cleanup batch file
Dwayne Epps
cleans up my recent folder, temp files, temporary internet files, cookies
and recycled bin.
EX: deltree /y c:\windows\cookies\*.*
I'm running Win98 and I noticed that when I run the batch program, that the
recycled bin icon still shows contents (trash can bin full), and under the
accessories - system tools - disk cleanup, the temporary internet files
still indicate that files have not been deleted. I checked the folders in
Win Explorer and everything was removed properly by the batch file. I was
curious if there is a way to include batch commands that sets the recycled
bin icon from full to empty when I execute the batch file and will show the
temporary internet files to be emptied in the disk cleanup utility? Any
suggestions would be appreciate. Thanks.
-D-
William Allen
> I am fairly new to writing batch files and have written a batch file that
> cleans up my recent folder, temp files, temporary internet files, cookies
> and recycled bin.
>
> EX: deltree /y c:\windows\cookies\*.*
>
> I'm running Win98 and I noticed that when I run the batch program, that the
> recycled bin icon still shows contents (trash can bin full)
> I was
> curious if there is a way to include batch commands that sets the recycled
> bin icon from full to empty when I execute the batch file
> Any suggestions would be appreciate. Thanks.
Here are a couple of suggestions
1) ====Real mode execution
One approach would be to put the cleanup commands in a batch
file, say C:\FOLDER\TIDYUP.BAT, and CALL it from AUTOEXEC.BAT
with a line such as:
CALL C:\FOLDER\TIDYUP.BAT
This would run the cleanup process in real mode during each boot
sequence. You would _need_ to use short form paths to any the
long name folders (see Note at end for how to find short form paths).
When the GUI boots, it will then re-initialise the Explorer state
for the Recycle Bin icon. (We don't use Disk Cleanup here and
have no information about it, but it _may_ re-initialise, too).
However, you may not always want to execute the cleanup at
boot time, and the cleanup will be slower in real mode than in
the Windows GUI.
2) ====Cleaning Recycle bin in the GUI.
When you clear C:\RECYCLED in Windows 95/98 from a batch
script, for example with:
DEL C:\RECYCLED\*?.*
(note: the special syntax *?.* avoids a permission prompt from DEL
or use the deltree /y syntax of your example if you prefer)
the Explorer shell doesn't "know" about it, and needs refreshing
in order to toggle the Recycle bin icon state.
It's _not_ normally sufficient to auto-refresh Explorer (which you
can force from the Update mode registry key):
HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\control\Update hex-value "UpdateMode"
Change this value to anywhere from 02 to 07 to force auto-refresh.
As I say, that's normally not sufficient for auto refresh of the sort
of system states you're talking about.
You need to refresh the Recycle bin folder specifically. Microsoft
provide a batch file extension (CSCRIPT.EXE - already installed in
Win98 by default, but you would need the free upgrade to run the
Batch file demo below). This allows your Batch files to interact with
GUI objects. The CSCRIPT extension is part of WSH (Windows Script
Host), effectively it's a powerful Windows batch processing language
which you can use from Batch files (or use separately if you prefer).
If you upgrade (or have upgraded) your default Win98 WSH installation
to the latest version of WSH, this includes the SendKeys method
which enables your ordinary Batch script to "press" keys in another
window. See Note 2 below for details of how to download the free
upgrade to current version WSH (around 1-1/2 Mbytes including
documentation).
With that installed, you make your Batch script do the
following steps automatically (only steps 3 and 4 need
the CSCRIPT interface):
1) Delete all files in the Recycle bin
2) Open an instance of Explorer rooted on C:\RECYCLED
3) Refresh the Explorer instance with F5
4) Close the Explorer instance with Alt-F4
Afterwards, the Recycle Bin icon in any other instance
of Explorer you open (or which you had previously opened
and is still open) will show the correct icon state.
With WSH current version installed, this batch demo shows
the sort of syntax to do (1) to (4) above:
====Begin cut-and-paste (omit this line)
@ECHO OFF
:: Try this Batch script with something in the Recycle bin
:: First delete all non-hidden files from Recycle bin
IF EXIST C:\RECYCLED\*.* DEL C:\RECYCLED\*?.*
:: Open an Explorer instance rooted on the Recycle bin
:: This will briefly become the window with focus
start /r explorer /e,/root,C:\RECYCLED
:: Create a WSH script to refresh and close window with current focus
ECHO.set sh=WScript.CreateObject("WScript.Shell")>_TEMP.VBS
ECHO.Wscript.sleep 200>>_TEMP.VBS
ECHO.sh.SendKeys "{F5}">>_TEMP.VBS
ECHO.Wscript.sleep 200>>_TEMP.VBS
ECHO.sh.SendKeys "%%{F4}">>_TEMP.VBS
:: Execute the temporary script
cscript//nologo _TEMP.VBS
:: Delete the temporary script
:: DEL _TEMP.VBS
====End cut-and-paste (omit this line)
Cut-and-paste text between the ==== lines into file with extension .BAT
(and suitable base name). Lines that don't begin with two spaces have
wrapped accidentally. The code sample is purely for demonstration and
study purposes. It was written/tested in Win9x GUI with WSH5.6 installed.
All of the details of the WSH script in the demo above are
explained in the WSH documentation.
--
(pp) William Allen
Note 1: Finding the short name alias for a filename or foldername
Open a DOS box, and open Windows Explorer so you can see
some of the DOS box window. Choose the folder or file you want
to know the full short name path of, and drag-and-drop it onto the
DOS box window. Windows will display the full short-form path
to the file or folder. You can cut-and-paste from the DOS box
with the Mark, Copy and Paste buttons. Click the "Mark" button
(that's the first one), then hold down the left mouse button while
you swipe the mouse cursor to select the text you want to copy, then
click Copy button (second button) - don't press Ctrl-C as you normally
would for copying. You can find the names of the buttons by hovering
the mouse over them for two seconds - a tooltip appears.
When you are dragging-and-dropping a file onto a DOS box, it's often
a good idea to type REM[Space] (but don't press [Return]) in the
DOS box first, so that you don't accidentally execute the file as
you drag-and-drop it.
Note 2: WSH (Windows Script Host)
WSH (Windows Script Host) is available as a free downloadable
add-on for the tiny proportion of Windows machines (mostly older
Windows 95 ones) which don't already have it installed in one
version or another. If you plan to use it, it's worthwile upgrading
to latest version (5.6 when last checked, and this will install on
Windows 95 machines as well as Windows 98 and ME). There
is _extremely_ extensive documentation included with the WSH
download in the form of HTML help files, which include hundreds of
cut-and-pastable syntax examples in VBScript and JScript.
The self-unpacking and installing package is around 1-1/2 Mbytes.
For the task above, the documentation includes detailed tables of
how to send keystroke combos with SendKeys (and syntax examples).
Windows Script Host main page for information and downloads:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/scripting/
CSCRIPT is the Batch file interface for WSH (installed automatically
with WSH) and it allows you to use WSH functions from a Batch file.
It also includes extra Batch-file-specific features.
Dwayne Epps
work. I really appreciate your help. Thanks again.
-D-
"William Allen" <NgR...@mayfly13.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a3j868$18au37$1...@ID-55970.news.dfncis.de...
William Allen
> work. I really appreciate your help. Thanks again.
You're welcome. Post back with how it works out.
Notes:
(1) The sleep 200 parts of the WSH script are to allow
time for the Explorer Window to gain focus and respond
to keystrokes. The 200 = 200 milliseconds (a fifth of a
second) which is usually enough for SendKeys from a
Batch script to work reliably.
(2)
Look at the idea of running cleanups from AUTOEXEC.BAT
as well. As I say, they have the disadvantage that they
will always run if just CALLed in the normal way. You
can work round this in a Batch file, however.
For example, you can use the Debug command (a standard
command always installed with Windows 95/98/ME) to
enable a batch file to detect, for example, whether or not
the Scroll Lock key is ON. I use this as a way of running
cleanups at boot time. Simply press Scroll Lock when
you see the "Starting Windows..." message, and the
Cleanup Batch script can take a different action from
the one it would if Scroll Lock wasn't pressed.
This makes Scroll Lock a handy switch to turn on
part (or all) of the cleanups at boot time, but they
don't run unless Scroll Lock is pressed. Other toggle
keys (such as Caps Lock) can be used, but Scroll
Lock is handy because it's not much used.
Alternatively, you can use a Desktop icon linked to
a Batch file to set a file flag that can be detected
from AUTOEXEC.BAT at the next boot. So click the
CleanUp icon and the cleanup is done as a one-time
action only at the next boot.
As I say, post back to the NewsGroup if interested.
--
(pp) William Allen
Clay Calvert
wrote:
>Windows Scripting Host is NOT on topic in a.m.b.
>Visual Basic Scripting is NOT on topic in a.m.b.
>The NT commandline emulator is NOT on topic in a.m.b.
Windows Scripting Host is not exclusive to NT/2000/XP.
Is it really necessary to bundle these two topics together?
>This is the wrong group for the promotion of Windows software
>or alternate OS's, such as NT/2000/XP.
>
>
>See appropriate newsgroups below.
>
>
>news:alt.msdos.batch.nt
>NT batch and the win95cmd.exe NT emulator. All versions of NT
>including 2000, XP.
>
>news://msnews.microsoft.public.win2000.cmdprompt.admin
>NT command prompt
>
>news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.wsh
>WSH (Windows Script Host) and CSCRIPT.EXE
>
>news://msnews.microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript
>Visual Basic Scripting
Clay Calvert
Replace "W" with "L" in email.
Joe Mehaffey
like.
However: May I observe:
1) New people coming in to the NG for the first time will have little
idea of what your preconceived notions of what your NG is about. You
MIGHT think about using some courtesy when telling new people your
(rather stiff) rules rather than just "blowing them away".
2) I believe you will find that the animosity you generate from being
rude and discourteous will <in the long run> draw the fire of the
misfits on the Internet and cause your newsgroup all manner of grief.
A word to the WISE is sufficient. To the UNWISE, it just generates
heat and friction. Sorry if some of the latter read this and choose to
act in an UNWISE manner.
I personally appreciate the help from a couple of people on here EVEN
THOUGH I did not realize that Win 2000 related questions were NOT
WELCOME here.
Joe Mehaffey
--
Charles Dye
wrote:
>Thank-you for your co-operation.
>Ross Martin, The Batch Team
Is than an actual name I see?
--
Charles Dye ras...@highfiber.com
Dwayne Epps
Thanks for the help. Those were some cool tricks. I did try the batch
file that you suggested and cut and paste the code into a batch file and ran
it, but it didn't clear the recycled icon. I also saw the e-mail trail that
followed and I hope that I didn't post in an incorrect newgroup and cause
any waves, but it appeared that I did. I just wanted to thank you again and
if there is anything that you can think of that might have caused the batch
file that you suggested not to work please let me know. Thanks for your
help.
-D-
"William Allen" <NgR...@mayfly13.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a3k2nq$18ptbi$1...@ID-55970.news.dfncis.de...
Dwayne Epps
the comments, it appeared that I did. Thanks for suggesting that these
folks use courtesy in alerting someone that they are posting to the wrong
newsgroup. Rudeness never carries very far and it's unfortunate that some
people don't understand that. Thanks for the support.
-D-
"Joe Mehaffey" <j...@mehaffey.com> wrote in message
news:3C5DA95A...@mehaffey.com...
William Allen
> file that you suggested and cut and paste the code into a batch file and ran
> it, but it didn't clear the recycled icon.
> if there is anything that you can think of that might have caused the batch
> file that you suggested not to work please let me know. Thanks for your
> help.
Hmm. The code works here. Did you read the point I made that
Windows 98 version CSCRIPT Batch file interface doesn't by
default support the SendKeys method required to refresh and
close Explorer. You do need the upgrade to version 5.6 via the
link I posted. Look for the trail via the Headlines:
Localized Windows Script 5.6 Released (November 8, Download)
Also, for general cleanups, consider the AUTOEXEC.BAT
ideas I suggested. Note that you can also put Batch files in
the start menu/startup group to run in the GUI at boot time.
Feel free to email if you prefer. Header address is valid.
Someone here checks it most days, and we try to answer
Windows 95/98/ME Batch questions (if they're interesting<G>).
We're currently collecting data on Windows 95/98/ME Batch
techniques and most of the useful information now comes
from trying to answer actual users' questions.
Email questions are more likely to be read if you put the
word "Batch" in the subject line. Allow a few days for replies.
--
(pp) William Allen
Ted Davis
wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:37:23 +0100, Batch_Team <Batch...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Thank-you for your co-operation.
>>Ross Martin, The Batch Team
>
>Is than an actual name I see?
Probably Outsider, but that's not his real name. It's his style and
it came through the same path his messages do.
T.E.D. (tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu - e-mail must contain "batch" in the subject or my .sig in the body)
Ted Davis
wrote:
I wish you had quoted the message yours is a reply to - it appears to
be one that is not available to me. I suspect one of the very few
rabid fanatics jumped in your case - they are not representative,
though they claim to be, and even claim to be be primary resources and
the true leaders. They are the people for whom twit filters (kill
files) were invented (which could explain why I don't see the
message).
Charles Dye
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:39:40 GMT, ras...@highfiber.com (Charles Dye)
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:37:23 +0100, Batch_Team <Batch...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Thank-you for your co-operation.
>>>Ross Martin, The Batch Team
>>
>>Is than an actual name I see?
>
>Probably Outsider, but that's not his real name. It's his style and
>it came through the same path his messages do.
Indubitably it's Outsider, but perhaps that really is his real
name. Who knows -- he might have decided that netiquette applies
to his own posts as well. Stranger things have happened. One
can always hope, anyway.
--
Charles Dye ras...@highfiber.com
Todd Vargo
"Dwayne Epps" <dwayne...@centurytel.net> wrote in message
news:pZi78.1573$U41.8...@feed.centurytel.net...
> I hope that I didn't post my message under the incorrect newgroup, but
from
> the comments, it appeared that I did. Thanks for suggesting that these
> folks use courtesy in alerting someone that they are posting to the wrong
> newsgroup. Rudeness never carries very far and it's unfortunate that some
> people don't understand that. Thanks for the support.
>
> -D-
>
> "Joe Mehaffey" <j...@mehaffey.com> wrote in message
> news:3C5DA95A...@mehaffey.com...
> > You guys are <of course> free to operate your newsgroup however you
> > like.
Dwayne, Joe,
Frequently, I can't help but wonder if anyone bothers to read the existing
messages when they subscribe to a newsgroup. If more did with this group,
they would notice an unofficial (but quite warranted) META-FAQ with very
useful information. Due to the META-FAQ being posted every 3-4 days
(sometimes 3-4 times on the same day), I just can't see a valid reason for
anyone to say they didn't know what's off-topic, or just ignore it's
existence and proceed to conduct off-topic discussions anyway.
However, that was not the case here. IMO, the question was appropriate. The
"stop posting" reply was actually meant for one person in particular only.
The "from" name was changed to get past that person's filters.
To the Batch_Team(s):
Obviously, innocent people _are_ being caught-up and offended in this
personal vendetta. Hopefully, this thread proves incentive enough to call a
truce on what one of you considers blatant disregard for amb, and the other
considers vigilantism to _attempt_ to keep it in check.
WA's team, FWIW, DE posted from OE 5.5, so a sufficient version of cscript
should be considered available in his path. IMO, instruction's to dl the
newest version just to use it's SendKeys method is unwarranted.
Ross Martin(or whatever name your team prefers), if anything, you should
draw DE's attention (in a polite manner) to netiquette standards regarding
proper quoting.
--
Todd Vargo (body of message must contain my name to reply by email)
William Allen
> You guys are <of course> free to operate your newsgroup however you
> like.
>
> However: May I observe:
> 1) New people coming in to the NG for the first time will have little
> idea of what your preconceived notions of what your NG is about. You
> MIGHT think about using some courtesy when telling new people your
> (rather stiff) rules rather than just "blowing them away".
I'm sorry if some poster has offended you. People interested
in the Batch language, and who post regularly, did try to help you
with an earlier problem. And new posters are always welcome
as far as I and my Partner (who helps a great deal, but doesn't
usually have time to post messages herself) are concerned.
There are no rules.
For the record, alt.msdos.batch is an unmoderated alt hierarchy
NewsGroup. There are therefore no rules and there is no one
who is authorised nor competent to make any. Repeat, no one.
Any posts you see with "rules" are either intended to be light,
humorous relief (we posted a Monty-Pythonesque set ourselves!)
or, if meant seriously, are merely the personal opinion of the
poster, and which you are free to ignore. And of course this
post is a personal opinion, too.
The writing team here answer most of the posted questions,
and have done so for the past year. You can search old
posts to alt.msdos.batch at the Google archive:
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
and, for example, since we always post under author
"William Allen" for continuity, you can find most (not quite
all) of our posts there. We observe the self-imposed rule
that material should usually be related to Microsoft software
(alt.MSdos.batch), and related to the use of DOS-style
commands (alt.msDOS.batch), and related to the use of
Batch files (alt.msdos.BATCH).
If someone asks an occasional very simple question that's
only indirectly related to all the above, for example: Why does
Notepad keep adding .TXT to my batch file scripts when
I save them? then we may choose to answer those, too,
if we happen to be on-line at the time. After all, why not help?
We tend to avoid the use of third-party utilities unless their use
seems essential to the task, or involves learning useful transferable
skills. That's merely because we're not interested ourselves in
third-party solutions. "Third party" as used by us means party other
than the first two parties - machine user/owner (you) and the Operating
System manufacturer (usually Microsoft in this case).
Others are free to take any view on third-party utilities they wish.
Others also post comparative non-Microsoft solutions, using for
example, 4DOS or similar products. These posts usefully
enable people to compare and evaluate the worth of other
methods against the use of standard Microsoft software
I repeat, there is no one authorised nor competent to "tell"
you what you may post to alt.msdos.batch. You are the judge.
One or two people post (sometimes under various aliases
to appear more numerous, or to circumvent killfiles implemented
by several regulars) and try to bully and drive people away who
don't agree with their own silly and narrow agenda. Most people
who read the NewsGroup regularly now appear to ignore them
(or even killfile them), as far as I can see.
Feel free to post your questions to the NewsGroup. If they are
reasonably Batch-related, can be run on systems using the older
MS-DOS 1.0 - 6.22 or on the far more common Windows 95/98/ME
systems, and most importantly, if they're interesting <G>, then
someone will probably answer them, or try to.
Read the NewsGroup, decide for _yourself_ who posts useful
information, who tries to be helpful, and who doesn't. You are
the only judge that matters. You can read/ignore as you wish.
And if you really want to help those who are trying to help
others, these are useful tips:
1) Say what Operating System you are using when you ask
a question
2) Post any Batch code you've written so far, it will help
define the question more accurately
3) When you try a solution, say whether or not it works by
posting back to the NewsGroup
4) Although you may not think so, knowing that it fails is
usually _more_ interesting to the person who posted the
solution/suggestion than knowing that it works. So tell them
because they're probably here to learn, too.
5) If a batch file fails, it often (not always) helps to remove
any @ECHO OFF from the top and see what happens when
it's run that way. All the commands will ECHO to screen as
they are executed, and the results may help the solution
provider diagnose the problem, even if they don't help you.
6) You can also (usually) insert a PAUSE (on a line on its
own) to create a breakpoint at parts of the code, so you
know for certain what stage has been reached.
7) You can also run Batch files line by line using the debugger
switch /y of COMMAND.COM, for example:
command /y /c MYBATCH.BAT
8) To get a quick rough idea what any Batch command does, type
CommandName /?
at the prompt for brief help. In that help text [square brackets]
mean [optional item] and a vertical bar means OR
If the help text flows off-screen, use either:
CommandName /? | more
which pauses after every screenful (and the | is the ASCII
character 124 - you can type it with [Alt + [1] [2] [4]] which
means hold down Alt and press 1 2 and then 4 on the
NUMBER keypad then release Alt)
Or you can use:
CommandName /? >HELP.TXT
which writes the brief help to a textfile HELP.TXT
Special Note on Diagnostic and {demo!} versions.
(a) Diagnostic versions:
Some Batch techniques discovered only recently are hard
to diagnose/debug by any of the above standard techniques.
That's why we sometimes post "diagnostic" versions of
certain Batch scripts: these display messages that try
to show what is happening as the Batch runs. In the
case of any of our posts, simply ask if you want diagnostic
code patched in to see more clearly how it works.
(b) ECHO.{demo!} only versions.
Some posters ask for Batch files that, for example, delete
all *.TMP files from the C: drive, or rename all files to
lowercase names, or similar relatively drastic large-scale
actions. In those cases, we normally post ECHO.{demo!}
versions that simply ECHO the commands to do the job.
That means you can try them out passively without being
concerned that you don't want, say all *.TMP files deleted at
the moment, thank you very much! To use them _actively_,
simply remove the ECHO.{demo!} where indicated to activate
the commands when you are quite satisfied that the Batch
script will do what you wish (and on your own head be it<G>!)
======Lurkers only!
Lurkers (NewsGroup readers who rarely or never post) who find
the tenor of this NewsGroup objectionable (because of one or
two ill-mannered individuals), and as a result are reluctant to
post questions, may email the team here if they wish.
(Please! specify the OS you're using if you do!). We can't
guarantee to reply. Currently, we're really only interested in
Windows 95/98/ME batch questions, though if there's plenty
of time to waste rebooting an old PC, we may occasionally
answer 6.22 or 3.20 ones). And we may not be able to answer
the question, of course<G> (though our Batch information and
techniques database is now very large indeed). And allow
several days or more for a reply, anyway. Also remember that
we are in the process of learning, too.
This is part of a research project designed to stimulate interest
among Windows 95/98/ME users in learning Batch file syntax
and programming. Many such users are unaware of how
powerful the Batch language is, and that it's always installed
by default on their machines. Our intention is to raise awareness.
Any interesting results that emerge from such questions may
be posted to alt.msdos.batch for general interest (unless you
specifically request otherwise).
--
(pp) William Allen
Mike Jones
> "Joe Mehaffey" wrote in message
> > You guys are <of course> free to operate your newsgroup however you
> > like.
> There are no rules.
[]
> One or two people post (sometimes under various aliases
> to appear more numerous, or to circumvent killfiles implemented
> by several regulars) and try to bully and drive people away who
> don't agree with their own silly and narrow agenda. Most people
> who read the NewsGroup regularly now appear to ignore them
> (or even killfile them), as far as I can see.
Well said that man!
I personally killfile Outsider, because, though he has/does sometimes post
interesting batches, these are swamped by his one-man crusade posts. I also
killfile Dr Stockton, not on any personal grounds, but because I want to learn
batch techniques, rather than use 3rd party programs, no matter how useful
they may be to others.
Others, who get embroiled in OS/interface wars also get close to killfile
status, but I generally just mark the thread as ignored. Personally, I don't
consider use of qbasic valid as a batch technique, but others differ, and I
don't get into a tizzy about posts which use it.
Batch Team
>
...snipped
> There are no rules.
>
> For the record, alt.msdos.batch is an unmoderated alt hierarchy
> NewsGroup. There are therefore no rules and there is no one
> who is authorised nor competent to make any. Repeat, no one.
The suggestion that alt newsgroups have no rules is preposterous.
The basic rule that applies to all newsgroups is that messages
should be on-topic for that group. To exploit the fact that there
is no moderator and continually post off-topic messages is a serious
abuse of this (or any) newsgroup.
...snipped
> And of course this post is a personal opinion, too.
Mr. Allen is entitled to his own opinions but not his own facts.
...snipped
> We observe the self-imposed rule
> that material should usually be related to Microsoft software
> (alt.MSdos.batch),
The alt.msdos.batch groups is most certainly not a general help group
for Microsoft software.
> and related to the use of DOS-style
> commands (alt.msDOS.batch), and related to the use of
> Batch files (alt.msdos.BATCH).
Alt.msdos.batch is a DOS group. It is designated for MSDOS batch
files, and not for "DOS-style" anything. See url below.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=EDD9Co.Lzt%40GTS.Net
alt.msdos.batch 0001429 MS-DOS batch files.
> If someone asks an occasional very simple question that's
> only indirectly related to all the above, for example: Why does
> Notepad keep adding .TXT to my batch file scripts when
> I save them? then we may choose to answer those, too,
> if we happen to be on-line at the time. After all, why not help?
That question is not related to DOS batch files. a.m.b. is NOT a general
Microsoft products help group. If the answer is _very simple_, it's fine
to give the answer as long as you direct the OP to group where it and
similar questions are on-topic. Otherwise, let someone else direct the
OP to a proper venue.
...snipped
> Others also post comparative non-Microsoft solutions, using for
> example, 4DOS or similar products. These posts usefully
> enable people to compare and evaluate the worth of other
> methods against the use of standard Microsoft software
Posts like those metioned above are also off-topic. a.m.b. is not about
"Microsoft standard software", is is about MSDOS batch files. If someone
wants to evaluate another OS or command interpreter, they should be
directed to the proper group. For example, 4DOS questions should be directed
here: news:comp.os.msdos.4dos
Other non DOS batch topics should accordingly be addressed in their
designated groups, for example:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.wsh
WSH (Windows Script Host) and CSCRIPT.EXE
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript
Visual Basic Scripting
> I repeat, there is no one authorised nor competent to "tell"
> you what you may post to alt.msdos.batch. You are the judge.
Again, to exploit the fact that there is no moderator and continually
post off-topic messages is a serious abuse of this newsgroup.
...snipped
> Read the NewsGroup, decide for _yourself_ who posts useful
> information, who tries to be helpful, and who doesn't. You are
> the only judge that matters. You can read/ignore as you wish.
Again, alt.msdos.batch is most certainly not a general help group
for Microsoft software. How helpful a message may be considered to
be by a reader, is NOT criteria for whether it is on-topic or not.
...snipped
-----------------------------------------------------------
The idea behind this group was to give a group based on the
comp.os.msdos.batch charter [below] another chance in .alt.
--Dirk van Deun, 29 Nov. 2001, alt.msdos.batch founder.
- general batch questions
- environment problems
- I/O redirection
- ready-to-run solutions
- batch enhancers
- batch tools (short binaries)
- DOSKEY macros
-----------------------------------------------------------
Since This is a DOS newgroup, obviously, the above items apply in
the context of the group name and purpose: MSDOS batch files.
--
Sincerely, Ross Martin
The Batch Team
Ted Davis
wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 19:41:12 -0600, Ted Davis
><tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:39:40 GMT, ras...@highfiber.com (Charles Dye)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:37:23 +0100, Batch_Team <Batch...@yahoo.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Thank-you for your co-operation.
>>>>Ross Martin, The Batch Team
>>>
>>>Is than an actual name I see?
>>
>>Probably Outsider, but that's not his real name. It's his style and
>>it came through the same path his messages do.
>
>Indubitably it's Outsider, but perhaps that really is his real
>name. Who knows -- he might have decided that netiquette applies
>to his own posts as well. Stranger things have happened. One
>can always hope, anyway.
I know what his real name is, and that isn't it - not even close.
T.E.D. (tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu)
SPAM filter: Messages to this address *must* contain "T.E.D."
somewhere in the body or they will be automatically rejected.
Timo Salmi
> There are no rules.
(The following discusses that particular statement and sentiment in
general terms of the Usenet news. Not in relation to any specific
newsgroup, even if this same subject arises here in alt.msdos.batch
much more often than average.)
The Usenet news no-rules fallacy: Despite the fact that some users
would like to think otherwise, there are many codes of conduct, both
voluntary and some even forced on the Usenet news.
The rules which are actually forced most often concern things such
as spam, binary postings in discussion newsgroups (if not explicitly
allowed by the charter), pyramid scams and other outright illegal
material. Such posting can invoke counter-measures, including
automatic cancels (cancelbots), complaints to the sender's ISP (and
the potential consequent action), and even police action as has
happened internationally in the case of distributing offensive,
illegal material. Also keep in mind that not all the ISPs pass on
all the material. Thus e.g. the binary posting do not necessarily
propagate as widely in discussion newsgroups as the poster of a
binary might think.
The very purpose of having distinct newsgroups with the topic areas
specified is to have some kind of an order in the system. Else the
system would neither be manageable for the carriers of the news nor
useful for the readership. Hence there are tens of thousands of
different newsgroups each with some sense of their topics. Why else
would one need more than one newsgroup on the Usenet new in the
first place! In the case of comp-hierarchy newsgroups the topics are
to a considerable degree governed by the charter of the newsgroup,
explicitly or implicitly drawn up for the voting process to create
the newsgroup. In the more easily created alt-newsgroup hierarchy
the critical phase is also at the creation time and furthermore to
get the ISPs to carry the newsgroups. In order for a newsgroup to
survive in the long-run, it needs to stay reasonably on-topic even
when there is no mechanism to actually force the issue.
Finally, there is the netiquette. Netiquette [net etiquette] is a
set of established conventions that have evolved over time on the
Internet and on the Usenet news. Netiquette is not a law nor a rule.
Netiquette is most of all based on what has been found useful and
proper in the electronic form of communication made possible by the
Internet, what is appropriate in any form of communication between
civilized human beings, and what is dictated by the common sense.
One of the obvious recommendations of the netiquette is to keep
one's material within the confines of the topic area of the
newsgroups where one decides to post. Newsgroup takeovers whether
factual or perceived are both bad netiquette and a breach of the
spirit of having the semi-organized system of newsgroups. All told,
thinking that one should feel totally free to post whatever and
wherever one happens like is neither very well founded nor
constructive.
(To repeat for the record, this material is meant as generic for any
newsgroup.)
All the best, Timo
--
Prof. Timo Salmi ftp & http://garbo.uwasa.fi/ archives 193.166.120.5
Department of Accounting and Business Finance ; University of Vaasa
mailto:t...@uwasa.fi <http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/> ; FIN-65101, Finland
Timo's FAQ materials at http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/tsfaq.html
John Cazale
> Charles Dye wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:37:23 +0100, Batch_Team <Batch...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Thank-you for your co-operation.
> > >Ross Martin, The Batch Team
> >
> > Is than an actual name I see?
>
> is no longer interested in participating in this group. I agreed to take the job of
> the posting of the NT and DOS batch meta-FAQ's. In addition, I promised Mr. Outsider
> I would try and help keep the group on topic. That is the extent of my interest in
> this group.
>
> --
> Ross Martin, The Batch Team
Ross Martin, actor, 22.03.1920 - 03.07.1981
You're welcome. :-D
--
John Cazale
Clay Calvert
wrote:
<snip>
>Other non DOS batch topics should accordingly be addressed in their
>designated groups, for example:
>
>news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.wsh
>WSH (Windows Script Host) and CSCRIPT.EXE
>
>news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript
>Visual Basic Scripting
You should include: alt.os.assembly
This group is becoming more and more assembly language centric, and
fortunately there is a group dedicated to the topic.
Should there be another meta-FAQ to cover this issue?
<snip>
Dr John Stockton
, seen in news:alt.msdos.batch, Mike Jones <ad...@127.0.0.1> wrote at
Mon, 4 Feb 2002 09:35:49 :-
> I personally killfile Outsider, because, though he has/does sometimes post
>interesting batches, these are swamped by his one-man crusade posts. I also
>killfile Dr Stockton, not on any personal grounds, but because I want to learn
>batch techniques, rather than use 3rd party programs, no matter how useful
>they may be to others.
That means that you can never honourably recommend a batch solution,
other than a trivial one, to a questioner, since you will have no way of
knowing how much more easily a problem might be solved with known helper
routines, and you could so easily deceive an innocent newcomer unaware
of your one-eyed use of the newsgroup.
That is a limitation on your usefulness.
You are, of course, also hiding from yourself expressions of views such
as this article, unless you also use some other means to access News or
you feel that you can rely on quotations by others.
--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. j...@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL: http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)
Charles Dye
<tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Feb 2002 02:34:41 GMT, ras...@highfiber.com (Charles Dye)
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 19:41:12 -0600, Ted Davis
>><tda...@gearbox.maem.umr.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:39:40 GMT, ras...@highfiber.com (Charles Dye)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 21:37:23 +0100, Batch_Team <Batch...@yahoo.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Thank-you for your co-operation.
>>>>>Ross Martin, The Batch Team
>>>>
>>>>Is than an actual name I see?
>>>
>>>Probably Outsider, but that's not his real name. It's his style and
>>>it came through the same path his messages do.
>>
>>Indubitably it's Outsider, but perhaps that really is his real
>>name. Who knows -- he might have decided that netiquette applies
>>to his own posts as well. Stranger things have happened. One
>>can always hope, anyway.
>
>I know what his real name is, and that isn't it - not even close.
Hmp. I figured he was trying the honorable road in hopes of
regaining lost respect, and I was going to give him some. I
guess I'm just the born sucker.
"Mr. Outsider" indeed.
--
Charles Dye ras...@highfiber.com
Charles Dye
wrote:
>That is an actual name. Mr. Outsider is still a consultant with The Batch Team, but
>is no longer interested in participating in this group. I agreed to take the job of
>the posting of the NT and DOS batch meta-FAQ's. In addition, I promised Mr. Outsider
>I would try and help keep the group on topic. That is the extent of my interest in
>this group.
As Mr. Outsider is no longer interested in the group, one wonders
why he cares whether it remains on-topic. Also where he thinks he
gets the authority to name moderators. Well, Mr. Outsider is just
the man of mystery I suppose.
Ross, I'd like to tell you at length just how easy your job will be
now that this group's most prolific generator of flames, paranoid
persecution tales, personality games and other such off-topic
material is no longer interested in participating in this group.
But frankly, long discussions with sock puppets just aren't my
style somehow. Back into the old plonk-O-matic with you.
--
Charles Dye ras...@highfiber.com
Charles Dye
>William Allen <NgR...@mayfly13.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>> There are no rules.
>
> [snip]
>The very purpose of having distinct newsgroups with the topic areas
>specified is to have some kind of an order in the system. Else the
>system would neither be manageable for the carriers of the news nor
>useful for the readership. Hence there are tens of thousands of
>different newsgroups each with some sense of their topics. Why else
>would one need more than one newsgroup on the Usenet new in the
>first place! In the case of comp-hierarchy newsgroups the topics are
>to a considerable degree governed by the charter of the newsgroup,
>explicitly or implicitly drawn up for the voting process to create
>the newsgroup. In the more easily created alt-newsgroup hierarchy
>the critical phase is also at the creation time and furthermore to
>get the ISPs to carry the newsgroups. In order for a newsgroup to
>survive in the long-run, it needs to stay reasonably on-topic even
>when there is no mechanism to actually force the issue.
Which is in accord with Mr. Allen's attempt, in the fifth paragraph
of his post, to present a vague outline of the kind of material he
thinks appropriate for this group. Having read it all the way
through, I really don't believe that he is advocating discussion of
Tibetan yak-herding practises or whatever in alt.msdos.batch.
--
Charles Dye ras...@highfiber.com
Todd Vargo
"Dr John Stockton" <sp...@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:+WpTJwBQ...@merlyn.demon.co.uk...
> JRS: In article <BGs78.10314$XS6.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
> , seen in news:alt.msdos.batch, Mike Jones <ad...@127.0.0.1> wrote at
> Mon, 4 Feb 2002 09:35:49 :-
<snipped>
> you feel that you can rely on quotations by others.
How about a partial quote to spark interest.<g>
Clay Calvert
<sp...@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>JRS: In article <BGs78.10314$XS6.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
>, seen in news:alt.msdos.batch, Mike Jones <ad...@127.0.0.1> wrote at
>Mon, 4 Feb 2002 09:35:49 :-
>
>> I personally killfile Outsider, because, though he has/does sometimes post
>>interesting batches, these are swamped by his one-man crusade posts. I also
>>killfile Dr Stockton, not on any personal grounds, but because I want to learn
>>batch techniques, rather than use 3rd party programs, no matter how useful
>>they may be to others.
>
>That means that you can never honourably recommend a batch solution,
>other than a trivial one, to a questioner, since you will have no way of
>knowing how much more easily a problem might be solved with known helper
>routines, and you could so easily deceive an innocent newcomer unaware
>of your one-eyed use of the newsgroup.
OK. Since you feel this way. Please write us an executable that will
do the following:
- Enumerate all Workgroups/Domains in use on the network
- Within each W/D enumerate the following for every computer:
- CompuerName
- Logged on user, if any
- MAC Address
- IP Address
The above is a non-trivial task that can be done with a batch file,
please convert this into binary form.
>That is a limitation on your usefulness.
>You are, of course, also hiding from yourself expressions of views such
>as this article, unless you also use some other means to access News or
>you feel that you can rely on quotations by others.
He'll get a chance to see it now.
Thanks in advance,
Timo Salmi
> On 4 Feb 2002 20:12:25 +0200, t...@UWasa.Fi (Timo Salmi) wrote:
> >get the ISPs to carry the newsgroups. In order for a newsgroup to
> >survive in the long-run, it needs to stay reasonably on-topic even
> >when there is no mechanism to actually force the issue.
> thinks appropriate for this group. Having read it all the way
> through, I really don't believe that he is advocating discussion of
> Tibetan yak-herding practises or whatever in alt.msdos.batch.
Dear Charles,
My posting was meant generic and not about any single individual or
even any single newsgroup. But it came up here because the issue
arises in alt.msdos.batch in many forms more often than average and
because there is a constant, underlying tug of war about what this
particular newsgroup is about. There are several sides to that coin,
and the agendas and interpretations presented can, if read hastily,
give a newscomer a skewed picture of this newsgroup's situation.
<nonserious>
Funny you mentioned Tibetan yak-herding. Isn't herding meant to
coral those beasts into batches?
</nonserious>
Timo Salmi
> , seen in news:alt.msdos.batch, Mike Jones <ad...@127.0.0.1> wrote at
> > I personally killfile Outsider, because, though he has/does sometimes post
> >interesting batches, these are swamped by his one-man crusade posts. I also
> >killfile Dr Stockton, not on any personal grounds, but because I want to learn
As for killfiling, I have always considered killfiles private, and,
at least tried to keep the contents to myself. Disclosing their
contents has several disadvantages. Publishing them can easily be
deemed as a public snub (and that indeed sometimes seems to be the
sole purpose of the public plonkings). Furthermore, situations can
change. What one wants to select or discard for reading may vary
over time. Why bind oneself to public commitments and statements?
And why should another person's killfile be of interest anyway?
> That means that you can never honourably recommend a batch solution,
As for being in killfiles. Why care about someone else's killfiles?
Especially given the huge number of readers on the Usenet news. It
is just one of the many methods one uses to choose what one wishes
to read and what not. Also note that everyone is involved in blanket
killfiling already when one chooses the newsgroups which one intends
to read. Besides, as a personal preference, I very much rather would
be killfiled than e.g. be pestered or whined at.
As for overlapping batch solutions. So much MS-DOS batch information
has been presented over the years and is readily available on the
net*) that it is rare that truly new ideas emerge for that scene.
And if they do, they are bound to be discussed at length by several
of the stalwarts. Everyone to one's own, especially given the
personal-agendas-prone atmosphre around here. It is more rewarding
and interesting just to concentrate on solving the problems for
one's own edification, and hopefully sometimes even for the benefit
of the person who asked, rather than pay overly much attention to
the quirks of others.
*) http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/http2.html#batch
Batch Team
>
> On Mon, 04 Feb 2002 17:19:00 +0100, Batch Team <Batch...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >That is an actual name. Mr. Outsider is still a consultant with The Batch Team, but
> >is no longer interested in participating in this group. I agreed to take the job of
> >the posting of the NT and DOS batch meta-FAQ's. In addition, I promised Mr. Outsider
> >I would try and help keep the group on topic. That is the extent of my interest in
> >this group.
>
> As Mr. Outsider is no longer interested in the group, one wonders
> why he cares whether it remains on-topic. Also where he thinks he
> gets the authority to name moderators. Well, Mr. Outsider is just
> the man of mystery I suppose.
For your edification, Mr. Outsider participates in many areas of the internet including
many newsgroups and uses several different names and alias. I am not he. My real name is
Ross Martin. Mr. Outsider and I have known each other quite a while and have worked
together on The Batch Team for about a year and a half. We share the same office and
occasionally use each others computer. We both enjoy Netscape 4.08, but Mr. Outsider uses
an older version of Windows. His system is very fast, so I like to use it on the rare
occasions when it is available to surf on the internet.
> Ross, I'd like to tell you at length just how easy your job will be
> now that this group's most prolific generator of flames, paranoid
> persecution tales, personality games and other such off-topic
> material is no longer interested in participating in this group.
> But frankly, long discussions with sock puppets just aren't my
> style somehow. Back into the old plonk-O-matic with you.
Unlike Mr. Outsider, I am not and never have been interested in newsgroup participation. I
owe Mr. Outsider much, for he has helped me in many difficult situations. He even saved my
life once, quite literally.
I know all about the persecution of Mr. Outsider in this newsgroup and I am immune to such
things. My job is to post the batch meta-FAQ and NT divert meta-FAQ, and that is all. Mr.
Outsider asked me to do this for reasons of his own and I agreed. I will engage in no further
discussions with anyone in this group. However, if anyone has anything intelligent to say
which is relevant to my duties here, I will accept email at ross_martin_cs
@yahoo.com.
That is all.
PS.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22John+Cazale%22
4,990 hits
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Ross+Martin%22
6,370 hits
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22William+Allen%22
58,100 hits
--
Klaus Meinhard
> other than a trivial one, to a questioner, since you will have no way
of
> knowing how much more easily a problem might be solved with known
helper
Interesting. That´s exactly my argument for the need to make newcomers
aware of 4DOS, the helper routine to end the need for helper routines
:-))
--
Viele Grüße, best regards,
*Klaus Meinhard*
07°36´57" East 53°07´52" North
Author of the 4XBTM batch collection at http://www.4xbtm.de
Mike Jones
"Clay Calvert" <ccal...@Wanguru.com> wrote in message
news:3nqu5u4g6tv18l81s...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2002 20:52:32 +0000, Dr John Stockton
> <sp...@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >JRS: In article <BGs78.10314$XS6.1...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com>
> >, seen in news:alt.msdos.batch, Mike Jones <ad...@127.0.0.1> wrote at
> >Mon, 4 Feb 2002 09:35:49 :-
> >
> >> I personally killfile Outsider, because, though he has/does sometimes
post
> >>interesting batches, these are swamped by his one-man crusade posts. I
also
> >>killfile Dr Stockton, not on any personal grounds, but because I want to
learn
> >>batch techniques, rather than use 3rd party programs, no matter how useful
> >>they may be to others.
I'll just re-emphasise this is my personal view, which is determined by my
wish to use Batch, with embedded assembler "helpers" where appropriate. Again,
the way I use killfiles is merely for my convenience to access the useful (to
me) posts. I have no personal grudge against Dr Stockton, indeed I learnt
something from the discussion about the clocktimer, but I wish to use portable
batch solutions, *not* relying on his utilities, though they are no doubt
invaluable to him, and I daresay others.
> >That means that you can never honourably recommend a batch solution,
> >other than a trivial one, to a questioner, since you will have no way of
> >knowing how much more easily a problem might be solved with known helper
> >routines, and you could so easily deceive an innocent newcomer unaware
> >of your one-eyed use of the newsgroup.
But they can always read your posts.
> >That is a limitation on your usefulness.
>
> >You are, of course, also hiding from yourself expressions of views such
> >as this article, unless you also use some other means to access News or
> >you feel that you can rely on quotations by others.
>
> He'll get a chance to see it now.
>
Thanks!
I don't want to be the new outsider, so I'll try to resist debating further!
Charles Dye
>
> <nonserious>
> Funny you mentioned Tibetan yak-herding. Isn't herding meant to
> coral those beasts into batches?
> </nonserious>
Yeesh. I guess if it's alpacas or vicunas instead, and the herd
contains only two animals, then you have a "dos batch"....
--
Charles Dye ras...@highfiber.com
Tom Lavedas
>
> Windows Scripting Host is NOT on topic in a.m.b.
> Visual Basic Scripting is NOT on topic in a.m.b.
> The NT commandline emulator is NOT on topic in a.m.b.
>
> This is the wrong group for the promotion of Windows software
> or alternate OS's, such as NT/2000/XP.
>
I've seen this crap about one thousand times too many.
I don't need this any more. I'm out of here.
Bye
Tom Lavedas
-----------
Todd Vargo
"Batch Team" <Batch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3C5F892D...@yahoo.com...
> PS.
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22John+Cazale%22
> 4,990 hits
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Ross+Martin%22
> 6,370 hits
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22William+Allen%22
> 58,100 hits
>
> --
> Ross Martin
> The Batch Team
I clicked each of the url's above and got these results respectively;
2,880
5,570
54,900
Cancel bots seem to be working overtime.<g>
BTW, one of the many results found contained this information...
"William Allen born 1725 in New Kent Co., Va. and died 8 Apr 1789 in St
James Parish, Mecklenburg Co."
For anyone interested, these search results are all useless anyway. They
represent posts from every person having the same name and every reply
containing that particular names.
Timo Salmi
> I don't need this any more. I'm out of here.
That sentiment is very easy to understand. This alt.msdos.batch is a
somewhat exceptional newsgroup given the combination of the really
high technical expertise by many of the regulars and the constant
discords that tear up this newsgroup. The underlying cause of that
discord basically lies in the fact that there are too many
incompatible agendas about what MS-DOS batches are or should be. The
trouble ranges from the more or less subtle promotional plugs, and
the purposeful paradigm-shift bids, to the constant reminders of
what should be considered MS-DOS batch programming. There also has
been some insistent personal pestering at times.
