Re: IE8
![PA Bear [MS MVP]'s profile photo](http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a-/ALV-UjXsf05hH-R8XChS3fXPPzfoO8FYYxAKhT86KfPnIELr3QJ9tQ=s40-c)
PA Bear [MS MVP]
Tell us more, please:
What happened when you tried to send/receive with IE8 installed?
What anti-virus application or security suite is installed and is your
subscription current? What anti-spyware applications (other than Defender)?
What third-party firewall (if any)? Were any of these applications running
in the background when you installed or uninstalled IE8?
Has a Norton or McAfee application ever been installed on this machine
(e.g., a free-trial version that came preinstalled when you bought it)?
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-IE, Mail, Security, Windows Client - since 2002
nutkiller wrote:
> I installed IE8 on my XP PC and Outlook Express would not work. I couldn't
> send or recieve mail. So I uninstalled it and everything went back to
> normal
> with IE7. I wont upgrade to IE8 until it works right, probly never!
VanguardLH
> [x-post to OE General & IE General]
>
> Tell us more, please:
>
> What happened when you tried to send/receive with IE8 installed?
>
> What anti-virus application or security suite is installed and is your
> subscription current? What anti-spyware applications (other than Defender)?
> What third-party firewall (if any)? Were any of these applications running
> in the background when you installed or uninstalled IE8?
>
> Has a Norton or McAfee application ever been installed on this machine
> (e.g., a free-trial version that came preinstalled when you bought it)?
Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing discussion
to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups not originally
specified by the OP (original poster). This can mislead the OP or
others to believe PA Bear's pretense of a moderator or admin. There may
be more replies under the original post than just those shown under the
subthread for PA Bear's reply. If the OP and others wish to see ALL
replies then they must visit the original group to view the other
subthreads that are NOT under PA Bear's reply.
If the OP wishes to move or copy their discussion to another group, that
should be THEIR choice and not something forced by another *user*. PA
Bear is not a moderator or admin but just just another user. He thinks
he should force the OP to move or copy their thread to different
group(s) that he has divined as more appropriate. If the OP wants to
move or copy their discussion to another group, that should be THEIR
choice, not PA Bear's. PA Bear should only recommend to the OP that
there may be a more proper or useful group to which the OP should repost
or cross-post their message. He should only suggest the move, not try
to enforce it.
PA Bear [MS MVP]
the crosspost if he so wishes.
PS: <bite me>
PPS: IE8 is no longer in beta!
[You lasted all of 24 hours as a non-plonked participant here. I won't make
that mistake again. <re-plonk>]
--
~PA�
~BD~
A good post VanguardLH :))
Readers should also be aware that although PABear has great knowledge
about 'computing' matters, he has told lies - not someone to be trusted
in my opinion.
--
Dave
"VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:h2os83$eij$1...@news.albasani.net...
Peter Foldes
--
Peter
Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
~BD~
be trusted (again, in my opinion)
He knows much about computing - but that does *not* mean that he's one
of the good guys!
Beware of anything posted by Peter Foldes - especially any links.
--
Dave
"Peter Foldes" <ok...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eycE5tT$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
~BD~
> news:eycE5tT$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> ID Ten T
>>
>> --
>> Peter
>>
>> Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
>> Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be
>> acknowledged.
>>
Peter Foldes recently posted a similar item on the Annexcafe U2U
computer help newsgroup, but his message Header info was rather
different then, viz:-
Subject: OT:Narrow or LongBoat
From: "Peter Foldes" <shan...@Dfoldes.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:43:32 -0400
Message-ID: <12459770...@pegasus.annex.net>
Bytes: 547
Lines: 6
NNTP-Posting-Host: 74.57.253.90
Path: pegasus.annex.net!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: annexcafe.general.user2user
X-Authenticated-User: Derek
X-Trace: pegasus.annex.net 1245977006 74.57.253.90 (25 Jun 2009
19:43:26 -0500)
Reply-to: "Peter Foldes" <bounce@bounce>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.3959
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.4325
Xref: pegasus.annex.net annexcafe.general.user2user:262643
Still an ID Ten T
--
Peter
***********************************
I have no trust in inconsistencies!
HTH
--
Dave
Twayne
news:OWTHRoT$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
> A good post VanguardLH :))
>
> Readers should also be aware that although PABear has great knowledge
> about 'computing' matters, he has told lies - not someone to be
> trusted in my opinion.
>
I almost agree with you, except that he has not posted any "lies" that
I've noticed.
Twayne
Twayne
should know better. In at least one instance I've seen you do that when
the OP had already asked in the "better" group and received no
assistance there; and you put his post right back to the same group.
It's not your decision to decide which groups are crossed.
Suggestions are fine; creating another's crossposts is not.
Twayne
"PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%231Ej5uQ$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl
> I crossposted in an attempt to assist the OP, who may choose to
> discontinue the crosspost if he so wishes.
>
> PS: <bite me>
>
> PPS: IE8 is no longer in beta!
>
> [You lasted all of 24 hours as a non-plonked participant here. I
> won't make that mistake again. <re-plonk>]
>
Twayne
> Ah! Another frequent poster here on the Microsoft groups who should
> not be trusted (again, in my opinion)
>
> He knows much about computing - but that does *not* mean that he's one
> of the good guys!
>
> Beware of anything posted by Peter Foldes - especially any links.
