"As soon as I realized that I didn't need meat to survive or to be in
good health, I began to see how forlorn it all is. If only we had a
different mentality about the drama of the cowboy and the range and
all the rest of it. It's a very romantic notion, an entrenched part of
American culture, but I've seen, for example, pigs waiting to be
slaughtered, and their hysteria and panic was something I shall never
forget." -- Chloris Leachman

Gandhi tells a story about a wise man meditating by a river. A
scorpion in a tree repeatedly falls into the water, and the wise man
rescues him each time. And each time, the scorpion stings him. Another
man sees this drama played out several times and approaches the wise
man, asking why he continues to save the scorpion and risk being stung
every time? "It is his nature to sting," says the wise man. "I am a
human. It is my nature to save."

"I think that people should start eating less meat. In case you
haven't noticed, meat is made out of animals. How would you feel if
you were a baby pig separated from your mother and about to be turned
into bacon? We don't eat dogs and cats because they are cute. Well,
pigs can be just as cute if you give them a chance." -- Isaac Bustos,
age 9, Public School 32-Bronx NY

**************************************

They just don't get it, do they, Brian?

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 02:48:54 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

<nothing>

Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?

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

Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
...
>
> Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
> newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?
>

1) Define "most newsreaders". Most by count? Most by usage? I only ask
because my newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine. While OE is much
maligned, it is also fairly ubiquitous.

2) Having looked at the headers for Jack's message, it appears to have the
proper information...

References: >

....to associate it with the original message.

Message-ID: >

Perhaps it's the newsreader's fault.

--
TFM3

Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 02:48:54 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
> @cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>
> <nothing>
>
> Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
> newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?

I was unaware of that, Kevin. My posts have shown up on my newsreader as
replies to the OP. Perhaps the best thing, in the long run is just to
ignore the troll, but my thought was to alert all others without offering
any gratification to the troll. Maybe adding a single message word would
solve the problem?
Are there others in the ng who see blank replies as new posts?

Jack Curry

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:04:14 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:

>I only ask
>because my newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine.

There's the problem. I said "newsreader," not "worm and virus
dissemination system."

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

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:09:13 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

>Perhaps the best thing, in the long run is just to
>ignore the troll,

Yep.

> but my thought was to alert all others without offering
>any gratification to the troll.

What exactly would you be protecting us from? If the subject line
doesn't alert me to the fact that it's flame-bait, then two seconds
glancing at the body certainly does. Since your warning appears as a
separate, empty post, it takes me just as much time to open it as it
would to open the flame bait.

I honestly don't understand what you hope to accomplish.

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

"Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis @cfl.rr.com> wrote in message

> Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 02:48:54 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
>> @cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> <nothing>
>>
>> Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
>> newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?
>
> I was unaware of that, Kevin. My posts have shown up on my
> newsreader as replies to the OP. Perhaps the best thing, in the long
> run is just to ignore the troll, but my thought was to alert all
> others without offering any gratification to the troll. Maybe adding
> a single message word would solve the problem?
> Are there others in the ng who see blank replies as new posts?
>
> Jack Curry

Perhaps the solution is to put "Troll dickhead, was..." in front of the
original subject along with the empty message body. Everybody would know not
to waste their time.

JD

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:22:42 GMT, "JD" >
wrote:

>Perhaps the solution is to put "Troll dickhead, was..." in front of the
>original subject along with the empty message body. Everybody would know not
>to waste their time.

That's a solution in search of a problem. What exactly would it
accomplish? If your intent is to keep me from wasting my time, your
efforts would be better spent urging people not to post dumbass
one-liners such as "ROFLMAO." I certainly spend more time quickly
reading such things than I do reading the flame-bait.

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

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:09:13 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
> @cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps the best thing, in the long run is just to
>> ignore the troll,
>
> Yep.
>
>> but my thought was to alert all others without offering
>> any gratification to the troll.
>
> What exactly would you be protecting us from? If the subject line
> doesn't alert me to the fact that it's flame-bait, then two seconds
> glancing at the body certainly does. Since your warning appears as a
> separate, empty post, it takes me just as much time to open it as it
> would to open the flame bait.
>
> I honestly don't understand what you hope to accomplish.

