From: Leythos on
In article <hpljte$gio$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
me(a)nowhere.whocareswhatthisemailisanyway says...
> Do you take into account that just about every thread on the internet has an
> ebb and flow and it's normal for content within threads to vary away from
> the subject title? Just a thought.
>

Yes, this one has been off-topic for many posts, but, do we accept
wrongs just because it's not convenient or do we seek to correct wrongs
because it's the proper and right thing to do?

--
You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little
voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that.
Trust yourself.
spam999free(a)rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
From: ~BD~ on
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> ~BD~ wrote:
>
>> Leythos wrote:
>>> Why not respect Usenet yourself?
>>>
>>> Usenet is not a chat group that you can ramble on about any given
>>> subject in any given group - the GROUP NAME DEFINES THE DISCUSSION
>>> TYPE AND CONTENT.
>>>
>>> If you want to "Talk" with people about non-Anti-Virus things, then
>>> you should respect Usenet and how it was intended to be used and
>>> take your discussion to email.
>>>
>>> It's simple to follow Usenet methods, if you care.
>>
>> Everyone has a different view! Here's an example:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> There, SeaNymph said ........
>
> "SeaNymph" is definitely not a person whose opinion should be used as a
> reference to describe how Usenet works.


That's like throwing down a gauntlet!

Perhaps you should consider saying that to her face, BTS.

*Why* is her opinion unworthy? Tell me that.

--
Dave
From: Jenn on
"Leythos" <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.26281dfb4cde55fe98a29c(a)us.news.astraweb.com...
> In article <hpljte$gio$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>,
> me(a)nowhere.whocareswhatthisemailisanyway says...
>> Do you take into account that just about every thread on the internet has
>> an
>> ebb and flow and it's normal for content within threads to vary away from
>> the subject title? Just a thought.
>>
>
> Yes, this one has been off-topic for many posts, but, do we accept
> wrongs just because it's not convenient or do we seek to correct wrongs
> because it's the proper and right thing to do?


oh come on ... :D ...... it's a newsgroup .. not a moral dilema <wink>
;-)
--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/


From: Andy Walker on
Jenn wrote:

>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off_Topic

Wikipedia is not considered a reliable enough content source for
Usenet. ;-)
From: Jenn on
"Andy Walker" <awalker(a)nspank.invalid> wrote in message
news:4bbe549e.688634718(a)news.webtv.com...
> Jenn wrote:
>
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off_Topic
>
> Wikipedia is not considered a reliable enough content source for
> Usenet. ;-)


well ... it was good enough for Lythos... so I used the same source ...
makes no nevermind to me...

--
Jenn (from Oklahoma)
http://pqlr.org/bbs/