Funny ... I recall good posts from all the ones mentioned so far ... but
none from you. My opinion is quite different from yours.
Twayne
Twayne
You must be reaching the bottom of the barrel ... perhaps it's the
BETA-ware you're running.
James Silverton
> He knows much about computing - but that does *not* mean that he's one
> of the good guys!
> Beware of anything posted by Peter Foldes - especially any
> links. --
> Dave
PA Bear has contributed more useful information to m.p.oe.general than
anyone I know! I don't always agree completely but I am willing to give
him the benefit of the doubt for *any* of his posts.
Keep up the good work, PA Bear!
--
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>
>> [x-post to OE General & IE General]
>>
>> Tell us more, please:
>>
>> What happened when you tried to send/receive with IE8 installed?
>>
>> What anti-virus application or security suite is installed and is
>> your subscription current? What anti-spyware applications (other
>> than Defender)? What third-party firewall (if any)? Were any of
>> these applications running in the background when you installed or
>> uninstalled IE8?
>>
>> Has a Norton or McAfee application ever been installed on this
>> machine (e.g., a free-trial version that came preinstalled when you
>> bought it)?
>
> Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
>
> This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing
> discussion to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups not
> originally specified by the OP (original poster).
Would you like to cite a source for this piece of misinformation?
> This can mislead
> the OP or others to believe PA Bear's pretense of a moderator or
> admin.
By making up random rules, you appear to be doing a bit of moderating
yourself.
> There may be more replies under the original post than just
> those shown under the subthread for PA Bear's reply. If the OP and
> others wish to see ALL replies then they must visit the original
> group to view the other subthreads that are NOT under PA Bear's reply.
>
> If the OP wishes to move or copy their discussion to another group,
> that should be THEIR choice and not something forced by another
> *user*. PA Bear is not a moderator or admin but just just another
> user. He thinks he should force the OP to move or copy their thread
> to different group(s) that he has divined as more appropriate. If
> the OP wants to move or copy their discussion to another group, that
> should be THEIR choice, not PA Bear's. PA Bear should only recommend
> to the OP that there may be a more proper or useful group to which
> the OP should repost or cross-post their message. He should only
> suggest the move, not try to enforce it.
He crossposted appropriately to get the OP additional assistance.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
--
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
Message-ID: gng3nb$j6i$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
"BTW: Lionel was no "kookologist". If you knew what you were talking
about, you'd know that."
Message-ID: glgh70$g12$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com
"Lionel laurer will be a real kookologist the day after the Sun
explodes."
Robert Aldwinckle
"Twayne" <nob...@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message news:%230VEqMX$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Your "assistance" was misguided. Since you're not new to newsgroups, you
> should know better.
> In at least one instance I've seen you do that when
> the OP had already asked in the "better" group and received no
> assistance there; and you put his post right back to the same group.
All the more reason to cross-post then, especially if the Subject is identical,
which it often is, since then at least all discussion on that topic may be grouped together
in both newsgroups for users of MS newsreaders (OE, WinMail, and WLMail).
> It's not your decision to decide which groups are crossed.
?
> Suggestions are fine; creating another's crossposts is not.
Even if it doesn't attract comments from other responders in the more appropriate
newsgroup, it can provide relevant information for new readers to find, one of the
main purposes of providing content for newsgroups. Besides that it makes responders
who read in both newsgroups more aware that a multi-post has been done, without
anybody having to figure out which came first.
FYI
Robert Aldwinckle
---
PA Bear [MS MVP]
James Silverton wrote:
> ~BD~ wrote on Sun, 5 Jul 2009 07:56:53 +0100:
>
>> He knows much about computing - but that does *not* mean that he's one
>> of the good guys!
>
>> Beware of anything posted by Peter Foldes - especially any
>> links.
>
> anyone I know! I don't always agree completely but I am willing to give
> him the benefit of the doubt for *any* of his posts.
>
> Keep up the good work, PA Bear!
Thanks & please don't feed the trolls, especially /that/ troll (who's been
banned from numerous user-forums and ISPs yet continues to grind his
psychotic axe).
PS: Ignore Twayne, too.
~BD~
> "~BD~" <Boate...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:OWTHRoT$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
>> A good post VanguardLH :))
>>
>> Readers should also be aware that although PABear has great knowledge
>> about 'computing' matters, he has told lies - not someone to be
>> trusted in my opinion.
>>
>
> I almost agree with you, except that he has not posted any "lies" that
> I've noticed.
>
> Twayne
>
This very day, PABear said:-
"PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYnzRdY$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> Thanks & please don't feed the trolls, especially /that/ troll (who's
> been banned from numerous user-forums and ISPs yet continues to grind
> his psychotic axe).
> PS: Ignore Twayne, too.
>
For the record - I HAVE NEVER BEEN BANNED BY ANY ISP - *EVER*
PABear frequents (well, runs!) www.aumha.net and I confirm that I *have*
been banned from posting there - *why* is not known!
I was also banned from posting on the Annexcafe newsgroups - to which I
was once enticed by Peter Foldes. I'm quite certain all is not as it
seems on the surface on the computer help site there - User2User. Proof
is another matter though! :(
However, the truth *will* out!
--
Dave
IMO two groups is not 'numerous'!
VanguardLH
> "Twayne" ...
>>
>> "PA Bear" wrote:
>>>
>>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>>
>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [x-post to OE General & IE General] <snip Bear's reply>
>>>>
>>>> Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
>>>>
>>>> This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing
>>>> discussion to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups
>>>> not originally specified by the OP (original poster). ...
>>>
>>> I crossposted in an attempt to assist the OP, who may choose to
>>> discontinue the crosspost if he so wishes.
>>>
>>> PS: <bite me> PPS: IE8 is no longer in beta! <snip - useless plonk
>>> threat>
>>
>> Your "assistance" was misguided. Since you're not new to newsgroups,
>> you should know better.
>>
>> In at least one instance I've seen you do that when the OP had
>> already asked in the "better" group and received no assistance
>> there; and you put his post right back to the same group.
>>
>> It's not your decision to decide which groups are crossed.
>> Suggestions are fine; creating another's crossposts is not.
>
> All the more reason to cross-post then, especially if the Subject is
> identical, which it often is, since then at least all discussion on
> that topic may be grouped together in both newsgroups for users of
> MS newsreaders (OE, WinMail, and WLMail).
>
> Even if it doesn't attract comments from other responders in the more
> appropriate newsgroup, it can provide relevant information for new
> readers to find, one of the main purposes of providing content for
> newsgroups. Besides that it makes responders who read in both
> newsgroups more aware that a multi-post has been done, without
> anybody having to figure out which came first.
Oh, so you're saying that ANYONE can now become a moderator of sorts by
moving around discussions wherever *they* feel is more appropriate and
to newsgroups of THEIR choice? This is not a forum. It is Usenet
(despite Microsoft's attempt to pretend they have forums by providing a
webnews-for-dummies gateway to Usenet). It is also not a moderated
group. PA Bear nor anyone else here is a moderator.
The problem with the UNSOLICITED cross-posting is that the OP and
others may actually only visit the *other* groups to which PA Bear
cross-posted. They may not take separate action to go visit the
ORIGINAL group to see if there are further replies there (i.e., that
are *not* under PA Bear's cross-posted subthread). PA Bear is
declaring himself an admin or moderator in moving around the discussion
based on his perception of what would constitute a better group in
which to continue the discussion. And if his choice is wrong, huh?
What about when the problem may actually be back in the product for the
original newsgroup and NOT in the product where the symptom was
exhibited or reported?
Moving around discussions isn't just netcoppish, arrogant, or
misguided. It is trollish. That PA Bear can do it doesn't mean it is
proper. Suggesting someone to move over is a hell of a lot different
than shoving them over.
Side note: If PA Bear were truly concerned about helping rather than
wielding his moderator-wannabe wand of power, he would have long ago
realized that signatures always go at the bottom of a reply. There is
only the start-of- signature delimiter (sigdash line). There is no
end-of-signature delimiter so EVERYTHING after the sigdash becomes your
signature!
VanguardLH
> VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>
>>> [x-post to OE General & IE General]
>>>
>>> Tell us more, please:
>>>
>>> What happened when you tried to send/receive with IE8 installed?
>>>
>>> What anti-virus application or security suite is installed and is
>>> your subscription current? What anti-spyware applications (other
>>> than Defender)? What third-party firewall (if any)? Were any of
>>> these applications running in the background when you installed or
>>> uninstalled IE8?
>>>
>>> Has a Norton or McAfee application ever been installed on this
>>> machine (e.g., a free-trial version that came preinstalled when you
>>> bought it)?
>>
>> Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
>>
>> This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing
>> discussion to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups not
>> originally specified by the OP (original poster).
>
> Would you like to cite a source for this piece of misinformation?
Go look at the Newsgroups header in the *original* post in the
*original* group. The OP did *not* cross-post. That was PA Bear's
action.
>> This can mislead
>> the OP or others to believe PA Bear's pretense of a moderator or
>> admin.
>
> By making up random rules, you appear to be doing a bit of moderating
> yourself.
As explained in my next paragraph. If this were such a pervasive de
facto standard then why is it PA Bear is amongst a rare few *users*
committing this "helpful" action?
>> There may be more replies under the original post than just
>> those shown under the subthread for PA Bear's reply. If the OP and
>> others wish to see ALL replies then they must visit the original
>> group to view the other subthreads that are NOT under PA Bear's reply.
>>
>> If the OP wishes to move or copy their discussion to another group,
>> that should be THEIR choice and not something forced by another
>> *user*. PA Bear is not a moderator or admin but just just another
>> user. He thinks he should force the OP to move or copy their thread
>> to different group(s) that he has divined as more appropriate. If
>> the OP wants to move or copy their discussion to another group, that
>> should be THEIR choice, not PA Bear's. PA Bear should only recommend
>> to the OP that there may be a more proper or useful group to which
>> the OP should repost or cross-post their message. He should only
>> suggest the move, not try to enforce it.
>
> He crossposted appropriately to get the OP additional assistance.
>
> There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Then he suggests to the OP of the more appropriate group (which is
obviously his opinion, not a guarantee). You ask someone to move. You
don't shove them over.
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
> Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>
>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>
>>>> [x-post to OE General & IE General]
>>>>
>>>> Tell us more, please:
>>>>
>>>> What happened when you tried to send/receive with IE8 installed?