There are several ways for an interested batch programmer to react
to the situation. Personally, I have tried them all at various
points of time.
1) To go along into the endless bickering about what this newsgroup
is about. The events (actually emanating from MS platform
policies) have shown over time that this option is hopeless.
2) To leave alt.msdos.batch. At least for a spell of time.
3) To ignore most of what the others do and come up with, and to
steadfastly post one's solutions to the questions that happen to
interest your own self.
For the baffled batch newcomer, who might be reading this, my advice
is to read and try all the solutions that seem useful to you. But
take nothing that is claimed here automatically at face value.
Klaus Meinhard
> somewhat exceptional newsgroup given the combination of the really
> high technical expertise by many of the regulars and the constant
> discords that tear up this newsgroup.
Has anybody of those people so concerned with keeping this group on
topic (as narrowly defined by them) ever stopped to think why this is
so?
(MS-) DOS must by now be nearly twenty years old, and nothing really new
has been added to the meagre capabilities of command.com for more than
ten years (not counting LFNs, but this is no Windows group).
This means that this group plays in a really small sand box. I have seen
most of the straight DOS FAQs asked here again and again a dozen years
ago in FIDO, with very similar answers. There are collections of
hundreds and thousands of little (and not so little) utilities written
to overcome the shortcomings of command.com, but still people here
insist on reinventing the wheel for the umpteenth time and write another
one.
In the meantime Windows in it´s various versions (95, 98, ME, ...) and
NT have grabbed the market, and those people that still prefer the
command line have new problems and new tools.
So it is quite natural that many people (regulars, lurkers and OQs)
expect this group to react to these changes, to give answers to
questions that concern the new OSs using tools provided by these new
OSs, especially since all these MS systems have a "MSDOS command line"
and are syntactically very similar.
Still some people (and there aren´t so many, you probably don´t need two
hands to count them) try to stem themselves against these developements
by trying to exclude everything they define as outside the scope of this
group, constantly flooding this group with more or less unfriendly
messages. These people simply are unable to endure and ignore postings
that shouldn´t concern them.
> The underlying cause of that
> discord basically lies in the fact that there are too many
> incompatible agendas about what MS-DOS batches are or should be.
Incompatibility here lies in the eyes of the beholder. Just ignore the
items that don´t interest you. I have every respect for the majority of
people here who love batching, be it as an intellectual challenge or to
provide real live solutions. But I (and I believe I am not alone in
this) get a claustrophobic feeling by the constant attempts to exclude
now this and now that topic. Don´t you see that a) you have no chance to
stop these questions/topics coming in, b) create a counterreaction from
those people that don´t agree with what they feel is a too narrow
definition? The exclusion attempts are really the reason for all this
constant bickering.
> 3) To ignore most of what the others do and come up with, and to
> steadfastly post one's solutions to the questions that happen to
> interest your own self.
Now that is a mature reaction, and if all adopted it the tone in this
group might change for the better. Does anybody really believe that this
group might stray really far off topic, e.g. take up yak herding as it´s
main theme, if some people would stop their selfstyled netcophood?
Think about it.
tom
> [Perhaps there is one intelligent human in this group.] We have been
online since January 7th and from what I have seen in the short time I
have monitored alt.msdos.batch, the group confirms the reputation of
newsgroups in general - they seem to attract the dregs of computing
society and the majority of participants are mentally unbalanced; for
the most part, insecure and narrowminded people on a power trip. Since
we are still busy setting up shop in our new office, I hadn't noticed
your message until now. Since this thread concerns a personal attack
against me, I take the liberty of responding directly in the group.
>
> A shining example of the state of mental health of this group's participants was thoroughly demonstrated on the very first day I contacted
> the group, by a Mr. John Cazale who accused me of being a dead actor, "Ross Martin, actor, 22.03.1920 - 03.07.1981". I thought that fascinating since John Cazale himself died shortly after filming "Deer Hunter" <big grin>.
>
> http://www.blockbuster.com/bb/person/details/0,4487,BIO-P+11919,00.html
> John Cazale
> After studying drama at Oberlin College and Boston
> University, wiry-nosed, melancholy character actor John
> Cazale established himself as one of the off-Broadway
> scene's most intensely fascinating talents. He won Obie
> Awards for his stage performances in The Indian Wants
> the Bronx and The Line. At the invitation of his close
> friend Al Pacino, Cazale tried out for a role in The
> Godfather (1972), landing the part of Fredo Corleone. He
> was subsequently seen in Godfather II (1974) and Dog
> Day Afternoon (1975). Looking far older than his 41
> years, John Cazale made his last appearance in The Deer
> Hunter (1978), which co-starred his then-fiancee Meryl
> Streep; he died of cancer before Deer Hunter was ready
> for release. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
>
> After clicking on the "Deer Hunter" link,
> http://www.blockbuster.com/bb/movie/details/0,7286,VID-V++++13060,00.html
>
> I noticed John Savage (whom I understand also participates in this group) was also in "Deer Hunter".
> http://www.blockbuster.com/bb/person/details/0,7621,BIO-P+63326,00.html
>
> I think Mr. Savage is still alive, or at least he was in 2000.
> http://www.blockbuster.com/bb/movie/details/0,7286,VID-V+++198446,00.html
>
> As there is no "known" actor called William Allen, I don't know which William Allen is participating in this group. I suppose it could be any one of these, but he definitely appears to be dead. Letter E gets my vote.
>
> A. "William Allen died on 15 January 1831 in South Carolina."
> B. "William Allen born in 1675 in Stafford County, Virginia and died in 1741 within the county of his birth."
> C. "William Allen died in 1752."
> D. "William Allen was born in Virginia. Some records states he resided "Claremont," Surry Co. VA. He would have been born about 1720-1725. Nothing more is known about William Allen"
> E. "There is a reference to a William Allen a Cherokee trader named William Allen described in 1797 as being too old to be of service. Who is this William Allen?"
Let's see... the Bitch_Team posted the above all-together-off-topic
bull-kucky under the subject of: (Quote) Please stop posting off-topic
material now! (Unquote)
Who in the hell can you trust now-a-days??
I guess the Bitch_Team doesn't have to adhere to the standards it
promulgates.
tom
> PS.
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22John+Cazale%22
> 4,990 hits
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Ross+Martin%22
> 6,370 hits
>
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22William+Allen%22
> 58,100 hits
DUMMY!!! Didn't "Mr. Outsider" teach you anything? You don't
use Google, you use Ixquick! That is the search engine of
choice for "Mr. Outsider." If you want, I'll dig up the
reference for the message where he extols its virtues. Like
in the above, you only obtained about 69,000 hits; but note
this data: 76 unique top-ten pages selected from at least
1,174,255 matching results.
Now there are some nice numbers.
Enjoy your PMS.
Rik D'haveloose
> Charles Dye <ras...@highfiber.com> wrote:
> > On 4 Feb 2002 20:12:25 +0200, t...@UWasa.Fi (Timo Salmi) wrote:
> > >get the ISPs to carry the newsgroups. In order for a newsgroup to
> > >survive in the long-run, it needs to stay reasonably on-topic even
> > >when there is no mechanism to actually force the issue.
> My posting was meant generic and not about any single individual or
> even any single newsgroup. But it came up here because the issue
> arises in alt.msdos.batch in many forms more often than average and
> because there is a constant, underlying tug of war about what this
> particular newsgroup is about. There are several sides to that coin,
I only add my feeling: the fact that this issue arises more often than
average, should some regulars let think about their behaviour here, and
what is to be considered on-topic, to keep it ALAP annoying.
And yes, personally i mean WA and DRS...
and still second the Batch team's view also.
ALAP: as less as possible
--
KISSTUF Greetings from Rumbeke
Belgium
Ted Davis
>Bitch Team <Bitch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3C5F892D...@yahoo.com>...
>
>> PS.
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22John+Cazale%22
>> 4,990 hits
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Ross+Martin%22
>> 6,370 hits
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22William+Allen%22
>> 58,100 hits
>
>DUMMY!!! Didn't "Mr. Outsider" teach you anything?
Most likely "Batch_Team" *is* Outsider.
Klaus Meinhard
> Most likely "Batch_Team" *is* Outsider.
Now, wouldn´t that be a surprise?!
Once you have Multiple Peronality Disorder, it tends to get worse and
the personalities promulgate. I suspect there are a few more identities
he works under...
BTW, you can easily see when he´s not taking his medication regularly.
Matthias Paul
> Most likely "Batch_Team" *is* Outsider.
I tend to agree on this unless proven otherwise, but Multiple
Personalities should have all rights to post here as well.
By his own explanations names are not important, as we are
all anonymous to each other anyway. What counts is what one
writes, so we should better listen to the words...
I should add, that my impression of him was never much influenced
by his inappropriate use of a handle, but by - guess what -
his words. As in most these cases there was an interesting
coincidence, though... ;-)
Games can be played only on those, who let play (if this translates).
I sometimes wondered if some kind of strange psychological experiment
or social survey was carried out in this group. If you have got the
nerve, it´s probably best to just ignore this kind of noise.
For everyone´s benefit, let´s hope this show is over now, and
the group can be, umm, handled again...
Greetings,
Matthias
--
<mailto:Matthi...@post.rwth-aachen.de>; <mailto:mp...@drdos.org>
http://www.uni-bonn.de/~uzs180/mpdokeng.html; http://mpaul.drdos.org
Todd Vargo
"Klaus Meinhard" <K_Mei...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:a3vuh2$ins$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
> Ted,
>
> > Most likely "Batch_Team" *is* Outsider.
>
> Now, wouldn´t that be a surprise?!
>
> Once you have Multiple Peronality Disorder, it tends to get worse and
> the personalities promulgate. I suspect there are a few more identities
> he works under...
>
> BTW, you can easily see when he´s not taking his medication regularly.
TSK! TSK! You snarfed his meds for recreational use. <g>
Todd Vargo
"tom" <ze...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9c4f0f2c.02020...@posting.google.com...
> Let's see... the Bitch_Team posted the above all-together-off-topic
> bull-kucky under the subject of: (Quote) Please stop posting off-topic
> material now! (Unquote)
>
> Who in the hell can you trust now-a-days??
>
> I guess the Bitch_Team doesn't have to adhere to the standards it
> promulgates.
@ECHO Sadly, we have yet to see anything relevant from your posts.
@TYPE NUL|PAUSE % You can BREAK out of this. %
::
@ECHO (Oops. I meant your team.)
@CTTY NUL % But not this one. %
tom
> Remarkable. This supports my contention that newsgroups attract many
> mentally unbalanced people.
We wondered why you are here. Now we know.
tom
> "tom" <ze...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:9c4f0f2c.02020...@posting.google.com...
>
> > Let's see... the Bitch_Team posted the above all-together-off-topic
> > bull-kucky under the subject of: (Quote) Please stop posting off-topic
> > material now! (Unquote)
> >
> > Who in the hell can you trust now-a-days??
> >
> > I guess the Bitch_Team doesn't have to adhere to the standards it
> > promulgates.
>
> @ECHO Sadly, we have yet to see anything relevant from your posts.
> @TYPE NUL|PAUSE % You can BREAK out of this. %
> ::
> @ECHO (Oops. I meant your team.)
> @CTTY NUL % But not this one. %
Now, now, Toddy; don't ruffle your pleats.
Just look at the above! You really failed to get the subject to agree with
the object. Would you like to try again?
And, make up an excuse for why _YOU_ wrote OT. And don't use a ploy
such as your easily-seen-thru guise. Hell, even I, a mere mortal, can do
better than your feeble efforts:
I recently created a small batchfile (about 750 bytes)
which would invoke a text-search utility. This batchfile
echoed 8 lines to the screen, providing the user with
information concerning its operation. I then copied this
batchfile under a different name and edited it by adding
a switch to include creating a file that would contain
the results of the search. This was the only thing changed.
Now the question: When I would run the original batchfile
it echoed the 8 lines to the screen in discernible steps,
albeit quick steps. But when I would run the _copy_ it
always flashed the 8 lines onto the screen as a single
event, much like as if it was a .Com file.
I repeatedly ran the files and the results were always the
same, as described above. I meticulously examined and
compared the two files and found no differences except for
the added switch.
So what caused the difference in operation of these nearly
identical batchfiles?
To the best of my knowledge, the files were created and run
under DOS 6.22, and not in WIN98. However, it is possible
that the files were created under WIN/DOS, but they would
have been run under both WIN and vanilla DOS.
As an aside, I later again copied the slow, original file to
a temporary name, deleted the original, and renamed the temp
file as the original; I then ran it and it no longer behaved
as the original had!
Thanx, Toddy.
Your batchfile buddy,
zeyep
Batch Team
>
> There are no rules.
>
> NewsGroup. There are therefore no rules and there is no one
> who is authorised nor competent to make any. Repeat, no one.
The suggestion that alt newsgroups have no rules is preposterous.
The basic rule that applies to all newsgroups is that messages
should be on-topic for that group. To exploit the fact that there
is no moderator and continually post off-topic messages is a serious
abuse of this (or any) newsgroup.
> And of course this post is a personal opinion, too.
Mr. Allen is entitled to his own opinions but not his own facts.
> We observe the self-imposed rule
> that material should usually be related to Microsoft software
> (alt.MSdos.batch),
The alt.msdos.batch groups is most certainly not a general help group
for Microsoft software.
> and related to the use of DOS-style
> commands (alt.msDOS.batch), and related to the use of
> Batch files (alt.msdos.BATCH).
Alt.msdos.batch is a DOS group. It is designated for MSDOS batch
files, and not for "DOS-style" anything. See url below.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=EDD9Co.Lzt%40GTS.Net
alt.msdos.batch 0001429 MS-DOS batch files.
> If someone asks an occasional very simple question that's
> only indirectly related to all the above, for example: Why does
> Notepad keep adding .TXT to my batch file scripts when
> I save them? then we may choose to answer those, too,
> if we happen to be on-line at the time. After all, why not help?
That question is not related to DOS batch files. a.m.b. is NOT a general
Microsoft products help group. If the answer is _very simple_, it's fine
to give the answer as long as you direct the OP to group where it and
similar questions are on-topic. Otherwise, let someone else direct the
OP to a proper venue.
> Others also post comparative non-Microsoft solutions, using for
> example, 4DOS or similar products. These posts usefully
> enable people to compare and evaluate the worth of other
> methods against the use of standard Microsoft software
Posts like those metioned above are also off-topic. a.m.b. is not about
"Microsoft standard software", is is about MSDOS batch files. If someone
wants to evaluate another OS or command interpreter, they should be
directed to the proper group. For example, 4DOS questions should be directed
here: news:comp.os.msdos.4dos
Other non DOS batch topics should accordingly be addressed in their
designated groups, for example:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.wsh
WSH (Windows Script Host) and CSCRIPT.EXE
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript
Visual Basic Scripting
> I repeat, there is no one authorised nor competent to "tell"
> you what you may post to alt.msdos.batch. You are the judge.
Again, to exploit the fact that there is no moderator and continually
post off-topic messages is a serious abuse of this newsgroup.
> Read the NewsGroup, decide for _yourself_ who posts useful
> information, who tries to be helpful, and who doesn't. You are
> the only judge that matters. You can read/ignore as you wish.
Again, alt.msdos.batch is most certainly not a general help group
for Microsoft software. How helpful a message may be considered to
be by a reader, is NOT criteria for whether it is on-topic or not.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The idea behind this group was to give a group based on the
comp.os.msdos.batch charter [below] another chance in .alt.
--Dirk van Deun, 29 Nov. 2001, alt.msdos.batch founder.
- general batch questions
- environment problems
- I/O redirection
- ready-to-run solutions
- batch enhancers
- batch tools (short binaries)
- DOSKEY macros
-----------------------------------------------------------
Since This is a DOS newgroup, obviously, the above items apply in
the context of the group name and purpose: MSDOS batch files.
--
Sincerely, Ross Martin
The Batch Team
Todd Vargo
> "Todd Vargo" <todd...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:<a42a0j$1bpl7a$2...@ID-25025.news.dfncis.de>...
> > "tom" <ze...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:9c4f0f2c.02020...@posting.google.com...
> >
> > > Let's see... the Bitch_Team posted the above all-together-off-topic
> > > bull-kucky under the subject of: (Quote) Please stop posting off-topic
> > > material now! (Unquote)
> > >
> > > Who in the hell can you trust now-a-days??
> > >
> > > I guess the Bitch_Team doesn't have to adhere to the standards it
> > > promulgates.
> >
> > @ECHO Sadly, we have yet to see anything relevant from your posts.
> > @TYPE NUL|PAUSE % You can BREAK out of this. %
> > ::
> > @ECHO (Oops. I meant your team.)
> > @CTTY NUL % But not this one. %
>
> Now, now, Toddy; don't ruffle your pleats.
>
> Just look at the above! You really failed to get the subject to agree with
> the object. Would you like to try again?
Nope! That's a pure batch reply. It even contains useful information, if you
both to read between the lines.
>
> And, make up an excuse for why _YOU_ wrote OT. And don't use a ploy
> such as your easily-seen-thru guise. Hell, even I, a mere mortal, can do
> better than your feeble efforts:
>
> I recently created a small batchfile (about 750 bytes)
<sob story snipped>
Without seeing the actual batch code in question, there is no way anyone
could possibly find anything useful from your batch experience. Come to
think of it, why didn't you just post the batch?
Because you might post something on topic for a change?
Because you plagiarized the batch?
Because 750 bytes might flood Usenet?
Because you just made the whole story up (or reworded an old post), in a
feeble attempt at posting something remotely batch related?
Oh, I'm sure it happened the way you say it did.<wink> But sadly, your lack
of proper BATCH/DOS nomenclature indicates (to me) otherwise. If your
question is genuine, show us the _entire_ batch in question, and maybe, just
maybe, someone in the group will take pity, look it over and possibly even
offer you some closure.
Batch Team
>
> There are no rules.
>
> For the record, alt.msdos.batch is an unmoderated alt hierarchy
> NewsGroup. There are therefore no rules and there is no one
> who is authorised nor competent to make any. Repeat, no one.
-- Batch Team:
The suggestion that alt newsgroups have no rules is preposterous.
