JANET and cam.ac.uk cutting Usenet News feed from July
in [UK Mac]
|
Prev: Mail and trash
Next: Mac Pro problem
From: Jim on 16 Apr 2010 02:02 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > [1] And the killfile entry is still active. Examine MacSoup to learn > > > how one may over-ride the killfile in MacSoup on a post-by-post basis. > > > > That would appear not to be its best feature. > > I fail to see any point in this post from you Ok, don't flame me for this but... You keep replying to people you claim are in your killfile. Given that the primary use of a killfile is to _avoid_ reading posts that meet a certain criteria, this seems...odd. If someone is in your killfile but you override it every time, they're effectively not in your killfile. I've tried in the past to use a killfile. I can't. I just don't get on with them. Jim -- http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk http://twitter.com/GreyAreaUK Please help save Bletchley Park - sign the petition for Government funding at: (open to UK residents and ex.pats) http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/BletchleyPark/ Thank you.
From: The Older Gentleman on 16 Apr 2010 02:14 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > [snip reams of what I assume is malicious abusive drivel that I've not > bothered reading] This *might* be why you have a problem in believing that every posting written in answer to one of yours is a malicious attack. > leave off the personal abuse There was none. -- BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Honda CB400F Triumph Street Triple Suzuki TS250ER GN250 Damn, back to six bikes! Try Googling before asking a damn silly question. chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
From: James Jolley on 16 Apr 2010 06:38 On 2010-04-16 07:02:27 +0100, jim(a)magrathea.plus.com (Jim) said: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > >>>> [1] And the killfile entry is still active. Examine MacSoup to learn >>>> how one may over-ride the killfile in MacSoup on a post-by-post basis. >>> >>> That would appear not to be its best feature. >> >> I fail to see any point in this post from you > > Ok, don't flame me for this but... > > You keep replying to people you claim are in your killfile. Given that > the primary use of a killfile is to _avoid_ reading posts that meet a > certain criteria, this seems...odd. > > If someone is in your killfile but you override it every time, they're > effectively not in your killfile. > > I've tried in the past to use a killfile. I can't. I just don't get on > with them. > > Jim Same here, I find it quite difficult to maintain and so on. Not to mention I think it's wrong to show off with them like a couple do on here. Would you treat people with that much contempt on the street? Probably not because you'd be punched. Best -James-
From: Jaimie Vandenbergh on 16 Apr 2010 06:49 On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:38:36 +0100, James Jolley <jrjolley(a)me.com> wrote: >On 2010-04-16 07:02:27 +0100, jim(a)magrathea.plus.com (Jim) said: > >> You keep replying to people you claim are in your killfile. Given that >> the primary use of a killfile is to _avoid_ reading posts that meet a >> certain criteria, this seems...odd. >> >> If someone is in your killfile but you override it every time, they're >> effectively not in your killfile. I'll *very* occasionally (once a month ish) follow a References: header to pick up a killed post, but would only post to follow them up in cases of potentially dangerous errors of fact (twice a year ish). >> I've tried in the past to use a killfile. I can't. I just don't get on >> with them. > >Same here, I find it quite difficult to maintain and so on. Mine (Agent for Windows, no use for you) allows auto-expiring kill filters, so I can pick Kill on author, choose maybe 30 days or 300 or forever, and all is simple and self maintaining. On top of that I kill threads and subthreads once in a while, which just takes a tap of the 'i' for ignore key. That's all the killfiling I do. And it's enough. >Not to >mention I think it's wrong to show off with them like a couple do on >here. Would you treat people with that much contempt on the street? >Probably not because you'd be punched. Saying "killfile for you then" (and then actually doing so) is far less annoying than subjecting the group to yet another set of posts sniping away at each other... (Sorry Sn!pe, didn't mean you!) Cheers - Jaimie -- Beer has food value, but food has no beer value.
From: TOG on 16 Apr 2010 08:33
On 16 Apr, 11:38, James Jolley <jrjol...(a)me.com> wrote: > On 2010-04-16 07:02:27 +0100, j...(a)magrathea.plus.com (Jim) said: > > > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-...(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > >>>> [1] And the killfile entry is still active. Examine MacSoup to learn > >>>> how one may over-ride the killfile in MacSoup on a post-by-post basis. > > >>> That would appear not to be its best feature. > > >> I fail to see any point in this post from you > > > Ok, don't flame me for this but... > > > You keep replying to people you claim are in your killfile. Given that > > the primary use of a killfile is to _avoid_ reading posts that meet a > > certain criteria, this seems...odd. > > > If someone is in your killfile but you override it every time, they're > > effectively not in your killfile. > > > I've tried in the past to use a killfile. I can't. I just don't get on > > with them. > > > Jim > > Same here, I find it quite difficult to maintain and so on. Not to > mention I think it's wrong to show off with them like a couple do on > here. Would you treat people with that much contempt on the street? > Probably not because you'd be punched. > <AOL> Used them in the past, but so much quoted text floats around they're effectively useless sometimes. The only time they've definitely been of value was when ngs were hit by troll invasions, but that seems to happen so infrequently these days. ISTR that alt.local.yorkshire was effectively disabled a few years ago by the trolls. Dunno what has happened since. They tried blasting ukrm into the stratosphere at about the same time, and failed miserably. |