I started when the troll was spoofing regular poster's sigs, warning that
the posts were spoofs, which seemed appropriate to me. If I am spoofed, I
hope someone will do the same.
Many of the troll's messages have not be immediately obvious as to their
nature and that's when I started posting "Troll crap," or somesuch. My
thought was and is to alert ng readers that the post is trollbait. Some ng
readers seem to think that a quick heads up such as this is a good idea, but
as I have said, I was unaware that blank posts are appearing as new
subjects, which certainly is not helpful.
Ergo, a single word response, "troll" to make the message follow in thread
may be appreciated.
It's obvious to me that the troll has accomplished at least part of its
mission by causing us to spend time discussing remedies, and that's too bad.
If we all could recognize troll bait and not respond, that would probably
solve the problem.
While I find Brian's "Please don't feed the troll" a bit annoying and while
I have no desire to be a netcop, my objective was only to make sure that we
all, regs and newbies alike recognize the troll.
You are certainly as capable as I am at troll recognition, but others
apparently are not since we've had plenty of responses.
Defense rests.

Jack Curry

Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:04:14 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> > wrote:
>
> >I only ask
> >because my newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine.
>
> There's the problem. I said "newsreader," not "worm and virus
> dissemination system."
>

C'mon Kevin. I really expected better from you. This is exactly the type
of response you often rail against. I mean, it's cute. But it really
didn't answer the question I posed.

How about this: Show me where Forte is RFC-compliant in this regard and OE
is not, and I'll shut my mouth on the subject. But just because you use a
newsreader you feel is superior doesn't mean it isn't technically flawed.

I presented a piece of empirical evidence (the References: / Message ID:
headers) that the thread was not broken. I've never read any of the NNTP
RFCs, so I don't know if this is the gold standard. But, if you want to
point me to the portion of the appropriate RFC that shows Forte's
behavior to be more compliant than OE's, then I'll let it slide that the
majority of the posts on this newsgroup are made with OE and the vast
majority are not made with Forte.

BTW, could someone using Mozilla (the other major player here) let us know
what they "see" regarding whether Jack's responses spawn new threads for
their newsreaders.

--
TFM3

Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:22:42 GMT, "JD" >
> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps the solution is to put "Troll dickhead, was..." in front of the
>> original subject along with the empty message body. Everybody would know not
>> to waste their time.
>
> That's a solution in search of a problem. What exactly would it
> accomplish? If your intent is to keep me from wasting my time, your
> efforts would be better spent urging people not to post dumbass
> one-liners such as "ROFLMAO." I certainly spend more time quickly
> reading such things than I do reading the flame-bait.
>
> --
> Kevin S. Wilson
> Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
> "Who put these fingerprints on my imagination?"


Since there is obviously (to me any way) nothing in this newsgroup that meets
*YOUR* expectations and or approval, why don't you just un-subscribe and not
read any of the posts?

BOB

" BOB" > wrote in message

> Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:22:42 GMT, "JD" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps the solution is to put "Troll dickhead, was..." in front of
>>> the original subject along with the empty message body. Everybody
>>> would know not to waste their time.
>>
>> That's a solution in search of a problem. What exactly would it
>> accomplish? If your intent is to keep me from wasting my time, your
>> efforts would be better spent urging people not to post dumbass
>> one-liners such as "ROFLMAO." I certainly spend more time quickly
>> reading such things than I do reading the flame-bait.
>>
>> --
>> Kevin S. Wilson
>> Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
>> "Who put these fingerprints on my imagination?"
>
>
> Since there is obviously (to me any way) nothing in this newsgroup
> that meets *YOUR* expectations and or approval, why don't you just
> un-subscribe and not read any of the posts?
>
> BOB

Because if he spewed that crap face to face in Cowtown, Idaho, some cowgirl
would shove his teeth down his throat. He's safe here.

JD

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:46:18 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:

>Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:04:14 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >I only ask
>> >because my newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine.
>>
>> There's the problem. I said "newsreader," not "worm and virus
>> dissemination system."
>>
>
>C'mon Kevin. I really expected better from you. This is exactly the type
>of response you often rail against. I mean, it's cute. But it really
>didn't answer the question I posed.

I didn't directly answer your question because I think the question is
fundamentally flawed, because it depends on the premise that what
works for most is automatically desireable. "Majority rules" works
fine for picking whether the 6th graders want to play dodge ball or
volleyball at recess; beyond that, it isnt much help. I try to make my
posts conveniently viewable on any newsreader. That means not breaking
threaded posts by inserting a new subject line unless it is my
intention to start a new thread.