>>>>
>>>> What anti-virus application or security suite is installed and is
>>>> your subscription current? What anti-spyware applications (other
>>>> than Defender)? What third-party firewall (if any)? Were any of
>>>> these applications running in the background when you installed or
>>>> uninstalled IE8?
>>>>
>>>> Has a Norton or McAfee application ever been installed on this
>>>> machine (e.g., a free-trial version that came preinstalled when you
>>>> bought it)?
>>>
>>> Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
>>>
>>> This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing
>>> discussion to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups not
>>> originally specified by the OP (original poster).
>>
>> Would you like to cite a source for this piece of misinformation?
>
> Go look at the Newsgroups header in the *original* post in the
> *original* group. The OP did *not* cross-post. That was PA Bear's
> action.
And there was absolutely nothing wrong in his action.
It's not like he was doing auk-style crossposting. He posted into
appropriate groups so that people who might be able to answer the question
would see it.
I challenge you to document your contention that this is wrong.
>>> This can mislead
>>> the OP or others to believe PA Bear's pretense of a moderator or
>>> admin.
>>
>> By making up random rules, you appear to be doing a bit of moderating
>> yourself.
>
> As explained in my next paragraph. If this were such a pervasive de
> facto standard
Whoops! How did "de facto standard" get in there?
All PA Bear did was to bring the original query to the attention of those
who might be able to answer it. You're the one who made up a rule that his
crossposting of someone else's query is wrong.
The burden is on you to prove he did something wrong, and I don't think you
can do that.
> then why is it PA Bear is amongst a rare few *users*
> committing this "helpful" action?
I've done it. I've known a lot of other people who have done it. It can be
very useful when someone has posted into the wrong group or when the
crossposter knows there is someone elsewhere who is well-equipped to answer
the question.
>>> There may be more replies under the original post than just
>>> those shown under the subthread for PA Bear's reply. If the OP and
>>> others wish to see ALL replies then they must visit the original
>>> group to view the other subthreads that are NOT under PA Bear's
>>> reply.
>>>
>>> If the OP wishes to move or copy their discussion to another group,
>>> that should be THEIR choice and not something forced by another
>>> *user*. PA Bear is not a moderator or admin but just just another
>>> user. He thinks he should force the OP to move or copy their thread
>>> to different group(s) that he has divined as more appropriate. If
>>> the OP wants to move or copy their discussion to another group, that
>>> should be THEIR choice, not PA Bear's. PA Bear should only
>>> recommend to the OP that there may be a more proper or useful group
>>> to which the OP should repost or cross-post their message. He
>>> should only suggest the move, not try to enforce it.
>>
>> He crossposted appropriately to get the OP additional assistance.
>>
>> There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
>
> Then he suggests to the OP of the more appropriate group (which is
> obviously his opinion, not a guarantee). You ask someone to move.
> You don't shove them over.
This is your unstudied opinion, not a law of usenet netiquette.
Twayne
> "Twayne" <nob...@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:%236p7ONX$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> "~BD~" <Boate...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:OWTHRoT$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
>>> A good post VanguardLH :))
>>>
>>> Readers should also be aware that although PABear has great
>>> knowledge about 'computing' matters, he has told lies - not someone
>>> to be trusted in my opinion.
>>>
>>
>> I almost agree with you, except that he has not posted any "lies"
>> that I've noticed.
>>
>> Twayne
>>
>
> This very day, PABear said:-
>
> "PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:OYnzRdY$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>> Thanks & please don't feed the trolls, especially /that/ troll (who's
>> been banned from numerous user-forums and ISPs yet continues to grind
>> his psychotic axe).
>> PS: Ignore Twayne, too.
>>
>
> For the record - I HAVE NEVER BEEN BANNED BY ANY ISP - *EVER*
You have to excuse PaBearmsmvp extra-ordinaire; he has an ego the size
of Texas and posts good stuff when his biolerplate will suffice but
anyone that disagrees with him or calls him on any mistake or error on
judgement tends to make him flop around like a fish on drydock. You
"shall" agree with his every whim, see, so there's no way he did
anything wrong by deciding whose posts should be crossposted to where.
After all, he's a supposed MVP regardless of his actions and infractions
thereof.
>
> PABear frequents (well, runs!) www.aumha.net and I confirm that I
> *have* been banned from posting there - *why* is not known!
And isn't likely to be. He and three others like to write tripe there
and then refer to it as though it were biblical in origin. He doesn't
like it when I mention that very few people outside his um,huh "friends"
ever heard of the site so he advertises it as much as he can, along with
his friends. There was a day when it was a great place to go, but ...
no more. You can't trust it anymore for accuracy or credibility in some
areas.
>
> I was also banned from posting on the Annexcafe newsgroups - to which
> I was once enticed by Peter Foldes. I'm quite certain all is not as it
> seems on the surface on the computer help site there - User2User.
> Proof is another matter though! :(
I'm surprised Peter would do anything like that. And all in all, I
haven't seen you post enough to know whether you're accurate & credible,
so have no opinion on that side of things either way. I pay little
attention to names unless they're ultra-credible folk I'm happy to know
or misinformationists that need hand holding and exposure to the
newbies.
Mostly it's just a case of ignoring it unless you have the time to send
a few jabs at them when they do things that aren't right or make silly
claims that just aren't true. There's lots of both from that one little
tribe.
>
> However, the truth *will* out!
Not that it matters a whit.
Cheers,
Twayne
Twayne
news:uC8gC5X$JHA...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl
> In news:h2os83$eij$1...@news.albasani.net,
> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>
>>> [x-post to OE General & IE General]
>>>
>>> Tell us more, please:
>>>
>>> What happened when you tried to send/receive with IE8 installed?
>>>
>>> What anti-virus application or security suite is installed and is
>>> your subscription current? What anti-spyware applications (other
>>> than Defender)? What third-party firewall (if any)? Were any of
>>> these applications running in the background when you installed or
>>> uninstalled IE8?
>>>
>>> Has a Norton or McAfee application ever been installed on this
>>> machine (e.g., a free-trial version that came preinstalled when you
>>> bought it)?
>>
>> Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
>>
>> This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing
>> discussion to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups not
>> originally specified by the OP (original poster).
>
> Would you like to cite a source for this piece of misinformation?
Probably not worth his effort; same with me but I do recall the relevent
numbers. And dollars to donuts, as smart as you claim to be, you already
know anyway.
>
>> This can mislead
>> the OP or others to believe PA Bear's pretense of a moderator or
>> admin.
>
> By making up random rules, you appear to be doing a bit of moderating
> yourself.
Those aren't "random rules" and where the plural comes from, I don't
know. He only mentioned one.
>
>> There may be more replies under the original post than just
>> those shown under the subthread for PA Bear's reply. If the OP and
>> others wish to see ALL replies then they must visit the original
>> group to view the other subthreads that are NOT under PA Bear's
>> reply. If the OP wishes to move or copy their discussion to another
>> group,
>> that should be THEIR choice and not something forced by another
>> *user*. PA Bear is not a moderator or admin but just just another
>> user. He thinks he should force the OP to move or copy their thread
>> to different group(s) that he has divined as more appropriate. If
>> the OP wants to move or copy their discussion to another group, that
>> should be THEIR choice, not PA Bear's. PA Bear should only recommend
>> to the OP that there may be a more proper or useful group to which
>> the OP should repost or cross-post their message. He should only
>> suggest the move, not try to enforce it.
>
> He crossposted appropriately to get the OP additional assistance.
That was completely inapproptiate. A suggestion to do so, with some
backup reasoning would have been OK, but he had no business doing it on
his own, which he's done numerous times before. Let's say I think this
thread was relevent to a Warez post I read recently: Should I just go
ahead and cross-post it there?
>
> There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Yes, there is. How do you know it didn't just create a set of questions
that had already been exhausted on that group? Making it repeat
information? How do you know he hadn't left because of a troll on that
group yet you put him right back there. Was the question asked? Was the
any benefit derived from the cross? I can think of three more relevent
places it could be crossed to; guess I'll just go ahead and add the
cross-post now, OK? Then when I think of a couple more I'll add those,
too. Maroon is your color.
Twayne
Which IMO comes dangerously close to spamming from some of the things he
said.
Twayne
You need to do some research and actually learn what's what.
Twayne
news:O8oh37X$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl
The other side of that big coin is that it was probably a vague question
to many readers too. It's the poster who needs to decide the most
relevant group/s to post to.
D.
my inquiries most helpful .
at least he tries to provide assistance , which
is MORE than most of his critics do !
what a witchhunt !
D.
"PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23fn3dIO$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
Got an RFC for that?
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
What do "relevant numbers" and doughnuts have to do with your inability to
cite the source for the rule he obviously invented on the fly?
>>> This can mislead
>>> the OP or others to believe PA Bear's pretense of a moderator or
>>> admin.
>>
>> By making up random rules, you appear to be doing a bit of moderating
>> yourself.
>
> Those aren't "random rules" and where the plural comes from, I don't
> know. He only mentioned one.
I suppose you also do grammar lames.
>>> There may be more replies under the original post than just
>>> those shown under the subthread for PA Bear's reply. If the OP and
>>> others wish to see ALL replies then they must visit the original
>>> group to view the other subthreads that are NOT under PA Bear's
>>> reply. If the OP wishes to move or copy their discussion to another
>>> group,
>>> that should be THEIR choice and not something forced by another
>>> *user*. PA Bear is not a moderator or admin but just just another
>>> user. He thinks he should force the OP to move or copy their thread
>>> to different group(s) that he has divined as more appropriate. If
>>> the OP wants to move or copy their discussion to another group, that
>>> should be THEIR choice, not PA Bear's. PA Bear should only
>>> recommend to the OP that there may be a more proper or useful group
>>> to which the OP should repost or cross-post their message. He
>>> should only suggest the move, not try to enforce it.
>>
>> He crossposted appropriately to get the OP additional assistance.
>
> That was completely inapproptiate. A suggestion to do so, with some
> backup reasoning would have been OK, but he had no business doing it
> on his own, which he's done numerous times before. Let's say I think
> this thread was relevent to a Warez post I read recently: Should I
> just go ahead and cross-post it there?
Your take on how things are supposed to be does not constitute a natural
law.
When you can show me a cite, preferably from an RFC, get back to me.
Better yet, since this is actually a private hierarchy, why don't you talk
to the server administrator and see if he agrees with you. The rules in the
Microsoft groups are not the same as the rules in usenet, so that would be a
better way to go.
>> There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
>
> Yes, there is. How do you know it didn't just create a set of
> questions that had already been exhausted on that group? Making it
> repeat information? How do you know he hadn't left because of a troll
> on that group yet you put him right back there. Was the question
> asked? Was the any benefit derived from the cross? I can think of
> three more relevent places it could be crossed to; guess I'll just go
> ahead and add the cross-post now, OK? Then when I think of a couple
> more I'll add those, too. Maroon is your color.
I am cut to the quick.
~BD~
You may pop on over to 'microsoft.public.test.here' if you wish to
follow dialogue between me and Peter Foldes!
Have a great day!
--
Dave
VanguardLH
> VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>> Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries wrote:
>>
>>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>>
>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [x-post to OE General & IE General]
>>>>
>>>> Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
>>>>
>>>> This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing
>>>> discussion to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups not
>>>> originally specified by the OP (original poster).
>>>
>>> Would you like to cite a source for this piece of misinformation?
>>
>> Go look at the Newsgroups header in the *original* post in the
>> *original* group. The OP did *not* cross-post. That was PA Bear's
>> action.
>
> And there was absolutely nothing wrong in his action.
And you're back to your prior argument which was already addressed in my
prior reply to it. Getting circular, Rhonda.
> It's not like he was doing auk-style crossposting. He posted into
> appropriate groups so that people who might be able to answer the question
> would see it.
>
> I challenge you to document your contention that this is wrong.
Until a solution is proposed which actually resolves the OP's problem,
there is no guarantee that the newly cross-posted group(s) is any more
appropriate than the original group(s).
What, you have NEVER seen someone complain about a problem in one
program which was merely a symptom and the actual cause was in a
different program (and which might've been proper for the original
group)?
Since there is no surity that PA Bear's advice in suggesting a course of
action in troubleshooting a problem (with whatever little info was
provided by the OP) until the OP finds out if that advice was correct,
there is also no surity that PA Bear picked the correct group.
If you asked a coworker for help, which would you prefer: have them tell
you where to find help, or have them hike you over their shoulder and
carry you there? One is polite. The other is not.
~BD~
Why do you lie about this PABear?
Just curious!
--
Dave
"PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:OYnzRdY$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Leonard Grey
ruin it for me, you pompous curmudgeon. <plonk>
---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est
Robert Aldwinckle
"VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message news:h2qu1j$61s$1...@news.albasani.net...
> Robert Aldwinckle wrote:
>> All the more reason to cross-post then, especially if the Subject is
>> identical, which it often is, since then at least all discussion on
>> that topic may be grouped together in both newsgroups for users of
>> MS newsreaders (OE, WinMail, and WLMail).
>>
>> Even if it doesn't attract comments from other responders in the more
>> appropriate newsgroup, it can provide relevant information for new
>> readers to find, one of the main purposes of providing content for
>> newsgroups. Besides that it makes responders who read in both
>> newsgroups more aware that a multi-post has been done, without
>> anybody having to figure out which came first.
>
> Oh, so you're saying that ANYONE can now become a moderator of sorts by
> moving around discussions wherever *they* feel is more appropriate and
> to newsgroups of THEIR choice?
"Spreading" might be a better word to characterize what I said, if you like. ; )
"Moving" would be more appropriate if we were discussing the use of FollowUp-To.
> This is not a forum. It is Usenet
> (despite Microsoft's attempt to pretend they have forums by providing a
> webnews-for-dummies gateway to Usenet). It is also not a moderated
> group. PA Bear nor anyone else here is a moderator.
How is widening a discussion appropriately "moderating"?
Many OPs are actually grateful when their issue is given
wider exposure to potentially more relevant knowledge.
And users of the web interface can actually just use a cross-post link
to enter the more relevant newsgroup to do some browsing there,
without any more updates to the thread. Again, many OPs are
grateful after being made aware of such resources.
>
> The problem with the UNSOLICITED cross-posting is that the OP and
> others may actually only visit the *other* groups to which PA Bear
> cross-posted. They may not take separate action to go visit the
> ORIGINAL group to see if there are further replies there (i.e., that
> are *not* under PA Bear's cross-posted subthread).
Is that what this is about, pique about appearing left behind by
not cross-posting *your* reply? There are surely more effective ways
of making sure your point is seen by the second newsgroup than by
starting a rant about the use of cross-posting. ; |
> PA Bear is
> declaring himself an admin or moderator in moving around the discussion
> based on his perception of what would constitute a better group in
> which to continue the discussion. And if his choice is wrong, huh?
That happens occasionally but less often than multi-posters get exposed
and a lot less often than useful information gets shared appropriately,
so I like that tradeoff.
> What about when the problem may actually be back in the product for the
> original newsgroup and NOT in the product where the symptom was
> exhibited or reported?
Your arguments seem to be more appropriate for a discussion about FollowUp-To.
Yes, occasionally it may seem desirable to reel back discussion into the most
appropriate newsgroup, especially when some Me too! poster in a cross-posted
thread takes over with a topic which is completely irrelevant to the other
newsgroup. Again, I don't think this happens often enough to be concerned about it.
>
> Moving around discussions isn't just netcoppish, arrogant, or
> misguided. It is trollish. That PA Bear can do it doesn't mean it is
> proper. Suggesting someone to move over is a hell of a lot different
> than shoving them over.
Still mischaracterizing what is being done with the word "moving"... ; }
Robert
---
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
> Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>
>>> Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries wrote:
>>>
>>>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> [x-post to OE General & IE General]
>>>>>
>>>>> Original newsgroup: microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is to warn that PA Bear has moved or copied an existing
>>>>> discussion to another group by cross-posting his reply to groups
>>>>> not originally specified by the OP (original poster).
>>>>
>>>> Would you like to cite a source for this piece of misinformation?
>>>
>>> Go look at the Newsgroups header in the *original* post in the
>>> *original* group. The OP did *not* cross-post. That was PA Bear's
>>> action.
>>
>> And there was absolutely nothing wrong in his action.
>
> And you're back to your prior argument which was already addressed in
> my prior reply to it. Getting circular, Rhonda.
You contend there was something wrong with what he did, but you have nothing
to back it up.
>> It's not like he was doing auk-style crossposting. He posted into
>> appropriate groups so that people who might be able to answer the
>> question would see it.
>>
>> I challenge you to document your contention that this is wrong.
>
> Until a solution is proposed which actually resolves the OP's problem,
> there is no guarantee that the newly cross-posted group(s) is any more
> appropriate than the original group(s).
>
> What, you have NEVER seen someone complain about a problem in one
> program which was merely a symptom and the actual cause was in a
> different program (and which might've been proper for the original
> group)?
>
> Since there is no surity that PA Bear's advice in suggesting a course
> of action in troubleshooting a problem (with whatever little info was
> provided by the OP) until the OP finds out if that advice was correct,
> there is also no surity that PA Bear picked the correct group.
>
> If you asked a coworker for help, which would you prefer: have them
> tell you where to find help, or have them hike you over their
> shoulder and carry you there? One is polite. The other is not.
Those who cannot construct good analogies should avoid analogizing.
I await proof of your contention. IMO, PA Bear did nothing wrong in
crossposting the question. Given that you have taken issue with the
practice, it's up to you to prove that it was, in fact, wrong.
Twayne
news:%232kv6vb$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl
> I have always found PA Bears replies to
> my inquiries most helpful .
> at least he tries to provide assistance , which
> is MORE than most of his critics do !
> what a witchhunt !
> D.
I agree with that for the most part. Except for trying to make himself
a net nanny and telling people where to post by forcing their crossposts
rather than suggesting it. Makes him look like a dummy on the other
groups too if they notice.
Twayne
Twayne
No thanks, I'm not looking for troll fests. Peter's OK I think for the
most part and I don't go after names; only misinformation when I come
across it. Strictly reactionary when inaccuracy pops up and I'm certain
of my facts..
Twayne
Twayne
"Making aware" and forcing are two different issues you seem incapable
of separating. The OP "owns" a post and is tasked with control of it,
not you.
~BD~
You said "this" newsgroup.
I post below your Header information. Should I be able to determine from
such information the actual newsgroup to which you refer?
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2009 10:13:54 -0400
From: Leonard Grey <l.g...@invalid.invalid>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: IE8
References: <2DAD1042-3EB2-4EBE...@microsoft.com>
<#fn3dIO$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl> <h2os83$eij$1...@news.albasani.net>
<OWTHRoT$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
<eycE5tT$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>
<u2dpL3T$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl>
<uT1ubnX$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
<OYnzRdY$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>
<#I7DXGh$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <#I7DXGh$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <OhFLAQk$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl>
Newsgroups:
microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta,microsoft.public.internetexplorer.general,microsoft.public.outlookexpress.general
NNTP-Posting-Host: meei-5-1.meei.harvard.edu 65.112.5.1
Path: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl
Lines: 1
Xref: TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl
microsoft.public.internetexplorer.general:277052
microsoft.public.outlookexpress.general:61455
microsoft.public.internetexplorer.beta:79786
*************
--
Dave
"Leonard Grey" <l.g...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:OhFLAQk$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
VanguardLH
misguided "help" action is often ignored) but it is NOT an admin-only
function and these are NOT moderated newsgroups. That PA Bear wants to
play moderator is not sufficient excuse to allow him to do so. Other
users may follow PA Bear's lead. PA Bear has the "MVP" moniker. What
he does is seen as an example of what others should also do. That means
it is quite possible that other users will deem that they should also go
moving or copying around discussions to wherever THEY decide is
appropriate whether they are correct or not. Is it guaranteed that the
other groups are actually appropriate to whatever is the actual cause of
the problem? No, not even with PA Bear making that decision. If the
trend continues, the result is that OPs won't know where are all the
replies to their discussions and those reading the responses in one
group won't know that their replies may have already been duplicated in
the original groups. Usenet is not a forum and these groups are not
moderated so actions under the pretense of moderator or admin should be
denounced. Once more users realize they can do the same thing that PA
Bear is doing then the worse will become the unmoderated newsgroups. Is
it here, is it there, is some of it not here but back there, is the
other groups actually on-topic or appropriate, is the solution actually
related to the topics of those other groups, and so on. Spammers and
trolls already know the tricks of using the FollowUp-To header and of
changing the Newsgroups header. Do we really want to encourage an army
of ordinary users to go moving around the discussions?
I see the UNSOLICITED moving, copying, cross-posting, or whatever you
want to call it as a dangerous precedent. When it occurred at a
sporadic and non-frequent rate then it was something that could be
overlooked as being impolite but tolerable. It is getting worse and it
is better to fix the leaks now rather than wait for the dam to collapse.
VanguardLH
> I await proof of your contention. IMO, PA Bear did nothing wrong in
> crossposting the question. Given that you have taken issue with the
> practice, it's up to you to prove that it was, in fact, wrong.
That you cannot see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Plenty of
arguments (pro and con) have been provided in other subthreads.
~BD~
Maybe your comments have had an effect! Viz:-
"PA Bear [MS MVP]" <PABe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eX8KEcl$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> You should be posting in the microsoft.public.windows.server.security
> newsgroup instead of this one.
--
Dave
"VanguardLH" <V...@nguard.LH> wrote in message
news:h2thh3$nvf$1...@news.albasani.net...
Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries
I'm looking for the standard that allows you to accuse him of moderating or
net nannying for what he did. You can't provide such a standard because it
does not exist. It's merely your opinion. Your opinion is no better than
that of anyone else posting here.
When you can produce a *fact*, get back to me.
...winston
validate(in the opinions of many others)the site owners made the correct decision.
--
...winston
ms-mvp mail
"~BD~" <Boate...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message news:u9LJr7Y$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> I was also banned from posting on the Annexcafe newsgroups - to which I was once enticed by Peter Foldes. I'm quite certain all
> is not as it seems on the surface on the computer help site there - User2User. Proof is another matter though! :(
>
> However, the truth *will* out!
>
> --
> Dave
>
> IMO two groups is not 'numerous'!
>
~BD~
'...winston' ;)
I'd value your opinion on the following The original text is in
'microsoft.public.test.here'.(please read from the bottom upwards):-
OK Andrew. An acceptable argument in the case of Ann.
Hazzard a guess, though, as to *why* Peter has copies of my messages -
if, indeed, he has actually has such copies.
It was interesting, to me, to hear that he had kept copies of my posts
to U2U, Aumha (although he misspelt the name) the Microsoft news servers
and to Jenn's site at www.pqlr.org/bbs
Quote:
"I have all your posts (831of them in total up to today) from u2u,
msnew servers, Ahuma and from Jen's group also from among others since
you started posting going back 4 yrs.
I strongly suggest that you do, indeed, telephone him and discuss just
*why* Mr Foldes is spying on me! Oh yes - and explain *how* he does it.
I'll wager he'll not be able to tell you!
I wonder, too, why he doesn't have copies of *all* the other posts I've
made - on different servers - Google knows!
Warm regards,
--
Dave
"Andrew Taylor" <andrewcr...@spamcopSUBVERSIVE.net> wrote in
message news:u98SUZr$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> David
>
> I will just say that some Sysops take great care at their unpaid job
> and keep copies of posts as proof of why they took the action they
> did. The person in question is meticulous and I would put money on it
> that Peter has no idea, or contact with the person we are talking
> about.
>
> --
> Andrew Taylor
> Mississauga - Ontario
> Canada
> ~
>
> "~BD~" <Boate...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:OYPCMKj$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>> I was very surprised when sysop Ann:) sent me copies of posts which
>> *she* had stored on her PC (she said) - I wondered, too, why *she*
>> had kept them! Are you in cahoots by any chance?
>>
>
>
"...winston" <winst...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eiga05r$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
~BD~
> Gullible I certainly am, Peter!
>
> I'm just an ordinary guy - who hates the bad guys, whoever they are!
>
> If you were good, you would not tease - especially on my wife's
> birthday. It is raining too! :(
>
> I tell you the truth ........ the truth *will* out!
> --
> Dave
>
>
> "Peter Foldes" <ok...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uGEmZFx$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> LOL. I love this.You are easy to play with. Get you each time. Oh
>> my,how gullible
PA Bear [MS MVP]
[crossposts to IE NGs eliminated]
Wow, BD, Vanguard, Twayne and the inimitable RLKF, all in one thread? Why,
it's a vertible battle of wits between unarmed combatants! <VBEG>
...winston wrote:
> Lol...the number of newsgroups is of little consequence....absence from
> each holds a much higher significance and will continues to validate(in
> the
> opinions of many others)the site owners made the correct decision.
<troll-blither snippage>
BoaterDave
> [crossposting eliminated] BD stalks the OE newsgroups, Leonard, and has
> been banned by at least two (2) ISPs for his offensive online behavior.
Absolutley untrue!
You are a liar, Mr Dyer!
I HAVE *NEVER* BEEN BANNED BY *ANY* ISP - EVER!
--
Dave
1PW
> I HAVE *NEVER* BEEN BANNED BY *ANY* ISP - EVER!
>
> --
> Dave
If so, perhaps you should be now. Get help.
Pete
--
1PW @?6A62?FEH9:DE=6o2@=]4@> [r4o7t]
~BD~
expecting help.
It was not forthcoming.
I had half-expected better from you, Pete.
One just cannot tell who are the good guys.
Is your wife still above ground, btw?
--
Dave
"1PW" <barcrna...@nby.pbz> wrote in message
news:h2vvkq$jh7$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
Tom Willett
"~BD~" <Boate...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:h30074$vqg$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
:I first came .............. here (where am I?????) about 4 years ago -
:
:
~BD~
<vbg>
One is supposed to be supportive of those (like me) who need help!
--
Dave
"Tom Willett" <t...@youreadaisyifyoudo.com> wrote in message
news:eCKUZ1y$JHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...