FoodBanter.com

FoodBanter.com (https://www.foodbanter.com/)
-   Barbecue (https://www.foodbanter.com/barbecue/)
-   -   SURVEY: Binaries on Alt.Food.Barbecue (https://www.foodbanter.com/barbecue/19581-survey-binaries-alt-food.html)

MikeT 02-01-2004 03:12 AM

SUMMARY: Binaries on Alt.Food.Barbecue - objection is strong.
 
I have read all the replies to date.
A resounding feeling of no binaries to this group has been sent and heard.
Also provided were suggestions of where to get the old posts to ABF.
(change news providers came up a few times as did a site which is archiving
posted binaries.)



The wording that I used caused confusion as to respondents intent.
Fortunately many of you also saw fit to clearly add to the response.
This is something not easily done in most voting situations.


The question asked if there was objection.

Answering "NO" would mean that they had no objection. - binaries can go here.
Answering "YES" would mean that they do have objection. - No binaries allowed.


Most folks quickly responded "NO" meaning that they had no objection.
However, they then proceeded to object in no uncertain terms.

Others properly answered in the affirmative, YES, they object.

A few did not give a selection (which in this case would have been a "NO"
response, indicating that they would accept binaries) However, they, too, made
points that would seem that they object to binaries in this group.

Actual Results are a mess.
I clearly see how the presidential election became so F-ed up.
Many of the "ballots" contain contradictory responses and would have been
declared invalid.

-miket



Harry Demidavicius 02-01-2004 05:20 AM

SURVEY: Binaries on Alt.Food.Barbecue
 
On 01 Jan 2004 04:09:17 GMT, wrote:

Bill wrote:
In article ,
says...
[]
Shaddup! It wasn't a g*dd*mned sarong, it was a pakhama!


I hear you can get that cleared up with a series of shots now.


.45 ACP?

Some of yer food posts look pretty tasteless, too! So there!


Have you tried licking the screen harder?


Yep. Shocking!

Happy F***ing New Year, anyhow.

And a Joyous New Year to you and yours.

Semper Fi, Nick.

It's been a good year. Like someone else said, " May the worst of 2004 be
better than the best of 2003!"


That would have been me, you skirt wearing cross-dresser, you ;0)

Happy New year Nick!

Harry
posting from Ice Station Calgary!

Howard R. Bricker 02-01-2004 05:24 AM

Just say "no" to binaries on afb
 
"TFM®" wrote

Tell me where you live (in an email of course) and I'll see what I can
dig up. You've *gotta* have more options than that.

TFM®



'fraid not. I live in an old mobile home park. Time Warner is not
allowed in here. The phone company will not upgrade to DSL capability.
Of course all the new developements just up the road have it. SWMBO
will not move. I live in 33635. Rotsa Ruck.

M&M Man

Howard R. Bricker 02-01-2004 05:54 AM

SUMMARY: Binaries on Alt.Food.Barbecue - objection is strong.
 
"MikeT" wrote in
news:[email protected]_s03:

I have read all the replies to date.
A resounding feeling of no binaries to this group has been sent and
heard. Also provided were suggestions of where to get the old posts to
ABF. (change news providers came up a few times as did a site which is
archiving posted binaries.)



The wording that I used caused confusion as to respondents intent.
Fortunately many of you also saw fit to clearly add to the response.
This is something not easily done in most voting situations.


The question asked if there was objection.

Answering "NO" would mean that they had no objection. - binaries can
go here. Answering "YES" would mean that they do have objection. - No
binaries allowed.


Most folks quickly responded "NO" meaning that they had no objection.
However, they then proceeded to object in no uncertain terms.

Others properly answered in the affirmative, YES, they object.

A few did not give a selection (which in this case would have been a
"NO" response, indicating that they would accept binaries) However,
they, too, made points that would seem that they object to binaries in
this group.

Actual Results are a mess.
I clearly see how the presidential election became so F-ed up.
Many of the "ballots" contain contradictory responses and would have
been declared invalid.

-miket



Mike, most people here understand that there are two types of
newsgroups. There are discussion groups like this one and then
there are binary groups for the posting of executables and
pictures. This is not citizens band for all that it may seem
to be. Despite the level of contamination that does exist in the
altl* hierarchy, there is strong resistance to actually destroying
it. Which is what would probably happen if the contamination
was allowed to cross the structure lines.

M&M Man

Kevin S. Wilson 03-01-2004 06:39 PM

Just say "no" to binaries on afb
 
On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 01:08:06 -0600, "Thomas Mooney"
wrote:

Howard R. Bricker wrote in message
. 12.204...
"Thomas Mooney" wrote

snip

Perhaps the news server one attaches to can (but doesn't necessarily)
exercise some control.


snip some more

You have that right Thomas.


I'm sorry, Brick, I'm missing your point. I have _what_ right?

Try it again, with a comma after "right."

--
Kevin S. Wilson
Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
"Who put these fingerprints on my imagination?"

B.Server 03-01-2004 08:41 PM

SUMMARY: Binaries on Alt.Food.Barbecue - objection is strong.
 
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 03:12:44 GMT, "MikeT"
wrote:

I have read all the replies to date.
A resounding feeling of no binaries to this group has been sent and heard.
Also provided were suggestions of where to get the old posts to ABF.
(change news providers came up a few times as did a site which is archiving
posted binaries.)



The wording that I used caused confusion as to respondents intent.
Fortunately many of you also saw fit to clearly add to the response.
This is something not easily done in most voting situations.


The question asked if there was objection.

Answering "NO" would mean that they had no objection. - binaries can go here.
Answering "YES" would mean that they do have objection. - No binaries allowed.


Most folks quickly responded "NO" meaning that they had no objection.
However, they then proceeded to object in no uncertain terms.

Others properly answered in the affirmative, YES, they object.

A few did not give a selection (which in this case would have been a "NO"
response, indicating that they would accept binaries) However, they, too, made
points that would seem that they object to binaries in this group.

Actual Results are a mess.
I clearly see how the presidential election became so F-ed up.
Many of the "ballots" contain contradictory responses and would have been
declared invalid.

-miket


Guilty as charged. Kind of embarrassing as I live in Texas where the
purposeful obscuring of the purpose and effect of ballot measures by
our esteemed legislature is a minor art form. Triple negatives,
anyone? Fortunately, they have not yet passed a measure that permits
them to do as they please if everyone votes against a proposition.
Thus the reflex to vote no automatically; absent a very strong reason
to do otherwise.

And thank you for the honesty to recognize that the commentary
probably reflects the sentiment of the voter more accurately than the
(IMO) backwards proposition. Another difference from "real" politics.





CSS 03-01-2004 08:54 PM

SUMMARY: Binaries on Alt.Food.Barbecue - objection is strong.
 
It's a moot point for me--my ISP strips binaries from non-binary groups,
anyway.


"B.Server" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 03:12:44 GMT, "MikeT"
wrote:

I have read all the replies to date.
A resounding feeling of no binaries to this group has been sent and

heard.
Also provided were suggestions of where to get the old posts to ABF.
(change news providers came up a few times as did a site which is

archiving
posted binaries.)



The wording that I used caused confusion as to respondents intent.
Fortunately many of you also saw fit to clearly add to the response.
This is something not easily done in most voting situations.


The question asked if there was objection.

Answering "NO" would mean that they had no objection. - binaries can go

here.
Answering "YES" would mean that they do have objection. - No binaries

allowed.


Most folks quickly responded "NO" meaning that they had no objection.
However, they then proceeded to object in no uncertain terms.

Others properly answered in the affirmative, YES, they object.

A few did not give a selection (which in this case would have been a "NO"
response, indicating that they would accept binaries) However, they, too,

made
points that would seem that they object to binaries in this group.

Actual Results are a mess.
I clearly see how the presidential election became so F-ed up.
Many of the "ballots" contain contradictory responses and would have been
declared invalid.

-miket


Guilty as charged. Kind of embarrassing as I live in Texas where the
purposeful obscuring of the purpose and effect of ballot measures by
our esteemed legislature is a minor art form. Triple negatives,
anyone? Fortunately, they have not yet passed a measure that permits
them to do as they please if everyone votes against a proposition.
Thus the reflex to vote no automatically; absent a very strong reason
to do otherwise.

And thank you for the honesty to recognize that the commentary
probably reflects the sentiment of the voter more accurately than the
(IMO) backwards proposition. Another difference from "real" politics.








All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter