Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
First Call for Nominations - UK Usenet Committee Elections 2012
6 views
Skip to first unread message
Barry Salter
Sep 7, 2012, 10:20:37 AM9/7/12
to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
Open Class (Three Vacancies)
Please note that, in this Call for Nominations, all email addresses,
including the application address, are munged with (at) replacing the @,
in accordance with standard practice.
Applications and Nominations are requested for the "Open" class of
membership of the UK Usenet Committee.
There are currently three Open Vacancies.
Votetakers for the 2012 UK Usenet Committee Elections:
Primary: Barry Salter <com2k12-queries (at) ukvotes.southie.me.uk>
Secondary: Pedt Scragg <p.scragg (at) ukvoting (dot) org (dot) uk>
(Please only contact the secondary votetaker in an emergency)
========================================================================
Definition of Open Class of Membership
Any participant in the uk.* hierarchy qualifies as a candidate in the
Open class.
========================================================================
Application Requirements
Any participant in the uk.* hierarchy qualifies as a nominator for the
Open class.
Any individual may nominate a maximum of three candidates.
========================================================================
Nominations must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 1st October 2012.
========================================================================
Each candidate must receive four nominations. The nominators must
confirm support for their candidate(s) by replying to an email from the
votetaker. Replies must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 8th October 2012.
Please note that the usual voting rules on email address validity also
apply to all application and nomination emails. An application or
nomination cannot be accepted if the votetaker is unable to verify the
identity of the sender.
If a candidate fails to attract four confirmations from their nominators
by that deadline, they will not qualify for this round of elections.
NOTE: All applications will be released to the community by a posting
from a votetaker handling the elections as soon as they are received and
confirmed by similar method once the nominators have confirmed their
nomination.
Please note that there will be not be a period of grace for
confirmations after the deadline of 23:59:59 BST, 8th October 2012.
If candidates wish to supply more than the minimum four nominators, they
may do so. The first four qualifying confirmations received from
nominators will be announced by the votetaker as the official nominators
for each candidate.
In the event of there being more than three "Open" Candidates an
election will be held during October 2012.
Nominations *MUST* be sent to xcom12a (at) vote.ukvoting.org.uk.
========================================================================
In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
Graham Drabble
Clive D. W. Feather
Matthew Vernon
========================================================================
- - - - - - - - - - Delete this line and everything above it - - - - - - -
================= Call for Nominations - 2012 Election =================
Sections A and B MUST be completed for your nomination to be considered.
Section C is optional, but recommended.
A. Candidate - Name and Email Address:
Name : [ ]
Email: [ ]
B. Nominators - Name and Email Address
1. Name : [ ]
1. Email: [ ]
2. Name : [ ]
2. Email: [ ]
3. Name : [ ]
3. Email: [ ]
4. Name : [ ]
4. Email: [ ]
5. (continue the sequence if required)
C. A short ( < 15 lines ) paragraph on yourself (optional):
================= Call for Nominations - 2012 Election =================
- - - - - - - - - - Delete this line and everything below it - - - - - - -
========================================================================
This vote is being conducted by neutral third party members of UKVoting.
UKVoting is a group of independent votetakers who count votes on
behalf of the uk.* hierarchy and other 3rd parties.
The rules under which votes for the uk.* hierarchy are taken are posted
regularly to uk.net.news.announce or can be found at the following URL:
<http://www.usenet.org.uk/voting.html>
The UKVoting web pages can be found at <http://www.ukvoting.org.uk/>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 1.4.10
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBUEoCyGOfGXkh8vHZAQE+JgP/ay5+ghrZrZzyZCwkEsZ2UIWSY06bZH0j
fP0lLQVJeGEUk1p4oWnjYwyge7hE9JUxqQoeeIhuQqyrAUs6JRdnvZVJssVuM29O
z+ZwKMdWrB3W7nR+Y40sj+Umkj/emz6YHgLV+/gJ14rC7CbPwhcEtx/nHRPCZP0q
PmA5V3juMVo=
=GvMB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
Open Class (Three Vacancies)
Please note that, in this Call for Nominations, all email addresses,
including the application address, are munged with (at) replacing the @,
in accordance with standard practice.
Applications and Nominations are requested for the "Open" class of
membership of the UK Usenet Committee.
There are currently three Open Vacancies.
Votetakers for the 2012 UK Usenet Committee Elections:
Primary: Barry Salter <com2k12-queries (at) ukvotes.southie.me.uk>
Secondary: Pedt Scragg <p.scragg (at) ukvoting (dot) org (dot) uk>
(Please only contact the secondary votetaker in an emergency)
========================================================================
Definition of Open Class of Membership
Any participant in the uk.* hierarchy qualifies as a candidate in the
Open class.
========================================================================
Application Requirements
Any participant in the uk.* hierarchy qualifies as a nominator for the
Open class.
Any individual may nominate a maximum of three candidates.
========================================================================
Nominations must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 1st October 2012.
========================================================================
Each candidate must receive four nominations. The nominators must
confirm support for their candidate(s) by replying to an email from the
votetaker. Replies must be received by 23:59:59 BST, 8th October 2012.
Please note that the usual voting rules on email address validity also
apply to all application and nomination emails. An application or
nomination cannot be accepted if the votetaker is unable to verify the
identity of the sender.
If a candidate fails to attract four confirmations from their nominators
by that deadline, they will not qualify for this round of elections.
NOTE: All applications will be released to the community by a posting
from a votetaker handling the elections as soon as they are received and
confirmed by similar method once the nominators have confirmed their
nomination.
Please note that there will be not be a period of grace for
confirmations after the deadline of 23:59:59 BST, 8th October 2012.
If candidates wish to supply more than the minimum four nominators, they
may do so. The first four qualifying confirmations received from
nominators will be announced by the votetaker as the official nominators
for each candidate.
In the event of there being more than three "Open" Candidates an
election will be held during October 2012.
Nominations *MUST* be sent to xcom12a (at) vote.ukvoting.org.uk.
========================================================================
In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
Graham Drabble
Clive D. W. Feather
Matthew Vernon
========================================================================
- - - - - - - - - - Delete this line and everything above it - - - - - - -
================= Call for Nominations - 2012 Election =================
Sections A and B MUST be completed for your nomination to be considered.
Section C is optional, but recommended.
A. Candidate - Name and Email Address:
Name : [ ]
Email: [ ]
B. Nominators - Name and Email Address
1. Name : [ ]
1. Email: [ ]
2. Name : [ ]
2. Email: [ ]
3. Name : [ ]
3. Email: [ ]
4. Name : [ ]
4. Email: [ ]
5. (continue the sequence if required)
C. A short ( < 15 lines ) paragraph on yourself (optional):
================= Call for Nominations - 2012 Election =================
- - - - - - - - - - Delete this line and everything below it - - - - - - -
========================================================================
This vote is being conducted by neutral third party members of UKVoting.
UKVoting is a group of independent votetakers who count votes on
behalf of the uk.* hierarchy and other 3rd parties.
The rules under which votes for the uk.* hierarchy are taken are posted
regularly to uk.net.news.announce or can be found at the following URL:
<http://www.usenet.org.uk/voting.html>
The UKVoting web pages can be found at <http://www.ukvoting.org.uk/>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 1.4.10
Charset: noconv
iQCVAwUBUEoCyGOfGXkh8vHZAQE+JgP/ay5+ghrZrZzyZCwkEsZ2UIWSY06bZH0j
fP0lLQVJeGEUk1p4oWnjYwyge7hE9JUxqQoeeIhuQqyrAUs6JRdnvZVJssVuM29O
z+ZwKMdWrB3W7nR+Y40sj+Umkj/emz6YHgLV+/gJ14rC7CbPwhcEtx/nHRPCZP0q
PmA5V3juMVo=
=GvMB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Matthew Vernon
Sep 9, 2012, 12:04:23 PM9/9/12
to
Hi,
> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
> Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
> from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>
> Graham Drabble
> Clive D. W. Feather
> Matthew Vernon
I intend to stand for re-election, but could do with a couple more
nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
or comment here.
Matthew
--
`O'-----0 `O'---. `O'---. `O'---.
\___| | \___|0-/ \___|/ \___|
| | /\ | | \ | |\ | |
The Dangers of modern veterinary life
> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
> Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
> from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>
> Graham Drabble
> Clive D. W. Feather
> Matthew Vernon
nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
or comment here.
Matthew
--
`O'-----0 `O'---. `O'---. `O'---.
\___| | \___|0-/ \___|/ \___|
| | /\ | | \ | |\ | |
The Dangers of modern veterinary life
Clive George
Sep 9, 2012, 12:10:26 PM9/9/12
to
On 09/09/2012 17:04, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
>> Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
>> from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>>
>> Graham Drabble
>> Clive D. W. Feather
>> Matthew Vernon
>
> I intend to stand for re-election, but could do with a couple more
> nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
> or comment here.
I will.
> Hi,
>
>> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
>> Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
>> from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>>
>> Graham Drabble
>> Clive D. W. Feather
>> Matthew Vernon
>
> I intend to stand for re-election, but could do with a couple more
> nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
> or comment here.
Paul Cummins
Sep 9, 2012, 12:21:00 PM9/9/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when mat...@debian.org (Matthew Vernon)
came up to me and whispered:
> I intend to stand for re-election,
The it looks like I'm standing as well.
Nomnations welcome to my reply-to address please.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
came up to me and whispered:
> I intend to stand for re-election,
Nomnations welcome to my reply-to address please.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Judith
Sep 9, 2012, 1:47:36 PM9/9/12
to
On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 17:04:23 +0100, Matthew Vernon <mat...@debian.org> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
>> Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
>> from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>>
>> Graham Drabble
>> Clive D. W. Feather
>> Matthew Vernon
>
>I intend to stand for re-election, but could do with a couple more
>nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
>or comment here.
>
>Matthew
Have you tried the URCM moderation team - or perhaps the chiark user group.
>Hi,
>
>> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open Class
>> Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to be retiring
>> from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>>
>> Graham Drabble
>> Clive D. W. Feather
>> Matthew Vernon
>
>I intend to stand for re-election, but could do with a couple more
>nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
>or comment here.
>
>Matthew
John Hall
Sep 9, 2012, 2:06:57 PM9/9/12
to
In article <87bohfi...@macbeth.sac.ac.uk>,
well as Paul. (That's a "yes", in case it isn't clear!)
--
John Hall
"The beatings will continue until morale improves."
