What's annoying ( UC)

Steve spake thus:

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:50:38 -0500, G- Blank wrote:

In article , Mike
wrote:

Most people don't want to mess around with configuring a usenet
client.

Wow really, after all is it that hard to do?

Try PAN it is very very simple to set up and use.

Well, shoot, my experience with Thunderbird showed me that it takes the
farthest thing from a rocket scientist to set it up--assuming, of
course, that you know what your news server is. Hell, even OE isn't
difficult to set up; all you need is the news server name, your user ID
and a couple other pieces of information.


--
The only reason corrupt Republicans rule the roost in Washington
is because the corrupt Democrats can't muster any viable opposition.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:00:19 -0800, David Nebenzahl
wrote:

Try PAN it is very very simple to set up and use.

Well, shoot, my experience with Thunderbird showed me that it takes the
farthest thing from a rocket scientist to set it up--assuming, of
course, that you know what your news server is. Hell, even OE isn't
difficult to set up; all you need is the news server name, your user ID
and a couple other pieces of information.

The best is still Agent with Dialog a close second.

JD

In article ain,
Steve wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:50:38 -0500, G- Blank wrote:

In article ,
Mike wrote:


Most people don't want to mess around with
configuring a usenet client.

Wow really, after all is it that hard to do?

Try PAN it is very very simple to set up and use.


I was being sarcastic, happy with MT NewsWatcher.



--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

greg_____photo(dot)com

David Nebenzahl wrote:
Peter Chant spake thus:

Yes, but you see, *it doesn't work*. Don't you see that? Don't you
see all your multiple posts here? I do, and so does everyone else.

Have a look in Google groups. He does not see them.

The trouble is, Google propagates them before he deletes them. So the
only person not seeing them is UC, which from everyones point of
view, especiallys UC's, if I were him, is worse then useless.

Hey, UC, didja hear that? You're viewing the newsgroup through a filter
that only applies to you.

Try reading this group normally (i.e., through a mail/news client, like
Thunderbird or even [cough] Outhouse Express); you'll see many many
"rough drafts" that you thought had been nuked.

What are you talking about?


--
The only reason corrupt Republicans rule the roost in Washington
is because the corrupt Democrats can't muster any viable opposition.

How do you accomplish this:

"Note: The author of this message requested that it not be archived.
This message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Jan 25, 10:21
am)."

???


Mike wrote:

Most people don't want to mess around with
configuring a usenet client.

Wow really, after all is it that hard to do?

You may take for granted how tech savvy you are compared to others.

UC spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Peter Chant spake thus:

Yes, but you see, *it doesn't work*. Don't you see that? Don't
you see all your multiple posts here? I do, and so does
everyone else.

Have a look in Google groups. He does not see them.

The trouble is, Google propagates them before he deletes them. So
the only person not seeing them is UC, which from everyones point
of view, especiallys UC's, if I were him, is worse then useless.

Hey, UC, didja hear that? You're viewing the newsgroup through a
filter that only applies to you.

Try reading this group normally (i.e., through a mail/news client,
like Thunderbird or even [cough] Outhouse Express); you'll see many
many "rough drafts" that you thought had been nuked.

What are you talking about?

Sheesh, I can't believe you don't know this stuff.

OK, you're posting these messages through Google; in general, you are
using a Web-based Usenet host. (Usenet is the name for the system of
newsgroups, including this one.) There are other web-based hosts.

The alternative is to use a mail/news client, aka "newsreader" to read
and post to newsgroups. It looks just like an email client: in fact, it
*is* the same program you'd use to read and send email. But instead of
reading and sending email messages (using SMTP, POP or whatever
protocol), it's set to read and send Usenet messages, using NNTP
(network news transfer protocol).

None of which is stuff you actually have to know in order to use this
method; as I said elsewhere, in most mail/news programs, it's very
simple to set it up for newsgroup access. Generally (not always), your
"news server" will be news.xxx.yyy, where "xxx.yyy" is your ISP's domain
name (like sbcglobal.net or whatever).

Why do this? Because I find, as do many other people, that it's much
simpler, easier and faster to use a mail/news client to read newsgroups.
Instead of having to wait for a web page to refresh for each new
message, the messages simply open in my clien't message window. (I use
Thunderbird, the open-source client that's free: get it at
http://www.mozilla.com/thunderbird/). Also, the way the newsgroup is
displayed is far superior: you see the entire newsgroup at once, not
just the little section that Google shows you, and it's easier to
navigate and find stuff.


--
The only reason corrupt Republicans rule the roost in Washington
is because the corrupt Democrats can't muster any viable opposition.

In article . com,
says...
David Nebenzahl wrote:
One suggestion for something you might do to help make your case (and
clean up this newsgroup while you're at it): enough with the multiple
posts already!

You're the only poster I've seen who regularly does this; invariably,
there will be one UC post (usually a reply to another message), followed
by another, or sometimes 2 or 3, nearly identical messages. What's the
problem--don't you know how to edit posts before clicking "Send"? C'mon,
you can do better than that. From now on, how about trying to get it all
in there the first time? Other people seem to manage this fairly well.

If I do that, I delete the previous posts within a minute or so. I use
USENET. It allows me to remove earlier posts.

USENET doesn't allow you to do that. Some news clients allow you to
send a CANCEL message, but few news servers honour those messages.

--

Hywel
http://kibo.org.uk/

Google groups allows me to remove my own posts.


Hywel Jenkins wrote:
In article . com,
says...
David Nebenzahl wrote:
One suggestion for something you might do to help make your case (and
clean up this newsgroup while you're at it): enough with the multiple
posts already!

You're the only poster I've seen who regularly does this; invariably,
there will be one UC post (usually a reply to another message), followed
by another, or sometimes 2 or 3, nearly identical messages. What's the
problem--don't you know how to edit posts before clicking "Send"? C'mon,
you can do better than that. From now on, how about trying to get it all
in there the first time? Other people seem to manage this fairly well.

If I do that, I delete the previous posts within a minute or so. I use
USENET. It allows me to remove earlier posts.

USENET doesn't allow you to do that. Some news clients allow you to
send a CANCEL message, but few news servers honour those messages.

--

Hywel
http://kibo.org.uk/

http://www.mozilla.com/thunderbird/). Also, the way the newsgroup is
displayed is far superior: you see the entire newsgroup at once, not
just the little section that Google shows you, and it's easier to
navigate and find stuff.

UC:

The most obvious thing is that threads will be displayed much more clearly
than you see on Google.

If you really don't want to install a proper news-reader have a look at this
web based news-reader to see what we are on about:

http://news.interbulletin.com/

Go to rec.photo.darkroom and have a look, the tread 35mm Tri-X Pan,
Neopan... is a good example. The posts you think you deleted are there for
all to see.

Pete

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

In don't see what the point is.


Peter Chant wrote:
http://www.mozilla.com/thunderbird/). Also, the way the newsgroup is
displayed is far superior: you see the entire newsgroup at once, not
just the little section that Google shows you, and it's easier to
navigate and find stuff.

UC:

The most obvious thing is that threads will be displayed much more clearly
than you see on Google.

If you really don't want to install a proper news-reader have a look at this
web based news-reader to see what we are on about:

http://news.interbulletin.com/

Go to rec.photo.darkroom and have a look, the tread 35mm Tri-X Pan,
Neopan... is a good example. The posts you think you deleted are there for
all to see.

Pete

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk