|
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
|
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:40:52 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote: On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:34:08 -0400, John H. penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: | |If he is using Agent, it is not necessary to 'subscribe' to a group to see |headers, read the posts, or respond to the posts. One simply looks in the |"All Groups" list, finds 'rec.boats' and downloads the headers. I don't remember that far back, you are using Version 1.91.... that is 6 years old. I don't remember a time when you didn't have to subscribe. Certainly, since 2.0 it was necessary to subscribe. Ditto every other Usenet client I have used in the last few years. He's using Google Groups,,,, one must subscribe.... Well, that shows that I've been OBE! |
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
"John H." wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:40:52 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:34:08 -0400, John H. penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: | |If he is using Agent, it is not necessary to 'subscribe' to a group to see |headers, read the posts, or respond to the posts. One simply looks in the |"All Groups" list, finds 'rec.boats' and downloads the headers. I don't remember that far back, you are using Version 1.91.... that is 6 years old. I don't remember a time when you didn't have to subscribe. Certainly, since 2.0 it was necessary to subscribe. Ditto every other Usenet client I have used in the last few years. He's using Google Groups,,,, one must subscribe.... Well, that shows that I've been OBE! Out Buying Eggs ? |
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:30:27 -0400, John H. wrote: On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:57:19 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:11:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 9:51 am, JimH wrote: On Jul 16, 9:28 am, "Don White" wrote: "Jim" wrote in message ... You don't close cases around here Jimmy boy. And we don't STFU because a deranged nincompoop tells us to. Yeah but...just think how much the newsgroup would improve if you did. Florida Jim has no interest in improving the tone and quality of this NG. Take a look at Don's latest contribution to the group. How does that improve the group? How does telling people to STFU improve the tone and quality of the group? How does your boyfriend WAFA's constant name calling, and third grade insults improve the quality and tone of the group? How does his constant lies improve the quality and tone of the group? I think it's pretty clear by now that NO ONE is interested in improving the tone of the group. All sides continue to bait, and point fingers. Not a one of you is helping things. Just a bunch of whiny, ineffectual, pussies. EVERY_SINGLE_ONE You're wrong. But that's OK. It's definitely true that there are plenty of folks on both sides who don't give a crap. But to say 'NO ONE' is inaccurate. Are you including yourself? Sure. I'm not expending any great energy trying to fix the group. There are some participants that I barely pay any attention to when they post, and if it gets to the point where my eyes glaze over and there's nothing entertaining enough, I'll probably stop bothering to keep it on my list of regular stops. It's not that important to me. There are many thousands of other groups on a variety of subjects where I can waste the same amount of time. Whether I visit or even post here doesn't make any difference. There are newsgroups where I was a very active regular for many, many years that I haven't looked at in years. I lost interest for one reason or another. What separates me from you, Harry, Don, The Jims, loogyfreaks, etc, is that I think you are all essentially the same, and all are the problem. Even the ones who pretend to be peacemakers or the voice of reason always manage to keep it going in the same direction. I don't think any of you wants to improve the group. If you did, it would have happened a long time ago. You are a bunch of talkers, not do-ers. As I said, you all run around stirring up nonsense and old bull****, and at the same time point fingers at everyone else. None of you REALLY wants to improve the group, and I frankly don't care that much either way. Gad, what a bag of intestinal gas you are, salty. Phew. |
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:42:14 -0400, wrote:
Can you read headers? Does the bear **** in the woods? --Vic |
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:34:40 -0400, "Jim" wrote:
"John H." wrote in message .. . On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:40:52 -0400, Gene Kearns wrote: On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:34:08 -0400, John H. penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: | |If he is using Agent, it is not necessary to 'subscribe' to a group to see |headers, read the posts, or respond to the posts. One simply looks in the |"All Groups" list, finds 'rec.boats' and downloads the headers. I don't remember that far back, you are using Version 1.91.... that is 6 years old. I don't remember a time when you didn't have to subscribe. Certainly, since 2.0 it was necessary to subscribe. Ditto every other Usenet client I have used in the last few years. He's using Google Groups,,,, one must subscribe.... Well, that shows that I've been OBE! Out Buying Eggs ? Very close. Overtaken By Events. |
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:40:34 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:30:27 -0400, John H. wrote: On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:57:19 -0400, wrote: On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:11:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Jul 16, 9:51*am, JimH wrote: On Jul 16, 9:28*am, "Don White" wrote: "Jim" wrote in message ... You don't close cases around here Jimmy boy. And we don't STFU because a deranged nincompoop tells us to. Yeah but...just think how much the newsgroup would improve if you did. Florida Jim has no interest in improving the tone and quality of this NG. Take a look at Don's latest contribution to the group. How does that improve the group? How does telling people to STFU improve the tone and quality of the group? How does your boyfriend WAFA's constant name calling, and third grade insults improve the quality and tone of the group? How does his constant lies improve the quality and tone of the group? I think it's pretty clear by now that NO ONE is interested in improving the tone of the group. All sides continue to bait, and point fingers. Not a one of you is helping things. Just a bunch of whiny, ineffectual, pussies. EVERY_SINGLE_ONE You're wrong. But that's OK. It's definitely true that there are plenty of folks on both sides who don't give a crap. But to say 'NO ONE' is inaccurate. Are you including yourself? Sure. I'm not expending any great energy trying to fix the group. Noted. |
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
"Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:52:12 -0400, wrote: If that's where he is when the mood strikes. Can you read headers? Not sure if you're serious, since you were talking about pre 2.0 as if you knew it. All 1.93 and previous Agent versions I've used use header-based retrievals. Options allow for message body retrieval upon header retrieval but mine are set for headers only. I pull message bodies separately to avoid pulling in spam. Parsing the server side message ID's to match the Agent counters when retrieving "latest" seems to be "slow" part of Agent. Message body retrieval is normally very fast. --Vic Please refrain from exercising your remaining brain cells. We are supposed to be in the "forget" mode. You're making the rest of us look bad. Eisboch |
OT Are Facts Obsolete?
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:52:12 -0400, wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:49:46 -0500, Vic Smith wrote: On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:42:14 -0400, wrote: Can you read headers? Does the bear **** in the woods? --Vic If that's where he is when the mood strikes. Can you read headers? Not sure if you're serious, since you were talking about pre 2.0 as if you knew it. All 1.93 and previous Agent versions I've used use header-based retrievals. Options allow for message body retrieval upon header retrieval but mine are set for headers only. I pull message bodies separately to avoid pulling in spam. Parsing the server side message ID's to match the Agent counters when retrieving "latest" seems to be "slow" part of Agent. Message body retrieval is normally very fast. --Vic |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com