If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:35:32 +1100, Monty wrote:
Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:35:32 +1100, Monty wrote:
Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:55:08 -0700, Franklin wrote:
Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 09 Feb 2015 13:55:08 -0700, Franklin wrote:
Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 17:41:08 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:35:32 +1100, Monty wrote: Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. Sorry, Monty, I accidentally posted in the wrong place. The reply was not meant for you. I'll repost it more appropriately. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 17:41:08 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:35:32 +1100, Monty wrote: Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. Sorry, Monty, I accidentally posted in the wrong place. The reply was not meant for you. I'll repost it more appropriately. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 17:44:23 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 17:41:08 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:35:32 +1100, Monty wrote: Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. Sorry, Monty, I accidentally posted in the wrong place. The reply was not meant for you. I'll repost it more appropriately. There! I did it. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 17:44:23 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 17:41:08 -0800, Gene E. Bloch wrote: On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 12:35:32 +1100, Monty wrote: Stand by for a flame war :-) Thanks for verifying my prediction. I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Try to understand that there was a joke buried subtly[1] in there. [1] Honestly, I didn't realize it was so subtle. Sorry, Monty, I accidentally posted in the wrong place. The reply was not meant for you. I'll repost it more appropriately. There! I did it. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:20:51 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote: Stand by for a flame war :-) NO - NOT THE BIG RED, YELLOW AND ORANGE BUTTON !!!!! |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:20:51 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote: Stand by for a flame war :-) NO - NOT THE BIG RED, YELLOW AND ORANGE BUTTON !!!!! |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
"Franklin" wrote in message om... On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:20:51 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" wrote: On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:54:56 -0500, Dan Schumacher wrote: Three qualifiers: 1. Monty mistakenly said "e-mail" instead of "USENET posting" or "newsgroup posting". He compounded that error by top posting. 2. Email and USENET/newsgroups are two different things. 3. The discussion pertains to where the discussion is taking place - that is to say, newsgroups. But that is only true if one assumes that you are entering a discussion mid-stream. Then that (bottom posting - yes, top posting - no) is true, because you, in fact, entered the discussion midstream. In newsgroups, even if you are the 2nd poster, you have entered midstream. In business, if you are one of the original addressees, then you get all responses, preferably at the top, because ... Haven't seen any businesses using a USENET newsgoup to conduct business, so I will guess that you are talking Email. This is the standard practice for all US government communications. ... The US government doesn't communicate via USENET. P.S. I use bottom postings only to satisfy those net nannies, who contradict common sense. Correct results, wrong reason. Stand by for a flame war :-) I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Franklin, Unfortunately, you can't seem to understand the differentiation that you pointed out. The OP referred to email and that is what I responded to; I am not making any claim that it applies to Usenet (whether it should is an other issue). Any statement that I am applying it to Usenet is totally erroneous despite your assertion to the contrary. Regards, Dan |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
"Franklin" wrote in message om... On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:20:51 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" wrote: On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:54:56 -0500, Dan Schumacher wrote: Three qualifiers: 1. Monty mistakenly said "e-mail" instead of "USENET posting" or "newsgroup posting". He compounded that error by top posting. 2. Email and USENET/newsgroups are two different things. 3. The discussion pertains to where the discussion is taking place - that is to say, newsgroups. But that is only true if one assumes that you are entering a discussion mid-stream. Then that (bottom posting - yes, top posting - no) is true, because you, in fact, entered the discussion midstream. In newsgroups, even if you are the 2nd poster, you have entered midstream. In business, if you are one of the original addressees, then you get all responses, preferably at the top, because ... Haven't seen any businesses using a USENET newsgoup to conduct business, so I will guess that you are talking Email. This is the standard practice for all US government communications. ... The US government doesn't communicate via USENET. P.S. I use bottom postings only to satisfy those net nannies, who contradict common sense. Correct results, wrong reason. Stand by for a flame war :-) I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Franklin, Unfortunately, you can't seem to understand the differentiation that you pointed out. The OP referred to email and that is what I responded to; I am not making any claim that it applies to Usenet (whether it should is an other issue). Any statement that I am applying it to Usenet is totally erroneous despite your assertion to the contrary. Regards, Dan |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
"Monty" wrote in message ... Franklin wrote: On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:20:51 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" wrote: On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:54:56 -0500, Dan Schumacher wrote: Three qualifiers: 1. Monty mistakenly said "e-mail" instead of "USENET posting" or "newsgroup posting". Those four lines are part of an archive going back about 30 years. I didn't notice that I had not changed the reference to e-mail instead of Usenet posting. I have now changed that reference. Thank you. He compounded that error by top posting. I wasn't compounding that error. I posted those four lines at the start of my message in support of John's comment re top posting - in an attempt to demonstrate the short-comings of top posting, particularly when posting to Usenet. 2. Email and USENET/newsgroups are two different things. 3. The discussion pertains to where the discussion is taking place - that is to say, newsgroups. But that is only true if one assumes that you are entering a discussion mid-stream. This would be the normal usage of Usenet. Then that (bottom posting - yes, top posting - no) is true, because you, in fact, entered the discussion midstream. In newsgroups, even if you are the 2nd poster, you have entered midstream. In business, if you are one of the original addressees, then you get all responses, preferably at the top, because ... Haven't seen any businesses using a USENET newsgoup to conduct business, so I will guess that you are talking Email. This is the standard practice for all US government communications. ... The US government doesn't communicate via USENET. P.S. I use bottom postings only to satisfy those net nannies, who contradict common sense. Correct results, wrong reason. Stand by for a flame war :-) I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Monty, Thank you for acknowledging that there is a difference between email and UseNet, which corrects your previous erroneous statement. Regards, Dan |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
"Monty" wrote in message ... Franklin wrote: On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:20:51 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" wrote: On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 13:54:56 -0500, Dan Schumacher wrote: Three qualifiers: 1. Monty mistakenly said "e-mail" instead of "USENET posting" or "newsgroup posting". Those four lines are part of an archive going back about 30 years. I didn't notice that I had not changed the reference to e-mail instead of Usenet posting. I have now changed that reference. Thank you. He compounded that error by top posting. I wasn't compounding that error. I posted those four lines at the start of my message in support of John's comment re top posting - in an attempt to demonstrate the short-comings of top posting, particularly when posting to Usenet. 2. Email and USENET/newsgroups are two different things. 3. The discussion pertains to where the discussion is taking place - that is to say, newsgroups. But that is only true if one assumes that you are entering a discussion mid-stream. This would be the normal usage of Usenet. Then that (bottom posting - yes, top posting - no) is true, because you, in fact, entered the discussion midstream. In newsgroups, even if you are the 2nd poster, you have entered midstream. In business, if you are one of the original addressees, then you get all responses, preferably at the top, because ... Haven't seen any businesses using a USENET newsgoup to conduct business, so I will guess that you are talking Email. This is the standard practice for all US government communications. ... The US government doesn't communicate via USENET. P.S. I use bottom postings only to satisfy those net nannies, who contradict common sense. Correct results, wrong reason. Stand by for a flame war :-) I happen to agree with you, but I never admit it publicly. You agree with what? I agree with him - taken out of context, because he is talking Email. I disagree with him, because he is applying it to USENET. Monty, Thank you for acknowledging that there is a difference between email and UseNet, which corrects your previous erroneous statement. Regards, Dan |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Freeware after ten
On Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:32:42 +1100, Monty wrote:
On Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:20:51 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" wrote: Stand by for a flame war :-) NO - NOT THE BIG RED, YELLOW AND ORANGE BUTTON !!!!! Three, two, one - PUSH! ....Evil cackling laugh heard sub voce. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|