Prev: additional guard
Next: Exceeded Internet Timeout Virus?
From: "FromTheRafters" erratic on 8 Dec 2009 22:01
"MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%235kP7aHeKHA.2188(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> On 12/08/2009 09:16 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
>> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uudwMXGeKHA.5156(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> If we constantly call them names or question their activities, they
>>> will likely stop participating altogether.
>>
>> Well, it's worth a try. I'm in!
>>
>> :oD
>>
>>
>
> Okay,, but it never worked for Usenet abusers,, then again using these
> techniques on non-trolls or other innocent users likely will drive
> away
> further usage of these groups...
>
> So is that what you really want?

No, but it would be nice if they were indocrinated into the usenet style
by the gateway program. It would also be nice if they didn't keep three
year old posts sitting there as if they were just posted yesterday. The
creator(s) of the techarena.in site should get a clue and stop using old
usenet posts so that their "forum" appears to be "hopping" with
activity.

It appears to the user that MS MVP's post there - well...they post
*here*, and many of them probably dislike that place as much as I do.

(I was just kidding about calling all those idiots, idiots)
:oD


From: MEB on 8 Dec 2009 22:28
On 12/08/2009 10:01 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%235kP7aHeKHA.2188(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> On 12/08/2009 09:16 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
>>> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:uudwMXGeKHA.5156(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>>> If we constantly call them names or question their activities, they
>>>> will likely stop participating altogether.
>>>
>>> Well, it's worth a try. I'm in!
>>>
>>> :oD
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Okay,, but it never worked for Usenet abusers,, then again using these
>> techniques on non-trolls or other innocent users likely will drive
>> away
>> further usage of these groups...
>>
>> So is that what you really want?
>
> No, but it would be nice if they were indocrinated into the usenet style
> by the gateway program. It would also be nice if they didn't keep three
> year old posts sitting there as if they were just posted yesterday. The
> creator(s) of the techarena.in site should get a clue and stop using old
> usenet posts so that their "forum" appears to be "hopping" with
> activity.
>
> It appears to the user that MS MVP's post there - well...they post
> *here*, and many of them probably dislike that place as much as I do.
>
> (I was just kidding about calling all those idiots, idiots)
> :oD
>
>

Well that's a bit short sighted, as without these archives it would be
difficult to find a lot of the self-help on the Internet that one now
does. On the other hand, it has helped slow the necessity for people TO
post help requests [decreasing Usenet traffic], particularly for old
issues, as they merely need to search the archives.
What HASN'T been addressed except the *new* OSs and *new* malware...

But I agree, it would be nice for these users to quote needed aspects
from the discussion for reference, but *there* its just the next message
in the forum as seen by those users. Is it their fault you deleted those
threads and messages, regardless of age or relevance...

So it revolves around your perspective; where you sit/where its viewed...

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---
From: Andy Medina on 8 Dec 2009 23:41
Call them "ID-10-Ts" instead. :D

"FromTheRafters" <erratic @nomail.afraid.org> wrote in message
news:%238qiuvHeKHA.2460(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> (I was just kidding about calling all those idiots, idiots)
> :oD


From: "FromTheRafters" erratic on 9 Dec 2009 07:59
"MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e7lJW%23HeKHA.5608(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> On 12/08/2009 10:01 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
>> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%235kP7aHeKHA.2188(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> On 12/08/2009 09:16 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
>>>> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:uudwMXGeKHA.5156(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> If we constantly call them names or question their activities,
>>>>> they
>>>>> will likely stop participating altogether.
>>>>
>>>> Well, it's worth a try. I'm in!
>>>>
>>>> :oD
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay,, but it never worked for Usenet abusers,, then again using
>>> these
>>> techniques on non-trolls or other innocent users likely will drive
>>> away
>>> further usage of these groups...
>>>
>>> So is that what you really want?
>>
>> No, but it would be nice if they were indocrinated into the usenet
>> style
>> by the gateway program. It would also be nice if they didn't keep
>> three
>> year old posts sitting there as if they were just posted yesterday.
>> The
>> creator(s) of the techarena.in site should get a clue and stop using
>> old
>> usenet posts so that their "forum" appears to be "hopping" with
>> activity.
>>
>> It appears to the user that MS MVP's post there - well...they post
>> *here*, and many of them probably dislike that place as much as I do.
>>
>> (I was just kidding about calling all those idiots, idiots)
>> :oD
>>
>>
>
> Well that's a bit short sighted, as without these archives it would be
> difficult to find a lot of the self-help on the Internet that one now
> does. On the other hand, it has helped slow the necessity for people
> TO
> post help requests [decreasing Usenet traffic], particularly for old
> issues, as they merely need to search the archives.
> What HASN'T been addressed except the *new* OSs and *new* malware...
>
> But I agree, it would be nice for these users to quote needed aspects
> from the discussion for reference, but *there* its just the next
> message
> in the forum as seen by those users. Is it their fault you deleted
> those
> threads and messages, regardless of age or relevance...
>
> So it revolves around your perspective; where you sit/where its
> viewed...

Agreed. Except I feel that there are plenty of searchable usenet
archives that don't result in idiots posting responses to years old
posts. I'm not even suggesting deletion of old posts, but these web
based applications could easily prevent replying to old posts just as
the actual web based forum programs pronounce some topics as 'closed'.

If a poster needs to, he or she could quote the relevant portion of an
old post in a *new* post instead of just stating "I have the same
problem" or "here's how you fix it" without any references.


From: MEB on 9 Dec 2009 12:35
On 12/09/2009 07:59 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e7lJW%23HeKHA.5608(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> On 12/08/2009 10:01 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
>>> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%235kP7aHeKHA.2188(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>> On 12/08/2009 09:16 PM, FromTheRafters wrote:
>>>>> "MEB" <MEB-not-here(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:uudwMXGeKHA.5156(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>>>
>>>>>> If we constantly call them names or question their activities,
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> will likely stop participating altogether.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, it's worth a try. I'm in!
>>>>>
>>>>> :oD
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay,, but it never worked for Usenet abusers,, then again using
>>>> these
>>>> techniques on non-trolls or other innocent users likely will drive
>>>> away
>>>> further usage of these groups...
>>>>
>>>> So is that what you really want?
>>>
>>> No, but it would be nice if they were indocrinated into the usenet
>>> style
>>> by the gateway program. It would also be nice if they didn't keep
>>> three
>>> year old posts sitting there as if they were just posted yesterday.
>>> The
>>> creator(s) of the techarena.in site should get a clue and stop using
>>> old
>>> usenet posts so that their "forum" appears to be "hopping" with
>>> activity.
>>>
>>> It appears to the user that MS MVP's post there - well...they post
>>> *here*, and many of them probably dislike that place as much as I do.
>>>
>>> (I was just kidding about calling all those idiots, idiots)
>>> :oD
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Well that's a bit short sighted, as without these archives it would be
>> difficult to find a lot of the self-help on the Internet that one now
>> does. On the other hand, it has helped slow the necessity for people
>> TO
>> post help requests [decreasing Usenet traffic], particularly for old
>> issues, as they merely need to search the archives.
>> What HASN'T been addressed except the *new* OSs and *new* malware...
>>
>> But I agree, it would be nice for these users to quote needed aspects
>> from the discussion for reference, but *there* its just the next
>> message
>> in the forum as seen by those users. Is it their fault you deleted
>> those
>> threads and messages, regardless of age or relevance...
>>
>> So it revolves around your perspective; where you sit/where its
>> viewed...
>
> Agreed. Except I feel that there are plenty of searchable usenet
> archives that don't result in idiots posting responses to years old
> posts. I'm not even suggesting deletion of old posts, but these web
> based applications could easily prevent replying to old posts just as
> the actual web based forum programs pronounce some topics as 'closed'.
>
> If a poster needs to, he or she could quote the relevant portion of an
> old post in a *new* post instead of just stating "I have the same
> problem" or "here's how you fix it" without any references.
>
>

I'd have to agree with that. Locking the discussion could easily be
done, and should be if a final answer to that particular issue was provided.

Same for the new post, which should be done if some new variant of an
old issues has been found, or special individual help or explanation is
needed.

--
MEB
http://peoplescounsel.org/ref/windows-main.htm
Windows Info, Diagnostics, Security, Networking
http://peoplescounsel.org
The "real world" of Law, Justice, and Government
___---
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: additional guard
Next: Exceeded Internet Timeout Virus?