. You support "if it feels good, do it -
>to hell with the rest of you."

Again, wrong. You do not support courtesy because you expect other
people to adopt your preferences. It's selfish and it's ignorant.



>> Since you (presumably) drive an Audi, do you expect that everyone
>> drives one since that is your preference?
>
>Have I ever said that?

No, it was a question <doh>. The question still remains - do you
expect that everyone should follow your preference WRT the car you
drive?



>> Do you think people that drive other models are wrong?
>
>Have I ever said that?

Again, no - it was a *question*. If you'd already said it, I wouldn't
be asking would I...


>
>> Do you think motorbikes should be outlawed too?
>
>Have I ever said that?

Er.. right, once again.. it's a *question*.


However, I think you're perhaps getting the point. To make such
requests based on your own preferences would be ridiculous. I'm glad
to see that in at least some walks of life, you're happy to accept the
choices other people make and don't expect them to make the same
choices as you.




>> Incidentally, it speaks volumes that you've bailed out of replying to
>> any message of mine, yet you're still sniping and whining elsewhere.
>
>It speaks volumes that you are running around a.a.a

Running around?! LOL!


> humping my posts trying to goad me into a flamewar.

This is not about a flamewar (have I flamed you *at all*?), this is
merely trying to help you adjust your self-centered attitude with
regard to expecting everyone else to adopt your preferences. Whenever
I back you inter a corner, you bail. However, you then start to whine
elsewhere with the same botched and false arguments. This, as I say,
speaks volumes.


> Find another hobby.

I would suggest the same WRT your top-post whining. If you hadn't
decided to start moaning about it, I wouldn't be responding now would
I..


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 9 Apr 2005 08:57:18 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Andy Turner wrote:
>> On 8 Apr 2005 21:43:50 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed
>limit
>> >in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you
>could
>> >expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
>> >styles must be accomadated.
>>
>> Different styles of driving *are* accomodated, as are different modes
>> of transport and indeed different models of car.
>
>You mean like driving 5 under in a passing lane? Or those folks who
>swing wide for right turns, blocking two lanes? Folks who stop
>needlessly on on-ramps, because they can't figure out how to merge?
>Dream up some other legal, but discourteous traffic behavior that suits
>the scenario. There are probably thousands. But you get the point.

The only point I see is that you just *cannot* bring yourself to
appreciate that top-posting is a preferred and welcomed style by
thousands upon thousands of people. Your analogies are always wrong
because they are with practices which are either dangerous or entirely
unaccepted. Y'see those are not driving styles that are perfectly
accepted and welcomed by loads of other people. However top-posting
*is* perfectly accepted and welcomed by thousands of people.

Your analogy fails.

If you want to compare top-posting to something else, then you have to
compare it to something which is also preferred by a great many people
- such as motorbikes versus cars.


>Unlike you, I support courtesy. You support "if it feels good, do it -
>to hell with the rest of you."

Again, wrong. You do not support courtesy because you expect other
people to adopt your preferences. It's selfish and it's ignorant.



>> Since you (presumably) drive an Audi, do you expect that everyone
>> drives one since that is your preference?
>
>Have I ever said that?

No, it was a question <doh>. The question still remains - do you
expect that everyone should follow your preference WRT the car you
drive?



>> Do you think people that drive other models are wrong?
>
>Have I ever said that?

Again, no - it was a *question*. If you'd already said it, I wouldn't
be asking would I...


>
>> Do you think motorbikes should be outlawed too?
>
>Have I ever said that?

Er.. right, once again.. it's a *question*.


However, I think you're perhaps getting the point. To make such
requests based on your own preferences would be ridiculous. I'm glad
to see that in at least some walks of life, you're happy to accept the
choices other people make and don't expect them to make the same
choices as you.




>> Incidentally, it speaks volumes that you've bailed out of replying to
>> any message of mine, yet you're still sniping and whining elsewhere.
>
>It speaks volumes that you are running around a.a.a

Running around?! LOL!


> humping my posts trying to goad me into a flamewar.

This is not about a flamewar (have I flamed you *at all*?), this is
merely trying to help you adjust your self-centered attitude with
regard to expecting everyone else to adopt your preferences. Whenever
I back you inter a corner, you bail. However, you then start to whine
elsewhere with the same botched and false arguments. This, as I say,
speaks volumes.


> Find another hobby.

I would suggest the same WRT your top-post whining. If you hadn't
decided to start moaning about it, I wouldn't be responding now would
I..


andyt

Re: Newsgroup Etiquette
 

On 9 Apr 2005 08:57:18 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:

>
>Andy Turner wrote:
>> On 8 Apr 2005 21:43:50 -0700, gcmschemist@gmail.com wrote:
>> >
>> >I guess that maybe top-posting Audi drivers would hold the speed
>limit
>> >in the passing lane. Since only *they* matter, that's what you
>could
>> >expect. Or some other MFFY* driving habit. After all, differing
>> >styles must be accomadated.
>>
>> Different styles of driving *are* accomodated, as are different modes
>> of transport and indeed different models of car.
>
>You mean like driving 5 under in a passing lane? Or those folks who
>swing wide for right turns, blocking two lanes? Folks who stop
>needlessly on on-ramps, because they can't figure out how to merge?
>Dream up some other legal, but discourteous traffic behavior that suits
>the scenario. There are probably thousands. But you get the point.

The only point I see is that you just *cannot* bring yourself to
appreciate that top-posting is a preferred and welcomed style by
thousands upon thousands of people. Your analogies are always wrong
because they are with practices which are either dangerous or entirely
unaccepted. Y'see those are not driving styles that are perfectly
accepted and welcomed by loads of other people. However top-posting
*is* perfectly accepted and welcomed by thousands of people.

Your analogy fails.

If you want to compare top-posting to something else, then you have to
compare it to something which is also preferred by a great many people
- such as motorbikes versus cars.


>Unlike you, I support courtesy. You support "if it feels good, do it -
>to hell with the rest of you."

Again, wrong. You do not support courtesy because you expect other
people to adopt your preferences. It's selfish and it's ignorant.



>> Since you (presumably) drive an Audi, do you expect that everyone
>> drives one since that is your preference?
>
>Have I ever said that?

No, it was a question <doh>. The question still remains - do you
expect that everyone should follow your preference WRT the car you
drive?



>> Do you think people that drive other models are wrong?
>
>Have I ever said that?

Again, no - it was a *question*. If you'd already said it, I wouldn't
be asking would I...


>
>> Do you think motorbikes should be outlawed too?
>
>Have I ever said that?

Er.. right, once again.. it's a *question*.


However, I think you're perhaps getting the point. To make such
requests based on your own preferences would be ridiculous. I'm glad
to see that in at least some walks of life, you're happy to accept the
choices other people make and don't expect them to make the same
choices as you.




>> Incidentally, it speaks volumes that you've bailed out of replying to
>> any message of mine, yet you're still sniping and whining elsewhere.
>
>It speaks volumes that you are running around a.a.a

Running around?! LOL!


> humping my posts trying to goad me into a flamewar.

This is not about a flamewar (have I flamed you *at all*?), this is
merely trying to help you adjust your self-centered attitude with
regard to expecting everyone else to adopt your preferences. Whenever
I back you inter a corner, you bail. However, you then start to whine
elsewhere with the same botched and false arguments. This, as I say,
speaks volumes.


> Find another hobby.

I would suggest the same WRT your top-post whining. If you hadn't
decided to start moaning about it, I wouldn't be responding now would
I..


andyt