Attributed to the Commander of Japan's Submarine Forces in WW2
Matthew Vernon <mat...@debian.org> writes:
>I intend to stand for re-election, but could do with a couple more
>nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
>or comment here.
If I'm to be consistent, then I have to be willing to nominate you as
>I intend to stand for re-election, but could do with a couple more
>nominations; if you're prepared to nominate me, please drop me an email,
>or comment here.
well as Paul. (That's a "yes", in case it isn't clear!)
--
John Hall
"The beatings will continue until morale improves."
Attributed to the Commander of Japan's Submarine Forces in WW2
Paul Cummins
Sep 9, 2012, 2:49:00 PM9/9/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when nospam...@jhall.co.uk (John
Hall) came up to me and whispered:
> If I'm to be consistent, then I have to be willing to nominate
> you as well as Paul. (That's a "yes", in case it isn't clear!)
Well done, Sir :-)
Hall) came up to me and whispered:
> If I'm to be consistent, then I have to be willing to nominate
> you as well as Paul. (That's a "yes", in case it isn't clear!)
Graham Drabble
Sep 9, 2012, 3:40:10 PM9/9/12
to
On 07 Sep 2012, you wrote in uk.net.news.management:
> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open
> Class Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to
> be retiring from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>
> Graham Drabble
> Clive D. W. Feather
> Matthew Vernon
FTR, I won't be standing again this year.
> In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open
> Class Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to
> be retiring from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
>
> Graham Drabble
> Clive D. W. Feather
> Matthew Vernon
--
Graham Drabble
"Usenet is mostly just a geek entertainment system that far too many
people try to pretend as some type of "real" value to society."
Curt Welch - news.software.nntp
Paul Cummins
Sep 9, 2012, 5:42:00 PM9/9/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when usen...@drabble.me.uk (Graham
Drabble) came up to me and whispered:
> FTR, I won't be standing again this year.
May I be the first to offer my heartfelt thanks for your committee
activities over the last few years, and thank you for your service.
Drabble) came up to me and whispered:
> FTR, I won't be standing again this year.
activities over the last few years, and thank you for your service.
A.Lee
Sep 10, 2012, 2:08:06 AM9/10/12
to
Graham Drabble <usen...@drabble.me.uk> wrote:
> On 07 Sep 2012, you wrote in uk.net.news.management:
>
> > In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open
> > Class Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to
> > be retiring from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
> >
> > Graham Drabble
> > Clive D. W. Feather
> > Matthew Vernon
>
> FTR, I won't be standing again this year.
In that case, then I will gladly accept any nominations to stand.
> On 07 Sep 2012, you wrote in uk.net.news.management:
>
> > In accordance with the Committee Document, the following Open
> > Class Members have served a full three year term and are deemed to
> > be retiring from the Committee. They are eligible for re-election.
> >
> > Graham Drabble
> > Clive D. W. Feather
> > Matthew Vernon
>
> FTR, I won't be standing again this year.
Thanks
alan ( at ) darkroom.plus.com
--
To reply by e-mail, change the ' + ' to 'plus'.
Ian Clifton
Sep 10, 2012, 5:32:28 AM9/10/12
to
I will be standing again too, basically for the same reasons as last
year—that it’s healthier to have more candidates than vacancies. As last
year I got in a mess by making my candidature conditional on
circumstances, I think it’s better to just say I’m standing, should I
get sufficient nominations—more still required!
--
Ian ◎
year—that it’s healthier to have more candidates than vacancies. As last
year I got in a mess by making my candidature conditional on
circumstances, I think it’s better to just say I’m standing, should I
get sufficient nominations—more still required!
--
Ian ◎
Paul Cummins
Sep 10, 2012, 5:59:00 AM9/10/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when alan@darkroom.+.com (A.Lee) came
> *Date:* Mon, 10 Sep 2012 07:08:06 +0100
up to me and whispered:
> *From:* alan@darkroom.+.com (A.Lee)
> *Date:* Mon, 10 Sep 2012 07:08:06 +0100
>
> Graham Drabble <usen...@drabble.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > On 07 Sep 2012, you wrote in uk.net.news.management:
> >
> > > In accordance with the Committee Document, the following
> > Open
> > > Class Members have served a full three year term and are
> > deemed to
> > > be retiring from the Committee. They are eligible for
> > re-election.
> > >
> > > Graham Drabble
> > > Clive D. W. Feather
> > > Matthew Vernon
> >
> > FTR, I won't be standing again this year.
>
> In that case, then I will gladly accept any nominations to
> stand.
You can have mine with pleasure.
> Graham Drabble <usen...@drabble.me.uk> wrote:
>
> > On 07 Sep 2012, you wrote in uk.net.news.management:
> >
> > > In accordance with the Committee Document, the following
> > Open
> > > Class Members have served a full three year term and are
> > deemed to
> > > be retiring from the Committee. They are eligible for
> > re-election.
> > >
> > > Graham Drabble
> > > Clive D. W. Feather
> > > Matthew Vernon
> >
> > FTR, I won't be standing again this year.
>
> In that case, then I will gladly accept any nominations to
> stand.
Paul Cummins
Sep 10, 2012, 5:59:00 AM9/10/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk (Ian
Clifton) came up to me and whispered:
> *From:* Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk>
> *Date:* Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:32:28 +0100
> should I
> get sufficient nominations_more still required!
> --
> Ian _
>
Happy to nominate you.
Clifton) came up to me and whispered:
> *From:* Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk>
> *Date:* Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:32:28 +0100
>
> I will be standing again too, basically for the same reasons as
> last
> year_that it_s healthier to have more candidates than
> I will be standing again too, basically for the same reasons as
> last
> vacancies. As last
> year I got in a mess by making my candidature conditional on
> circumstances, I think it_s better to just say I_m standing,
> year I got in a mess by making my candidature conditional on
> should I
> get sufficient nominations_more still required!
> --
> Ian _
>
Happy to nominate you.
Paul Cummins
Sep 10, 2012, 1:23:00 PM9/10/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
(Paul Cummins) came up to me and whispered:
> Nomnations welcome to my reply-to address please.
I am currently one-to-go and would appreciate any further offers.
(Paul Cummins) came up to me and whispered:
> Nomnations welcome to my reply-to address please.
A.Lee
Sep 10, 2012, 1:39:53 PM9/10/12
to
Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
> (Paul Cummins) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > Nomnations welcome to my reply-to address please.
>
> I am currently one-to-go and would appreciate any further offers.
As am I.
> We were about to embark at Dover, when uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
> (Paul Cummins) came up to me and whispered:
>
> > Nomnations welcome to my reply-to address please.
>
> I am currently one-to-go and would appreciate any further offers.
Thanks to the three who have responded.
Alan.
Dr J R Stockton
Sep 12, 2012, 4:28:55 PM9/12/12
to
In uk.net.news.management message <notice-cfn-committee-elections-
2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
> ...
IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
existence.
Although it would be nice to set an example to certain other parts of
the world by consolidating and removing dead groups until only this
group is left, before finally closing the door.
But I'd like to see the experiment of somehow setting up a Web-based
discussion server with powerful robo-control : fixed-pitch font, <=72
characters/line, characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
keyboard, 5000-character hard limit, six hour posting delay, hand
moderation if any spam-type words robo-detected, etc. That would
discourage the inane, while still being useful.
--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. For Mail, see Home Page. Turnpike, WinXP.
Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQ-type topics, acronyms, and links.
Command-prompt MiniTrue is useful for viewing/searching/altering files. Free,
DOS/Win/UNIX now 2.0.6; see <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/pc-links.htm>.
2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
existence.
Although it would be nice to set an example to certain other parts of
the world by consolidating and removing dead groups until only this
group is left, before finally closing the door.
But I'd like to see the experiment of somehow setting up a Web-based
discussion server with powerful robo-control : fixed-pitch font, <=72
characters/line, characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
keyboard, 5000-character hard limit, six hour posting delay, hand
moderation if any spam-type words robo-detected, etc. That would
discourage the inane, while still being useful.
--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. For Mail, see Home Page. Turnpike, WinXP.
Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQ-type topics, acronyms, and links.
Command-prompt MiniTrue is useful for viewing/searching/altering files. Free,
DOS/Win/UNIX now 2.0.6; see <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/pc-links.htm>.
Tony
Sep 13, 2012, 3:13:07 AM9/13/12
to
In uk.net.news.management, Dr J R Stockton
it still needs to exist, in my view.
>But I'd like to see the experiment of somehow setting up a Web-based
>discussion server with powerful robo-control : fixed-pitch font, <=72
>characters/line, characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>keyboard, 5000-character hard limit, six hour posting delay, hand
>moderation if any spam-type words robo-detected, etc. That would
>discourage the inane, while still being useful.
Let us know when you've built such a thing and we'll come have a look.
--
Tony Evans
Saving trees and wasting electrons since 1993
blog -> http://perceptionistruth.com/
books -> http://www.bookthing.co.uk/
[ anything below this line wasn't written by me ]
<repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>In uk.net.news.management message <notice-cfn-committee-elections-
>2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
>15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
>
>> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
>> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
>> ...
>
>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>existence.
While there are people using the hierarchy, the machinery set up to manage
>In uk.net.news.management message <notice-cfn-committee-elections-
>2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
>15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
>
>> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
>> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
>> ...
>
>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>existence.
it still needs to exist, in my view.
>But I'd like to see the experiment of somehow setting up a Web-based
>discussion server with powerful robo-control : fixed-pitch font, <=72
>characters/line, characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>keyboard, 5000-character hard limit, six hour posting delay, hand
>moderation if any spam-type words robo-detected, etc. That would
>discourage the inane, while still being useful.
--
Tony Evans
Saving trees and wasting electrons since 1993
blog -> http://perceptionistruth.com/
books -> http://www.bookthing.co.uk/
[ anything below this line wasn't written by me ]
Ian Clifton
Sep 13, 2012, 9:26:00 AM9/13/12
to
Tony <to...@darkstorm.invalid> writes:
> In uk.net.news.management, Dr J R Stockton
> <repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>>In uk.net.news.management message <notice-cfn-committee-elections-
>>2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
>>15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
>>
>>> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
>>> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
>>> ...
>>
>>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>>existence.
>
> While there are people using the hierarchy, the machinery set up to manage
> it still needs to exist, in my view.
One might also say the machinery still needs to exist—for a while—even
> In uk.net.news.management, Dr J R Stockton
> <repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>>In uk.net.news.management message <notice-cfn-committee-elections-
>>2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
>>15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
>>
>>> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
>>> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
>>> ...
>>
>>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>>existence.
>
> While there are people using the hierarchy, the machinery set up to manage
> it still needs to exist, in my view.
in the bleakest Doomsday Scenario. I don’t believe that’s going to
happen though. My own gut feeling, in ignorance of the statistics, is
that we’re over the worst, if Usenet News was going to die, it should
have happened about five years ago.
>>But I'd like to see the experiment of somehow setting up a Web-based
>>discussion server with powerful robo-control : fixed-pitch font, <=72
>>characters/line, characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>>keyboard, 5000-character hard limit, six hour posting delay, hand
>>moderation if any spam-type words robo-detected, etc. That would
>>discourage the inane, while still being useful.
raise the question of why go to the whole trouble of replacing Usenet?
Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
really intend to ban lower‐case letters? And who is supposed to
benefit—you’re forbidding a great many characters, such as €, which
practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
as £, which might cause problems on vintage ASCII‐only systems.
--
Ian ◎
Andy Leighton
Sep 13, 2012, 10:19:18 AM9/13/12
to
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:26:00 +0100, Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> Tony <to...@darkstorm.invalid> writes:
>
>> In uk.net.news.management, Dr J R Stockton
>> <repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>In uk.net.news.management message <notice-cfn-committee-elections-
>>>2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
>>>15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
>>>
>>>> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
>>>> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
>>>> ...
>>>
>>>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>>>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>>>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>>>existence.
>>
>> While there are people using the hierarchy, the machinery set up to manage
>> it still needs to exist, in my view.
>
> One might also say the machinery still needs to exist???for a while???even
> Tony <to...@darkstorm.invalid> writes:
>
>> In uk.net.news.management, Dr J R Stockton
>> <repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>In uk.net.news.management message <notice-cfn-committee-elections-
>>>2012-20120907142037$5b...@matrix.darkstorm.co.uk>, Fri, 7 Sep 2012
>>>15:20:37, Barry Salter <bsa...@ukvoting.org.uk> posted:
>>>
>>>> First Call for Nominations for the UK Usenet Committee
>>>> Open Class (Three Vacancies)
>>>> ...
>>>
>>>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>>>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>>>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>>>existence.
>>
>> While there are people using the hierarchy, the machinery set up to manage
>> it still needs to exist, in my view.
>
> in the bleakest Doomsday Scenario. I don???t believe that???s going to
> happen though. My own gut feeling, in ignorance of the statistics, is
> that we???re over the worst, if Usenet News was going to die, it should
> have happened about five years ago.
Nope. The old-timers, and I count myself as one, will keep it going for a
while longer. As they begin to retire/die off so will Usenet. There just
isn't enough new blood anymore, it hasn't been the first port of call for
many for ages.
I can't see how the decline can be reversed.
I'm not a "Imminent death of Usenet predicted. Film at 11!" man but
more of a "long, lingering death of Usenet predicted" man.
--
Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
kat
Sep 13, 2012, 11:20:59 AM9/13/12
to
posrting to web forums. Something else will have come along. We might be
expected to video it all perhaps, then those who want to be anonymous will
need a mask. Now, where did I put that lion head....
--
kat
>^..^<
Rob Morley
Sep 13, 2012, 12:06:31 PM9/13/12
to
On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:19:18 -0500
Andy Leighton <an...@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
> I can't see how the decline can be reversed.
Write a front end that looks like a Twitter app.
Andy Leighton <an...@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
> I can't see how the decline can be reversed.
John Hall
Sep 13, 2012, 1:54:37 PM9/13/12
to
In article <k2smt8$glc$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>,
Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
<snip>
My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
"only".
Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
<snip>
>Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>really intend to ban lower?case letters? And who is supposed to
>keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>benefit—you’re forbidding a great many characters, such as €, which
>practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
>as £, which might cause problems on vintage ASCII?only systems.
>practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
"only".
John Hall
Sep 13, 2012, 1:57:15 PM9/13/12
to
In article <abebus...@mid.individual.net>,
kat <little...@hotmail.com> writes:
<snip>
incapable of expressing any thought that can't be compressed into at
most 140 characters?
kat <little...@hotmail.com> writes:
<snip>
>By the time we die out people will be complaining that no-one new is
>posrting to web forums. Something else will have come along.
It possibly already has, namely Twitter. Will the next generation be
>posrting to web forums. Something else will have come along.
incapable of expressing any thought that can't be compressed into at
most 140 characters?
Tony
Sep 14, 2012, 4:01:33 AM9/14/12
to
John Briggs
Sep 14, 2012, 3:00:36 PM9/14/12
to
On 13/09/2012 18:54, John Hall wrote:
> In article<k2smt8$glc$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>,
> Ian Clifton<ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
> <snip>
>> Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>> keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>> really intend to ban lower?case letters? And who is supposed to
>> benefit—you’re forbidding a great many characters, such as €, which
>> practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
>> as £, which might cause problems on vintage ASCII?only systems.
>
> My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
> with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
> "only".
It should be a simple hyphen - which makes this a bit of mystery as you
> In article<k2smt8$glc$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>,
> Ian Clifton<ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
> <snip>
>> Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>> keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>> really intend to ban lower?case letters? And who is supposed to
>> benefit—you’re forbidding a great many characters, such as €, which
>> practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
>> as £, which might cause problems on vintage ASCII?only systems.
>
> My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
> with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
> "only".
both seem to be using Unicode (UTF-8).
--
John Briggs
John Hall
Sep 14, 2012, 4:03:33 PM9/14/12
to
In article <H9L4s.117403$of1....@fx07.am4>,
Though when I sent my message it somehow became transformed into a
question mark, in Ian's post I saw it displayed as a sort of upside-down
L, that is a vertical bar with a shorter horizontal bar at the top
right.
question mark, in Ian's post I saw it displayed as a sort of upside-down
L, that is a vertical bar with a shorter horizontal bar at the top
right.
Message has been deleted
Percy Picacity
Sep 14, 2012, 5:10:17 PM9/14/12
to
On 2012-09-14 20:25:06 +0000, Sn!pe said:
> John Hall <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
>>>> with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
>>>> "only".
>>>
>>> It should be a simple hyphen - which makes this a bit of mystery as
>>> you both seem to be using Unicode (UTF-8).
>>
>> Though when I sent my message it somehow became transformed into a
>> question mark, in Ian's post I saw it displayed as a sort of upside-down
>> L, that is a vertical bar with a shorter horizontal bar at the top
>> right.
>
> Is it not m dash? Even antediluvian MacSOUP can render that, but only
> if there's a correct Mime declaration, which John's post lacks.
Unison renders it in the original post as a hyphen. But in what it
describes as raw text mode it shows 'a' with a circumflex (I am not
going to add one of those for obvious reasons). In the quoted version,
both modes show a question mark. So it has clearly been changed
somewhere, whatever it was originally.
--
Percy Picacity
> John Hall <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
>>>> with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
>>>> "only".
>>>
>>> It should be a simple hyphen - which makes this a bit of mystery as
>>> you both seem to be using Unicode (UTF-8).
>>
>> Though when I sent my message it somehow became transformed into a
>> question mark, in Ian's post I saw it displayed as a sort of upside-down
>> L, that is a vertical bar with a shorter horizontal bar at the top
>> right.
>
> if there's a correct Mime declaration, which John's post lacks.
Unison renders it in the original post as a hyphen. But in what it
describes as raw text mode it shows 'a' with a circumflex (I am not
going to add one of those for obvious reasons). In the quoted version,
both modes show a question mark. So it has clearly been changed
somewhere, whatever it was originally.
--
Percy Picacity
Dr J R Stockton
Sep 14, 2012, 4:35:42 PM9/14/12
to
In uk.net.news.management message <k2smt8$glc$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>, Thu, 13
Sep 2012 14:26:00, Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> posted:
>Those are mostly (arguably) nice?to?haves, rather than must?haves, and
Such pedantry is indeed worthy of a self-overrated university.
And the Euro sign is commonly found on a UK PC's "4" key, though I
acknowledge that the future Baron Sugar did not put it there on my
still-working Amstrad PPC640.
--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via Homepage, Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Food expiry ambiguities: <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/date2k-3.htm#Food>
Sep 2012 14:26:00, Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> posted:
>Those are mostly (arguably) nice?to?haves, rather than must?haves, and
>raise the question of why go to the whole trouble of replacing Usenet?
>Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>really intend to ban lower?case letters? And who is supposed to
>Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>benefit—you’re forbidding a great many characters, such as €, which
>practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
>as £, which might cause problems on vintage ASCII?only systems.
>practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
Such pedantry is indeed worthy of a self-overrated university.
And the Euro sign is commonly found on a UK PC's "4" key, though I
acknowledge that the future Baron Sugar did not put it there on my
still-working Amstrad PPC640.
--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Mail via Homepage, Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Food expiry ambiguities: <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/date2k-3.htm#Food>
John Briggs
Sep 14, 2012, 6:50:28 PM9/14/12
to
On 14/09/2012 21:25, Sn!pe wrote:
--
John Briggs
> John Hall<nospam...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
>>>> with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
>>>> "only".
>>>
>>> It should be a simple hyphen - which makes this a bit of mystery as
>>> you both seem to be using Unicode (UTF-8).
>>
>> Though when I sent my message it somehow became transformed into a
>> question mark, in Ian's post I saw it displayed as a sort of upside-down
>> L, that is a vertical bar with a shorter horizontal bar at the top
>> right.
>
>
>>>> My own vintage newsreader is happy with all the characters you've used
>>>> with the exception of whatever character you put between "ASCII" and
>>>> "only".
>>>
>>> It should be a simple hyphen - which makes this a bit of mystery as
>>> you both seem to be using Unicode (UTF-8).
>>
>> Though when I sent my message it somehow became transformed into a
>> question mark, in Ian's post I saw it displayed as a sort of upside-down
>> L, that is a vertical bar with a shorter horizontal bar at the top
>> right.
>
> Is it not m dash? Even antediluvian MacSOUP can render that, but only
> if there's a correct Mime declaration, which John's post lacks.
No, there em (note spelling) dashes in his post which render correctly.
> if there's a correct Mime declaration, which John's post lacks.
--
John Briggs
Message has been deleted
John Briggs
Sep 15, 2012, 1:46:12 AM9/15/12
to
On 15/09/2012 00:16, Sn!pe wrote:
> significant to be worth posting a correction. However, having reviewed
> the thread and the relevant headers, it seems that I may have been
> talking through my hat regarding the Mime declaration (not unusual...)
>
> So, if it wasn't an em dash, what was it?
It was a hyphen. (Possibly a minus sign, which is a different character.)
--
John Briggs
> John Briggs<john.b...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>> Is it not m dash? Even antediluvian MacSOUP can render that, but only
>>> if there's a correct Mime declaration, which John's post lacks.
>>
>> No, there em (note spelling) dashes in his post which render correctly.
>
> Indeed, I noticed my typo after I'd posted but thought it insufficiently
>
>>> Is it not m dash? Even antediluvian MacSOUP can render that, but only
>>> if there's a correct Mime declaration, which John's post lacks.
>>
>> No, there em (note spelling) dashes in his post which render correctly.
>
> significant to be worth posting a correction. However, having reviewed
> the thread and the relevant headers, it seems that I may have been
> talking through my hat regarding the Mime declaration (not unusual...)
>
> So, if it wasn't an em dash, what was it?
It was a hyphen. (Possibly a minus sign, which is a different character.)
--
John Briggs
Ian Clifton
Sep 16, 2012, 3:58:37 PM9/16/12
to
Dr J R Stockton <repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> writes:
> In uk.net.news.management message <k2smt8$glc$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>, Thu, 13
> Sep 2012 14:26:00, Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> posted:
>
>>Those are mostly (arguably) nice?to?haves, rather than must?haves, and
>>raise the question of why go to the whole trouble of replacing Usenet?
>>Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>>keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>>really intend to ban lower?case letters? And who is supposed to
>>benefit—you’re forbidding a great many characters, such as €, which
>>practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
>>as £, which might cause problems on vintage ASCII?only systems.
>
> Such pedantry is indeed worthy of a self-overrated university.
Good poo, deftly flung.
> In uk.net.news.management message <k2smt8$glc$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>, Thu, 13
> Sep 2012 14:26:00, Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> posted:
>
>>Those are mostly (arguably) nice?to?haves, rather than must?haves, and
>>raise the question of why go to the whole trouble of replacing Usenet?
>>Except “characters only those which are marked on a UK PC
>>keyboard”—surely that’s a terrible idea! Whose “UK PC keyboard”? Do you
>>really intend to ban lower?case letters? And who is supposed to
>>benefit—you’re forbidding a great many characters, such as €, which
>>practically all modern systems can handle, and permitting others, such
>>as £, which might cause problems on vintage ASCII?only systems.
>
> Such pedantry is indeed worthy of a self-overrated university.
> And the Euro sign is commonly found on a UK PC's "4" key, though I
> acknowledge that the future Baron Sugar did not put it there on my
> still-working Amstrad PPC640.
U+00A6 BROKEN BAR but just gives me another way of typing U+007C
VERTICAL LINE |. Which just goes to show that the different keycap sets
are even more confused than the crazy world world of character sets.
--
Ian ◎
Richard Kettlewell
Sep 18, 2012, 6:02:59 AM9/18/12
to
Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
> One might also say the machinery still needs to exist—for a while—even
> in the bleakest Doomsday Scenario. I don’t believe that’s going to
> happen though. My own gut feeling, in ignorance of the statistics, is
> that we’re over the worst, if Usenet News was going to die, it should
> have happened about five years ago.
uk.* pretty reliably ran at over 3000 articles/day in 2010 and the first
> One might also say the machinery still needs to exist—for a while—even
> in the bleakest Doomsday Scenario. I don’t believe that’s going to
> happen though. My own gut feeling, in ignorance of the statistics, is
> that we’re over the worst, if Usenet News was going to die, it should
> have happened about five years ago.
half of 2011, but it's spent 2012 (so far) heading determinedly for 2000
articles/day. I suspect that the decline will eventually flatten out
but wouldn't care to predict at what level it will do so, or which
groups will be left with any worthwhile traffic.
(Figures collected on the right side of a Cleanfeed install, i.e. with a
substantial chunk of spam removed.)
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Ian Clifton
Sep 18, 2012, 6:51:25 AM9/18/12
to
my back‐pedalling sounds weak—that I wouldn’t say there’s been a
turn‐around in terms of numbers, but in terms of *mood*. Perhaps it’s
just wishful thinking on my part, but I believe I’ve seen anecdotal
evidence of more people admitting to regretting the decline of Usenet,
and of others tiring of, or becoming more suspicious of the motives of,
commercial social networking.
--
Ian ◎
Judith
Sep 18, 2012, 7:06:41 AM9/18/12
to
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 11:02:59 +0100, Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk>
wrote:
Does that include posts from Microsoft accounts - or are they discarded as
spam?
wrote:
spam?
Andy Leighton
Sep 18, 2012, 7:08:21 AM9/18/12
to
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012 11:51:25 +0100, Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> writes:
>
>> Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
>>> One might also say the machinery still needs to exist???for a while???even
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> writes:
>
>> Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
>>> in the bleakest Doomsday Scenario. I don???t believe that???s going to
>>> happen though. My own gut feeling, in ignorance of the statistics, is
>>> that we???re over the worst, if Usenet News was going to die, it should
>>> have happened about five years ago.
>>
>> uk.* pretty reliably ran at over 3000 articles/day in 2010 and the first
>> half of 2011, but it's spent 2012 (so far) heading determinedly for 2000
>> articles/day. I suspect that the decline will eventually flatten out
>> but wouldn't care to predict at what level it will do so, or which
>> groups will be left with any worthwhile traffic.
>>
>> (Figures collected on the right side of a Cleanfeed install, i.e. with a
>> substantial chunk of spam removed.)
>
> I was going to reply to Andy Leighton???but didn???t get round to it, so now
>>
>> uk.* pretty reliably ran at over 3000 articles/day in 2010 and the first
>> half of 2011, but it's spent 2012 (so far) heading determinedly for 2000
>> articles/day. I suspect that the decline will eventually flatten out
>> but wouldn't care to predict at what level it will do so, or which
>> groups will be left with any worthwhile traffic.
>>
>> (Figures collected on the right side of a Cleanfeed install, i.e. with a
>> substantial chunk of spam removed.)
>
> my back???pedalling sounds weak???that I wouldn???t say there???s been a
> turn???around in terms of numbers, but in terms of *mood*. Perhaps it???s
> just wishful thinking on my part, but I believe I???ve seen anecdotal
> evidence of more people admitting to regretting the decline of Usenet,
> and of others tiring of, or becoming more suspicious of the motives of,
> commercial social networking.
Well maybe - I certainly hope so. However that may be a reflection of
> and of others tiring of, or becoming more suspicious of the motives of,
> commercial social networking.
the social circles you are in rather than a general population thing.
Also I'm not worried too much about absolute volumes. I would much
rather 2000 good quality useful/informative/entertaining/supportive
(depending on particular group's ethos) articles a day than 2000 good
articles plus 2000 trolling/wrecking/absuive articles.
John Hall
Sep 18, 2012, 2:38:44 PM9/18/12
to
In article <87vcfbr...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>,
major factor in that decline.
Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> writes:
>uk.* pretty reliably ran at over 3000 articles/day in 2010 and the first
>half of 2011, but it's spent 2012 (so far) heading determinedly for 2000
>articles/day. I suspect that the decline will eventually flatten out
>but wouldn't care to predict at what level it will do so, or which
>groups will be left with any worthwhile traffic.
>
>(Figures collected on the right side of a Cleanfeed install, i.e. with a
>substantial chunk of spam removed.)
I suspect that the problems that Googlegroups has had this year may be a
>uk.* pretty reliably ran at over 3000 articles/day in 2010 and the first
>half of 2011, but it's spent 2012 (so far) heading determinedly for 2000
>articles/day. I suspect that the decline will eventually flatten out
>but wouldn't care to predict at what level it will do so, or which
>groups will be left with any worthwhile traffic.
>
>(Figures collected on the right side of a Cleanfeed install, i.e. with a
>substantial chunk of spam removed.)
major factor in that decline.
Richard Kettlewell
Sep 19, 2012, 6:20:01 AM9/19/12
to
John Hall <nospam...@jhall.co.uk> writes:
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> writes:
>> uk.* pretty reliably ran at over 3000 articles/day in 2010 and the
>> first half of 2011, but it's spent 2012 (so far) heading determinedly
>> for 2000 articles/day. I suspect that the decline will eventually
>> flatten out but wouldn't care to predict at what level it will do so,
>> or which groups will be left with any worthwhile traffic.
>>
>> (Figures collected on the right side of a Cleanfeed install,
>> i.e. with a substantial chunk of spam removed.)
>
> I suspect that the problems that Googlegroups has had this year may be a
> major factor in that decline.
I’m sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all text
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> writes:
>> uk.* pretty reliably ran at over 3000 articles/day in 2010 and the
>> first half of 2011, but it's spent 2012 (so far) heading determinedly
>> for 2000 articles/day. I suspect that the decline will eventually
>> flatten out but wouldn't care to predict at what level it will do so,
>> or which groups will be left with any worthwhile traffic.
>>
>> (Figures collected on the right side of a Cleanfeed install,
>> i.e. with a substantial chunk of spam removed.)
>
> I suspect that the problems that Googlegroups has had this year may be a
> major factor in that decline.
groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
smooth decline either side of them.
I think what’s really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend. This
shouldn’t be surprising to any reader of uk.net.*, which tends to have
periods of silence punctuated by occasional large threads.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Ian Clifton
Sep 23, 2012, 10:56:27 PM9/23/12
to
Only 5 more hours of work to go…
--
Ian ◎
Geoff Berrow
Sep 24, 2012, 7:53:58 PM9/24/12
to
On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:28:55 +0100, Dr J R Stockton
<repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>existence.
Sorry for only just getting round to this.
<repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>existence.
I have made (I'm sure) similar suggestions in the past.
There was a time, when, if wishing to find out about something, one
would simply look up the appropriate newsgroup. The ease in which
forums can be created is their downfall - it is difficult to find a
good one and when you do they are much more difficult to use than a
newsgroup.
I've seen a lot of people on Facebook attempting to use it as a
discussion group, like Usenet. Facebook makes an even bigger mess of
it than forums.
The demand is there I'm sure. The software could be written. You may
end up with another eternal September though.
--
Geoff Berrow (Put thecat out to email)
It's only Usenet, no one dies.
My opinions, not the committee's, mine.
Simple RFDs www.4theweb.co.uk/rfdmaker
Dr J R Stockton
Sep 26, 2012, 5:43:34 PM9/26/12
to
In uk.net.news.management message <r4s16899qju3v0gdbl2ol9676o81tqo67m@4a
x.com>, Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:53:58, Geoff Berrow <blth...@ckdog.co.uk>
posted:
>On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:28:55 +0100, Dr J R Stockton
><repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>>existence.
>
>Sorry for only just getting round to this.
>
>I have made (I'm sure) similar suggestions in the past.
>
>There was a time, when, if wishing to find out about something, one
>would simply look up the appropriate newsgroup. The ease in which
>forums can be created is their downfall - it is difficult to find a
>good one and when you do they are much more difficult to use than a
>newsgroup.
>
>I've seen a lot of people on Facebook attempting to use it as a
>discussion group, like Usenet. Facebook makes an even bigger mess of
>it than forums.
>
>The demand is there I'm sure. The software could be written. You may
>end up with another eternal September though.
The robo-moderation was intended to make it unattractive to /hoi
polloi/, and inconvenient for vandals.
Query - a few years ago, when Usenet UK was still flourishing, what sort
of size of single machine would be needed to support the article-flow of
news:uk.*, using a single server?
I'm under the impression that AIOE, and maybe eternal-september, are
hobbyist machines.
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Web site writers : consider <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/linxchek.htm>
x.com>, Tue, 25 Sep 2012 00:53:58, Geoff Berrow <blth...@ckdog.co.uk>
posted:
>On Wed, 12 Sep 2012 21:28:55 +0100, Dr J R Stockton
><repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>>IMHO, unless the Committee will attempt seriously to revive, in the UK,
>>Usenet News, or to cause the provision of some similar but distinct (and
>>browser-based) service, there is little point in it continuing in
>>existence.
>
>Sorry for only just getting round to this.
>
>I have made (I'm sure) similar suggestions in the past.
>
>There was a time, when, if wishing to find out about something, one
>would simply look up the appropriate newsgroup. The ease in which
>forums can be created is their downfall - it is difficult to find a
>good one and when you do they are much more difficult to use than a
>newsgroup.
>
>I've seen a lot of people on Facebook attempting to use it as a
>discussion group, like Usenet. Facebook makes an even bigger mess of
>it than forums.
>
>The demand is there I'm sure. The software could be written. You may
>end up with another eternal September though.
polloi/, and inconvenient for vandals.
Query - a few years ago, when Usenet UK was still flourishing, what sort
of size of single machine would be needed to support the article-flow of
news:uk.*, using a single server?
I'm under the impression that AIOE, and maybe eternal-september, are
hobbyist machines.
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Web site writers : consider <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/linxchek.htm>
Tony
Sep 26, 2012, 6:51:05 PM9/26/12
to
In uk.net.news.management, Dr J R Stockton
hobby. It's not the amount of traffic you have to worry about with text
only groups, it's the load actual users generate on the servers. I can't
comment on the volume when the uk.* was at it's busiest but it wouldn't
surprise me to find out the data volume wasn't the issue then either.
<repl...@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>I'm under the impression that AIOE, and maybe eternal-september, are
>hobbyist machines.
Eternal September is significantly more than 1 machine and is far beyond a
>I'm under the impression that AIOE, and maybe eternal-september, are
>hobbyist machines.
hobby. It's not the amount of traffic you have to worry about with text
only groups, it's the load actual users generate on the servers. I can't
comment on the volume when the uk.* was at it's busiest but it wouldn't
surprise me to find out the data volume wasn't the issue then either.
Message has been deleted
Nomen Nescio
Sep 29, 2012, 6:17:25 PM9/29/12
to
In article <87wqzqt...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
ad infinitum.
> This
> shouldn't be surprising to any reader of uk.net.*, which tends to have
> periods of silence punctuated by occasional large threads.
i tidied the apostorphes by hand as i wasn't sure this would
transport otherwise
--
Jamie Madrox XVII
Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all text
> groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
> smooth decline either side of them.
>
> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
in what way? i can see that being true for traditionally quiet
> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all text
> groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
> smooth decline either side of them.
>
> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
ad infinitum.
> This
> shouldn't be surprising to any reader of uk.net.*, which tends to have
> periods of silence punctuated by occasional large threads.
transport otherwise
--
Jamie Madrox XVII
Steve Firth
Sep 29, 2012, 7:07:58 PM9/29/12
to
Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote:
> i tidied the apostorphes by hand as i wasn't sure this would
> transport otherwise
Has someone stolen some of the keys from your keyboard or are you
> i tidied the apostorphes by hand as i wasn't sure this would
> transport otherwise
deliberately trying to make yourself look like a cunt?
Richard Kettlewell
Sep 30, 2012, 4:30:31 AM9/30/12
to
Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all
>> text groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
>> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
>> smooth decline either side of them.
>>
>> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
>> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
>
> in what way? i can see that being true for traditionally quiet
> groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
> a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
> ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
> ad infinitum.
It’s not really ad infinitum though; it comes and goes in bursts.
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all
>> text groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
>> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
>> smooth decline either side of them.
>>
>> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
>> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
>
> in what way? i can see that being true for traditionally quiet
> groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
> a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
> ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
> ad infinitum.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Nomen Nescio
Sep 30, 2012, 5:36:35 AM9/30/12
to
In article <1kr7k9u.1q4gxq414smwb2N%%steve%@malloc.co.uk>
to make a mistake when pointing one out is a tradition
Jamie Madrox XVII
Jamie Madrox XVII
Nomen Nescio
Sep 30, 2012, 6:54:55 AM9/30/12
to
In article <87y5jr7...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
^^^
you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
that
the rfds come in bursts or the complaints come in bursts ?
the unwritten bit that i should probably have made clear is that
uk.* is well respected for its moderated groups amongst other stuff.
do you have any feeling, looking at your feed, if this is uk on uk
or outside on inside ?
if the good folks just decline in numbers and the bad folks ramp
occasionally that should be noticeable statistically
anyway, have you worked out what the bursts are generally about ?
i'm going to guess "i want to play in your moderated group and you
said no"
right or not?
Jamie Madrox XVII
> --
> http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
that
the rfds come in bursts or the complaints come in bursts ?
the unwritten bit that i should probably have made clear is that
uk.* is well respected for its moderated groups amongst other stuff.
do you have any feeling, looking at your feed, if this is uk on uk
or outside on inside ?
if the good folks just decline in numbers and the bad folks ramp
occasionally that should be noticeable statistically
anyway, have you worked out what the bursts are generally about ?
i'm going to guess "i want to play in your moderated group and you
said no"
right or not?
Jamie Madrox XVII
> --
> http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Tony
Sep 30, 2012, 7:06:36 AM9/30/12
to
In uk.net.news.management, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote:
>In article <87y5jr7...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
>Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> It’s not really ad infinitum though; it comes and goes in bursts.
> ^^^
>you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
>hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
>that
Does your newsreader understand utf-8 as the charset? The original
>In article <87y5jr7...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
>Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> It’s not really ad infinitum though; it comes and goes in bursts.
> ^^^
>you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
>hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
>that
displays fine here with Agent.
Richard Kettlewell
Sep 30, 2012, 7:39:16 AM9/30/12
to
Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
>>> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all
>>>> text groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
>>>> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
>>>> smooth decline either side of them.
>>>>
>>>> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
>>>> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
>>>
>>> in what way? i can see that being true for traditionally quiet
>>> groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
>>> a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
>>> ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
>>> ad infinitum.
>>
>> It’s not really ad infinitum though; it comes and goes in bursts.
> ^^^
> you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
> hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
> that
Your newsreader doesn’t understand Unicode.
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
>>> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all
>>>> text groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
>>>> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
>>>> smooth decline either side of them.
>>>>
>>>> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
>>>> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
>>>
>>> in what way? i can see that being true for traditionally quiet
>>> groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
>>> a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
>>> ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
>>> ad infinitum.
>>
>> It’s not really ad infinitum though; it comes and goes in bursts.
> ^^^
> you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
> hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
> that
> the rfds come in bursts or the complaints come in bursts ?
>
> the unwritten bit that i should probably have made clear is that
> uk.* is well respected for its moderated groups amongst other stuff.
>
> do you have any feeling, looking at your feed, if this is uk on uk
> or outside on inside ?
>
> if the good folks just decline in numbers and the bad folks ramp
> occasionally that should be noticeable statistically
>
> anyway, have you worked out what the bursts are generally about ?
> i'm going to guess "i want to play in your moderated group and you
> said no"
>
> right or not?
than the ones I read, I’m looking at whole-hierarchy graphs. The larger
hierarchies show fairly smooth decline; the smaller ones jump around all
over the place. uk.* is somewhere between the two - there’s a lots of
short/medium-term “choppiness” but it still looks like decline over
longer intervals.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Nomen Nescio
Sep 30, 2012, 9:34:15 AM9/30/12
to
In article <87mx074...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
apostrophe appear to you ?
> > the rfds come in bursts or the complaints come in bursts ?
> >
> > the unwritten bit that i should probably have made clear is that
> > uk.* is well respected for its moderated groups amongst other stuff.
> >
> > do you have any feeling, looking at your feed, if this is uk on uk
> > or outside on inside ?
> >
> > if the good folks just decline in numbers and the bad folks ramp
> > occasionally that should be noticeable statistically
> >
> > anyway, have you worked out what the bursts are generally about ?
> > i'm going to guess "i want to play in your moderated group and you
> > said no"
> >
> > right or not?
>
> I’m not looking at individual articles or even individual groups other
> than the ones I read, I’m looking at whole-hierarchy graphs. The larger
> hierarchies show fairly smooth decline; the smaller ones jump around all
> over the place. uk.* is somewhere between the two - there’s a lots of
> short/medium-term “choppiness” but it still looks like decline over
> longer intervals.
i'm sort of missing the point of what u were saying now, or why u
said it, we are in uk.net.news.management after all, if we wanted
points made about the big 8 we'd have a look there. i'm suggesting
that if u haven't already squashed things you take a look at uk.*
and let us know what your feelinjg is within
Jamie Madrox XVII
Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
> > Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> >> Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
> >>> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
> >>>> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all
> >>>> text groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
> >>>> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
> >>>> smooth decline either side of them.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
> >>>> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
> >>>
> >>> in what way? i can see that being true for traditionally quiet
> >>> groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
> >>> a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
> >>> ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
> >>> ad infinitum.
> >>
> >> It’s not really ad infinitum though; it comes and goes in bursts.
> > ^^^
> > you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
> > hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
> > that
>
> Your newsreader doesn’t understand Unicode.
anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
>
> Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
> > Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> >> Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
> >>> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>
> >>>> I'm sceptical about that, both since the long-term decline of all
> >>>> text groups began over a decade ago and since rec.* shows much deeper
> >>>> transient impact from the Google outages but otherwise a relatively
> >>>> smooth decline either side of them.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think what's really going on is that uk.* is now small enough that
> >>>> statistical noise is starting to obscure the underlying trend.
> >>>
> >>> in what way? i can see that being true for traditionally quiet
> >>> groups that get all a buzz when something interesting happens (say
> >>> a jeddi warrior was found frozen on mars: i expect a number of uk.*
> >>> ngs would light up) but for uk.net.news.* the problem is complaint
> >>> ad infinitum.
> >>
> >> It’s not really ad infinitum though; it comes and goes in bursts.
> > ^^^
> > you're still doing that weird apostrophe stuff, I get: a with a
> > hat, euro symbol, tm; don't really see how you can blame Emacs for
> > that
>
> Your newsreader doesn’t understand Unicode.
apostrophe appear to you ?
> > the rfds come in bursts or the complaints come in bursts ?
> >
> > the unwritten bit that i should probably have made clear is that
> > uk.* is well respected for its moderated groups amongst other stuff.
> >
> > do you have any feeling, looking at your feed, if this is uk on uk
> > or outside on inside ?
> >
> > if the good folks just decline in numbers and the bad folks ramp
> > occasionally that should be noticeable statistically
> >
> > anyway, have you worked out what the bursts are generally about ?
> > i'm going to guess "i want to play in your moderated group and you
> > said no"
> >
> > right or not?
>
> I’m not looking at individual articles or even individual groups other
> than the ones I read, I’m looking at whole-hierarchy graphs. The larger
> hierarchies show fairly smooth decline; the smaller ones jump around all
> over the place. uk.* is somewhere between the two - there’s a lots of
> short/medium-term “choppiness” but it still looks like decline over
> longer intervals.
said it, we are in uk.net.news.management after all, if we wanted
points made about the big 8 we'd have a look there. i'm suggesting
that if u haven't already squashed things you take a look at uk.*
and let us know what your feelinjg is within
Jamie Madrox XVII
Molly Mockford
Sep 30, 2012, 9:58:22 AM9/30/12
to
At 15:34:15 on Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote
in <39efbba8c4676f64...@dizum.com>:
>anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
>apostrophe appear to you ?
Your apostrophe looks fine. However, there is something seriously wrong
with your Shift keys.
--
Molly - I don't speak for the Committee. I speak for me.
Nature loves variety. Unfortunately, society hates it. (Milton
Diamond Ph.D.)
My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not be so for ever.
in <39efbba8c4676f64...@dizum.com>:
>anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
>apostrophe appear to you ?
with your Shift keys.
--
Molly - I don't speak for the Committee. I speak for me.
Nature loves variety. Unfortunately, society hates it. (Milton
Diamond Ph.D.)
My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not be so for ever.
Percy Picacity
Sep 30, 2012, 10:17:09 AM9/30/12
to
On 2012-09-30 13:58:22 +0000, Molly Mockford said:
> At 15:34:15 on Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote
> in <39efbba8c4676f64...@dizum.com>:
>
>> anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
>> apostrophe appear to you ?
>
> Your apostrophe looks fine. However, there is something seriously
> wrong with your Shift keys.
I thought we should be aiming for 7 bit compatible characters. (I know
> At 15:34:15 on Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote
> in <39efbba8c4676f64...@dizum.com>:
>
>> anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
>> apostrophe appear to you ?
>
> Your apostrophe looks fine. However, there is something seriously
> wrong with your Shift keys.
this incudles many obtained with the shift key, but I couldn't be
bothered to find the right place in the thread for this interjection.)
--
Percy Picacity
Richard Kettlewell
Sep 30, 2012, 11:10:51 AM9/30/12
to
Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> writes:
> anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
> apostrophe appear to you ?
Anonymity has nothing whatsoever to do with character encodings, and
> anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
> apostrophe appear to you ?
Unicode is hardly “fancy”.
> i'm sort of missing the point of what u were saying now, or why u
> said it, we are in uk.net.news.management after all, if we wanted
> points made about the big 8 we'd have a look there. i'm suggesting
> that if u haven't already squashed things you take a look at uk.*
> and let us know what your feelinjg is within
already. I have no idea what you’re asking for beyond that; try asking
a concrete question.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Nomen Nescio
Sep 30, 2012, 12:00:06 PM9/30/12
to
In article <QtDI77E+$EaQ...@molly.mockford>
some will
and i get to vote as Jamie too if i want to but not at the same
time as hoover runs me, that very bad, very, very bad, no do that,
never Missy Molly. i tried for deadpool b4 madrox, but didn't get
anything that made sense back, i presume yoove looked Madrox up ?
Jamie Madrox XVII
Molly Mockford <nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:
>
> At 15:34:15 on Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote
> in <39efbba8c4676f64...@dizum.com>:
>
> >anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
> >apostrophe appear to you ?
>
> Your apostrophe looks fine. However, there is something seriously wrong
> with your Shift keys.
me'm avoidining id to make point obverse if know who i am presume
>
> At 15:34:15 on Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote
> in <39efbba8c4676f64...@dizum.com>:
>
> >anonymity and fancy charsets don't mix as a rule. how does my
> >apostrophe appear to you ?
>
> Your apostrophe looks fine. However, there is something seriously wrong
> with your Shift keys.
some will
and i get to vote as Jamie too if i want to but not at the same
time as hoover runs me, that very bad, very, very bad, no do that,
never Missy Molly. i tried for deadpool b4 madrox, but didn't get
anything that made sense back, i presume yoove looked Madrox up ?
Jamie Madrox XVII
Nomen Nescio
Sep 30, 2012, 1:48:13 PM9/30/12
to
In article <87r4pj5...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
MID, group and date, please, i must have missed it
Jamie Madrox XVII
Jamie Madrox XVII
Richard Kettlewell
Sep 30, 2012, 3:05:05 PM9/30/12
to
>> I’ve told you my opinions about the evolution of uk.* traffic levels
>> already. I have no idea what you’re asking for beyond that; try
>> asking a concrete question.
>
> MID, group and date, please, i must have missed it
You replied to it!
>> already. I have no idea what you’re asking for beyond that; try
>> asking a concrete question.
>
> MID, group and date, please, i must have missed it
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Nomen Nescio
Sep 30, 2012, 6:22:21 PM9/30/12
to
In article <87txuff...@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk>
i thought you were going to say that but had some hope you wouldn't
JM17
JM17
Paul Cummins
Oct 1, 2012, 6:36:00 AM10/1/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when k...@under.the.invalid (Percy
Picacity) came up to me and whispered:
>
> I thought we should be aiming for 7 bit compatible characters.
I though 7 Bit was mandated, as UK is binaries-free.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Picacity) came up to me and whispered:
>
> I thought we should be aiming for 7 bit compatible characters.
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is cruel
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx
---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----
Jon Ribbens
Oct 1, 2012, 6:48:58 AM10/1/12
to
On 2012-10-01, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when k...@under.the.invalid (Percy
> Picacity) came up to me and whispered:
>> I thought we should be aiming for 7 bit compatible characters.
>
> I though 7 Bit was mandated, as UK is binaries-free.
That sentence makes no sense - "binaries" is to do with transporting
> We were about to embark at Dover, when k...@under.the.invalid (Percy
> Picacity) came up to me and whispered:
>> I thought we should be aiming for 7 bit compatible characters.
>
> I though 7 Bit was mandated, as UK is binaries-free.
non-textual files over Usenet, and has no relationship whatsoever to
whether 7 or 8 bits are used.
Paul Cummins
Oct 1, 2012, 8:19:00 PM10/1/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> That sentence makes no sense - "binaries" is to do with
> transporting
> non-textual files over Usenet, and has no relationship
> whatsoever to
> whether 7 or 8 bits are used.
I disagree.
Usenet was originally designed as a 7-bit environment, as was Email.
Does RFC 1036 permit 8-bit? I believe it does, but only to facilitate
Binaries.
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> That sentence makes no sense - "binaries" is to do with
> transporting
> non-textual files over Usenet, and has no relationship
> whatsoever to
> whether 7 or 8 bits are used.
Usenet was originally designed as a 7-bit environment, as was Email.
Does RFC 1036 permit 8-bit? I believe it does, but only to facilitate
Binaries.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 1, 2012, 9:07:36 PM10/1/12
to
On 2012-10-02, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> That sentence makes no sense - "binaries" is to do with
>> transporting
>> non-textual files over Usenet, and has no relationship
>> whatsoever to
>> whether 7 or 8 bits are used.
>
> I disagree.
Of course you do.
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> That sentence makes no sense - "binaries" is to do with
>> transporting
>> non-textual files over Usenet, and has no relationship
>> whatsoever to
>> whether 7 or 8 bits are used.
>
> I disagree.
> Does RFC 1036 permit 8-bit? I believe it does, but only to facilitate
> Binaries.
Paul Cummins
Oct 2, 2012, 4:57:00 AM10/2/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
> I suppose you could always try reading it.
Yes. but not at 1.20am on a bad day in any case.
RFC1036 requires Usenet messages to comply with both itself and RFC822.
RFC 822 only permits ascii characters 0 to 127. (section 3.3)
Thus a Usenet message (like an old email message before RFC822 was
obsoleted) should be 7-bit compliant, not 8-bit.
RFC1036 has not been superseded, though there has been much discussion
for many years on "son of" and even "grandson of" the RFC.
Rebuttal welcome :-)
Ian Clifton
Oct 2, 2012, 7:07:19 AM10/2/12
to
uset...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins) writes:
> RFC1036 requires Usenet messages to comply with both itself and RFC822.
>
> RFC 822 only permits ascii characters 0 to 127. (section 3.3)
>
> Thus a Usenet message (like an old email message before RFC822 was
> obsoleted) should be 7-bit compliant, not 8-bit.
>
> RFC1036 has not been superseded, though there has been much discussion
> for many years on "son of" and even "grandson of" the RFC.
>
> Rebuttal welcome :-)
That’s a good point! Of course any message can be made 7‐bit compliant
> RFC1036 requires Usenet messages to comply with both itself and RFC822.
>
> RFC 822 only permits ascii characters 0 to 127. (section 3.3)
>
> Thus a Usenet message (like an old email message before RFC822 was
> obsoleted) should be 7-bit compliant, not 8-bit.
>
> RFC1036 has not been superseded, though there has been much discussion
> for many years on "son of" and even "grandson of" the RFC.
>
> Rebuttal welcome :-)
by appropriate use of MIME encodings. The behaviour of Gnus(5.13), which
I use, with respect to message bodies (I believe Gnus’s handling of the
headers is always compliant) is that emails are sent encoded, while
Usenet postings are set raw, “Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit”. I’d
always assumed this behaviour was compliant! Anyway, when I’ve got time
I’ll study the RFCs myself and see if I can come up with a rebuttal.
--
Ian ◎
Molly Mockford
Oct 2, 2012, 7:14:38 AM10/2/12
to
At 12:07:19 on Tue, 2 Oct 2012, Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk>
wrote in <k4eht7$5rb$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>:
>he behaviour of Gnus(5.13), which I use, with respect to message bodies
>(I believe Gnus’s handling of the headers is always compliant) is
>that emails are sent encoded, while Usenet postings are set raw,
>“Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit”. I’d always assumed this
>behaviour was compliant!
>
>--
>Ian ?
Two little boxes display in Turnpike: one between 7 and bit, and one in
the second space after the signature.
wrote in <k4eht7$5rb$1...@news.ox.ac.uk>:
>he behaviour of Gnus(5.13), which I use, with respect to message bodies
>(I believe Gnus’s handling of the headers is always compliant) is
>that emails are sent encoded, while Usenet postings are set raw,
>“Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit”. I’d always assumed this
>behaviour was compliant!
>
>Ian ?
Two little boxes display in Turnpike: one between 7 and bit, and one in
the second space after the signature.
Richard Kettlewell
Oct 2, 2012, 7:44:17 AM10/2/12
to
Ian Clifton <ian.c...@chem.ox.ac.uk> writes:
> That’s a good point! Of course any message can be made 7‐bit compliant
> by appropriate use of MIME encodings. The behaviour of Gnus(5.13), which
> I use, with respect to message bodies (I believe Gnus’s handling of the
> headers is always compliant) is that emails are sent encoded, while
> Usenet postings are set raw, “Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit”. I’d
> always assumed this behaviour was compliant! Anyway, when I’ve got time
> I’ll study the RFCs myself and see if I can come up with a rebuttal.
5536 and 5537 are the current documents. They are quite recent but the
> That’s a good point! Of course any message can be made 7‐bit compliant
> by appropriate use of MIME encodings. The behaviour of Gnus(5.13), which
> I use, with respect to message bodies (I believe Gnus’s handling of the
> headers is always compliant) is that emails are sent encoded, while
> Usenet postings are set raw, “Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit”. I’d
> always assumed this behaviour was compliant! Anyway, when I’ve got time
> I’ll study the RFCs myself and see if I can come up with a rebuttal.
specification of 8-bit transport and MIME support reflects practice
going back many years.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Jon Ribbens
Oct 2, 2012, 8:39:11 AM10/2/12
to
On 2012-10-02, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> RFC1036 requires Usenet messages to comply with both itself and RFC822.
>
> RFC 822 only permits ascii characters 0 to 127. (section 3.3)
>
> Thus a Usenet message (like an old email message before RFC822 was
> obsoleted) should be 7-bit compliant, not 8-bit.
That is the opposite of what you were claiming. You said "Does RFC
>
> RFC 822 only permits ascii characters 0 to 127. (section 3.3)
>
> Thus a Usenet message (like an old email message before RFC822 was
> obsoleted) should be 7-bit compliant, not 8-bit.
1036 permit 8-bit? I believe it does, but only to facilitate Binaries".
> RFC1036 has not been superseded, though there has been much discussion
> for many years on "son of" and even "grandson of" the RFC.
Obsoleted by RFC 5536, RFC 5537.
> for many years on "son of" and even "grandson of" the RFC.
Ian Clifton
Oct 2, 2012, 4:24:11 PM10/2/12
to
header field is languishing among the obsolete headers, we “SHOULD NOT
[be] generate[ing] it”. A quick look seems to indicate that this is
observed mainly in the breach,
e.g. Message-id:<LvKzp...@clerew.man.ac.uk>
--
Ian ◎
Paul Cummins
Oct 3, 2012, 5:26:00 PM10/3/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard
Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
> 5536 and 5537 are the current documents. They are quite recent
> but the
> specification of 8-bit transport and MIME support reflects
> practice
> going back many years.
Incorrect. RFC1036 has not been superseded, and it requires compliance
with RFC822.
Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
> 5536 and 5537 are the current documents. They are quite recent
> but the
> specification of 8-bit transport and MIME support reflects
> practice
> going back many years.
with RFC822.
Paul Cummins
Oct 3, 2012, 5:26:00 PM10/3/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> Obsoleted by RFC 5536, RFC 5537.
Neither RFC 5536 or 5537 are standards. Both are proposed standards.
RFC1036 has NOT been declared obselete.
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> Obsoleted by RFC 5536, RFC 5537.
RFC1036 has NOT been declared obselete.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 3, 2012, 5:42:28 PM10/3/12
to
On 2012-10-03, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> Obsoleted by RFC 5536, RFC 5537.
>
> Neither RFC 5536 or 5537 are standards. Both are proposed standards.
>
> RFC1036 has NOT been declared obselete.
You'd better notify the IETF of their error immediately then,
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> Obsoleted by RFC 5536, RFC 5537.
>
> Neither RFC 5536 or 5537 are standards. Both are proposed standards.
>
> RFC1036 has NOT been declared obselete.
because they hold a contrary opinion.
Rob Morley
Oct 3, 2012, 9:26:43 PM10/3/12
to
are still proposed standards.
This is confirmed by http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536 and
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537 which are both headed "PROPOSED
STANDARD".
However http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1036 states "Obsoleted by: 5536,
5537".
Which leaves me confused.
Paul Cummins
Oct 4, 2012, 2:45:00 AM10/4/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> You'd better notify the IETF of their error immediately then,
> because they hold a contrary opinion.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536 - Proposed Standard.
> because they hold a contrary opinion.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537 - Proposed Standard.
That means that RFC1036 has not, yet, been obseleted.
Richard Kettlewell
Oct 4, 2012, 4:17:00 AM10/4/12
to
Rob Morley <nos...@ntlworld.com> writes:
> According to http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcxx00.html RFC5536 and RFC5537
> are still proposed standards.
> This is confirmed by http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536 and
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537 which are both headed "PROPOSED
> STANDARD".
“Proposed standard” doesn’t mean “don’t implement it”; indeed the
> According to http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfcxx00.html RFC5536 and RFC5537
> are still proposed standards.
> This is confirmed by http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536 and
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537 which are both headed "PROPOSED
> STANDARD".
process documenation specifically indicates that it is desirable to
implement such specifications.
> However http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1036 states "Obsoleted by: 5536,
> 5537".
> Which leaves me confused.
standard (or anything else) in IETF-speak, even after the introduction
of the standards process (which postdates it). The current “proposed
standards” (including the various NNTP RFCs) are only the relevant
standards-track documents available.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Paul Cummins
Oct 4, 2012, 4:59:00 AM10/4/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard
Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
> TBOMK it was never a
> standard (or anything else)
What about RFC821 and 822? Were they ever standards?
If not, how on earth did we all have email?
Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
> TBOMK it was never a
> standard (or anything else)
If not, how on earth did we all have email?
Richard Kettlewell
Oct 4, 2012, 5:11:20 AM10/4/12
to
uset...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins) writes:
> If not, how on earth did we all have email?
I'm sure there was no such thing as email before the concept of an
Internet standard was invented.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
> r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard Kettlewell) writes:
>> TBOMK it was never a standard (or anything else)
>
> What about RFC821 and 822? Were they ever standards?
I'm sure you can do your own research.
>> TBOMK it was never a standard (or anything else)
>
> What about RFC821 and 822? Were they ever standards?
> If not, how on earth did we all have email?
Internet standard was invented.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Jon Ribbens
Oct 4, 2012, 6:03:22 AM10/4/12
to
On 2012-10-04, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> You'd better notify the IETF of their error immediately then,
>> because they hold a contrary opinion.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536 - Proposed Standard.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537 - Proposed Standard.
>
> That means that RFC1036 has not, yet, been obseleted.
Now go read http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1036 .
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> You'd better notify the IETF of their error immediately then,
>> because they hold a contrary opinion.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536 - Proposed Standard.
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5537 - Proposed Standard.
>
> That means that RFC1036 has not, yet, been obseleted.
Paul Cummins
Oct 4, 2012, 9:04:00 AM10/4/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard
Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
>
> I'm sure you can do your own research.
I did. I evidenced that RFC 1036 is the only currently valid RFC for
Usenet.
Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
>
> I'm sure you can do your own research.
Usenet.
Paul Cummins
Oct 4, 2012, 9:04:00 AM10/4/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
It can't possibly be obseleted by things that are not yet standards.
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
That's like saying the Raspberry Pi is obselete, now that it's great
granson machine has been proposed for 2015.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 4, 2012, 9:10:39 AM10/4/12
to
On 2012-10-04, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> Now go read http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1036 .
>
> It can't possibly be obseleted by things that are not yet standards.
If you say so, Paul. Like I said, perhaps you'd better go and tell the
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> Now go read http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1036 .
>
> It can't possibly be obseleted by things that are not yet standards.
IETF that they're doing it all wrong.
Richard Kettlewell
Oct 4, 2012, 9:23:35 AM10/4/12
to
uset...@stedtelephone.invalid (Paul Cummins) writes:
> r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
> r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
>> Paul Cummins wrote:
>>> r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard Kettlewell) writes:
>>>> TBOMK it was never a standard (or anything else)
>>> What about RFC821 and 822? Were they ever standards?
>>> r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard Kettlewell) writes:
>>>> TBOMK it was never a standard (or anything else)
>>> What about RFC821 and 822? Were they ever standards?
>> I'm sure you can do your own research.
> I did. I evidenced that RFC 1036 is the only currently valid RFC for
> Usenet.
I'm not sure what your fantasies about 1036 have to do with 821 and 822.
> I did. I evidenced that RFC 1036 is the only currently valid RFC for
> Usenet.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Paul Cummins
Oct 4, 2012, 12:18:00 PM10/4/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when r...@greenend.org.uk (Richard
Kettlewell) came up to me and whispered:
> I'm not sure what your fantasies about 1036 have to do with 821
> and 822.
Perhaps if you read 1036 you might find out?
> and 822.
Paul Cummins
Oct 4, 2012, 12:18:00 PM10/4/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> If you say so, Paul. Like I said, perhaps you'd better go and
> tell the IETF that they're doing it all wrong.
They clearly are, since their own website can't decide.
> tell the IETF that they're doing it all wrong.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 4, 2012, 1:26:52 PM10/4/12
to
On 2012-10-04, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> If you say so, Paul. Like I said, perhaps you'd better go and
>> tell the IETF that they're doing it all wrong.
>
> They clearly are, since their own website can't decide.
Yes, either the IETF are incompetent and confused... or you are not
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
>> If you say so, Paul. Like I said, perhaps you'd better go and
>> tell the IETF that they're doing it all wrong.
>
> They clearly are, since their own website can't decide.
correct that RFCs can only be obsoleted by standards.
Paul Cummins
Oct 5, 2012, 12:42:00 PM10/5/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> Yes, either the IETF are incompetent and confused... or you are
> not correct that RFCs can only be obsoleted by standards.
And given their website makes it clear that the additional RFC's are not
> not correct that RFCs can only be obsoleted by standards.
yet standards, I will stick with the "they are confused" since it is
clearly nt possible for a standard to be obseleted by something that is
not a standard.
The opposing position that a Standard can be obseleted by a proposal is
not logical or reasonable.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 5, 2012, 12:58:06 PM10/5/12
to
On 2012-10-05, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> Yes, either the IETF are incompetent and confused... or you are
>> not correct that RFCs can only be obsoleted by standards.
>
> And given their website makes it clear that the additional RFC's are not
> yet standards, I will stick with the "they are confused" since it is
> clearly nt possible for a standard to be obseleted by something that is
> not a standard.
You seem to be assuming that RFC 1036 is or was a standard.
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> Yes, either the IETF are incompetent and confused... or you are
>> not correct that RFCs can only be obsoleted by standards.
>
> And given their website makes it clear that the additional RFC's are not
> yet standards, I will stick with the "they are confused" since it is
> clearly nt possible for a standard to be obseleted by something that is
> not a standard.
Why is that?
> The opposing position that a Standard can be obseleted by a proposal is
> not logical or reasonable.
Internet standards process is being run by the incompetent IETF
and not by your good self.
Paul Cummins
Oct 5, 2012, 1:19:00 PM10/5/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
> You seem to be assuming that RFC 1036 is or was a standard.
> Why is that?
Because NetNews clearly exists, (though it appers you don't think you are
> Why is that?
using it) and there are no other "standards" documents that relate to it.
> I must say it is clearly a great pity that the
> Internet standards process is being run by the incompetent IETF
> and not by your good self.
I have merely stated that the website is "confused"
ma...@peterduncanson.net
Oct 5, 2012, 2:00:05 PM10/5/12
to
On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 18:19 +0100 (BST), uset...@stedtelephone.invalid
(Paul Cummins) wrote:
>We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
>Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
>>
>> You seem to be assuming that RFC 1036 is or was a standard.
>> Why is that?
>
>Because NetNews clearly exists, (though it appers you don't think you are
>using it) and there are no other "standards" documents that relate to it.
>
>> I must say it is clearly a great pity that the
>> Internet standards process is being run by the incompetent IETF
>> and not by your good self.
>
>The person who keeps using the word "Incompetent" is you.
>
>I have merely stated that the website is "confused"
RFC documents are specifications. They are not necessarily "Standards".
(Paul Cummins) wrote:
>We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
>Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
>>
>> You seem to be assuming that RFC 1036 is or was a standard.
>> Why is that?
>
>Because NetNews clearly exists, (though it appers you don't think you are
>using it) and there are no other "standards" documents that relate to it.
>
>> I must say it is clearly a great pity that the
>> Internet standards process is being run by the incompetent IETF
>> and not by your good self.
>
>The person who keeps using the word "Incompetent" is you.
>
>I have merely stated that the website is "confused"
The initials RFC stand for Request For Comments.
The specification in an RFC will often be used before it becomes a
standard. Revised RFCs (with new numbers) will be created in the light
of experience using an earlier one.
A specification will not automatically become a Standard
As far as I can see the RFC for Simple Mail Transfer Protocol, for
instance, is only a Draft Standard in spite of the fact that the
specification and its predecessors have been used for sending and
receiving gazillions of emails. Before the Draft Standard version was
issued the email transfer specification was contained in a series of
RFCs each one obsoleting the previous one as things developed.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
Jon Ribbens
Oct 5, 2012, 2:40:39 PM10/5/12
to
On 2012-10-05, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> You seem to be assuming that RFC 1036 is or was a standard.
>> Why is that?
>
> Because NetNews clearly exists, (though it appers you don't think you are
> using it) and there are no other "standards" documents that relate to it.
You seem to be a little confused as to what a standard is.
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> You seem to be assuming that RFC 1036 is or was a standard.
>> Why is that?
>
> Because NetNews clearly exists, (though it appers you don't think you are
> using it) and there are no other "standards" documents that relate to it.
Perhaps some more reading would be in order.
Rob Morley
Oct 5, 2012, 4:36:13 PM10/5/12
to
obsolete a previous RFC if the RFC it obsoletes never achieved Status:
STANDARD
Can a proposed standard obsolete a draft standard?
Richard Kettlewell
Oct 6, 2012, 2:58:56 PM10/6/12
to
Rob Morley <nos...@ntlworld.com> writes:
and moreover seems to have been merged into “standard”. But anyway...)
“Obsoleted by” can apply to any RFC that is superseded by another; it’s
not part of the standards-track process. 5741 and 2223 describe.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
> Richard Kettlewell <r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> 1036 is just a random RFC in formal terms; TTBOMK it was never a
>> standard (or anything else) in IETF-speak, even after the
>> introduction of the standards process (which postdates it). The
>> current “proposed standards” (including the various NNTP RFCs) are
>> only the relevant standards-track documents available.
>
> The penny just dropped for me - an RFC Status: PROPOSED STANDARD can
> obsolete a previous RFC if the RFC it obsoletes never achieved Status:
> STANDARD
> Can a proposed standard obsolete a draft standard?
(“Draft standard” is more mature than “proposed standard” in IETF-speak,
>> 1036 is just a random RFC in formal terms; TTBOMK it was never a
>> standard (or anything else) in IETF-speak, even after the
>> introduction of the standards process (which postdates it). The
>> current “proposed standards” (including the various NNTP RFCs) are
>> only the relevant standards-track documents available.
>
> The penny just dropped for me - an RFC Status: PROPOSED STANDARD can
> obsolete a previous RFC if the RFC it obsoletes never achieved Status:
> STANDARD
> Can a proposed standard obsolete a draft standard?
and moreover seems to have been merged into “standard”. But anyway...)
“Obsoleted by” can apply to any RFC that is superseded by another; it’s
not part of the standards-track process. 5741 and 2223 describe.
--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
Paul Cummins
Oct 6, 2012, 6:55:00 PM10/6/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> You seem to be a little confused as to what a standard is.
> Perhaps some more reading would be in order.
Perhaps not.
> Perhaps some more reading would be in order.
As previously pointed out, NetNews works, and that's because the acceoted
standard in RFC 1036.
Anything not RFC 1036 compliant need not be accepted by any news server.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 6, 2012, 9:41:43 PM10/6/12
to
On 2012-10-06, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> You seem to be a little confused as to what a standard is.
>> Perhaps some more reading would be in order.
>
> Perhaps not.
>
> As previously pointed out, NetNews works, and that's because the acceoted
> standard in RFC 1036.
That's not what a "standard" is, in IETF terms.
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> You seem to be a little confused as to what a standard is.
>> Perhaps some more reading would be in order.
>
> Perhaps not.
>
> As previously pointed out, NetNews works, and that's because the acceoted
> standard in RFC 1036.
Paul Cummins
Oct 7, 2012, 8:06:00 AM10/7/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>
> That's not what a "standard" is, in IETF terms.
And, as you quite rightly posted out, IETF didn't exist when RFC1036 was
implemented.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 7, 2012, 10:14:39 AM10/7/12
to
On 2012-10-07, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> That's not what a "standard" is, in IETF terms.
>
> And, as you quite rightly posted out, IETF didn't exist when RFC1036 was
> implemented.
I didn't point that out, and also it's not true. But your point has
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> That's not what a "standard" is, in IETF terms.
>
> And, as you quite rightly posted out, IETF didn't exist when RFC1036 was
> implemented.
appeared to be that RFCs can't obsolete RFC 1036 unless they are
IETF standards, which is also not true and anyway is inconsistent with
RFC 1036 not itself being an IETF standard.
Paul Cummins
Oct 7, 2012, 8:01:00 PM10/7/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> But your point has
> appeared to be that RFCs can't obsolete RFC 1036 unless they are
> IETF standards, which is also not true and anyway is
> inconsistent with
> RFC 1036 not itself being an IETF standard.
So on what basis is RFC 1036 the (previous) accepted standard for netnews.
> appeared to be that RFCs can't obsolete RFC 1036 unless they are
> IETF standards, which is also not true and anyway is
> inconsistent with
> RFC 1036 not itself being an IETF standard.
Because I don't see you arguing that it isn't/wasn't...
Jon Ribbens
Oct 7, 2012, 8:28:24 PM10/7/12
to
On 2012-10-08, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> So on what basis is RFC 1036 the (previous) accepted standard for netnews.
General consensus.
> So on what basis is RFC 1036 the (previous) accepted standard for netnews.
> Because I don't see you arguing that it isn't/wasn't...
Paul Cummins
Oct 8, 2012, 5:30:00 AM10/8/12
to
We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
> > So on what basis is RFC 1036 the (previous) accepted standard
> for netnews.
>
> General consensus.
So where is the "general consensus" that it has been obsoleted?
> for netnews.
>
> General consensus.
Jon Ribbens
Oct 8, 2012, 6:37:06 AM10/8/12
to
On 2012-10-08, Paul Cummins <uset...@stedtelephone.invalid> wrote:
> We were about to embark at Dover, when jon+u...@unequivocal.co.uk (Jon
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> > So on what basis is RFC 1036 the (previous) accepted standard
>> for netnews.
>>
>> General consensus.
>
> So where is the "general consensus" that it has been obsoleted?
If you want to do some research, I'm not stopping you. However I don't
> Ribbens) came up to me and whispered:
>> > So on what basis is RFC 1036 the (previous) accepted standard
>> for netnews.
>>
>> General consensus.
>
> So where is the "general consensus" that it has been obsoleted?
see what relevance this has to my original point - which was that
binaries being disallowed in the uk.* hierarchy has nothing to do with
whether 8-bit posts are allowed.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages