Adams print sells for $722K
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: David Ruether on 24 Jun 2010 17:26 "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message news:2010062413120427722-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... > On 2010-06-24 12:41:31 -0700, "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> said: [...] >> (Hey, if we let that in, purdy soon people will be >> adding HTML visual gizmos and even photos [gasp!] here...;-) >> --DR > ...and this from somebody open minded enough to move from view camera, to 35mm, to digital. I would never have taken you for a > Luddite, stuck in the world of plaintext, and MS IT brainwashing. ;-) -- > Regards, > > Savageduck Actually, I moved from an Argus "75" to an Olympus Pen EE half-frame, to a Practica SLR, to an Exa I SLR, to a Nikon F/F2/F3 (with a Rollei 3.5F added somewhere along there, with several Rollei 35 compacts...), and along with much Nikon 35mm gear was a 5"x7" light-weight view with three Nikkor lenses, later used as a 4"x5", then a Fuji-Wide was bought/sold and I still have a Mamiya 645 with two lenses leftover plus the pile of 35mm Nikon gear. More recently, I've dabbled in digital stills and video...;-) (Ooops! I forgot the pinhole cameras I used to build and use...;-) I did get the impression along the way from writing/reading here that the formatting is properly plain-text only, not HTML - and I do have fun tweaking the "Mac-heads" (those who spend vastly more for similar hardware in order to get the pretty Mac "plastic goo" all over their computer cases - and let's not even touch the "better" software issue, except for saying that Apple finally got smart and made it possible to run PC apps on a Mac...8^). So I buy/build cheap PCs, which I can update easily and cheaply myself. As for being a Luddite, you are right - but it's more a matter of not liking change, being an Asperger...;-) --DR
From: David Ruether on 24 Jun 2010 17:33 "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message news:4c23bfe7$0$5545$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com... > "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message news:i00248$cd3$1(a)ruby.cit.cornell.edu... >> Being Asperger, and stupid, I likely would have...;-) > Stupidity is not the issue. I know several people who have Asperger's. (Sorry Tony.) None of them seem to know when to keep > quiet. -- > Peter Yuh, "stupid" - we just don't know when to shut up, and we "blab all" instead (which is often not "smart"...;-). --DR
From: David Ruether on 24 Jun 2010 17:36 "Robert Spanjaard" <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote in message news:c4c50$4c23c3f5$546ac3cf$24234(a)cache90.multikabel.net... > On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:41:31 -0400, David Ruether wrote: >>> It is still best to place a URL on a seperate line, enclosed so, < >>> (space)url(space) > or; < >>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/_DNC0924w.jpg > -- Regards, >> But, adding the URL as an HTML line *should* be unnecessary in a >> text-only group... > It isn't written as HTML. HTML would be: > > <a href="http://www.blablabla.com">blablabla</a> > > Enclosing a URL (or a message-id, or an e-mail address) in inequality > signs (_without_ the spaces, BTW) is the best way to avoid ambiguities. > -- > Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com Thanks for clarifying that. As Gilda used to say, "Never mind!" 8^) --DR
From: John McWilliams on 24 Jun 2010 19:43 David Ruether wrote: > "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message > news:2010062409300315668-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >> On 2010-06-24 08:52:02 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> said: > >>> To ensure the maximum "readability" of links, put each on a separate line, enclosed in angled brackets < >, with a space and a >>> c/r at the end; nothing else. > >> Exactly. > > But, these *are* plain-text only NGs - so why would we think > it necessary to format URLs for rich-text/HTML groups, huh? The angled brackets are not html; they help some newsreaders parse a long URL. Speaking of formatting, though, David: Your line wrap is awfully short- ca. 80 characters is a good choice. And the sig. delimiter- two dashes, a space and a c/r- what Unison does to those is not cricket.... Cheers. -- John McWilliams "Nobody in football should be called a genius. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein." - Football commentator and former player Joe Theismann, 1996
From: John McWilliams on 24 Jun 2010 21:25
Savageduck wrote: > On 2010-06-24 16:43:04 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> said: > >> David Ruether wrote: >>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message >>> news:2010062409300315668-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom... >>>> On 2010-06-24 08:52:02 -0700, John McWilliams <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> said: >>> >>>>> To ensure the maximum "readability" of links, put each on a >>>>> separate line, enclosed in angled brackets < >, with a space and a >>>>> c/r at the end; nothing else. >>> >>>> Exactly. >>> >>> But, these *are* plain-text only NGs - so why would we think >>> it necessary to format URLs for rich-text/HTML groups, huh? >> >> The angled brackets are not html; they help some newsreaders parse a >> long URL. >> >> Speaking of formatting, though, David: Your line wrap is awfully >> short- ca. 80 characters is a good choice. >> >> And the sig. delimiter- two dashes, a space and a c/r- what Unison >> does to those is not cricket.... >> >> Cheers. > > David is using Outlook Express. > I am the one using Unison, and I fully agree with you regarding how > URL's should be entered. However I am not sure what you are getting at > with regard to sig delimiters. From what I see Unison keeps to the > convention as you stated when I compose a post, and I see yours as I am > sure you intended. > < http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/JW-01.jpg > Ah, I see: OE is mangling your perfectly well formed sig delimiter, (as seen in DR's replies to you) but that's OE. David is, perhaps, missing a carriage return on his, or OE butchers it on the outgoing. All's well and nothing's changed: Google groups and OE are tied for the worst news handlers. -- John McWilliams |