The basic rule that applies to all newsgroups is that messages
should be on-topic for that group. To exploit the fact that there
is no moderator and continually post off-topic messages is a serious
abuse of this (or any) newsgroup.
William Allen:
> And of course this post is a personal opinion, too.
-- Batch Team:
Mr. Allen is entitled to his own opinions but not his own facts.
William Allen:
> We observe the self-imposed rule
> that material should usually be related to Microsoft software
> (alt.MSdos.batch),
-- Batch Team:
The alt.msdos.batch groups is most certainly not a general help group
for Microsoft software.
William Allen:
> and related to the use of DOS-style
> commands (alt.msDOS.batch), and related to the use of
> Batch files (alt.msdos.BATCH).
-- Batch Team:
Alt.msdos.batch is a DOS group. It is designated for MSDOS batch
files, and not for "DOS-style" anything. See url below.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=EDD9Co.Lzt%40GTS.Net
alt.msdos.batch 0001429 MS-DOS batch files.
William Allen:
> If someone asks an occasional very simple question that's
> only indirectly related to all the above, for example: Why does
> Notepad keep adding .TXT to my batch file scripts when
> I save them? then we may choose to answer those, too,
> if we happen to be on-line at the time. After all, why not help?
-- Batch Team:
That question is not related to DOS batch files. a.m.b. is NOT a general
Microsoft products help group. If the answer is _very simple_, it's fine
to give the answer as long as you direct the OP to group where it and
similar questions are on-topic. Otherwise, let someone else direct the
OP to a proper venue.
William Allen:
> Others also post comparative non-Microsoft solutions, using for
> example, 4DOS or similar products. These posts usefully
> enable people to compare and evaluate the worth of other
> methods against the use of standard Microsoft software
-- Batch Team:
Posts like those metioned above are also off-topic. a.m.b. is not about
"Microsoft standard software", is is about MSDOS batch files. If someone
wants to evaluate another OS or command interpreter, they should be
directed to the proper group. For example, 4DOS questions should be directed
here: news:comp.os.msdos.4dos
Other non DOS batch topics should accordingly be addressed in their
designated groups, for example:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.wsh
WSH (Windows Script Host) and CSCRIPT.EXE
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.scripting.vbscript
Visual Basic Scripting
William Allen:
> I repeat, there is no one authorised nor competent to "tell"
> you what you may post to alt.msdos.batch. You are the judge.
-- Batch Team:
Again, to exploit the fact that there is no moderator and continually
post off-topic messages is a serious abuse of this newsgroup.
William Allen:
> Read the NewsGroup, decide for _yourself_ who posts useful
> information, who tries to be helpful, and who doesn't. You are
> the only judge that matters. You can read/ignore as you wish.
-- Batch Team:
Again, alt.msdos.batch is most certainly not a general help group
for Microsoft software. How helpful a message may be considered to
be by a reader, is NOT criteria for whether it is on-topic or not.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The idea behind this group was to give a group based on the
comp.os.msdos.batch charter [below] another chance in .alt.
--Dirk van Deun, 29 Nov. 2001, alt.msdos.batch founder.
- general batch questions
- environment problems
- I/O redirection
- ready-to-run solutions
- batch enhancers
- batch tools (short binaries)
- DOSKEY macros
-----------------------------------------------------------
Since This is a DOS newgroup, obviously, the above items apply in
the context of the group name and purpose: MSDOS batch files.
--
The Batch Team
# From hw4...@vub.ac.be Tue Jul 18 04:47:32 1995
# Path: uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!Belgium.EU.net!
chaos.kulnet.kuleuven.ac.be!news.vub.ac.be!is1e!hw41652
# From: hw4...@vub.ac.be (Van Deun Dirk)
# Newsgroups: alt.config
# Subject: cmsg newgroup alt.msdos.batch
# Control: newgroup alt.msdos.batch
# Date: 18 Jul 1995 08:32:21 GMT
# Organization: Brussels Free Universities (VUB/ULB), Belgium
# Lines: 9
# Approved: hw4...@is1.vub.ac.be
# Message-ID: <3ufril$h...@rc1.vub.ac.be>
# NNTP-Posting-Host: is1e.bfu.vub.ac.be.
# X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
# Xref: uunet control:2279332
#
# This group was proposed on alt.config as an ersatz for
# comp.os.msdos.batch, which failed with just a few votes short.
# There were no comments on my proposal. As so many people had
# already voted yes on comp.os.msdos.batch, I am now creating it.
#
# Dirk van Deun.
#
# For your newsgroups file:
# alt.msdos.batch MS-DOS batch files
Batch Team
Batch Team
Larry Rohring
first place.
Rik D'haveloose
Because there are people who seem not able to grasp the usenet
etiquette, or have difficulty with social behaviour (or do very little
thinking).
Sorry, do not consider that as some 'insult', it's only my personal
view, and what my mind and reasoning is able to. If you consider that
being off-topic is not serious, then i wonder why there is need for that
many NG's ....
--
TUF Greetings from Rumbeke
Belgium
a.m.b. Batch Team
Dr John Stockton
news:alt.msdos.batch, a.m.b. Batch Team <Batch...@yahoo.com> wrote at
Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:57:54 :-
>To exploit the fact that there
>is no moderator and continually post off-topic messages is a serious
>abuse of this (or any) newsgroup.
As is the frequent repetitive posting of any material without the
express consent of the users of the newsgroup expressed in the
newsgroup. You are no better than Outsider.
--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. j...@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
I find MiniTrue useful for viewing/searching/altering files, at a DOS prompt;
free, DOS/UNIX, from <URL:http://www.pagesz.net/~minitrue/> & Garbo fileutil
Clay Calvert
<sp...@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>JRS: In article <3CA41072...@yahoo.com>, seen in
>news:alt.msdos.batch, a.m.b. Batch Team <Batch...@yahoo.com> wrote at
>Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:57:54 :-
>>To exploit the fact that there
>>is no moderator and continually post off-topic messages is a serious
>>abuse of this (or any) newsgroup.
>
>As is the frequent repetitive posting of any material without the
>express consent of the users of the newsgroup expressed in the
>newsgroup. You are no better than Outsider.
It isn't surprising that the "name" of this poster has changed again,
especially after the discussion last week on filtering.
Clay Calvert
Replace "W" with "L" in email.
Rik D'haveloose
> Dr John Stockton wrote:
> > a.m.b. Batch Team wrote
> >>To exploit the fact that there
> >>is no moderator and continually post off-topic messages is a serious
> >>abuse of this (or any) newsgroup.
> >
> >As is the frequent repetitive posting of any material without the
> >express consent of the users of the newsgroup expressed in the
> >newsgroup. You are no better than Outsider.
Why must there be any express consent in an .alt group (for any message)
??
IMHO, any repetitive posting is indeed to avoid, but why do you make
distinction, as there are more repetitive postings here (depending on
how one interprets repetetive; repeating the same technique (for other
details) may also be considered repetitive).
And why do you oppose to posting some 'facts' or 'arguments', so that
anyone can decide what he does and follow (or not) what is suggested ?
Sorry, who is better ??
> It isn't surprising that the "name" of this poster has changed again,
> especially after the discussion last week on filtering.
Filtering is a (imho imperfect) technique for personal comfort, and can
be circumvented indeed. Any problem with that ? Just invent some
'perfect' technique which cannot be circumvented then. IMEVHO, filtering
is bad for public forums, as it ignores some info, and may induce
unneeded dupicate reply's ? And it is imperfect replacement for
'ignoring'....
YM2C
Clay Calvert
<brol.d...@xs4all.be> wrote:
>Why must there be any express consent in an .alt group (for any message)
>??
>IMHO, any repetitive posting is indeed to avoid, but why do you make
>distinction, as there are more repetitive postings here (depending on
>how one interprets repetetive; repeating the same technique (for other
>details) may also be considered repetitive).
>And why do you oppose to posting some 'facts' or 'arguments', so that
>anyone can decide what he does and follow (or not) what is suggested ?
Not all of what is posted are facts.
>> It isn't surprising that the "name" of this poster has changed again,
>> especially after the discussion last week on filtering.
>
>Filtering is a (imho imperfect) technique for personal comfort, and can
>be circumvented indeed. Any problem with that ? Just invent some
>'perfect' technique which cannot be circumvented then. IMEVHO, filtering
>is bad for public forums, as it ignores some info, and may induce
>unneeded dupicate reply's ? And it is imperfect replacement for
>'ignoring'....
It would be quite easy to filter out a poster, if that poster did not
keep changing the name. A repeated post would be easy to filter if
the subject stayed the same.
Llanaderyn
posted in a Newsgroup? Unless you have strict enforcement of a set of rules,
which would not make this a forum in which ideas are freely shared ... between
adults. I personally only read those messages which pertain to my interests and
mark the rest of them as Read, so I don't see them.
Vic
a.m.b. Batch Team
>
> There are no rules.
>
> For the record, alt.msdos.batch is an unmoderated alt hierarchy
> NewsGroup. There are therefore no rules and there is no one
> who is authorised nor competent to make any. Repeat, no one.
-- Batch Team:
The suggestion that alt newsgroups have no rules is preposterous.
The basic rule that applies to all newsgroups is that messages
should be on-topic for that group. To exploit the fact that there
is no moderator and continually post off-topic messages is a serious
abuse of this (or any) newsgroup.