>How about this: Show me where Forte is RFC-compliant in this regard and OE
>is not, and I'll shut my mouth on the subject. But just because you use a
>newsreader you feel is superior doesn't mean it isn't technically flawed.
>
>I presented a piece of empirical evidence (the References: / Message ID:
>headers) that the thread was not broken. I've never read any of the NNTP
>RFCs, so I don't know if this is the gold standard. But, if you want to
>point me to the portion of the appropriate RFC that shows Forte's
>behavior to be more compliant than OE's, then I'll let it slide that the
>majority of the posts on this newsgroup are made with OE and the vast
>majority are not made with Forte.

Nah, I'll pass. I have better things to do than read RFCs.



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

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:46:20 -0500, " BOB" >
wrote:
>
>Since there is obviously (to me any way) nothing in this newsgroup that meets
>*YOUR* expectations and or approval, why don't you just un-subscribe and not
>read any of the posts?

I do it to annoy you, Bob. Let me know if it's working.

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

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:51:52 GMT, "JD" >
wrote:

>" BOB" > wrote in message

>>
>>
>> Since there is obviously (to me any way) nothing in this newsgroup
>> that meets *YOUR* expectations and or approval, why don't you just
>> un-subscribe and not read any of the posts?
>>
>> BOB
>
>Because if he spewed that crap face to face in Cowtown, Idaho, some cowgirl
>would shove his teeth down his throat. He's safe here.
>
Ah, violence. The last resort of the ignorant and illiterate.

Let me know when you wish to engage in reasoned debate, on BBQ or--in
the present case--Netiquette and posting behavior.

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

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:46:20 -0500, " BOB" >
> wrote:
>>
>> Since there is obviously (to me any way) nothing in this newsgroup that meets
>> *YOUR* expectations and or approval, why don't you just un-subscribe and not
>> read any of the posts?
>
> I do it to annoy you, Bob. Let me know if it's working.
>
> --
> Kevin S. Wilson
> Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
> "Who put these fingerprints on my imagination?"

Usually not. I rarely read any of your posts any more since IMO, they usually
have little or nothing to do with this newsgroup, except bitching ant trying to
prove your superiority.

BOB
bet I pushed a button or 2 there

Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:46:20 -0500, " BOB" >
> wrote:
>>
>> Since there is obviously (to me any way) nothing in this newsgroup that meets
>> *YOUR* expectations and or approval, why don't you just un-subscribe and not
>> read any of the posts?
>
> I do it to annoy you, Bob. Let me know if it's working.
>
That does seem to be your primary purpose in this newsgroup now, doesn't it?
IMO, of course.

BOB

In article >, "Jack
Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis @cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 02:48:54 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
> > @cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > <nothing>
> >
> > Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
> > newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?
>
> I was unaware of that, Kevin. My posts have shown up on my newsreader as
> replies to the OP. Perhaps the best thing, in the long run is just to
> ignore the troll, but my thought was to alert all others without offering
> any gratification to the troll. Maybe adding a single message word would
> solve the problem?
> Are there others in the ng who see blank replies as new posts?
>
Yep-me.
My reader sorts by article number and sees your stuff as a new thread.

monroe(not using OE)

Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
news
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:46:18 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> > wrote:
>
> >Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
> .. .
> >> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:04:14 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >I only ask
> >> >because my newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine.
> >>
> >> There's the problem. I said "newsreader," not "worm and virus
> >> dissemination system."
> >>
> >
> >C'mon Kevin. I really expected better from you. This is exactly the
type
> >of response you often rail against. I mean, it's cute. But it really
> >didn't answer the question I posed.
>
> I didn't directly answer your question because I think the question is
> fundamentally flawed, because it depends on the premise that what
> works for most is automatically desireable. "Majority rules" works
> fine for picking whether the 6th graders want to play dodge ball or
> volleyball at recess; beyond that, it isnt much help.

You made the following statement:

"...shows up in most newsreaders as a new, empty post..."

I asked for your definition of "most newsreaders". I don't particularly
care how you feel about majority rules. It is irrelevant. You used the
word "most". It is, unless the definition has changed when I wasn't
looking, synonymous with majority. I simply asked for a clarification of
what you meant by "most newsreaders". I would have been satisfied with
something like "three newsreaders constitute 99% of the NNTP traffic on this
newsgroup; OE, Forte, and Mozilla. Two of those (most!) behave in one way,
OE behaves the other." That would have been one definition of "majority".

OT: With your aversion to "majority rules", I'd be interested to know what
form of government you favor. Then again, maybe I wouldn't. At least not
in practice.

> I try to make my
> posts conveniently viewable on any newsreader. That means not breaking
> threaded posts by inserting a new subject line unless it is my
> intention to start a new thread.

That may be, but that's another matter entirely. You have conveniently
changed the subject. You do that when it suits you, you belittle others
when they do it to suit themselves.

Kevin, you are a very skilled debater. You know lots of tricks, perhaps all
of the tricks. You use them when you can get away with them. You are quick
to denigrate them with others employ them. Regardless, being a skilled
debater doesn't make you right. It just means you argue your case better.
It might even make your case seem more persuasive. But it still doesn't
make you right.

>
> >How about this: Show me where Forte is RFC-compliant in this regard and
OE
> >is not, and I'll shut my mouth on the subject. But just because you use
a
> >newsreader you feel is superior doesn't mean it isn't technically flawed.
> >
> >I presented a piece of empirical evidence (the References: / Message ID:
> >headers) that the thread was not broken. I've never read any of the NNTP
> >RFCs, so I don't know if this is the gold standard. But, if you want to
> >point me to the portion of the appropriate RFC that shows Forte's
> >behavior to be more compliant than OE's, then I'll let it slide that the
> >majority of the posts on this newsgroup are made with OE and the vast
> >majority are not made with Forte.
>
> Nah, I'll pass. I have better things to do than read RFCs.
>

Well, you just said "conveniently viewable on any newsreader". To me the
word "any" implies a standard a newsreader could adhere to. I was under the
impression that these standards were codified in the RFCs.

All of that said, I'll have to assume that when you said "most newsreaders"
you meant "my newsreader". And without any additional evidence, I'll just
assume your newsreader is flawed.

--
TFM3

Anxiously awaiting the post where you tell me that my mother dresses me
funny and you tell me this because you are my friend. BTW, I also enjoy
TFM®'s contributions to the group and find them consistently more on-topic
than yours. So, this might be a good time to label me as a racist.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 18:43:45 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:

>Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
>news
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:46:18 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
>> .. .
>> >> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:04:14 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I only ask
>> >> >because my newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine.
>> >>
>> >> There's the problem. I said "newsreader," not "worm and virus
>> >> dissemination system."
>> >>
>> >
>> >C'mon Kevin. I really expected better from you. This is exactly the
>type
>> >of response you often rail against. I mean, it's cute. But it really
>> >didn't answer the question I posed.
>>
>> I didn't directly answer your question because I think the question is
>> fundamentally flawed, because it depends on the premise that what
>> works for most is automatically desireable. "Majority rules" works
>> fine for picking whether the 6th graders want to play dodge ball or
>> volleyball at recess; beyond that, it isnt much help.
>
>You made the following statement:
>
>"...shows up in most newsreaders as a new, empty post..."
>
>I asked for your definition of "most newsreaders".

Fine. Have it you way. I amend my original statement to say "MANY
newsreaders." As you are congratulating yourself, please note that the
change doesn't at all change the fact that posting an empty reply
under a new subject line breaks the thread and is therefore neither
helpful nor useful.

> I don't particularly
>care how you feel about majority rules. It is irrelevant.

It is hardly irrelevant if the argument is being made that because the
followup displays as a threaded followup in OE, then posting it is
therefore helpful and useful. I see now that you said you only asked
"because [your] newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine." If
intellectual curiousity was your only intent in asking, then I
apologize for assuming you were leading up to an argument that
majority rule should prevail, regardless of what the followups do in
other newsreaders.

>You used the
>word "most". It is, unless the definition has changed when I wasn't
>looking, synonymous with majority. I simply asked for a clarification of
>what you meant by "most newsreaders". I would have been satisfied with
>something like "three newsreaders constitute 99% of the NNTP traffic on this
>newsgroup; OE, Forte, and Mozilla. Two of those (most!) behave in one way,
>OE behaves the other." That would have been one definition of "majority".
>
>OT: With your aversion to "majority rules", I'd be interested to know what
>form of government you favor. Then again, maybe I wouldn't. At least not
>in practice.

The one we have in the States, and I know you're smart enough to know
that it doesn't operate under majority rule.

>> I try to make my
>> posts conveniently viewable on any newsreader. That means not breaking
>> threaded posts by inserting a new subject line unless it is my
>> intention to start a new thread.
>
>That may be, but that's another matter entirely. You have conveniently
>changed the subject. You do that when it suits you, you belittle others
>when they do it to suit themselves.

Changed the subject or refused to do your homework for you?

>Kevin, you are a very skilled debater. You know lots of tricks, perhaps all
>of the tricks. You use them when you can get away with them. You are quick
>to denigrate them with others employ them.

So? Those "others" can step up to the plate if they feel they're being
unfairly criticized.

>Regardless, being a skilled
>debater doesn't make you right. It just means you argue your case better.
>It might even make your case seem more persuasive. But it still doesn't
>make you right.
>
Any other bit of common ****ing sense you'd like to share with me,
Thomas? I'm 46 years old; I don't need you to explain how the world
works.

>> >How about this: Show me where Forte is RFC-compliant in this regard and
>OE
>> >is not, and I'll shut my mouth on the subject. But just because you use
>a
>> >newsreader you feel is superior doesn't mean it isn't technically flawed.
>> >
>> >I presented a piece of empirical evidence (the References: / Message ID:
>> >headers) that the thread was not broken. I've never read any of the NNTP
>> >RFCs, so I don't know if this is the gold standard. But, if you want to
>> >point me to the portion of the appropriate RFC that shows Forte's
>> >behavior to be more compliant than OE's, then I'll let it slide that the
>> >majority of the posts on this newsgroup are made with OE and the vast
>> >majority are not made with Forte.
>>
>> Nah, I'll pass. I have better things to do than read RFCs.
>>
>
>Well, you just said "conveniently viewable on any newsreader". To me the
>word "any" implies a standard a newsreader could adhere to. I was under the
>impression that these standards were codified in the RFCs.
>
>All of that said, I'll have to assume that when you said "most newsreaders"
>you meant "my newsreader". And without any additional evidence, I'll just
>assume your newsreader is flawed.

Assume away. Your assumption doesn't make any less true my central
assertion, which is that posting empty followups is neither helpful
nor useful.

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

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 18:43:45 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:

>
>Anxiously awaiting the post where you tell me that my mother dresses me
>funny and you tell me this because you are my friend.

Scientists are working hard to isolate that humor gene you appear to
be missing, Thomsa. Don't give up hope.

>BTW, I also enjoy
>TFM®'s contributions to the group and find them consistently more on-topic
>than yours. So, this might be a good time to label me as a racist.

I'll be happy to do so. All you have to do is publicly state that you
find nothing offensive about what he posted or post something similar
yourself.

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

they come in loud and blank and clear here oe5
"Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis @cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
...
> Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 02:48:54 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
> > @cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > <nothing>
> >
> > Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
> > newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?
>
> I was unaware of that, Kevin. My posts have shown up on my newsreader as
> replies to the OP. Perhaps the best thing, in the long run is just to
> ignore the troll, but my thought was to alert all others without offering
> any gratification to the troll. Maybe adding a single message word would
> solve the problem?
> Are there others in the ng who see blank replies as new posts?
>
> Jack Curry
>
They come in loud and blank and clear here... oe5
Jack

In article >, "Jack
Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis @cfl.rr.com> says...
>
<snip>
> Are there others in the ng who see blank replies as new posts?
>
> Jack Curry
>
>
>

Yup, blank here. FWIW, I don't see the original posts either.
Killfiles are wonderful things. The blank posts are a bit annoying.

Bill

Thomas Mooney wrote:


> Kevin, you are a very skilled debater. You know lots of tricks, perhaps all
> of the tricks. You use them when you can get away with them. You are quick
> to denigrate them with others employ them. Regardless, being a skilled
> debater doesn't make you right. It just means you argue your case better.
> It might even make your case seem more persuasive. But it still doesn't
> make you right.
>

Very well put Thomas.

Happy Q'en,
BBQ

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:04:14 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:


>1) Define "most newsreaders". Most by count? Most by usage? I only ask
>because my newsreader (OE 5.0) handles it just fine. While OE is much
>maligned, it is also fairly ubiquitous.
>
>2) Having looked at the headers for Jack's message, it appears to have the
>proper information...
>
>References: >
>
>...to associate it with the original message.
>
>Message-ID: >
>
>Perhaps it's the newsreader's fault.

Most newsreaders allow you to configure them to "Start new thread when
followup-to Subject Changes" (or something similarly worded). This is
what seperates Curry's replies from the original thread regardless of
the References: line.

Most people usually set that option if it's available, IME.

Carry on, though. I'm sure the troll is proud to watch the bickering.

-sw

Steve Squirtz > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:04:14 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> > wrote:
>
>
> Most newsreaders allow you to configure them to "Start new thread when
> followup-to Subject Changes" (or something similarly worded). This is
> what seperates Curry's replies from the original thread regardless of
> the References: line.
>

There's that phrase "most newsreaders" again. <vbg>

Are you saying that toggling the "Start new thread..." configuration option
will change the appearance of the contents of the newsgroup? So that
setting it on will show Curry's reply in a separate thread while setting it
off will show Curry's reply as a follow-up in the original thread?

Also, is it
a) the change of subject line
b) the blank body
c) both of the above
d) something else altogether
that causes the observered behavior.

How about changing the subject line in the following manner:

From: "Apparently on-topic subject"
To: "Troll bait - was Apparently on-topic subject"

--
TFM3

Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address

> There's that phrase "most newsreaders" again. <vbg>

> Are you saying that toggling the "Start new thread..." configuration option
> will change the appearance of the contents of the newsgroup? So that
> setting it on will show Curry's reply in a separate thread while setting it
> off will show Curry's reply as a follow-up in the original thread?

> Also, is it
> a) the change of subject line
> b) the blank body
> c) both of the above
> d) something else altogether
> that causes the observered behavior.

> How about changing the subject line in the following manner:

> From: "Apparently on-topic subject"
> To: "Troll bait - was Apparently on-topic subject"

Threading is always done on the references line. Deleting the references
line will create a new thread. This is true for all newsreaders. Some
newsreaders can also thread by subject, as Steve pointed out, but it's
not recommended because it can lead to clutter.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:25:50 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:

>
>How about changing the subject line in the following manner:
>
>From: "Apparently on-topic subject"
>To: "Troll bait - was Apparently on-topic subject"

Exactly. What. Are. You. Trying. To. Accomplish?

I honestly don't get it.

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

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 17:09:13 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
@cfl.rr.com> wrote:

>Kevin S. Wilson wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 02:48:54 GMT, "Jack Curry" <Jack-Curry deletethis
>> @cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>> <nothing>
>>
>> Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
>> newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?
>
>I was unaware of that, Kevin. My posts have shown up on my newsreader as
>replies to the OP. Perhaps the best thing, in the long run is just to
>ignore the troll, but my thought was to alert all others without offering
>any gratification to the troll. Maybe adding a single message word would
>solve the problem?
>Are there others in the ng who see blank replies as new posts?
>
>Jack Curry
>
Yes

Harry

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 21:52:13 GMT, bbq > wrote:

>
>
>Thomas Mooney wrote:
>
>
>> Kevin, you are a very skilled debater. You know lots of tricks, perhaps all
>> of the tricks. You use them when you can get away with them. You are quick
>> to denigrate them with others employ them. Regardless, being a skilled
>> debater doesn't make you right. It just means you argue your case better.
>> It might even make your case seem more persuasive. But it still doesn't
>> make you right.
>>
>
>Very well put Thomas.
>
Um, which part? This?

> You know lots of tricks, perhaps all
> of the tricks. You use them when you can get away with them. You are quick
> to denigrate them with others employ them.

As I pointed out earlier, anyone on the receiving end of any
"denigration" is free to call me on it if they think they've been
unfairly criticized. But I really don't have much idea what Bob means
by "tricks."

Or this?

>Regardless, being a skilled
>debater doesn't make you right. It just means you argue your case better.
>It might even make your case seem more persuasive. But it still doesn't
>make you right.

That's hardly news to anyone old enough to vote. It's straight out of
the Obvious Bag, and on a par with such statements as "The sun rises
in the east and sets in the west."

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

Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:25:50 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >How about changing the subject line in the following manner:
> >
> >From: "Apparently on-topic subject"
> >To: "Troll bait - was Apparently on-topic subject"
>
> Exactly. What. Are. You. Trying. To. Accomplish?
>
> I honestly don't get it.
>

I'm trying to learn something. It's a stimulating process and really quite
simple. Almost anyone can do it. Find an area of interest, ask some
questions, seek out reference materials, think, repeat. An endeavor that
can last a lifetime.

I highly recommend it. Except to those who already know everything. For
them it's a waste of time and energy.

--
TFM3

Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 00:24:04 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:

>Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:25:50 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >How about changing the subject line in the following manner:
>> >
>> >From: "Apparently on-topic subject"
>> >To: "Troll bait - was Apparently on-topic subject"
>>
>> Exactly. What. Are. You. Trying. To. Accomplish?
>>
>> I honestly don't get it.
>>
>
>I'm trying to learn something. It's a stimulating process and really quite
>simple. Almost anyone can do it. Find an area of interest, ask some
>questions, seek out reference materials, think, repeat. An endeavor that
>can last a lifetime.
>
>I highly recommend it. Except to those who already know everything. For
>them it's a waste of time and energy.

I meant "What are you trying to accomplish by following-up in any way,
shape, or form to obvious flame bait?" It's neither useful nor
helpful, and it's doubly annoying when your follow-ups appear in MANY
newsreaders as empty posts that start new threads.

Oh, and Thomas? **** you, too.

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

Jack Curry wrote:
> Are there others in the ng who see blank replies as new posts?
>
> Jack Curry

Yep, M$'s OE6 reads it as a new thread. I've seen exceptions with a thread
having multiple subjects, but as a general rule, yes.

Even worse for threading I've discovered is Opera's reader, horrible. Do not
reccomend.

Unexpected bonus of having some people blocked, Thomas' one sided argument
with Kevin; it looks like Thomas always gets the last word. BONUS! Then
again, Thomas looks like he's talking to himself too .


--

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:44:18 -0800, "Duwop" >
wrote:

>Unexpected bonus of having some people blocked, Thomas' one sided argument
>with Kevin; it looks like Thomas always gets the last word. BONUS! Then
>again, Thomas looks like he's talking to himself too .

Glad to know you're still reading my posts in the follow-ups. Thanks.

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

Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
...

<significant snipping follows>
<apologies in advance for any context disturbance>
<all previous posts available for anyone foolish enough to still be reading>

> >
> >I asked for your definition of "most newsreaders".
>
> Fine. Have it you way. I amend my original statement to say "MANY
> newsreaders." As you are congratulating yourself, please note that the
> change doesn't at all change the fact that posting an empty reply
> under a new subject line breaks the thread and is therefore neither
> helpful nor useful.

Well, it's beginning to seem to me that it is not the thread that is broken,
but rather certain newsreaders' ability to properly handle Reference:
headers.

A quick quote from RFC 1036 (Standard for Interchange of USENET Messages):

"The purpose of the "References" header is to allow messages to be grouped
into conversations by the user interface program."

> >OT: With your aversion to "majority rules", I'd be interested to know
what
> >form of government you favor. Then again, maybe I wouldn't. At least
not
> >in practice.
>
> The one we have in the States, and I know you're smart enough to know
> that it doesn't operate under majority rule.

With few exceptions, the government we have in the States operates on some
variation or other of majority rule. Fortunately, safeguards are in place
to protect the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.
But most of the time there's a showing of hands, for better or worse, the
side with the most hands up carries the day. Sometimes those are our hands.
Sometimes they are the hands of people we have delegated our authority to
through another show of hands. Sometimes this delgation process is more
than one level deep.

> >That may be, but that's another matter entirely. You have conveniently
> >changed the subject. You do that when it suits you, you belittle others
> >when they do it to suit themselves.
>
> Changed the subject or refused to do your homework for you?

I was referring to changing the subject. But, you're right, I'd been lazy
and hadn't done my homework. That's been resolved. For any that are
interested, here is a link to the relevant RFC:

http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1036.html

>
> >Kevin, you are a very skilled debater. You know lots of tricks, perhaps
all
> >of the tricks. You use them when you can get away with them. You are
quick
> >to denigrate them with others employ them.
>
> So? Those "others" can step up to the plate if they feel they're being
> unfairly criticized.

I just thought I'd speak up for those that might have been too timid.
Frankly, you're a verbal bully. Bullies intimidate. I thought I'd call you
on it. Sometimes when one person stands up to a bully, others that might
have been heretofore reluctant stand up as well.

>
> >Regardless, being a skilled
> >debater doesn't make you right. It just means you argue your case
better.
> >It might even make your case seem more persuasive. But it still doesn't
> >make you right.
> >
> Any other bit of common ****ing sense you'd like to share with me,
> Thomas? I'm 46 years old; I don't need you to explain how the world
> works.

It is my perception that you feel that you are always right. Perhaps I'm
the only one that holds that perception. Perhaps the perception is wrong.

> >All of that said, I'll have to assume that when you said "most
newsreaders"
> >you meant "my newsreader". And without any additional evidence, I'll
just
> >assume your newsreader is flawed.
>
> Assume away. Your assumption doesn't make any less true my central
> assertion, which is that posting empty followups is neither helpful
> nor useful.

Quoting your original post in this thread:

"Jack, do you realize that your "reply" to the troll shows up in most
newsreaders as a new, empty post? How does that help?"

This is what I started responding to. To the best of my ability to tell,
you were complaining about the thread breaking. That was the line of
argument that I pursued. If I've read too little into this, I'm sorry. I'm
neither psychic nor omniscient.

--
TFM3

Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address

Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 00:24:04 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> > wrote:
>
> >Kevin S. Wilson > wrote in message
> .. .
> >> On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:25:50 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >How about changing the subject line in the following manner:
> >> >
> >> >From: "Apparently on-topic subject"
> >> >To: "Troll bait - was Apparently on-topic subject"
> >>
> >> Exactly. What. Are. You. Trying. To. Accomplish?
> >>
> >> I honestly don't get it.
> >>
> >
> >I'm trying to learn something. It's a stimulating process and really
quite
> >simple. Almost anyone can do it. Find an area of interest, ask some
> >questions, seek out reference materials, think, repeat. An endeavor that
> >can last a lifetime.
> >
> >I highly recommend it. Except to those who already know everything. For
> >them it's a waste of time and energy.
>
> I meant "What are you trying to accomplish by following-up in any way,
> shape, or form to obvious flame bait?" It's neither useful nor
> helpful, and it's doubly annoying when your follow-ups appear in MANY
> newsreaders as empty posts that start new threads.

There are a few that might consider it a service to label our resident
troll's posts. Here is one way that it might be useful. Suppose I am a
dial-up user. I'd prefer not to waste my time downloading messages that I
don't want to read. There is a troll in the group that is posting using
Subject: headers that are misleading and From: headers that purport to be
from a newsgroup "regular". If someone has come before me and "tagged"
threads of this sort, I only need expand the thread and read the subject
lines to know that I do not want to download the body of the original
message.

But my line of questioning was really more general. What exactly breaks the
thread from newsreaders such as Forte. A couple people have posted
information that leads me to believe that this might be nothing more than a
configuration choice. And even if it's not a configuration choice, it seems
to me that those newsreaders that break the thread do so in error.

Regardless, I was exploring ways in which one could change the Subject: for
a thread whose topic was different than what it was advertising. Many of us
have been in threads that have drifted. Sometimes there are multiple
branches to a thread. Some are on the original topic, one or more may have
drifted to another topic. It would be handy to be able to change the
Subject: line to indicate which branch of the thread had drifted.

So, I was trying to determine what it is exactly that breaks some/many?
newsreaders. If I understand the nature of their error, I might be able to
work around it.

>
> Oh, and Thomas? **** you, too.
>

Thanks, Kevin. That means a lot to me coming from you.

--
TFM3

Note: Spam-resistant e-mail address

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 01:24:18 GMT, "Thomas Mooney"
> wrote:

>
>With few exceptions, the government we have in the States operates on some
>variation or other of majority rule. Fortunately, safeguards are in place
>to protect the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority.
>But most of the time there's a showing of hands, for better or worse, the
>side with the most hands up carries the day. Sometimes those are our hands.
>Sometimes they are the hands of people we have delegated our authority to
>through another show of hands. Sometimes this delgation process is more
>than one level deep.

In tomorrow's class, could you go over that stuff about how a bill
becomes a law? Also, is all of this going to be on the test?

That patronizing attitude is precisely what got you the first "****
you." If I feel the need to brush up on my understanding of
representative democracy, I'll read a book. You can put your lecture
notes away.

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

"Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
...
> wsreaders as empty posts that start new threads.
>
> Oh, and Thomas? **** you, too.
>
> --
> Kevin S. Wilson
> Tech Writer at a University Somewhere in Idaho
> "Who put these fingerprints on my imagination?"

Thomas, I believe Kevin said that to you because he is your friend.
Jack<G>

"Duwop" > wrote in message
...
> Jack Sloan wrote:
> > "Kevin S. Wilson" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> wsreaders as empty posts that start new threads.
> >>
> >> Oh, and Thomas? **** you, too.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kevin S. Wilson
> >
> > Thomas, I believe Kevin said that to you because he is your friend.
> > Jack<G>
>
> Watch, Kevin's gonna call Thomas a Nazi now.
>
> Dale <BG>
> --
>
>
He wouldn't...Would he?
Jack