[Ann] MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.0 released
Simon Fraser
MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.0 is the latest release of the multi-threaded
derivative of the excellent NewsWatcher, a Usenet client for
Macintosh. MT-NewsWatcher enhances John Norstad's original with a
suite of features to make reading news fast and enjoyable. Multiple
threads allow you to download group headers at the same time as
reading articles, post articles in the background, and to extract
several sets of binaries concurrently. Sophisticated filtering
capabilities let you highlight those posts you want to see, and kill
all that annoying spam.
Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
More information about MT-NewsWatcher is available from:
<http://www.best.com/~smfr/mtnw/>
and you can find a list of download sites at:
<http://www.best.com/~smfr/mtnw/download.html>
--
Simon Fraser mailto:sm...@best.com
Pixel Perfectionist http://www.best.com/~smfr/
J.P. Kuypers
In article (Dans l'article)
<smfr-12029...@dynamic23.pm01.mv.best.com>, sm...@best.com (Simon
Fraser) wrote (écrivait) :
> MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.0 is the latest release of the multi-threaded
> derivative of the excellent NewsWatcher, a Usenet client for
> Macintosh.
The French version, F2.4.0, of MT-NewsWatcher is now available at
<ftp://ftp.sri.ucl.ac.be/pub/News/MTNewsWatcher/>.
And maybe on one of the mirrors :
<ftp://ftp.planete.net/pub/mac/vf/>
<ftp://ftp.calvacom.fr/pub/mac/Internet-fr/>
<ftp://ftp.oleane.fr/pub/mirrors/version-francaise/>
<ftp://ftp.lri.fr/pub/sri.ucl.ac.be/>
<ftp://ftp.univ-evry.fr/pub/mac/ucl/>
<ftp://ftp.cidif.org/pub/mac/>
<ftp://ftp.belnet.be/mirror/ftp.sri.ucl.ac.be/pub/>
--
Regards,
Jean-Pierre Kuypers
Simon Fraser
MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.1 is available as a patch from 2.4.0. This patch fixes
the problem displaying line counts, and a bug that could cause References
lines to exceed the 1000-character limit.
The patch is available as a 37k download from:
<ftp://ftp16.ba.best.com/web2/smfr/ftp/mt-newswatcher/MT-NW_2.4.1_patch.sit.hqx>
Simon
--
Simon Fraser http://www.best.com/~smfr/
sm...@best.com
terrell gibbs
In article <smfr-12029...@dynamic23.pm01.mv.best.com>,
sm...@best.com (Simon Fraser) wrote:
>Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
>the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
>adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
Unfortunately, one of the GNKSA revisions is having the opposite of the
intended effect on me. I keep sending emails when I mean to
post--something I never did before--because I'm so used to "Reply quoting
selection" meaning to post, and now it means to email. I suppose that I'll
get used to it eventually, but I wish there was some option I could turn
on in the meantime to double-check whether I really meant to email.
Jammer Six
>€ Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
>€ the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
>€ adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
I understand, now.
I wasn't aware of the Seal of Approval, or it's requirements.
After a quick preveiw of them at the above site, I'm glad the seal exists.
It will warn me off of products I'm not interested in.
I'm going back to 2.3.5, specifically because of these issues.
I do not now, nor will I ever, allow Grey Little Men to dictate what set
of manners I conduct myself under.
I will use the fruits of your labors without submitting to your arbitrary rules.
This thought will give me pleasure.
Vanish, wee ones.
------------
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you
want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
------------
Howard S Shubs
In article <jammer-1302...@sense-sea-pm5-19.oz.net>,
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
>I understand, now.
>I wasn't aware of the Seal of Approval, or it's requirements.
>After a quick preveiw of them at the above site, I'm glad the seal exists.
>It will warn me off of products I'm not interested in.
And thank -you- for letting those of us who consider these things
important know who you are, so we can now completely PLONK you.
>I'm going back to 2.3.5, specifically because of these issues.
>
>I do not now, nor will I ever, allow Grey Little Men to dictate what set
>of manners I conduct myself under.
Good for you. Irrelevant, but good for you.
>I will use the fruits of your labors without submitting to your arbitrary
rules.
There's very little arbitrary about this. These are netiquette rules
arrived at over a period of several years, intended to keep life easier
for most people. If you don't agree, you're welcome to not use the most
recent features and to stop using the Net when it goes completely bad for
you. Or to write your own newsreader based on an older version of
Newswatcher. Won't matter to me...
--
Howard S Shubs hsh...@bix.com
The Denim Adept hsh...@mindspring.com
Jammer Six
Ura Dippschitt, dippschi...@aol.com opened his mouth, and spewed forth:
>€ > In article <smfr-12029...@dynamic23.pm01.mv.best.com>,
>€ > sm...@best.com (Simon Fraser) wrote:
>€ >
>€ >
>€ > >Ä Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
>€ > >Ä the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval
<http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
>€ > >Ä adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
>€ >
>€ >
>€ > I understand, now.
>€ >
>€ > I wasn't aware of the Seal of Approval, or it's requirements.
>€ >
>€ > After a quick preveiw of them at the above site, I'm glad the seal exists.
>€ >
>€ > It will warn me off of products I'm not interested in.
>€ >
>€ > I'm going back to 2.3.5, specifically because of these issues.
>€ >
>€ > I do not now, nor will I ever, allow Grey Little Men to dictate what set
>€ > of manners I conduct myself under.
>€ >
>€ > I will use the fruits of your labors without submitting to your
>€ arbitrary rules.
>€ >
>€ > This thought will give me pleasure.
>€ >
>€ > Vanish, wee ones.
>€
>€
>€ Spoken like a true pommie asshole. Curl up and die you freak.
>€
I'm sure this is a grevious insult, but, you see, I speak American English.
Therefore, your vitrol would be far more effective, and would raise my
blood pressure much higher, if you used words, insults, and directives in
that language, as I get far angrier when I understand the insult.
I sincerely hope this helps, I know how frustrating it can be to be angry
at someone, and be rendered as impotent as your choice of words has made
you.
Best of luck, please, do try again. I'm sure you can do better.
After all, anyone could.
I've even heard Infantry Sergeants do better.
Jammer Six
In article <hshubs-1302...@ip241.dallas2.tx.pub-ip.psi.net>,
hsh...@mindspring.com (Howard S Shubs) wrote:
>€ And thank -you- for letting those of us who consider these things
>€ important know who you are, so we can now completely PLONK you.
You're welcome. I sincerely hope this means I won't hear from you again.
It's a wise move, I applaud you.
>€ There's very little arbitrary about this. These are netiquette rules
>€ arrived at over a period of several years, intended to keep life easier
>€ for most people. If you don't agree, you're welcome to not use the most
>€ recent features and to stop using the Net when it goes completely bad for
>€ you. Or to write your own newsreader based on an older version of
>€ Newswatcher. Won't matter to me...
Yes, I've heard it all before.
There's a word for "most people".
Average.
Scary, when you consider that, by definition, 50% of the population is
worse than that...
As for my not agreeing, and not using the most recent features, I do
believe that's what I stated I would be doing.
Now that we're all caught up, and on the same page, I consider our happy
relationship finished.
Thanks again, Simon. 2.3.5 is a great newreader.
Chad Irby
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
(About the Good Netkeeping Seal of Approval...)
> I understand, now.
>
> I wasn't aware of the Seal of Approval, or it's requirements.
>
> After a quick preveiw of them at the above site, I'm glad the seal exists.
>
> It will warn me off of products I'm not interested in.
>
> I'm going back to 2.3.5, specifically because of these issues.
>
> I do not now, nor will I ever, allow Grey Little Men to dictate what set
> of manners I conduct myself under.
Wow. That's a pretty strong moral stance just to avoid using software
that limits your signature to four lines.
That's the only real restriction in the GNKSA, especially as far as the
difference between 2.3.5 and 2.4.1 behaves. Almost everything else in the
GNKSA is just plain old practical Internet usage, and is there because
that's the way messages are *supposed* to be handled.
If you'd go back and read the text for GNKSA 2.0, all it is is a basic set
of guidelines for programmers to follow to make useful newsreaders. If
your newsreader *can't* do most of those things, it's probably just
broken, and I can't think of a major reason why someone would need a
newsreader that wouldn't have the GNKSA options built in.
--
Chad Irby / My greatest fear: that future generations will,
ci...@magicnet.net / for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
Hank Zimmerman
>In article <smfr-12029...@dynamic23.pm01.mv.best.com>,
>sm...@best.com (Simon Fraser) wrote:
>
>>€ Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
>>€ the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
>>€ adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
>I do not now, nor will I ever, allow Grey Little Men to dictate what set
>of manners I conduct myself under.
Yeah, why shouldn't I put my elbows on the table?
Why should I hold doors open for other people?
Why should I cover my face when I sneeze or cough?
Damn manners! People telling me I have to be nice to others.
For that matter, the government tells me what I can't do! Like steal!
What's up with that?
Does your statment that you will never allow "Grey Little Men" dictate
what set of manners you conduct yourself under mean that you refuse to
obey laws?
--
Hank Zimmerman maintains the comp.mail.eudora.mac FAQ
It can be found at <URL:http://www.ka.net/eudora/faqs/faq.html>
Hank Zimmerman's [Unofficial] Eudora Site: <URL:http://www.ka.net/eudora/>
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm terrell gibbs <tgi...@bu.edu> wrote:
> sm...@best.com (Simon Fraser) wrote:
>
> >Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
> >the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
> >adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
>
> Unfortunately, one of the GNKSA revisions is having the opposite of the
> intended effect on me. I keep sending emails when I mean to
> post--something I never did before--because I'm so used to "Reply quoting
> selection" meaning to post, and now it means to email. I suppose that I'll
> get used to it eventually, but I wish there was some option I could turn
> on in the meantime to double-check whether I really meant to email.
Just get used to using the command keys - they haven't changed. And
Cmd-Shift-R still quotes only the selected text.
--
John Moreno
Jeroen Scheerder
Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net>:
> Thanks again, Simon. 2.3.5 is a great newreader.
I am truly sorry to inform you -- but, as others have already explained,
MT-NewsWatcher 2.3.5 is just a hairline away from passing the Seal too.
The reason for this is, as you do seem to understand (in some sense of
that word), that it indeed appears to be quite a well-crafted
newsreader.
I think you should consider getting another one, since 2.3.5 undoubtedly
reeks too strongly of the GNKSA for you; you will find much bigger
offenders by a quick browse of the GNKSA archives yourself, so I won't
bother to recommend a less GNKSA-infected alternative.
On a further note, I'd like to thank you for your eloquently formulated,
well-argued and persuasive analysis. A truly admirable display of a
profound understanding, such as yours, can really make the difference.
Thanks, again.
-- J$
--
dash dash space
this is my .sig it's not so .big
Sean Harding
Chad Irby (ci...@magicnet.net) wrote:
> Wow. That's a pretty strong moral stance just to avoid using software
> that limits your signature to four lines.
Well, I agree with you on that...However, it is my opinion that it is a
Bad Thing for a program to completely prohibit such behavior. A stern
warning is OK, but banning it is not. When I use a .sig, it's usually
3 lines (2 if you don't count the "-- \n") so that's not my gripe. It's
just that it seems a bit stupid and short-sighted to put in a hard limit
on something so insignificant.
Sean
Darwin O. Magno
In article
<1d4es8q.a9b...@roxboro0-027.dyn.interpath.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
> Just get used to using the command keys - they haven't changed.
> And Cmd-Shift-R still quotes only the selected text.
I don't argue that it works especially since I didn't know, but
anyone else think it confusing since <shift-cmd-R> is listed
next to the News menu command Remove Read?
--
Mr. Darwin O. Magno <mailto:ma...@earthling.net>
Jim Correia
> In article
> <1d4es8q.a9b...@roxboro0-027.dyn.interpath.net>,
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
> > Just get used to using the command keys - they haven't changed.
> > And Cmd-Shift-R still quotes only the selected text.
>
> I don't argue that it works especially since I didn't know, but
> anyone else think it confusing since <shift-cmd-R> is listed
> next to the News menu command Remove Read?
I agree that it can be confusing to have the same key equivalent for two
commands. However, these two commands should never be available at the
same time, so there isn't a conflict, per se.
Jim
--
Jim Correia Bare Bones Software, Inc.
cor...@barebones.com <http://www.barebones.com>
terrell gibbs
In article <1d4es8q.a9b...@roxboro0-027.dyn.interpath.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
:Just get used to using the command keys - they haven't changed. And
:Cmd-Shift-R still quotes only the selected text.
Since I never used the command keys before, that doesn't much help.
Oops...there I go again; I see that "Send as email" is checked again. At
least now I'm starting to catch it before it goes out.
Allen Ethridge
In article <hshubs-1302...@ip241.dallas2.tx.pub-ip.psi.net>,
hsh...@mindspring.com (Howard S Shubs) wrote:
> There's very little arbitrary about this. These are netiquette rules
> arrived at over a period of several years, intended to keep life easier
> for most people.
Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
network connections? In these days of 56K modems such a rule just
doesn't make any sense. I miss most signatures simply because I'm
capable of determining the end of a message and going to the next one
without reading through the signature. If you have some sort of
obsessive-compulsive net-reading disability then get off the net and
see a psychiatrist. If you have a 1200 baud modem, well, that's still
your problem and not mine. And, in the end, I can cut and paste a
"pseudo-signature" without the nifty little "--" and still get
essentially the same results - you'll still get my oh-so-cool ASCII
graphic. Enforcing a four line limit on signatures is just plain petty.
Allen
Jeroen Scheerder
Hank Zimmerman <ch...@cornell.edu>:
> Damn manners! People telling me I have to be nice to others.
Hmm. GNKSA isn't about manners or niceties that much: it lets
newsreaders get away with *everything*, that is: as long as it doesn't
harm others.
It doesn't ask you to be nice to others; you're free to do anything you
like. Wander the streets, or don't -- as you prefer; but don't burn
other peoples houses when your cold, don't damage other peoples vehicles
when parking, that kind of thing.
I'd be the very first to fight against a narrow, paternalistic set of
stonecast rules for pestering people; and if GNKSA were like that, you'd
be very right in your complaint. As things are, and luckily so, you're
barking up the wrong tree.
So go ahead, and don't be nice if you choose; there's nothing in GNKSA
that will cause people to frown upon you because of it. Then again, if
you're hurting others, you're likely to find something in GNKSA that
condemns your behaviour. Not because it's not nice; it doesn't care --
but because it's damaging. It cairs about that. No more.
Barry Margolin
In article <ethridge-140...@ppp10-6.dllstx.onramp.net>,
ethr...@onramp.net (Allen Ethridge) wrote:
>Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
>network connections? In these days of 56K modems such a rule just
>doesn't make any sense.
While network speeds have increased, so has the total number of posts. I
don't know their respective rates of increase, but I suspect they're
comparable. Therefore, if 10% of posting content is waste material, it
has the same impact on the net as a whole.
Consider an analogy. You own a store, and discover that you don't have
room on your shelves for some new items you want to sell. So you stop
offering some items that don't sell well in the first place, to make
room. At some point your business increases, so you buy the adjacent
property to increase the size of your store. Does it make sense to start
offering things that don't sell, just because you have extra space for
them?
Also, excessive signatures don't just eat up network bandwidth, they also
eat up disk space. Sure, disks have gotten bigger, but I think Usenet has
grown faster than disks. And you should also consider people who download
news posts offline -- their personal disks probably aren't as big as the
servers'. And finally, junk in posts consumes mental resources of the
people reading your posts.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@bbnplanet.com
GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA
Support the anti-spam movement; see <http://www.cauce.org/>
Phil Stripling
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) writes:
Hi, Jammer,
You have the right to pick your newsreader and to ignore the conventions of
of Usenet. No problem. Others may disagree with you and express that
disagreement. No problem. Go for it, Jammer.
>
> I'm sure this is a grevious insult, but, you see, I speak American English.
>
grievous, Jammer.
> Therefore, your vitrol would be far more effective, and would raise my
vitriol, hon.
> blood pressure much higher, if you used words, insults, and directives in
directives? I
hope you did not mean invectives, though that seems to fit.
Given this level of spelling and diction, you are certainly _not_ a pommie.
But I forgive you.
--
Phil Stripling |Sorry for the inconvenience of the
The Civilized Explorer |munged reply, but you know what.
http://www.cieux.com/ |you need to remove.
Jammer Six
In article <chz1-14029...@29max1.ka.net>, ch...@cornell.edu (Hank
Zimmerman) wrote:
>€ Does your statement that you will never allow "Grey Little Men" dictate
>€ what set of manners you conduct yourself under mean that you refuse to
>€ obey laws?
Of course not.
I'm not talking about laws, I'm talking about etiquette, customs, and
manners. While I may choose to be polite, and abide by most customs, most
of the time, I don't always do so. To use an extreme example, in India, if
your wife doesn't please you, you set her on fire. Because I go to India,
does that mean, then, that it becomes OK for me to act that way? No, it
does not. It CERTAINLY doesn't mean that I'm obligated to act that way.
Therefore, when I come to the net, I bring with me that set of behavior
that *I* have chosen as my own, and I do not change it merely because I'm
in a different environment.
There's a difference between this position and law, which I abide by as
carefully as I can. Note carefully that we are not discussing law, when I
go to another country, I abide by their laws as carefully as I do at home.
There is no "law" here, there is only a generally accepted standard of
behavior, a set of customs, a code of etiquette. If it had been presented
to me properly, I may have chosen to abide by it.
It was not.
Instead, a dialog box opened, and informed me that my sig was too long.
Also acceptable, had I had a way to turn it off.
I'm not arguing about the length of sigs, I'm arguing that I will not be
TOLD what is appropriate behavior by someone from the net. I could end up
with some idiot telling me that fire doesn't really hurt your wife, it
just ends a problem. Therefore, I retain my right of choice, and I retain
the responsibility inherent to making them. People on the net may SUGGEST
that it's OK to set my wife on fire, but they may not insist on it, and
they may not interrupt me with dialog boxes if I choose not to.
Jammer Six
In article <w3qafbu...@shell.tsoft.com>, Phil Stripling
<phi...@what.civex.com> wrote:
>€ > I'm sure this is a grevious insult, but, you see, I speak American English.
>€ >
>€ grievous, Jammer.
>€
>€ > Therefore, your vitrol would be far more effective, and would raise my
>€
>€ vitriol, hon.
Thank you, dear.
I just now got around to discovering software.net, and purchasing
Spellswell Plus. This bodes well for my future appearence, and poorly for
my future finances. Software.net is jut too easy.
Now even us Simple Carpenters can look like we finished high school. I'm
very proud.
>€ directives? I
>€ hope you did not mean invectives, though that seems to fit.
Damned if I know. Sounds like a pommie thing, or maybe a woman thing. Is
it contagious?
>€ Given this level of spelling and diction, you are certainly _not_ a pommie.
>€
>€ But I forgive you.
Thank you. I think.
Aren't pommies the ones that are responsible for the spread of AIDS?
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Darwin O. Magno <ma...@earthling.net> wrote:
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
> > Just get used to using the command keys - they haven't changed.
> > And Cmd-Shift-R still quotes only the selected text.
>
> I don't argue that it works especially since I didn't know, but
> anyone else think it confusing since <shift-cmd-R> is listed
> next to the News menu command Remove Read?
Yes, and I'd (and believe did) recommend that it be switched to the
OTHER method of choosing which part to quote - if there is something
select then only quote that, i.e. just as it is now, but don't require
the shift key to be held down.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm terrell gibbs <tgi...@bu.edu> wrote:
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
> :Just get used to using the command keys - they haven't changed. And
> :Cmd-Shift-R still quotes only the selected text.
>
> Since I never used the command keys before, that doesn't much help.
> Oops...there I go again; I see that "Send as email" is checked again. At
> least now I'm starting to catch it before it goes out.
Try to get used to using the command keys. They are pretty easy.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> sm...@best.com (Simon Fraser) wrote:
>
> >€ Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
> >€ the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
> >€ adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
>
>
> I understand, now.
>
> I wasn't aware of the Seal of Approval, or it's requirements.
>
> After a quick preveiw of them at the above site, I'm glad the seal exists.
>
> It will warn me off of products I'm not interested in.
>
> I'm going back to 2.3.5, specifically because of these issues.
"These" - what are the other ones?
> I do not now, nor will I ever, allow Grey Little Men to dictate what set
> of manners I conduct myself under.
I don't think that anybody involved with the GNKSA or NewsWatcher is a
Little Grey Man. And it does NOT dictate what you can DO - if you want
to have a sig that is 1000 lines of 100 characters it is possible, it's
just not particularly EASY. To have a long sig you have to take some
extra steps, and as you may not be aware there has always been a limit
on the size of the sig in newswatcher 4096 characters. This limit has
just been reduced.
> I will use the fruits of your labors without submitting to your arbitrary
> rules.
>
> This thought will give me pleasure.
And you will loose the benefits of using the newer version - such as not
including the sig in your replies, which means that you don't have to do
it manually and you don't get flamed for not doing so.
> Vanish, wee ones.
MacSOUP (the newsreader that I am posting with) has much tighter limits
on sigs than NW or MT-NW does. But it also allows you to have a long
sig - it just won't include it for you.
--
John Moreno
__..--''``\--....___ _..,_
_.-' .-/"; ` ``<._ ``-+'~=.
_.-' _..--.'_ \ `(^) )
((..-' (< _ ;_..__ ; `'
`-._,_)' ``--...____..-'
Hank Zimmerman
In article <1d4fu01.1wb...@cats.xs4all.nl>, j...@xs4all.nl (Jeroen
Scheerder) wrote:
>Hank Zimmerman <ch...@cornell.edu>:
>
>> Damn manners! People telling me I have to be nice to others.
>So go ahead, and don't be nice if you choose; there's nothing in GNKSA
>that will cause people to frown upon you because of it. Then again, if
>you're hurting others, you're likely to find something in GNKSA that
>condemns your behaviour. Not because it's not nice; it doesn't care --
>but because it's damaging. It cairs about that. No more.
Umm... My post was in jest. I agree with your points to some degree (and I
like the fact that MT-NW now sports the GNKSA).
Hank Zimmerman
In article <jammer-1402...@sense-sea-pm7-12.oz.net>,
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
>In article <chz1-14029...@29max1.ka.net>, ch...@cornell.edu (Hank
>Zimmerman) wrote:
>
>
>> Does your statement that you will never allow "Grey Little Men" dictate
>> what set of manners you conduct yourself under mean that you refuse to
>> obey laws?
>
>Of course not.
>
>I'm not talking about laws, I'm talking about etiquette, customs, and
>manners. While I may choose to be polite, and abide by most customs, most
>of the time, I don't always do so. To use an extreme example, in India, if
>your wife doesn't please you, you set her on fire. Because I go to India,
>does that mean, then, that it becomes OK for me to act that way? No, it
>does not. It CERTAINLY doesn't mean that I'm obligated to act that way.
>
>Therefore, when I come to the net, I bring with me that set of behavior
>that *I* have chosen as my own, and I do not change it merely because I'm
>in a different environment.
Are you saying that you NEVER change your manners based on where you are?
Do you normally take your shoes off when entering a house? If you were to
go to a land where that is the accepeted (and expected) norm, would you
not do so because it does not fit into your normal custom?
I suppose not, since you state that you choose to abide by most customs.
How, then, do you draw the line? How does a four line .sig fit in with
wife-burning and not with removing one's shoes?
>There's a difference between this position and law, which I abide by as
>carefully as I can. Note carefully that we are not discussing law, when I
>go to another country, I abide by their laws as carefully as I do at home.
One could argue that laws are an extension of manners.
I consider it not only lawful but also polite not to steal.
>There is no "law" here, there is only a generally accepted standard of
>behavior, a set of customs, a code of etiquette. If it had been presented
>to me properly, I may have chosen to abide by it.
>
>It was not.
Only by your ignorance. In the "What's New" file distributed with
MT-Newswatcher 2.4.0, it reads (clipped at times)
>What's new in 2.4
>-----------------
>
>* GNSKA compliance
>
> GNKSA is the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval:
>
> <http://www.xs4all.nl/~js/gnksa/>
Pleading ignorance because one was not aware of something well-stated is
no excuse.
You say that the "accepted standard of behavior" was not presented and I
would agrue that the GNSKA is such a standard (for newsreaders) presented
in a requirement by requirement fasion.
>I'm not arguing about the length of sigs, I'm arguing that I will not be
>TOLD what is appropriate behavior by someone from the net. I could end up
Ahhh... Chaos. What standards are derived from chaos? I use the word chaos
because that is what would happen if everyone used their own rigid set of
manners. Compromise is what sets standards. You are unwilling to
compromise. That is fine. There are hundreds of newsreaders which fail the
GNKSA (which is what you are arguing for).
Suppose no one ever told people not to SPAM. What would occur? I think
that your argument would very well fail for SPAM.
I will save that argument for later.
John Moreno
All the GNKSA requires is a warning - which is all MT gives for sigs
under 8 lines. It does have a top limit for automatically included sigs
of 8 lines of no more than 80 chars each - but if you want to do it
manually you can add what ever you like. It just sets a limit on what
it will process for you.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> In article <chz1-14029...@29max1.ka.net>, ch...@cornell.edu (Hank
> Zimmerman) wrote:
>
>
> >Does your statement that you will never allow "Grey Little Men" dictate
> >what set of manners you conduct yourself under mean that you refuse to
> >obey laws?
>
>
> Of course not.
>
> I'm not talking about laws, I'm talking about etiquette, customs, and
> manners. While I may choose to be polite, and abide by most customs, most
> of the time, I don't always do so.
But software isn't obligated to aid you in violating those customs.
> Therefore, when I come to the net, I bring with me that set of behavior
> that *I* have chosen as my own, and I do not change it merely because I'm
> in a different environment.
No, you don't have to - but to continue with your own customs will take
a extra bit of effort.
-snip-
> Instead, a dialog box opened, and informed me that my sig was too long.
>
> Also acceptable, had I had a way to turn it off.
>
> I'm not arguing about the length of sigs, I'm arguing that I will not be
> TOLD what is appropriate behavior by someone from the net.
Why not? Think of it as asking for something and the person doing so
but saying that it is customary to say please and thank you when making
such request. You are asking MT to do something which it knows is wrong
- it goes ahead and does it, but tells you that it is wrong. Simon
decided that MT should give that warning every time you went to post,
instead of just not doing it or only warning you the first time. It's
not a unreasonable choice.
And I don't know of a single program which will PREVENT you from having
a long sig - just ones that refuse to automatically include them.
--
John Moreno
Donald L. Nash
>Therefore, when I come to the net, I bring with me that set of behavior
>that *I* have chosen as my own, and I do not change it merely because I'm
>in a different environment.
In other words, you don't care what other people think of your public
behavior, you'll act the way you want to act where ever you want to, and
screw the community when they take offense at your behavior. Thank you,
we could not ask for a better example of pure, self-centered arrogance.
>There is no "law" here, there is only a generally accepted standard of
>behavior, a set of customs, a code of etiquette. If it had been presented
>to me properly, I may have chosen to abide by it.
>
>It was not.
Oh, now I understand. If someone says, "Please don't do that," then you
would consider listening to them; but if they say, "You may not do that,"
then you will deliberately do so anyway just out of spite. In other
words, if it is only of mild importance then you'll consider it, but if it
important enough to make into an imperative then you will deliberately
ignore it. Gotcha.
BTW, your wife-burning example is pure BS. You are comparing something
which is objectively good, reducing the size of Usenet signatures, with
something which is objectively bad, murdering someone.
>I'm arguing that I will not be
>TOLD what is appropriate behavior by someone from the net.
First of all, you're not being told by "someone," you're being told by the
large group of someones which makes up the community in which you are
participating. If it was one person trying to impose his own arbitrary
rules then you'd have a point. But that's not the case here, GNKSA
represents years of Usenet communal experience, not one individual's own
personal ideas of right and wrong.
Second of all, you're not really being told at all. The Usenet signature
limit is a request, not a requirement. You can get around it simply by
using a newsreader which doesn't enforce it. You have complete freedom
over whether or not you will comply. All MT-NW and other GNKSA
newsreaders do is give you the option of using a newsreader which is smart
enough to prevent you from violating the request.
--
Donald L. Nash, <D.N...@utexas.edu>, PGP Key ID: 0x689DA021
The University of Texas System Office of Telecommunication Services
PGP Key Fingerprint: D6D2 CBEE 8F56 60B2 736C 031A A1E0 AF3D
Jammer Six
In article <D.Nash-1402...@dial-45-37.ots.utexas.edu>,
D.N...@utexas.edu (Donald L. Nash) wrote:
>€ In article <jammer-1402...@sense-sea-pm7-12.oz.net>,
>€ jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
>€
>€ >Therefore, when I come to the net, I bring with me that set of behavior
>€ >that *I* have chosen as my own, and I do not change it merely because I'm
>€ >in a different environment.
>€
>€ In other words, you don't care what other people think of your public
>€ behavior, you'll act the way you want to act where ever you want to, and
>€ screw the community when they take offense at your behavior. Thank you,
>€ we could not ask for a better example of pure, self-centered arrogance.
Yes, I am arrogant enough to maintain my own standards of conduct
regardless of my environment.
If you are not, if your behavior changes based on your location, I pity you.
>€ Oh, now I understand. If someone says, "Please don't do that," then you
>€ would consider listening to them; but if they say, "You may not do that,"
>€ then you will deliberately do so anyway just out of spite. In other
>€ words, if it is only of mild importance then you'll consider it, but if it
>€ important enough to make into an imperative then you will deliberately
>€ ignore it. Gotcha.
Good. I'm glad we're communicating. You seem to have grasp the idea that
it is NOT the sig I'm talking about, it's the imperative, and the fact
that I can't turn off the dialog box.
>€ BTW, your wife-burning example is pure BS. You are comparing something
>€ which is objectively good, reducing the size of UseNet signatures, with
>€ something which is objectively bad, murdering someone.
No, actually, that's inaccurate.
A single counter example means that the size of UseNet sigs is SUBjective,
not objective. I am that counter example for sig size.
I agree that murdering someone is objectively bad, but only in the US.
It's accepted, if not condoned, in India.
Therefore, neither of your examples are accurate. Neither are objective,
they are both subjective.
>€ First of all, you're not being told by "someone," you're being told by the
>€ large group of someones which makes up the community in which you are
>€ participating. If it was one person trying to impose his own arbitrary
>€ rules then you'd have a point. But that's not the case here, GNKSA
>€ represents years of UseNet communal experience, not one individual's own
>€ personal ideas of right and wrong.
The size of the population of India does not change my mind about setting
women on fire, nor does the long history of that practice. The same holds
true here. Every statement you just made applies to the Indian murders,
and are equally invalid there.
>€ Second of all, you're not really being told at all. The UseNet signature
>€ limit is a request, not a requirement. You can get around it simply by
>€ using a newsreader which doesn't enforce it. You have complete freedom
>€ over whether or not you will comply. All MT-NW and other GNKSA
>€ news readers do is give you the option of using a newsreader which is smart
>€ enough to prevent you from violating the request.
Yes.
This is the course I have chosen. This is being posted with 2.3.5, and I
am grateful for it, and sorry that such good software was ruined by the
GNKSA in the current version.
I don't use MT 2.4.0 or 2.4.1, specifically because those versions TELL me
that my sig is too long, and I can't turn it off. If I could disable that
dialog box after it made it's point once, that would constitute a polite
suggestion, and would be acceptable.
That is the crux of my point. By not allowing me to disable the dialog
after it has made it's point, it crosses the line from suggesting a
shorter sig to telling me I need a shorter sig.
As for GNKSA news readers being "smart" enough, no machine or piece of
software will ever be smart enough to make my choices for me. I hold those
who rely on software or equipment to make their choices for them in
contempt. A fine distinction, and a very important one, to me.
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Donald L. Nash <D.N...@utexas.edu> wrote:
-snip-
>
> Second of all, you're not really being told at all. The Usenet signature
> limit is a request, not a requirement. You can get around it simply by
> using a newsreader which doesn't enforce it. You have complete freedom
> over whether or not you will comply. All MT-NW and other GNKSA
> newsreaders do is give you the option of using a newsreader which is smart
> enough to prevent you from violating the request.
It's not even that strict with any program that I am aware of that warns
or restricts sigs - at MOST they simply refuse to include it
automatically. If you want to type or paste it in, then that is
possible. MT give a message saying that you shouldn't do it (unless you
use a really long sig) when you enter it into the preferences and then
gives a warning whenever you go to post with your long sig.
If he wants to use Quickeys or KeyQuenser or a desktop clipping to enter
it then, he can have a sig as long as he likes (well there might be a
32k limit).
--
John Moreno
Scott Forbes
In article <ethridge-140...@ppp10-6.dllstx.onramp.net>,
ethr...@onramp.net (Allen Ethridge) wrote:
> Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
> network connections?
No, not really. It was (and is) related to common courtesy.
--
Scott Forbes for...@ravenna.com
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> In article <D.Nash-1402...@dial-45-37.ots.utexas.edu>,
> D.N...@utexas.edu (Donald L. Nash) wrote:
>
> >In article <jammer-1402...@sense-sea-pm7-12.oz.net>,
> > jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
> >
> > >Therefore, when I come to the net, I bring with me that set of behavior
> > >that *I* have chosen as my own, and I do not change it merely because I'm
> > >in a different environment.
> >
> > In other words, you don't care what other people think of your public
> > behavior, you'll act the way you want to act where ever you want to, and
> > screw the community when they take offense at your behavior. Thank you,
> > we could not ask for a better example of pure, self-centered arrogance.
>
> Yes, I am arrogant enough to maintain my own standards of conduct
> regardless of my environment.
When compliance doesn't inconvenience you or anybody else in the
slightest and your standard of conduct is considered rude by most people
then, yes, I have to agree, it's arrogant.
> If you are not, if your behavior changes based on your location, I pity you.
Well, my behavior changs because of location - I've never yet found it
necessary to insist upon a bush to take piss behind when I was at
somebodies house.
> > Oh, now I understand. If someone says, "Please don't do that," then you
> > would consider listening to them; but if they say, "You may not do that,"
> > then you will deliberately do so anyway just out of spite. In other
> > words, if it is only of mild importance then you'll consider it, but if it
> > important enough to make into an imperative then you will deliberately
> > ignore it. Gotcha.
>
> Good. I'm glad we're communicating. You seem to have grasp the idea that
> it is NOT the sig I'm talking about, it's the imperative, and the fact
> that I can't turn off the dialog box.
So? If you go to print with smaller margins than the printer says it
needs, most programs warn you and they don't stop warning you just
because you've been told once - it's wrong each and everytime.
-snip-
> > Second of all, you're not really being told at all. The UseNet signature
> > limit is a request, not a requirement. You can get around it simply by
> > using a newsreader which doesn't enforce it. You have complete freedom
> > over whether or not you will comply. All MT-NW and other GNKSA
> > news readers do is give you the option of using a newsreader which is smart
> > enough to prevent you from violating the request.
>
> Yes.
>
> This is the course I have chosen. This is being posted with 2.3.5, and I
> am grateful for it, and sorry that such good software was ruined by the
> GNKSA in the current version.
No, it wasn't ruined - it was improved. It's complaining about length
of the sig is no more "ruins" it than a spreadsheet which complains
about circular references is "ruined" because it does so.
> I don't use MT 2.4.0 or 2.4.1, specifically because those versions TELL me
> that my sig is too long, and I can't turn it off. If I could disable that
> dialog box after it made it's point once, that would constitute a polite
> suggestion, and would be acceptable.
>
> That is the crux of my point. By not allowing me to disable the dialog
> after it has made it's point, it crosses the line from suggesting a
> shorter sig to telling me I need a shorter sig.
Why don't you just paste it in? Then you could make it as long as you
like.
> As for GNKSA news readers being "smart" enough, no machine or piece of
> software will ever be smart enough to make my choices for me. I hold those
> who rely on software or equipment to make their choices for them in
> contempt. A fine distinction, and a very important one, to me.
It doesn't make a choice for you - it makes a choice for itself. Not to
handle really long long sigs and to compalin about oversized sigs - it
doesn't reduce your choices because you can still do what you want, it
just won't help you do so.
To take your example and put you in the position of burning women - it
complains while selling you the firewood and says you have to get the
gasoline from somebody else. It doesn't do anything to prevent you from
burning them, it just limits it's participation.
--
John Moreno
Howard S Shubs
>Enforcing a four line limit on signatures is just plain petty.
Petty how?
--
Howard S Shubs hsh...@bix.com
The Denim Adept hsh...@mindspring.com
Jammer Six
In article <1d4gedq.y6...@roxboro0-045.dyn.interpath.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>€ When compliance doesn't inconvenience you or anybody else in the
>€ slightest and your standard of conduct is considered rude by most people
>€ then, yes, I have to agree, it's arrogant.
I see.
We're going to use your standards for "inconvenience" and "slightest"?
Not unless you change them, we're not. What is inconvenience to you is
offensive to me.
As for most people, I answered that a couple posts ago. Most people are average.
Most people in India allow their women to burn.
>€ Well, my behavior changs because of location - I've never yet found it
>€ necessary to insist upon a bush to take piss behind when I was at
>€ somebodies house.
Yes, but you still piss.
>€ So? If you go to print with smaller margins than the printer says it
>€ needs, most programs warn you and they don't stop warning you just
>€ because you've been told once - it's wrong each and everytime.
If I couldn't turn it off, and *I* determined that I was going to print
with those margins, the printer and it's software would join MT-NW 2.4.0
in the category of "Software That I Used To Use".
For the same reason.
I would then find a printer and software that suited my requirements for
printing margins.
(Incidentally, I've been through exactly this, with HP printers, ResEdit,
and DayRunner sized paper. Now I use a StyleWriter, and the HP is
suffering from Traumatic Lead Injection).
>€ To take your example and put you in the position of burning women - it
>€ complains while selling you the firewood and says you have to get the
>€ gasoline from somebody else. It doesn't do anything to prevent you from
>€ burning them, it just limits it's participation.
Perfect.
I'm glad we're getting there.
If, then, I'm Indian, and I want to set her on fire, then the software is
useless to me - it doesn't do what I want. In this case, I wouldn't care
what was considered acceptable in the U.S., I would only care that the
software doesn't function.
>€ No, it wasn't ruined - it was improved.
It performed perfectly in 2.3.5, and the upgrade renders it useless.
Ruined, not improved.
Jammer Six
In article <forbes-1402...@msf-5.pr.mcs.net>, for...@ravenna.com
(Scott Forbes) wrote:
>€ No, not really. It was (and is) related to common courtesy.
Not in my opinion.
And since it's my actions under discussion, my opinion is what's going to
count for the decision.
Software that objects more than once may join Fraser's latest efforts.
Howard S Shubs
>In other words, you don't care what other people think of your public
>behavior, you'll act the way you want to act where ever you want to, and
>screw the community when they take offense at your behavior. Thank you,
>we could not ask for a better example of pure, self-centered arrogance.
That being why I PLONKed him. If he can't be bothered to conform to what
others consider acceptible, fuck him and the horse he rode in on. OOoo,
did I offend? <grin>
Heinlein said it, through L. Long:
"Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive
wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people
rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naive, the
unsophisticated deplore these formalities as 'empty', 'meaningless', or
'dishonest', and scorn to use them. No matter how 'pure' their motives,
they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at
best."
Scott Forbes
In article <jammer-1402...@sense-sea-pm4-27.oz.net>,
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
> In article <forbes-1402...@msf-5.pr.mcs.net>, for...@ravenna.com
> (Scott Forbes) wrote:
>
> >€ No, not really. It was (and is) related to common courtesy.
>
> Not in my opinion.
#
# These filters were exported from MT-NewsWatcher
#
# Version: 2.4.1
# Date: Saturday, February 14, 1998
#
# You can use the ŚFilter to TEXTą utility available from the author
# of YA-NewsWatcher to convert this file to a filters file that
# YA-NewsWatcher can use.
#
GROUP=comp.sys.mac.comm
KEPT=kFalse
#
STRING=jam...@oz.net
HEADER=from
MATCH=kContainsTheString
EXPIRE=30
IGNORECASE=kTrue
SCORE=-10
LABEL=33
#
--
Scott Forbes for...@ravenna.com
Allen Ethridge
In article <barmar-1402...@barmar.ne.mediaone.net>,
bar...@bbnplanet.com (Barry Margolin) wrote:
> Consider an analogy. You own a store, and discover that you don't have
> room on your shelves for some new items you want to sell. So you stop
> offering some items that don't sell well in the first place, to make
> room. At some point your business increases, so you buy the adjacent
> property to increase the size of your store. Does it make sense to start
> offering things that don't sell, just because you have extra space for
> them?
Let's consider a more relevant analogy. I own a four wheel drive off-road
vehicle. You own a 10 year old rust-bucket. Your rust-bucket can't handle
running off-road. Or I have a muscle car and I like to accelerate rapidly
(within safety limits, of course) when getting on the freeway. Your
rust-bucket can't keep up. So you want to decree that all cars must be
disabled so that they can't function any better than your rust-bucket,
at least if they want to receive the Good Car-Keeping Seal of Approval.
If you want to filter out all posts, or perhaps just the signatures of
posts that are too long by your standards, that's fine with me. Perhaps
the GNKSA should be awarded to ISPs and newsreaders that provide such
filtering. But to encourage newsreaders to limit the actions of posters
because some readers are bothered is just the wrong way to do it.
This last doesn't apply to the message I'm replying to, but I'm bothered
by these funny little pictures that appear in the corner of my message
window. Since many of these are drawings and not pictures of the author,
shouldn't the GNKSA only be awarded to newsreaders that require a true
picture of the author, or better yet, from my point of view, prohibit
these pictures entirely? Even true pictures are of such limited resolution
as to be useless - talk about a waste of bandwidth!
But that then leads to the question of what will happen to USENET when
multimedia hits it and it finally catches up to the rest of the net. A four
(or even eight) line limit is going to seem kind of strange when graphics
and sound are all around. Or is USENET just going to roll over and die as
as the internet evolves? (Ever see a news post in MIME or HTML format?)
Allen
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
> > When compliance doesn't inconvenience you or anybody else in the
> > slightest and your standard of conduct is considered rude by most people
> > then, yes, I have to agree, it's arrogant.
>
> I see.
>
> We're going to use your standards for "inconvenience" and "slightest"?
>
> Not unless you change them, we're not. What is inconvenience to you is
> offensive to me.
Offensive - not inconvenient, and you consider it offensive because you
think it's trying to be bossy. It's not, it's formatting it's messages
to conform to existing standards. And when you try to create messages
that are outside those standards it doesn't prevent you from doing so -
it simply warns you about it and then refuses to AID you in doing so.
Those standards might have the force of law, but they are a little more
than mere "customs".
> As for most people, I answered that a couple posts ago. Most people are
> average.
>
> Most people in India allow their women to burn.
Well, if MT ever starts recommending that you burn women I'll be glad to
recommend that you give it.
> > Well, my behavior changs because of location - I've never yet found it
> > necessary to insist upon a bush to take piss behind when I was at
> > somebodies house.
>
> Yes, but you still piss.
Yeah, but I don't do it behind the bush. If you want to piss - have a
100 line sig, then it's still perfectly possible. You just have to
change your custom and go inside to do so. Or in this case to have a
clipping file that you can drop in the window or a KeyQuencer macro for
typeing it in.
> > So? If you go to print with smaller margins than the printer says it
> > needs, most programs warn you and they don't stop warning you just
> > because you've been told once - it's wrong each and everytime.
>
> If I couldn't turn it off, and *I* determined that I was going to print
> with those margins, the printer and it's software would join MT-NW 2.4.0
> in the category of "Software That I Used To Use".
>
> For the same reason.
>
> I would then find a printer and software that suited my requirements for
> printing margins.
>
> (Incidentally, I've been through exactly this, with HP printers, ResEdit,
> and DayRunner sized paper. Now I use a StyleWriter, and the HP is
> suffering from Traumatic Lead Injection).
Then don't get your panties in a uproar - you know you are exceeding
limits that the program is set up to cope with. Don't complain that it
doesn't cope with your exceeding those limits in a annoying manner.
Next you'll be complaining about low-memory warnings.
> > To take your example and put you in the position of burning women - it
> > complains while selling you the firewood and says you have to get the
> > gasoline from somebody else. It doesn't do anything to prevent you from
> > burning them, it just limits it's participation.
>
>
> Perfect.
>
> I'm glad we're getting there.
>
> If, then, I'm Indian, and I want to set her on fire, then the software is
> useless to me - it doesn't do what I want. In this case, I wouldn't care
> what was considered acceptable in the U.S., I would only care that the
> software doesn't function.
No, it's useful up to a point - it's up to you to decide whether using
it up to that point makes sense or whether there is something else that
works better for you. Just don't say it's useless, because it's not.
As for it being annoying - your posting a 5 line sig is annoying to a
lot of people, why shouldn't you share in the annoyance?
> > No, it wasn't ruined - it was improved.
>
> It performed perfectly in 2.3.5, and the upgrade renders it useless.
>
> Ruined, not improved.
Ah, I see - the only thing you want to do is post a 5 line sig and the
REST of the program is just so much fluff. Why didn't you say so in the
first place?
Well, MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.0 and above WILL do what you want to do, but
are probably not the best program for you to use.
--
John Moreno
Jammer Six
In article <6c5g9r$b...@crcnis3.unl.edu>, Greg Berigan
<gber...@cse.unl.edu> wrote:
>€ So, do you take showers fully clothed or do you regularly walk naked
>€ down the street?
Both.
Yes, I walk down the street, and yes, I take showers.
Those are the behaviors, (which is what we're discussing) and no, I don't
intend to change them.
Being a wise man, I frequently change my ATTIRE based on my environment.
>€ (Yes, I know my signature is 5 lines and contains wasteful ASCII art.)
So, I take it you don't use MT-NW 2.4?
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Allen Ethridge <ethr...@onramp.net> wrote:
> bar...@bbnplanet.com (Barry Margolin) wrote:
>
> > Consider an analogy. You own a store, and discover that you don't have
> > room on your shelves for some new items you want to sell. So you stop
> > offering some items that don't sell well in the first place, to make
> > room. At some point your business increases, so you buy the adjacent
> > property to increase the size of your store. Does it make sense to start
> > offering things that don't sell, just because you have extra space for
> > them?
>
> Let's consider a more relevant analogy. I own a four wheel drive off-road
> vehicle. You own a 10 year old rust-bucket. Your rust-bucket can't handle
> running off-road. Or I have a muscle car and I like to accelerate rapidly
> (within safety limits, of course) when getting on the freeway. Your
> rust-bucket can't keep up. So you want to decree that all cars must be
> disabled so that they can't function any better than your rust-bucket,
> at least if they want to receive the Good Car-Keeping Seal of Approval.
No, the GNKSA is a speed limit in this - if you want to post a 10,000
line sig that is easy as hell using a GNKSA complian newsreader. You
just have to take the appropriate actions to do so. All the GNKSA
requires is that the newsreader doesn't allow you to do it by accident.
> If you want to filter out all posts, or perhaps just the signatures of
> posts that are too long by your standards, that's fine with me. Perhaps
> the GNKSA should be awarded to ISPs and newsreaders that provide such
> filtering. But to encourage newsreaders to limit the actions of posters
> because some readers are bothered is just the wrong way to do it.
No, because this is ultimately in the hands of the users. The GNKSA
requires that the program warn the user and encourages that the program
not accept excessive sigs for automatic inclusion. It neither requires
nor encourages programs to prevent users from manually entering the sig.
-snip-
> But that then leads to the question of what will happen to USENET when
> multimedia hits it and it finally catches up to the rest of the net. A four
> (or even eight) line limit is going to seem kind of strange when graphics
> and sound are all around. Or is USENET just going to roll over and die as
> as the internet evolves? (Ever see a news post in MIME or HTML format?)
Graphics and sounds can be presented in a manner that doesn't interfere
with READING - and frankly that's what usenet is about. It's a written
medium, one that wouldn't work with sound and which doesn't require
graphics.
--
John Moreno
Phil Stripling
Jammer enquired:
> Aren't pommies the ones that are responsible for the spread of AIDS?
Check with Software.net and see if they have dictionaries, too, hon.
Greg Berigan
In news.software.readers, jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
> Yes, I am arrogant enough to maintain my own standards of conduct
> regardless of my environment.
>
> If you are not, if your behavior changes based on your location, I pity you.
So, do you take showers fully clothed or do you regularly walk naked
down the street?
(Yes, I know my signature is 5 lines and contains wasteful ASCII art.)
--
_-<#)-=# http://incolor.inetnebr.com/wotw/ (War of the Worlds)
___/___
_-~_--<###) Due to widespread abuse, I no longer read any messages
<~c>' __--< from users who employ munged addresses in their headers.
\_--=____#) Richard Hart and Justin Gunn at C|NET, this means you too.
Michel Gagnon
Scott Forbes <for...@ravenna.com> wrote:
> In article <ethridge-140...@ppp10-6.dllstx.onramp.net>,
> ethr...@onramp.net (Allen Ethridge) wrote:
> > Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
> > network connections?
>
> No, not really. It was (and is) related to common courtesy.
While I like short signatures, I think the limit should be raised to
something like 6 or 8 lines. Even better, I think it should be something
like 350 characters, irrespective of the number of lines, so it would
mean something short, but organised however you like it.
On the other hand, I have not seen anything in the Good Seals requiring
no HTML. Unless it is an oversight of mine, I definitely think HTML
should be out of news, unless specifically required by the poster.
--
Michel Gagnon -- Montréal (Québec, Canada)
Michel...@videotron.ca
Mike Marchetti
On Sat, 14 Feb 1998 23:28:36 -0500, Michel Gagnon wrote
(in message <1d4gpeh.pre...@ppp050.0.mmtl.videotron.net>):
>
> Scott Forbes <for...@ravenna.com> wrote:
>
> While I like short signatures, I think the limit should be raised to
> something like 6 or 8 lines. Even better, I think it should be something
> like 350 characters, irrespective of the number of lines, so it would mean
> something short, but organised however you like it.
Hogwasher allows up to 10 lines in a signature, as long as the total size is
less than 350 bytes. I like block-left alignment :)
> On the other hand, I have not seen anything in the Good Seals requiring no
> HTML. Unless it is an oversight of mine, I definitely think HTML should be
> out of news, unless specifically required by the poster.
GNKSA requires that human-readable articles (i.e. plain text) be posted unless
explicitly requested by the user. It cannot be the default.
--
Mike Marchetti
Asar Corporation
http://www.asar.com
Andrew Starr
> It performed perfectly in 2.3.5, and the upgrade renders it useless.
I'm just waiting to see your beautiful 20 line signature.
(Although I realize that your argument is that it is the principle that matters)
--
Andrew Starr http://www.amherst.edu/~atstarr
Andrew Starr
In article <jammer-1402...@sense-sea-pm6-15.oz.net>, jam...@oz.net
(Jammer Six) wrote:
> In article <6c5g9r$b...@crcnis3.unl.edu>, Greg Berigan
> <gber...@cse.unl.edu> wrote:
> >€ (Yes, I know my signature is 5 lines and contains wasteful ASCII art.)
>
> So, I take it you don't use MT-NW 2.4?
You don't need to take it. Just check headers:
---copy
User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980202 (UNIX) (IRIX64/6.2 (IP25))
---paste
Jeroen Scheerder
Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net>:
> As for GNKSA news readers being "smart" enough, no machine or piece of
> software will ever be smart enough to make my choices for me.
It should be smart enough to _let_ you make that choice. A
GNKSA-compliant newsreader lets _you_ decide; a non-GNKSA newsreader
probably allows messing things up, or even does so, without letting you
have any say in it.
If you with, please post encoded stuff. Include kibo's sig -- but let
that be _your_ choice, not the result of some design mistake in the
software.
-- J$
--
dash dash space
this is my .sig it's not so .big
Jeroen Scheerder
John Moreno <phe...@interpath.com>:
> It's not even that strict with any program that I am aware of that warns
> or restricts sigs - at MOST they simply refuse to include it
> automatically.
Actually, there are many existing "inews" programs, used by lots of
newsreaders to post articles, that simply dispense all but the first few
lines -- thus inducing the well-known "sig damage".
This happens at posting time, without the software being able to know
about it, and without the user knowing it. Until seeing the article
back, after it has propagated.
Rolf Braun
In article <1d4gpeh.pre...@ppp050.0.mmtl.videotron.net>,
Michel...@videotron.ca (Michel Gagnon) wrote:
> Scott Forbes <for...@ravenna.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <ethridge-140...@ppp10-6.dllstx.onramp.net>,
> > ethr...@onramp.net (Allen Ethridge) wrote:
> > > Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
> > > network connections?
> >
> > No, not really. It was (and is) related to common courtesy.
>
> While I like short signatures, I think the limit should be raised to
> something like 6 or 8 lines. Even better, I think it should be something
> like 350 characters, irrespective of the number of lines, so it would
> mean something short, but organised however you like it.
The limit in MT-NW (but not NW itself AFAIK, which uses 4) is 8 lines. It
warns at 4 lines though. I think warning beyond 4 (which is the
convention) is sensible, and I think 8 lines is a good etiquette limit,
but I'm not sure if it's a good idea to enforce it in software. Still, I
use MT-NW 2.4.1, because unlike some people, I don't bitch about a rule
I'm not even inclined to violate.
For those who think a rule is bad, people have been known to make 24-line
sigs. Ugly, wasteful, and just plain annoying. A sig length rule may be
annoying in itself, but it prevents the larger annoyance.
BTW: I really wouldn't like to see a 175 line sig with one character (plus
a carriage return) per line, and that's what a hard 350 character limit
might encourage. :)
> On the other hand, I have not seen anything in the Good Seals requiring
> no HTML. Unless it is an oversight of mine, I definitely think HTML
> should be out of news, unless specifically required by the poster.
The requirement of the GNKSA is that HTML not be turned on by default.
This is where Netscape Collabra 4 nicely fails. Allowing HTML mail/news is
fine for when formatting is desired, but Netscape stupidly made it the
default. Yuk. It is REALLY annoying to see a marked-up post by some newbie
who doesn't know better and forgot to change this setting.
This is one example of how the GNKSA is a fairly good standard, and how
major software companies ignore it. Also, note this: the only really
controversial GNKSA part is the signature limit suggestion. The GNKSA also
provides for sensible things like Mail-Copies-To, correct References
handling, and automatic clipping of signatures when replying.
--
- Rolf Braun ... e-mail: rbr...@cstone.net
- Web: http://www.cstone.net/~rbraun/
- Sassy Software: cool software for your Macintosh or Apple IIgs
- Rolf's HTML & Stuff: creative web design for less
Jammer Six
In article <rbraun-1502...@dialin1145.cstone.net>,
rbr...@cstone.net (Rolf Braun) wrote:
>€ The limit in MT-NW (but not NW itself AFAIK, which uses 4) is 8 lines. It
>€ warns at 4 lines though. I think warning beyond 4 (which is the
>€ convention) is sensible, and I think 8 lines is a good etiquette limit,
>€ but I'm not sure if it's a good idea to enforce it in software.
We agree on the warning. Once.
After I've been warned, if that warning is repeated, it isn't a warning
anymore, it's an annoyance.
We also agree that it's not up to the software to enforce manners.
Amitai Schlair
Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> We also agree that it's not up to the software to enforce manners.
That is precisely correct. It is not up to the software. It is up to the
user, who can work around software limitations if he so desires, and who
can choose different software if he so desires.
Keep in mind that you're free to use another newsreader, or, as you have
chosen, an older (and less "limited") version of the same newsreader.
I really don't understand what you're complaining about.
--
I know the answer! The answer lies within the heart of all mankind! The
answer is twelve? I think I'm in the wrong building.
-- Charles Schulz
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> rbr...@cstone.net (Rolf Braun) wrote:
>
>
> > The limit in MT-NW (but not NW itself AFAIK, which uses 4) is 8 lines. It
> > warns at 4 lines though. I think warning beyond 4 (which is the
> > convention) is sensible, and I think 8 lines is a good etiquette limit,
> > but I'm not sure if it's a good idea to enforce it in software.
>
> We agree on the warning. Once.
>
> After I've been warned, if that warning is repeated, it isn't a warning
> anymore, it's an annoyance.
>
> We also agree that it's not up to the software to enforce manners.
It doesn't ENFORCE manners - it refuses to automatically break them.
I'm tempting to post a message with a 20 line sig just to show you this.
But I've already done something similar with MacSOUP which has a more
strict limit.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jeroen Scheerder <j...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> John Moreno <phe...@interpath.com>:
>
> > It's not even that strict with any program that I am aware of that warns
> > or restricts sigs - at MOST they simply refuse to include it
> > automatically.
>
> Actually, there are many existing "inews" programs, used by lots of
> newsreaders to post articles, that simply dispense all but the first few
> lines -- thus inducing the well-known "sig damage".
And MacSOUP does esentially the same thing.
But since, inews can simply refuse to post the article at all, you're
still right.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Darwin O. Magno <ma...@earthling.net> wrote:
Or rather he had a header which said:
> Mail-Copies-To: ma...@earthling.net
I did. It bounced. Why?
--
John Moreno
Jammer Six
In article <1d4ihjc.wfxtcm1lfjywfN@[10.0.2.16]>, amitai....@usa.net
(Amitai Schlair) wrote:
>€ > We also agree that it's not up to the software to enforce manners.
>€
>€ That is precisely correct. It is not up to the software. It is up to the
>€ user, who can work around software limitations if he so desires, and who
>€ can choose different software if he so desires.
>€ I really don't understand what you're complaining about.
I'm complaining about the point we agree on.
That Fraser would "backgrade" software to the point where it attempts to
Jammer Six
In article
<0AFFCAD2FB5DF021.5215E615...@library-proxy.airnews.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>€ It doesn't ENFORCE manners - it refuses to automatically break them.
Breaking them is your definition, and I am under no obligation to accept it.
I consider a 4 line sig perfectly acceptable.
By my definition, (which is what I am discussing, and what everyone here
is trying to get me to change) the software refuses to do what I want
without complaining.
Once I've heard the complaint, I expect it to shut up and do as I instruct
it, and it does not.
Unusable. A Backgrade, not an upgrade. An example of wasted talent and effort.
A damn shame, that talent and effort could have been productive.
Note that his efforts have not succeeded in shortening my sig, they have
not accomplished their stated goal.
Stuart Park
Allen Ethridge (ethr...@onramp.net) wrote:
> But that then leads to the question of what will happen to USENET when
> multimedia hits it and it finally catches up to the rest of the net. A four
> (or even eight) line limit is going to seem kind of strange when graphics
> and sound are all around. Or is USENET just going to roll over and die as
> as the internet evolves? (Ever see a news post in MIME or HTML format?)
I hope that Usenet NEVER 'catches up' and starts using multimedia.
I enjoy reading Usenet messages without having to suffer through
waiting ages for stupid graphical images to appear or some
companies adverts to be plastered all around the message.
Usenet is supposed to be text-only..
so tell me, do you ever read novels? Or do you stick with only
reading comics because they are more 'colorful and graphical'?
--
"If only he used his talent for niceness, instead of evil"
- Get Smart
Stuart Park
E-Mail: stuart @ banana.psd.com.au Melbourne, Australia
John Moreno
In news.software.readers Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
> > It doesn't ENFORCE manners - it refuses to automatically break them.
>
> Breaking them is your definition, and I am under no obligation to accept it.
>
> I consider a 4 line sig perfectly acceptable.
So does MT-NW - you just don't happen to have one. You've got a 5 line
sig. I hadn't mentioned it before but you also aren't using the
standard sig delimiter which allows other programs to not include your
sig when they reply. This is also, shall we say, unkind?
> By my definition, (which is what I am discussing, and what everyone here
> is trying to get me to change) the software refuses to do what I want
> without complaining.
That's right.
> Once I've heard the complaint, I expect it to shut up and do as I instruct
> it, and it does not.
It does - until the next time you try to do it.
> Unusable. A Backgrade, not an upgrade. An example of wasted talent and effort.
As there are a lot of people using it, I think "Unusable" is incorrect.
Rather say that you don't like the way it works and then leave it at
that - nobody will argue that you should use it.
> A damn shame, that talent and effort could have been productive.
>
> Note that his efforts have not succeeded in shortening my sig, they have
> not accomplished their stated goal.
There are always going to be jerks who won't be polite - all you can do
is tell them they are being jerks and hope that eventually they wise up.
I don't know what you are getting upset about - this isn't really like
burning women, it's more like asking somebody to take their shoes off
when they enter your house.
--
John Moreno
Darwin O. Magno
In article
<BD9E8F9C133D4D47.F677BDA4...@library-proxy.airnews.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
Dunno. Couldn't tell you. Other mail seems to come just fine.
Could've been a server hiccup. :-(
--
Mr. Darwin O. Magno <mailto:ma...@earthling.net>
Sven Guckes
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six):
> We agree on the warning. Once. After I've been warned, if that
> warning is repeated, it isn't a warning anymore, it's an annoyance.
A warning will be given when appropriate - *every* time it is appropriate.
If all warning were removed then we might as well continue as nothing happened.
And if there were ways to turn all warning off with a copy of a setup file
then every would get a copy to happily be ignorant about everything.
Traffic analogy: Remove all road signs and brakes from cars.
But I think that most people like some basic rules -
especially when they know what happens without them.
Lets have *some* warnings!
Sven
Nana Yaw Ofori
In article <slrn6egoj9...@rudin.math.fu-berlin.de>,
guc...@math.fu-berlin.de wrote:
> jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six):
> > We agree on the warning. Once. After I've been warned, if that
> > warning is repeated, it isn't a warning anymore, it's an annoyance.
>
> A warning will be given when appropriate - *every* time it is appropriate.
> If all warning were removed then we might as well continue as nothing
happened.
> And if there were ways to turn all warning off with a copy of a setup file
> then every would get a copy to happily be ignorant about everything.
>
> Traffic analogy: Remove all road signs and brakes from cars.
>
Traffic Analogy to the present situation: Whenever you're about pass a
stop sign or a red light without stopping, steel spikes pop up from the
road and pop your tires, forcing you to either get new tires, or do your
driving elsewhere.
Yeah, I'm irked by it. But i really, really like MT-Newswatcher. So
I'm not going to hop back to the earlier version. So I guess I'll be
getting new tires.
Ah, well.
--
==== Nana Yaw "The Fish" Ofori ===== http://www.io.com/~beholder ====
<"}><_________ ___ _________ ___ ___ ___ |"Who's the
/ ______/| / /| / _____/| / /| / /| / /| | mighty Elder
/ /|_____|// / // /_____|// /_/_/ / // / / |God that is our
/ ____/| / / //_____ /| / _____ / //__/ / |claim to fame?
/ /|___|/ / / /_|____/ / // /|__/ / /_|__|/ |H-A-S, T-U-R!
/__/ / /__/ //_______/ //__/ / /__/ //__/| |Please don't say
|__|/<"}}}><|__|/ |_______|/ |__|/ |__|/ |__|/ | the name!"
== "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." Email: nof...@pop3.utoledo.edu ==
Dan Cottler
In article <cirby-14029...@pm54-22.magicnet.net>,
ci...@magicnet.net (Chad Irby) wrote:
>jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
>(About the Good Netkeeping Seal of Approval...)
>
>> I understand, now.>>
>> I wasn't aware of the Seal of Approval, or it's requirements.
>> After a quick preveiw of them at the above site, I'm glad the seal exists.
>> It will warn me off of products I'm not interested in.
>> I'm going back to 2.3.5, specifically because of these issues.
>> I do not now, nor will I ever, allow Grey Little Men to dictate what set
>> of manners I conduct myself under.
>Wow. That's a pretty strong moral stance just to avoid using software
>that limits your signature to four lines.
Some people just like to have the right and ability to poo whereever they wish.
But why buy shampoo, when real poo is free?
- Dan.
+---------------------------------------------------------+
| Dan Cottler <mailto:dar...@usa.net> |
| Psychoceramic Emeritus Cherry Hill, NJ, USA, Earth |
+---------------------------------------------------------+
terrell gibbs
In article <1d4g6ai.dp...@roxboro0-045.dyn.interpath.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
>Try to get used to using the command keys. They are pretty easy.
>
I generally don't bother learning command keys, except the universal or
near-universal ones. After all, whole point of having a menu bar is so
that you don't have to learn a bunch of obscure, program-specific
commands. In any case, the problem is that unless I think about it, I tend
to post a follow-up in the same way that I'm accustomed to doing it. So
I'd have to think about it to switch to a command-key. But when I think
about it, I don't make the mistake.
ORAC
In article <nofori-1602...@131.183.15.148>,
nof...@pop3.utoledo.edu (Nana Yaw Ofori) wrote:
>In article <slrn6egoj9...@rudin.math.fu-berlin.de>,
>guc...@math.fu-berlin.de wrote:
>
>> jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six):
>> > We agree on the warning. Once. After I've been warned, if that
>> > warning is repeated, it isn't a warning anymore, it's an annoyance.
>>
>> A warning will be given when appropriate - *every* time it is appropriate.
>> If all warning were removed then we might as well continue as nothing
>happened.
>> And if there were ways to turn all warning off with a copy of a setup file
>> then every would get a copy to happily be ignorant about everything.
>>
>> Traffic analogy: Remove all road signs and brakes from cars.
>>
>
> Traffic Analogy to the present situation: Whenever you're about pass a
>stop sign or a red light without stopping, steel spikes pop up from the
>road and pop your tires, forcing you to either get new tires, or do your
>driving elsewhere.
>
> Yeah, I'm irked by it. But i really, really like MT-Newswatcher. So
>I'm not going to hop back to the earlier version. So I guess I'll be
>getting new tires.
As long as Simon doesn't decide to rewrite MT-NW so that it is
*impossible* to use a .sig file longer than the net Nazi-"suggested" four
lines/80 characters, I'll just put up with the warning and continue to use
the latest version of MT-NW, because I really like the program. After all,
the warning only pops up the first time you try to post something in a
session or after you enter the text of your .sig file in the Preferences
dialogue. I can deal with that, although I do find it annoying.
And I don't plan on shortening my .sig right now. I already got rid of one
line containing my institutional affiliation. I fail to see why a .sig
file should be limited to four lines as opposed to five.
--
THE ABOVE E-MAIL ADDRESS IS A SPAMBOT TRAP AND IS RARELY CHECKED.
SEND E-MAIL TO dgorski(at)xsite(dot)net!
ORAC |"A statement of fact cannot be
a.k.a. David Gorski | insolent" ORAC
Jeroen Scheerder
John Moreno <phe...@interpath.com>:
> > Actually, there are many existing "inews" programs, used by lots of
> > newsreaders to post articles, that simply dispense all but the first few
> > lines -- thus inducing the well-known "sig damage".
>
> And MacSOUP does esentially the same thing.
No, it doesn't, AFAIK. The .sig that the user sees is what gets posted;
and while it refuses to auto-include long .sigs, MacSOUP does post what
the user chooses to post.
The difference: using inews, users don't see their .sig appear in their
message at all. There's a separate .sig file, which is appended when
posting; that is, the first four lines, often.
So the user may use a .sig and don't realise it; and the user may think
.reallykewlgiantsig gets included, without having any way of knowing
beforehand that only the first 4 lines will make it.
The upshot: using inews, the user has little knowledge of what will gets
posted. Experience will tell. In MacSOUP, however, what the user posts
is what gets posted. No more, no less -- and without hassle. The same
goes for most newsreader software.
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm ORAC <ORA...@aol.com> wrote:
> nof...@pop3.utoledo.edu (Nana Yaw Ofori) wrote:
>
> >guc...@math.fu-berlin.de wrote:
> >
> >> jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six):
> >> > We agree on the warning. Once. After I've been warned, if that
> >> > warning is repeated, it isn't a warning anymore, it's an annoyance.
> >>
> >> A warning will be given when appropriate - *every* time it is
> >> appropriate. If all warning were removed then we might as well continue
> >> as nothing happened. And if there were ways to turn all warning off
> >> with a copy of a setup file then every would get a copy to happily be
> >> ignorant about everything.
> >>
-snip-
> > Yeah, I'm irked by it. But i really, really like MT-Newswatcher. So
> >I'm not going to hop back to the earlier version. So I guess I'll be
> >getting new tires.
>
> As long as Simon doesn't decide to rewrite MT-NW so that it is
> *impossible* to use a .sig file longer than the net Nazi-"suggested" four
> lines/80 characters, I'll just put up with the warning and continue to use
> the latest version of MT-NW, because I really like the program. After all,
> the warning only pops up the first time you try to post something in a
> session or after you enter the text of your .sig file in the Preferences
> dialogue. I can deal with that, although I do find it annoying.
Argh. That'll teach me to not investigate and see what people are
talking about. When Simon was first proposing this he was going to have
it appear EVERY single time you posted. I suggested that he only do it
once per session - he didn't respond to my suggestion and when I saw
this guy complaining I thought he (Simon) had decided that wasn't
sufficient and was still giving the warning every single time.
If that's all that is bugging him - that it nags whenever he first post,
then I've got to say => he's a worse cry-baby than I thought.
If it did it every single time it'd be really annoying (but I still
wouldn't let comment's like net Nazi go by) and possibly enough to
justify switching programs. But still not bad enough to warrant the
comments he has been making. With it only doing it ONCE per seession,
his complaints are totally overblown. It's a polite note which takes a
second to get rid of, and which you probably only have to deal with once
or twice a day.
> And I don't plan on shortening my .sig right now. I already got rid of one
> line containing my institutional affiliation. I fail to see why a .sig
> file should be limited to four lines as opposed to five.
In for a penney, in for a pound. If you think the institution is
necessary, include it. The point of stuff like this is to keep you from
automatically doing things which are wrong without your having to
carefully consider it. If, after careful thought, you think it's needed
or best, then do it. Take me for example, until recently I posted using
a quote char of '] ' and not the standard '> ' because my ISP was
rejecting articles without something like 2/3 new text, and I didn't
want to bother checking to see if this or that article met the limits.
Once my ISP changed this (and I found out they had), I switched back.
Only people can make the final decisions as to what they should do, but
software (and the people writing it) can decide what *they* are going to
help you do.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jeroen Scheerder <j...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> John Moreno <phe...@interpath.com>:
>
> > > Actually, there are many existing "inews" programs, used by lots of
> > > newsreaders to post articles, that simply dispense all but the first few
> > > lines -- thus inducing the well-known "sig damage".
> >
> > And MacSOUP does esentially the same thing.
>
> No, it doesn't, AFAIK. The .sig that the user sees is what gets posted;
> and while it refuses to auto-include long .sigs, MacSOUP does post what
> the user chooses to post.
My mistake. It's been awhie and I thought that it did include it, but
didn't include anything past 4 lines. It simply refuses to do include
anything.
My appologizes to everyone - I shouldn't have been shooting my mouth
off.
--
John Moreno
Dan Peck
In article <1d4es8q.a9b...@roxboro0-027.dyn.interpath.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
> In comp.sys.mac.comm terrell gibbs <tgi...@bu.edu> wrote:
>
> > sm...@best.com (Simon Fraser) wrote:
> >
> > >Version 2.4.0 rolls in John Norstad's improvements for compliance with
> > >the Good Net-Keeping Seal of Approval <http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Ejs/gnksa/>
> > >adds some new features, and contains a few important bug fixes.
> >
> > Unfortunately, one of the GNKSA revisions is having the opposite of the
> > intended effect on me. I keep sending emails when I mean to
> > post--something I never did before--because I'm so used to "Reply quoting
> > selection" meaning to post, and now it means to email. I suppose that I'll
> > get used to it eventually, but I wish there was some option I could turn
> > on in the meantime to double-check whether I really meant to email.
>
> Just get used to using the command keys - they haven't changed. And
> Cmd-Shift-R still quotes only the selected text.
>
Actually my most used command key (K) has been eliminated. It used to be
Forward, very useful for Spam complaints.
But the bug fixes are well worth it.
I think I'll fire up ResEdit and see if I can fix it back.
--
Dan Peck
Milesquare Associates
Art Walker
On Sat, 14 Feb 1998 09:55:21 -0600, Allen Ethridge <ethr...@onramp.net> wrote:
>Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
>doesn't make any sense.
Actually, one could argue (and I frequently do) that with widespread IP
connectivity and directory services such as LDAP, .signature blocks simply
Are Not Necessary. Or at the very least, moved to the message header.
Art Walker
On Sat, 14 Feb 1998 19:36:46 -0600, Howard S Shubs <hsh...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
>Heinlein said it, through L. Long:
...and *that*, I believe, invokes some derivative of Godwin's Law...
Art Walker
On 15 Feb 1998 10:29:57 GMT, Stuart Park <stu...@banana.psd.com.au> wrote:
>Usenet is supposed to be text-only..
Explain alt.binaries.* then.
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Allen Ethridge <ethr...@onramp.net> wrote:
> hsh...@mindspring.com (Howard S Shubs) wrote:
>
> > There's very little arbitrary about this. These are netiquette rules
> > arrived at over a period of several years, intended to keep life easier
> > for most people.
>
> Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
> network connections? In these days of 56K modems such a rule just
> doesn't make any sense.
Not really, as when the rule was made most people on the net had direct
connection and were mainly dealing with T1 connections. It's simply common
courtesy along with annoyance at people making ASCII movies, and using them
as sigs (I've got a neat one of a guy diving into a pool). Four lines gives
you plenty of space to say what needs to be said and that's all you need -
notice that of the people involved in this thread that have sigs of more
than 4 lines only one has a reason other than "I like this, you might too".
Greg Berigan:
_-<#)-=# http://incolor.inetnebr.com/wotw/ (War of the Worlds)
___/___
_-~_--<###) Due to widespread abuse, I no longer read any messages
<~c>' __--< from users who employ munged addresses in their headers.
\_--=____#) Richard Hart and Justin Gunn at C|NET, this means you too.
He likes the war of the worlds ascii art - puts him one over the limit
Jammer Six:
------------
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you
want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
------------
Doesn't know how to properlly delimit a sig - puts him one over the limit.
Note that if Jammer Six new what he was doing this whole argument would have
been avoided as he could have (and should have) used a sig like:
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you
want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
Which put him one UNDER the limit, and give him a extra line to put his real
name in.
Nana Yaw Ofori:
==== Nana Yaw "The Fish" Ofori ===== http://www.io.com/~beholder ====
<"}><_________ ___ _________ ___ ___ ___ |"Who's the
/ ______/| / /| / _____/| / /| / /| / /| | mighty Elder
/ /|_____|// / // /_____|// /_/_/ / // / / |God that is our
/ ____/| / / //_____ /| / _____ / //__/ / |claim to fame?
/ /|___|/ / / /_|____/ / // /|__/ / /_|__|/ |H-A-S, T-U-R!
/__/ / /__/ //_______/ //__/ / /__/ //__/| |Please don't say
|__|/<"}}}><|__|/ |_______|/ |__|/ |__|/ |__|/ | the name!"
== "Life's a Fish, then you Fry." Email: nof...@pop3.utoledo.edu ==
Likes fish - 5 over the limit.
ORAC:
THE ABOVE E-MAIL ADDRESS IS A SPAMBOT TRAP AND IS RARELY CHECKED.
SEND E-MAIL TO dgorski(at)xsite(dot)net!
ORAC |"A statement of fact cannot be
a.k.a. David Gorski | insolent" ORAC
Some justification, mungues address and tells how to unmunge - puts him one
over the limit.
Long sigs are just a pain - if you want vanity put it in the headers where
people don't have to read it.
--
John Moreno
Ken Taylor
Art.W...@onesourcetech.com (Art Walker) writes:
The binaries are usually posted uuencoded or some other text format.
Most of USENET assumes only a 7-bit connection.
--
Ken Taylor k...@ampersand.com
Project Engineer voice: (978) 671-0785
Ampersand, Inc. FAX: (978) 671-0786
Jammer Six
In article
<1B364DFA69C6C18F.4CD3D554...@library-proxy.airnews.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>€ > I consider a 4 line sig perfectly acceptable.
>€
>€ So does MT-NW - you just don't happen to have one. You've got a 5 line
>€ sig. I hadn't mentioned it before but you also aren't using the
>€ standard sig delimiter which allows other programs to not include your
>€ sig when they reply. This is also, shall we say, unkind?
Yup. My mistake. I meant "5 line sig", my apologies.
I don't know what a "standard sig delimiter" is, and I don't know what
effect that it is having on other programs.
>€ > Once I've heard the complaint, I expect it to shut up and do as I instruct
>€ > it, and it does not.
>€
>€ It does - until the next time you try to do it.
OK, let me re-phrase. Once I've heard the complaint, I expect not to hear
it again.
>€ As there are a lot of people using it, I think "Unusable" is incorrect.
>€ Rather say that you don't like the way it works and then leave it at
>€ that - nobody will argue that you should use it.
It's unusable to me.
>€ There are always going to be jerks who won't be polite - all you can do
>€ is tell them they are being jerks and hope that eventually they wise up.
Actually, I don't. If they want to be jerks, they have my blessing. I
don't bother telling them, I assume they already know.
>€ I don't know what you are getting upset about - this isn't really like
>€ burning women, it's more like asking somebody to take their shoes off
>€ when they enter your house.
So, in your opinion, the amount of money that was stolen matters?
Jammer Six
>€ A warning will be given when appropriate - *every* time it is appropriate.
OK.
It's only appropriate once.
After that, I know my sig is too long, in the opinion of a piece of software.
Jammer Six
In article <ORACII-1602...@maxreader.bsd.uchicago.edu>,
ORA...@aol.com (ORAC) wrote:
>€ As long as Simon doesn't decide to rewrite MT-NW so that it is
>€ *impossible* to use a .sig file longer than the net Nazi-"suggested" four
>€ lines/80 characters, I'll just put up with the warning and continue to use
>€ the latest version of MT-NW, because I really like the program. After all,
>€ the warning only pops up the first time you try to post something in a
>€ session or after you enter the text of your .sig file in the Preferences
>€ dialogue. I can deal with that, although I do find it annoying.
You're right, and, since it doesn't affect you, you're safe.
My sig is 5 lines, and it affects me, but not you.
After all, it's only Jews they're taking away, not any of US, so I guess
it's OK.
I didn't believe it was possible for this logic to survive in 1998.
Well, live and learn.
Your other assumptions are incorrect. I've seen the dialog box as many as
four times in a single session. It was VERY annoying, and now it's gone.
Sven Guckes
ORA...@aol.com (ORAC):
> And I don't plan on shortening my .sig right now. I already got rid of one
> line containing my institutional affiliation. I fail to see why a .sig
>
> --
> SEND E-MAIL TO dgorski(at)xsite(dot)net!
>
> ORAC |"A statement of fact cannot be
> a.k.a. David Gorski | insolent" ORAC
Well, there's always someone who is opposed to a limit of 'n' -
for every $n \in \N$, of course. So $n := 4$ might as well be it.
Besides, the 4x80 limit also limits your sig to 320 bytes - plenty!
Let me show you an example:
--
David "ORAC" Gorski dgo...@xsite.net
"A statement of fact cannot be insolent"
There - name and address first, and even a quote.
Plenty room left for "institutional affiliation":
--
David "ORAC" Gorski dgo...@xsite.net
http://www.xsite.net/~dgorski/ bite me!
"A statement of fact cannot be insolent"
I am not affiliated to any institution!
Only 160 bytes - how's that? :-)
And if you have qmail installed then you can easily set up an extra address
which you use for posting on Usenet
From: David Gorski <dgorsk...@xsite.net>
Mails to this address you can easily deal with a mail filter.
Delete, mark as read, whatever.
And if you want to direct courtesy copies then you should use this line:
Mail-Copies-To: dgo...@xsite.net
Oh, you don't want any courtesy copies? Then use this:
Mail-Copies-To: never
Hope this helps.
Sven
Greg Berigan
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
> He likes the war of the worlds ascii art - puts him one over the limit
Well if I could have found a way to keep it within 4 lines I would have
done it when I created the ASCII-art. Yeah, I created it myself. I am
trying to come up with an alternative that would keep me within the limit
(which I've always agreed with) but it is difficult.
And I'm not using MT-NW 2.4.x yet because, well, I haven't gotten around
to installing it yet, and because of some problems with the news server
administration here (not of a technical, "incompatibilitization" nature,
more like it wasn't propogating articles off the server).
--
_-<#)-=# http://incolor.inetnebr.com/wotw/
___/___
_-~_--<###) Due to widespread abuse, I no longer read any messages
<~c>' __--< from users who employ munged addresses in their headers.
\_--=____#) Richard Hart and Justin Gunn of C|NET, this means you too.
Zeleznikar, Alan
In article <jammer-1702...@sense-sea-pm4-16.oz.net>,
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
> I don't know what a "standard sig delimiter" is, and I don't know what
> effect that it is having on other programs.
The standard sig delimter is as follows on the line below:
--
That's two dashes and a space. You use it because many newsreaders are
designed to NOT include anyhting below that character pattern, thus
avoiding including the sig stuff in a reply.
A few others havr alluded to this in their replies, but since you stated
you didn't know what it was, I thought I'd show you directly. <-- what a
helpful fellow.
> ------------
> "C'mon, you sons of bitches, you
> want to live forever?"
> -First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
> ------------
So, in this case, your sig would not include this line at the top:
------------
You would simply check on the box in the sig pref's that says:
Add "-- " separator line before signature (recommended)
and then type the following in the sig box:
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you
want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
Although I think it looks a little better to put it all on one line:
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
That particular pref was there before 2.4.0/1, btw.
There ya go!
--
Alan Zeleznikar
Lockheed Martin Western Development Labs
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Greg Berigan <gber...@cse.unl.edu> wrote:
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
> > He likes the war of the worlds ascii art - puts him one over the limit
>
> Well if I could have found a way to keep it within 4 lines I would have
> done it when I created the ASCII-art. Yeah, I created it myself. I am
> trying to come up with an alternative that would keep me within the limit
> (which I've always agreed with) but it is difficult.
Frankly, I'd rather you added another line and made it look better (if
you can) or get rid of it entirely, because as it is it simply looks
like line noise. The only thing worse than ascii art in the sig, is
incomprehensible ascii art in the sig.
> And I'm not using MT-NW 2.4.x yet because, well, I haven't gotten around
> to installing it yet, and because of some problems with the news server
> administration here (not of a technical, "incompatibilitization" nature,
> more like it wasn't propogating articles off the server).
Well, I'm currently giving airnews a 30 day trial because of problems
with my isp's news server - although so far it isn't doing so good (it
keeps loosing the article count so that I end up downloading already
read headers - and the expire after ~20 days).
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
>
> > > I consider a 4 line sig perfectly acceptable.
> >
> > So does MT-NW - you just don't happen to have one. You've got a 5 line
> > sig. I hadn't mentioned it before but you also aren't using the
> > standard sig delimiter which allows other programs to not include your
> > sig when they reply. This is also, shall we say, unkind?
>
> Yup. My mistake. I meant "5 line sig", my apologies.
>
> I don't know what a "standard sig delimiter" is, and I don't know what
> effect that it is having on other programs.
As I'm sure others will point out - it's a line that consist soley of a
two dashes and a space - everything after that is the sig and doesn't get
included in replies to your messages. Fire 2.4.0 up again and try to
reply to one of my messages and to one of your's - my sig doesn't get
quoted, and hence you don't have to delete it. Your sig DOES get quoted
and *I* have to delete it by hand.
> > > Once I've heard the complaint, I expect it to shut up and do as I instruct
> > > it, and it does not.
> >
> > It does - until the next time you try to do it.
>
> OK, let me re-phrase. Once I've heard the complaint, I expect not to hear
> it again.
This is the same thing as your car nagging you about not putting your seat
belt on whenever you start your car - everytime you start your car without
a seatbelt on it nags. If you like the car otherwise then you figure out
some way around it, if you don't like the car in general then just get rid
of it - you don't call the manufactures "little grey men".
> > As there are a lot of people using it, I think "Unusable" is incorrect.
> > Rather say that you don't like the way it works and then leave it at
> > that - nobody will argue that you should use it.
>
> It's unusable to me.
"I don't like it for these reasons so I'm going to use something
different" <- this would have got a couple of questions at most.
> > There are always going to be jerks who won't be polite - all you can do
> > is tell them they are being jerks and hope that eventually they wise up.
>
> Actually, I don't. If they want to be jerks, they have my blessing. I
> don't bother telling them, I assume they already know.
Did you?
> > I don't know what you are getting upset about - this isn't really like
> > burning women, it's more like asking somebody to take their shoes off
> > when they enter your house.
>
> So, in your opinion, the amount of money that was stolen matters?
I'm not sure what you are getting at here. But assuming you are asking
about how onerous the requirements are then, yes. Politeness means
compromise and deferring to somebody elses wishes - that doesn't mean that
you have to do something you feel is wrong, but if it's just different or
mildly uncomfortable then you do it, becuuse it's the right thing to do.
If you go into somebody's house and they say it's their custom to sit on
the floor while eating or take off your shoes then (absent medical reasons
not to) you do so (although you might not want to return if you find it
excessively annoying). OTOH if you go to somebody house and they say it's
their custom that guest provide a wife or daughter for the host to have
sex with - you stomp out vowing never to return (unless that kind of thing
appeals to you and your wife of course).
In your case all you need to do is replace the line
------------
with a standard sig delimiter and everything is OK.
Not to be insulting but you really don't have anything to complain about
and your doing so is, uhm, well I can't think of anything that wouldn't
sound insulting.
I'd suggest that you change your sig to this (deleting the << and the >>).
<<--
Jammer Six or Real Name (handles are fine but real names are appreciated)
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918 >>
Not only will it fit within the standard usuage, but it will look better.
--
John Moreno
Jammer Six
In article <alan.zeleznikar-...@280-3r-mac9a.wdl.lmco.com>,
alan.ze...@lmco.com (Zeleznikar, Alan) wrote:
>€ That's two dashes and a space. You use it because many newsreaders are
>€ designed to NOT include anyhting below that character pattern, thus
>€ avoiding including the sig stuff in a reply.
Thanks, Alan.
I'll think this over.
It would cut a line off my sig, which would get it in under the 4 line limit.
However, I still object, and probably won't be changing.
Thanks again for the information.
------------
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you
want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
------------
Howard S Shubs
In article <slrn6eihqo.1...@cx60550-a.omhaw1.ne.home.com>,
Art.W...@onesourcetech.com wrote:
There was no mention of the "N" word in there, but it was a way to call
the guy names w/o actually doing it myself. <grin>
--
Howard S Shubs hsh...@bix.com
The Denim Adept hsh...@mindspring.com
Stuart Park
> So does MT-NW - you just don't happen to have one. You've got a 5 line
> sig. I hadn't mentioned it before but you also aren't using the
> standard sig delimiter which allows other programs to not include your
> sig when they reply. This is also, shall we say, unkind?
What amazes me is that you need to go through all this trouble of
mentioning it in a GNKSA and changing news readers to stop idiots
from having ridiculously long signatures.
When I first started posting messages, I had a quick read of the
"new users" faq.. which mentioned the 4 line limit (which I
currently obey). Seems if a lot more people actually read faqs
there would be less problems.
What amazes me even more is that all the guy has to do, is to
delete his last line of dashes and the problem would disappear.
Gee, real hard.. but of course that last line of dashes is
just SO important. :-/
(I am more impressed by people who manage to fit a large amount
of information in 4 lines, than people with 5230857298753 line
signatures with ascii art)
> > Unusable. A Backgrade, not an upgrade. An example of wasted talent and effort.
Unusable by people with 5 line signatures.
Usable by people with 4 line signatures.
Wasted talent? Not if it convinces some people to stop using
ridiculously long signatures.
(sure, 5 lines isn't ridiculously long.. but the limit has
to be set somewhere)
--
"If only he used his talent for niceness, instead of evil"
- Get Smart
Stuart Park
E-Mail: stuart @ banana.psd.com.au Melbourne, Australia
Sylvan Butler
D.N...@utexas.edu (Donald L. Nash) wrote:
>BTW, your wife-burning example is pure BS. You are comparing something
Actually I find his example short and to the point. Like all analogies
it fails when pushed to the limits, but was quite effective in its scope.
>which is objectively good, reducing the size of Usenet signatures, with
Yup.
>something which is objectively bad, murdering someone.
Given a belief in reincarnation, that may not be "objectively bad." This
was stated to be an Indian and therefore what, a Hindu custom? My
understanding of that culture is limited, but perhaps this could be
looked on as merely moving someone who is suffering, from this to the
next phase of existance.
sdb
--
| Sylvan Butler | Not speaking for Hewlett-Packard | sbutler.boi.hp.com |
| Watch out for my e-mail address. Thank UCE. #### change ^ to @ #### |
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. --Benjamin Franklin, 1759
(Or was that Nov 11 1755, from the Pennsylvania Assembly ?)
"Don't Tread On Me!"
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Rolf Braun <rbr...@cstone.net> wrote:
> Michel...@videotron.ca (Michel Gagnon) wrote:
>
> > Scott Forbes <for...@ravenna.com> wrote:
> >
> > > ethr...@onramp.net (Allen Ethridge) wrote:
> > > > Wasn't the four line signature rule originally related to the speed of
> > > > network connections?
> > >
> > > No, not really. It was (and is) related to common courtesy.
> >
> > While I like short signatures, I think the limit should be raised to
> > something like 6 or 8 lines. Even better, I think it should be something
> > like 350 characters, irrespective of the number of lines, so it would
> > mean something short, but organised however you like it.
>
> The limit in MT-NW (but not NW itself AFAIK, which uses 4) is 8 lines. It
> warns at 4 lines though. I think warning beyond 4 (which is the
> convention) is sensible, and I think 8 lines is a good etiquette limit,
> but I'm not sure if it's a good idea to enforce it in software. Still, I
> use MT-NW 2.4.1, because unlike some people, I don't bitch about a rule
> I'm not even inclined to violate.
>
> For those who think a rule is bad, people have been known to make 24-line
> sigs. Ugly, wasteful, and just plain annoying. A sig length rule may be
> annoying in itself, but it prevents the larger annoyance.
24-line? Here's a relatively short one that *I* kinda like.
Start scrolling down with the arrow key, and AS SOON AS it says
"** Start Hitting Spacebar Now **", start hitting the spacebar (or
page down key) slowly.
o ___
/|\ /___\______
__/_\___/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
** Start Hitting (page down) Now **
o ___
/|\ /___\______
___/_\__/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o ___
|=/___\_______
_____/>/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
|=___
/|/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
/|\
//_\\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
_/|\
/_/_\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___/|\
/___/_\_____
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\/_\____
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\_/_\____
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\__/_\_
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\____/_\
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ |=
/___\______|
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___ o
/___\__ |=
_______/____|_ ---_>
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ |=
/___\______>
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
/=
___ _>
/___\___---
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
/=
/
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
__o
/ \
___
/___\_____
_______/____|_ --
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
____o
___ \
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
__
___ \o
/___\_______ \
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___ \
/___\_______ \o
_______/____|_ \
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______ \
_______/____|_ \
| |o
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_ \|
| |
| |o
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| \|
| ' |..'
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/o'~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_ . .
| . '. '
| '.\/..'.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/,~~~~
/o
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| .'..''..
| . .'.' '
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;|/,~~
_o/
- /
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| .. .
| ..'.'.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;,;~~~
_o__/'
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
| . .
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;~~~~
o__// ''
- //
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|\__
- \
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
| o
|~~~~~~~~~/|\~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/ \
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
| o/
|~~~~~~~~~/|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/ \
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| , Bye!
| o/
|~~~~~~~~~/|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/ \
-
Start scrolling down with the arrow key, and AS SOON AS it says
"** Start Hitting Spacebar Now **", start hitting the spacebar (or
page down key) slowly.
o ___
/|\ /___\______
__/_\___/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
** Start Hitting (page down) Now **
o ___
/|\ /___\______
___/_\__/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o ___
|=/___\_______
_____/>/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
|=___
/|/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
/|\
//_\\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
_/|\
/_/_\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___/|\
/___/_\_____
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\/_\____
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\_/_\____
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\__/_\_
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ /|\
/___\____/_\
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ |=
/___\______|
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___ o
/___\__ |=
_______/____|_ ---_>
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
___ |=
/___\______>
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
/=
___ _>
/___\___---
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
o
/=
/
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
__o
/ \
___
/___\_____
_______/____|_ --
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
____o
___ \
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
__
___ \o
/___\_______ \
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___ \
/___\_______ \o
_______/____|_ \
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______ \
_______/____|_ \
| |o
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_ \|
| |
| |o
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| \|
| ' |..'
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/o'~~~~~~
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_ . .
| . '. '
| '.\/..'.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~/,~~~~
/o
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| .'..''..
| . .'.' '
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;|/,~~
_o/
- /
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| .. .
| ..'.'.
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;,;~~~
_o__/'
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
| . .
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;~~~~
o__// ''
- //
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|\__
- \
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
| o
|~~~~~~~~~/|\~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/ \
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
|
| o/
|~~~~~~~~~/|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/ \
-
___
/___\_______
_______/____|_
| , Bye!
| o/
|~~~~~~~~~/|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/ \
-
John Moreno
In news.software.readers Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> alan.ze...@lmco.com (Zeleznikar, Alan) wrote:
>
> > That's two dashes and a space. You use it because many newsreaders are
> > designed to NOT include anyhting below that character pattern, thus
> > avoiding including the sig stuff in a reply.
>
> Thanks, Alan.
>
> I'll think this over.
>
> It would cut a line off my sig, which would get it in under the 4 line limit.
>
> However, I still object, and probably won't be changing.
>
> Thanks again for the information.
The fact that you object to the software nagging shouldn't influence
your decision to change it in a program that doesn't nag - also, as I
said in a earlier post, it will simply look better if you use a sig
like:
<<--
Jammer Six or (if you like) Real Name
"C'mon, you sons of bitches, you want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918>>
--
John Moreno
Sven Guckes
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six):
> [sigdashes] would cut a line off my sig,
> which would get it in under the 4 line limit.
Wrong. The sigdashes line does not count -
unless you make it part of your signature file.
The user agent (mailer or newsreader) should do this:
if signature file exists
append sigdashes
append first four line of signature file
call editor on header+quoted-post+sigdashes+signature
> However, I still object, and probably won't be changing.
Maybe a few pictures will change your mind?
http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/mutt/pics.html
http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/slrn/pics.html
These pictures show how nice it can be to make programs aware
of text objects like a "signature" to allow for coloring.
> ------------
> "C'mon, you sons of bitches, you
> want to live forever?"
> -First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
> ------------
Besides - this isn't a signature. It certainly is an "automatically
appended text" - but it is not a signature. Big difference!
A signature would have your name and address, too. Like this:
--
Jammer Six jam...@oz.net
"C'mon, you sons of bitches,
you want to live forever?"
-First Sergeant Dan Daly, 1918
There:
Sigdashes, name and address, and a quote. All within 4x80. A signature!
For more info on signatures see the FAQ to alt.fan.warlord (see sig).
Sven
--
Sven Guckes guc...@math.fu-berlin.de [afw] Newsgroup alt.fan.warlord on WWW:
AFW Home Page: http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/afw/
AFW Best of : http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/afw/best.of/
AFW Acronyms : http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/afw/afw.acronyms.html
ORAC
In article <jammer-1702...@sense-sea-pm2-26.oz.net>,
jam...@oz.net (Jammer Six) wrote:
>In article <ORACII-1602...@maxreader.bsd.uchicago.edu>,
>ORA...@aol.com (ORAC) wrote:
>
>>€ As long as Simon doesn't decide to rewrite MT-NW so that it is
>>€ *impossible* to use a .sig file longer than the net Nazi-"suggested" four
>>€ lines/80 characters, I'll just put up with the warning and continue to use
>>€ the latest version of MT-NW, because I really like the program. After all,
>>€ the warning only pops up the first time you try to post something in a
>>€ session or after you enter the text of your .sig file in the Preferences
>>€ dialogue. I can deal with that, although I do find it annoying.
>
>
>You're right, and, since it doesn't affect you, you're safe.
>My sig is 5 lines, and it affects me, but not you.
You obviously didn't pay attention to what I wrote. The warning dialogue
box *does* apply to me, because my .sig file is five lines long! I made a
point of commenting on how I reduced my .sig from five to six lines and
it's still too long. Pay attention to what you're responding to before you
start bitching about it!
>After all, it's only Jews they're taking away, not any of US, so I guess
>it's OK.
This has to be one of the most amazing examples of hyperbole I've seen on
Usenet in a long time, comparing an attitude towards having to put up with
a little dialogue box in a newsreader once per session to attitudes of
those who closed their eyes to what was happening during the Holocaust! A
new low. It's even more incomprehensible because the analogy is false,
because the warning dialogue box DOES apply to me. I guess that, in your
twisted analogy, that would make me one of the Jews.
>I didn't believe it was possible for this logic to survive in 1998.
I didn't believe it was possible for such cluelessness to survive in 1998.
Why are you making such a big deal over an annoyance that matters little
in the scheme of things? If you don't like MT-NW, then use an earlier
version or use a different newsreader. Earlier, I said I'd do just that if
Simon ever modified MT-NW so that a user is not allowed to use .sig files
longer than 4 lines, but that for now I find the warning tolerable. What's
the big deal?
>Well, live and learn.
Based on your posts regarding MT-NW, I conclude that, although you're
likely to do the former, it's highly unlikely you'll do the latter.
>Your other assumptions are incorrect. I've seen the dialog box as many as
>four times in a single session. It was VERY annoying, and now it's gone.
Well, I don't know what you're doing, but that's not my experience with
MT-NW 2.4.1. The most I've seen the dialogue in one session is twice.
Once, the first time I try to post with the longer .sig file, and then
again, but only if I go to the Preferences dialogue box and edit the .sig
file. If I don't go to the Preferences dialogue, I *never* see it more
than once per session. The only way you can see the dialogue more than
that is if you quit and restart MT-NW.
Jammer Six
In article
<3C90EF94FF17BEB8.559A4411...@library-proxy.airnews.net>,
phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>€ As I'm sure others will point out - it's a line that consist soley of a
>€ two dashes and a space - everything after that is the sig and doesn't get
>€ included in replies to your messages. Fire 2.4.0 up again and try to
>€ reply to one of my messages and to one of your's - my sig doesn't get
>€ quoted, and hence you don't have to delete it. Your sig DOES get quoted
>€ and *I* have to delete it by hand.
Now, THAT'S a real reason, that I see and understand the value of. My
apologies, I didn't realize I could do that, and get my sig cut out
automatically. I've changed my sig to take advantage of it.
Unfortunately, this brings my sig down to four lines, and my case is
beginning to disintegrate, as long as I'm willing to let haul people away,
as long as it's only Jews...
>€If you like the car otherwise then you figure out
>€ some way around it, if you don't like the car in general then just get rid
>€ of it - you don't call the manufactures "little grey men".
Actually, that's exactly what I do. Every time that little buzzer goes
off, I cuss them some more. Then I take some wire cutters and fix it.
Can't find the wires in MT-NW
>€ > Actually, I don't. If they want to be jerks, they have my blessing. I
>€ > don't bother telling them, I assume they already know.
>€
>€ Did you?
Of course.
Jerks who claim otherwise are liars as well as Jerks.
I detest liars, but I understand Jerks. :)
>€ In your case all you need to do is replace the line
>€ ------------
>€ with a standard sig delimiter and everything is OK.
Done.
I still don't like the warning, but I do like the deal about not quoting
sigs automatically. That's exactly the kind of thing I think computers
should provide.
Now I'm thinking about downloading 2.4.1 again.
>€ Not to be insulting but you really don't have anything to complain about
>€ and your doing so is, uhm, well I can't think of anything that wouldn't
>€ sound insulting.
Now, see, if you were a Jerk, it would be easy.
"You really ARE an expert at the Delivery of Complaints, aren't you?"
"You're good. I didn't see anything there to complain about at all..."
"Does it take a lot of time to come up with those complaints, or do you
just see them at first glance?"
There's three, of the top of my head. I leave the rest as an exercise for
these Gentle Readers.
>€
>€ Not only will it fit within the standard usuage, but it will look better.
I'll think that over.
>€ --
>€ John Moreno
Just as a side comment, MT-NW quoted your sig.
What's the story here? Did I do something wrong? Is it a bug? Is it fixed
in 2.4.1?
--
John Moreno
In comp.sys.mac.comm Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> phe...@interpath.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>
> > As I'm sure others will point out - it's a line that consist soley of a
> > two dashes and a space - everything after that is the sig and doesn't get
> > included in replies to your messages. Fire 2.4.0 up again and try to
> > reply to one of my messages and to one of your's - my sig doesn't get
> > quoted, and hence you don't have to delete it. Your sig DOES get quoted
> > and *I* have to delete it by hand.
>
> Now, THAT'S a real reason, that I see and understand the value of. My
> apologies, I didn't realize I could do that, and get my sig cut out
> automatically. I've changed my sig to take advantage of it.
>
> Unfortunately, this brings my sig down to four lines, and my case is
> beginning to disintegrate, as long as I'm willing to let haul people away,
> as long as it's only Jews...
The Jews get to say no as two people here who do use longer sigs have
said - they know it's wrong but feel that it's necessary or desirable.
There is never going to be shortages of ways to get around the limit.
> > If you like the car otherwise then you figure out
> > some way around it, if you don't like the car in general then just get rid
> > of it - you don't call the manufactures "little grey men".
>
> Actually, that's exactly what I do. Every time that little buzzer goes
> off, I cuss them some more. Then I take some wire cutters and fix it.
>
> Can't find the wires in MT-NW
It's possible to get the source code from Simon so that you could fix
this yourself, and (I don't know for sure because I haven't tried) it
should be possible with just a little hacking to eliminate the warning
without the source code. Quickeys, KeyQuencer and the Sig quoter (I
forget the name) are all wire cutters that could be used to snip the
wires. And it wouldn't suprise me if it could be done with applescript
(I'm not sure of what support MT has for applescript).
-snip-
> > In your case all you need to do is replace the line
> > ------------
> > with a standard sig delimiter and everything is OK.
>
> Done.
>
> I still don't like the warning, but I do like the deal about not quoting
> sigs automatically. That's exactly the kind of thing I think computers
> should provide.
>
> Now I'm thinking about downloading 2.4.1 again.
-snip-
> > Not only will it fit within the standard usuage, but it will look better.
>
> I'll think that over.
>
> > --
> > John Moreno
>
> Just as a side comment, MT-NW quoted your sig.
>
> What's the story here? Did I do something wrong? Is it a bug? Is it fixed
> in 2.4.1?
It's not a bug - 2.3.5 simply doesn't do it. This (not quoting the sig)
was one of the things that were changed/added for GNKSA compliance.
Well, on to another matter - you are using bullets as part of you
quoting string, bullets are characters which aren't available on many
systems and can cause trouble for people reading and/or responding to
your messages. By using it you are limiting the number of people who
CAN respond to your messages (i.e. not offended or anything, their
system simply can't handle it). It can also result in your messages
looking something like this:
>=A5 with a standard sig delimiter and everything is OK.
--
John Moreno
David Gimeno Gost
Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net> wrote:
> I wasn't aware of the Seal of Approval, or it's requirements.
>
> After a quick preveiw of them at the above site, I'm glad the seal exists.
>
> It will warn me off of products I'm not interested in.
I, as many other people, also find the 4-line signature limitation
ridiculous. I could understand it if the limitation was based on the
bandwith (total number of characters), but it doesn't. Something that
originally was a guideline has gone too far with GNKSA.
I don't find anything wrong with the rest of GNKSA, however (maybe it's
because I haven't read it completely). Unfortunately, the signature
limitation produces in many people the same feeling it produced in you (I
also hate GNKSA because of this). GNKSA could be really useful otherwise.
I've seen many nice signatures that take more than 4 lines but still use a
reasonable bandwith (even less than others that conform to the 4-line
limit). I wouldn't like to miss them and I hope people does not stop
making them simply because the author of the newsreader does not like
them. People annoyed by signatures longer than 4 lines should just filter
out those messages rather than attempting to enforce his/her tastes to
everyone else. A limitation on the maximum number of characters in the
signature would make sense, however, becuase that costs money to
everybody, even if they don't ignore the messages.
I've been considering writting my own offline newsreader since I found the
limitation in MacSOUP. Now that other newsreaders are following and I'm
finishing the development of a database engine, it has become a high
priority. It's likely that I will never finish it because it's a lot of
work, but the inexistence of good newsreaders that treat their users as
adult people opens an attractive opportunity for a good shareware
newsreader that does...
--
David Gimeno Gost <d...@mackeros.com>
Your Macintosh can do whatever you want... with our help, of course!
Copyright (c) 1996-1998 DGG Software
Andy Rabagliati
According to Jammer Six <jam...@oz.net>:
>
> After all, it's only Jews they're taking away, not any of US, so I guess
> it's OK.
Wait ! Don't do it !!
You know that if you mention H*tl*r in a thread it is doomed to die ?
> I didn't believe it was possible for this logic to survive in 1998.
>
> Well, live and learn.
Well, with all the things that were taken away from the J*ws, at
least they didn't have to move their mice and click a dialog box.
They boiled the mice in a teacup and ate them for breakfast.
Cheers, Andy!
Frank Slootweg
David Gimeno Gost (d...@mackeros.com) wrote:
[deleted]
> I've seen many nice signatures that take more than 4 lines but still use a
> reasonable bandwith (even less than others that conform to the 4-line
> limit). I wouldn't like to miss them and I hope people does not stop
> making them simply because the author of the newsreader does not like
> them.
Signatures should not be "nice". Signatures should be informative (if
needed at all).
If people want to be "nice", creative, fancy, etc., then they should
demonstrate their work in an appropriate newgroup, put it on their web
page, etc..
(Usenet) Signatures are intended for contact information, organization/
affiliation information, (web et al) pointers, etc.. In most cases,
signatures, even small ones, are, to a large extent, superfluous. In
most cases all the needed information is in the From: and Organization:
lines. If needed, one could *add* some additional information in the
"signature", i.e. when I am looking for something to buy/sell, I might
add my home country/city or address.
never use
> People annoyed by signatures longer than 4 lines should just filter
> out those messages rather than attempting to enforce his/her tastes to
> everyone else.
That puts the burden (i.e. getting/installing filtering capability) on
the victims. That is not in the spirit of the GNKSA/Netiquette.
> A limitation on the maximum number of characters in the
> signature would make sense, however, becuase that costs money to
> everybody, even if they don't ignore the messages.
That would indeed be more reasonable, provided that, as also others
have pointed out, the lines are not too short.
But in any case, as has been explained over and over again, the 4-line
"limit" is not really a limit because one can easily work around it if
needed, and, as also has been explained over and over again, there
hardly ever is such a "need", despite what the complainers/flamers want
us to believe.
--
Look, ma! No sig!
Jammer Six
In article <6ch3u5$2...@hpuamsa.neth.hp.com>, fra...@neth.hp.com (Frank
Slootweg) wrote:
>€ (Usenet) Signatures are intended for contact information, organization/
>€ affiliation information, (web et al) pointers, etc.. In most cases,
>€ signatures, even small ones, are, to a large extent, superfluous. In
>€ most cases all the needed information is in the From: and Organization:
>€ lines. If needed, one could *add* some additional information in the
>€ "signature", i.e. when I am looking for something to buy/sell, I might
>€ add my home country/city or address.
>€ never use
You mean like yours?
Jammer Six
In article <dgg-190298...@infovia187.grn.es>, d...@mackeros.com
(David Gimeno Gost) wrote:
>€ I've been considering writting my own offline newsreader since I found the
>€ limitation in MacSOUP. Now that other newsreaders are following and I'm
>€ finishing the development of a database engine, it has become a high
>€ priority. It's likely that I will never finish it because it's a lot of
>€ work, but the inexistence of good newsreaders that treat their users as
>€ adult people opens an attractive opportunity for a good shareware
>€ newsreader that does...
I'd be first in line.
Would you write from scratch, or build off existing NewWatchers?
Stefan Haller
Sven Guckes <guc...@math.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> The user agent (mailer or newsreader) should do this:
>
> if signature file exists
> append sigdashes
> append first four line of signature file
> call editor on header+quoted-post+sigdashes+signature
I'd suggest a slightly more elaborated algorythm. It is a very common
user error to put the sig dashes at the start of their .sig file, or
(worse) a line that contains of only two dashes without a space.
If signature file exists
append sigdashes
if first line of signature file is "-- \n" or "--\n"
skip that line
append first (or next) four lines of signature file
--
Stefan Haller
Berlin, Germany
http://www.snafu.de/~stk/