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 | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
I keep getting large icons?
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Mayayana writes: Hmm. All I want is that whenever and however I open Explorer, I get two panes - a tree view in the left pane, and a details view in the right pane. I don't really mind what size the window is (unless it's tiny or huge), and I don't mind if any folder has a special icon. You thought it would be simple, did you? (-: [] Mayayana, are you deliberately removing them? Yes. (Without them, it looks as if you Mayayana said "I just remember ..." Yes. Not so good, huh? Even with them in it can get very confusing. And what a mess on the reposting websites, where whole threads full of get reprinted over and over down the page. Yes. People have different approaches. People who started out with console mode often like to include the entire thread in each post. To me that's sloppy and outdated. I have to scroll down through a pile of muck to find the new post. Me too. I delete large chunks of what I'm replying to - and if I end up deleting all of the contributions from a given person, I delete that person's attribution line, too. I take the approach that since I'm using a modern GUI and people can easily glance at earlier posts for reference, a post should be written as neatly and clearly as possible, using only as much quoted text as necessary. Newsreaders Definitely agree there. now have a "treeview" layout and PCs have a mouse. It's no longer a scrolling console. There's no reason that people can't easily figure out who' replying to whom. It's graphically displayed. Ah, there I don't agree. It's easier to see who said what if you _don't_ have to poke around lots of places, if it's all in the post you're reading. I do agree with you that spurious stuff should be deleted, and far too few people do that. I'm not going to get into a long debate about this. I find that there are several ways people like to post, and 95% of people (including me) tolerate all of them without quibble. Then there are the "usenet fascists" who just insist that everyone has to do things their way. Some of I try through persuasion rather than fascism. [] Kudos. :-) to reason with obsessive compulsives. Anyone who can't tolerate my posts doesn't have to read my posts. Yes, but you post helpful stuff; I don't want to miss on that (-:. This whole debate has nothing to do with "fascism". It only has to do with making it easier to follow a thread. If you have to poke around in several places just to read and follow a thread, I think there is a problem there. :-) But I'll tell you what might have to do with "fascism": the arguments over "top" vs "bottom" vs "inline" postings, and that only one style is supposedly right, and is always best (cough). :-) (because it ain't so) Context is everything, in such cases. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
I keep getting large icons?
Bill in Co wrote:
Mayayana wrote: I take the approach that since I'm using a modern GUI and people can easily glance at earlier posts for reference, ... There is the crux of his argument. One, he doesn't care that readers of his posts must move OUT of the message to look elsewhere to trace who said what. Two, he thinks the posts he quotes will be present in someone else's NNTP client (see my reply to Char as to why those posts may be missing which means NO REFERENCE is available if not provided as attribution lines within the message). I guess I don't get what you are talking about. I open OE and try to read each thread individually in that one window, as one would expect, and can't see the attributions. Are you suggesting we have to open several panes or windows just to follow each thread with attributions? THAT seems a bit primitive to me. :-) Mayayana wants to present a style to exhibit a personality. He has no rational argument for omitting attributions other than his want for a style that's different. He just wants to be different. Of course, this could be trollish deliberation to instill argument in that he dishonors netiquette with which he had no participation in defining. If he doesn't want to include attributions (which he must manually trim out since his newsreader includes them) then he shouldn't bother to quote any posts to which he replies. After all, he claims you can go looking elsewhere to see the threading of the posts leading to his reply so obviously the same readers that have to look elsewhere for threading info can also look in those other posts to see their content - assuming, as he does mistakeningly, that those other posts are available to the readers of his posts. If he doesn't want to attribute the quoted content then don't bother to include any quoted content. With his "modern" GUI built on the old NNTP standards that help to support the lowest-common-denominator feature set so EVERYONE (not just him) can participate and with assumption of perfect and immediate peering across a worldwide mesh network of NNTP servers, he should just assume that all those posts he would've quoted are already there in the reader's client so, like attributions, all that quoting he does is superfluous. If you don't attribute a quote then don't bother including it. Quoting with attribution means you are pretending that content is yours. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|