Current rows etc
in [UK Mac]
|
From: James Jolley on 2 Jul 2010 06:59 On 2010-07-02 11:25:05 +0100, me9(a)privacy.net (Bella Jones) said: > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > >> On 2010-07-02 10:55:19 +0100, Jaimie Vandenbergh said: >> >>> On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:13:02 +0100, James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Some of them yes. There are, however, a few who openly admit to me >>>> being some sort of trolll. Ian Piper it appears being one of them. >>> >>> That may well be because they've killfiled Rowland (plus all the idiot >>> little hanger-on doodz), so your intemperate and sweary responses are >>> now the worst language in the group that they see. >> >> Nod. >> >>> So of you don't make those responses, for example by killfiling >>> Rowland if you can't help but get drawn in to a slanging match, and >>> get back to conversations about Apple kit and accessibility, then >>> we'll all learn more. >> >> I think James is also miscategorizing some other folks as trolls. I >> don't know why. Ian (Piper) certainly isn't a troll, and nor is "Dorian >> Gray" despite being a pseudonym. > > I'd have to agree. Ian and DG are not trolls, IMO. > > James, I appreciate that Rowland really pisses you off, but the more you > react to him the worse he will get, and then you end up categorised with > him. It really is 'step away from the keyboard' time when he attacks > you. I know it's hard! Again fair enough. I suppose nobody wins with him. I'll try and get on with anyone really, but his overall attitude is unusual. As to me thinking others are trolls, it's fairly easy to see why, when they are telling you that firstly you're not blind (Dorian Grey), secondly how my postings are irrelevant (Ian Piper), etc, etc. Yes, it hurts quite frankly.
From: TOG on 2 Jul 2010 07:21 On 2 July, 02:37, real-address-in-...(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > It's personal abuse[1] like this which is ruining this newsgroup - if > only people like Streater and `Dr' Geoff and The Older `Gent' and Peter > C. could learn to leave the personal abuse out of their posts, this > newsgroup would be a better place. > > But - well, that lot all seem to think that it's perfectly okay for them > to hurl personal abuse at anyone they like, sneering all the while... > What abuse?
From: Sak Wathanasin on 2 Jul 2010 07:26 On 2 July, 11:59, James Jolley <jrjol...(a)me.com> wrote: > On 2010-07-02 11:25:05 +0100, m...(a)privacy.net (Bella Jones) said: > > > > > Chris Ridd <chrisr...(a)mac.com> wrote: > > >> On 2010-07-02 10:55:19 +0100, Jaimie Vandenbergh said: > > >>> On Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:13:02 +0100, James Jolley <jrjol...(a)me.com> > >>> wrote: > > >>>> Some of them yes. There are, however, a few who openly admit to me > >>>> being some sort of trolll. Ian Piper it appears being one of them. > > >>> That may well be because they've killfiled Rowland (plus all the idiot > >>> little hanger-on doodz), so your intemperate and sweary responses are > >>> now the worst language in the group that they see. > > >> Nod. > > >>> So of you don't make those responses, for example by killfiling > >>> Rowland if you can't help but get drawn in to a slanging match, and > >>> get back to conversations about Apple kit and accessibility, then > >>> we'll all learn more. > > >> I think James is also miscategorizing some other folks as trolls. I > >> don't know why. Ian (Piper) certainly isn't a troll, and nor is "Dorian > >> Gray" despite being a pseudonym. > > > I'd have to agree. Ian and DG are not trolls, IMO. > > > James, I appreciate that Rowland really pisses you off, but the more you > > react to him the worse he will get, and then you end up categorised with > > him. It really is 'step away from the keyboard' time when he attacks > > you. I know it's hard! > > Again fair enough. I suppose nobody wins with him. I'll try and get on > with anyone really, but his overall attitude is unusual. > > As to me thinking others are trolls, it's fairly easy to see why, when > they are telling you that firstly you're not blind (Dorian Grey), > secondly how my postings are irrelevant (Ian Piper), etc, etc. Yes, it > hurts quite frankly. And if you're wondering why people are only saying these things to you and not RM, it's because we've given up on him. It's up to you: you can join Chris Holland and pursue your vendetta with RM through all the newgroups or you can get a life and just accept that being abused by RM is part of the initiation rite for this group. Either way, he "wins".
From: zoara on 2 Jul 2010 07:31 Bella Jones <me9(a)privacy.net> wrote: > Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > >> Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> Nige Danton <nige.danton(a)nospam.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I'm a regular reader and occassional poster seeking help and I've > > > > always >>>> received nothing but helpful and informative responses. >>> >>> I agree with you. But these post used to be the rule, and have > > > nothing >>> to do with the genuinely nasty posts we've been seeing lately. And, >>> using MacSOUP, those are easy to spot and skip. >> >> This is one area where I'd like to see an improvement in MacSOUP - if >> I've got a thread marked as killed (or 'killfile this person and all >> followups') then I don't want to see those posts -at all-. As it is >> MacSOUP still lets you see that they exist and get to them, which for >> people with poor willpower (ie, me) is no use at all. > > Totally agree. I don't want to see anything in italics. I just want > them > to disappear. Show only unread articles? I can't remember the setting I use, but all I see in MacSOUP is a diamond in the thread view; to actually see the article I need to tag it for download and reconnect to the server. Enough effort to make me stop and think what I'm doing. If anyone wants to know how I managed this, I can check my settings when I'm next at my Mac and post back. -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: zoara on 2 Jul 2010 07:31
Peter Ceresole <peter(a)cara.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Nige Danton <nige.danton(a)nospam.com> wrote: > >> I'm a regular reader and occassional poster seeking help and I've > > always >> received nothing but helpful and informative responses. > > I agree with you. But these post used to be the rule, and have nothing > to do with the genuinely nasty posts we've been seeing lately. And, > using MacSOUP, those are easy to spot and skip. MacSOUP has a wonderful way of responding to "this subthread has gone to the dogs" and I wish more newsreaders had it (and more people used it). When a post is obviously heading in that direction, hitting the minus key will kill all followups (and followups to followups, etc) to that post, without killing all posts by that author or other posts in other parts of the thread. A wonderful way of throwing out the bathwater and keeping the baby. Subthreads never recover properly when they go to the dogs, despite efforts involving cake and owls. Apparently this feature is on its way to NewsTap (which I use) and I will be taking advantage of it, rather than using its basic killfiles which lose effectiveness when other people respond to articles I have killed. -z- -- email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm |