rec.autos.simulators

What would be better

Tom Pabs

What would be better

by Tom Pabs » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:40:15

Eldred,

Configure your newsreader properly, then!  LOL.....  I'm pretty sure its in
the "options" tab under "tools"....at least it is for Outlook Express.  Not
sure what you are using, though.

TP

Andre

What would be better

by Andre » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:44:38

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:40:15 GMT, "Tom Pabst"


>Configure your newsreader properly, then!  LOL.....  I'm pretty sure its in
>the "options" tab under "tools"....at least it is for Outlook Express.  Not
>sure what you are using, though.

Some of us understand Usenet and know how ***OE is.
--

Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
Tom Pabs

What would be better

by Tom Pabs » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:49:04

Thanks Mario, for the explanation.  I wasn't aware that others were doing
that.  I'm not sure why, and as far as my experience in Usenet and
newsgroups (going back to the late 80's), its unusual.  "Read" messages are
unbolded, "unread" messages are bolded.  As soon as you read one, it turns
unbolded.  The string stays intact, and its very easy to see what you've
read and what you've not read.  And, if you need to refresh your memory, you
have all the messages in the string (that you've read) still there.  It's
even easy to tell if a "string" has new posts, the header string post will
be bolded when new replies are present (not bolded when no new replies are
present).  Not sure why you'd want to be deleting all read messages?  Can't
be a hard drive space problem (compact in the background any message over 60
days).....hard drives are dirt cheap these days (60 gigs for about $80
bucks......buy a dozen of them....LOL).

This is all kind of silly.....but my eyes were open to alternate settings
for newsgroups....didn't even imagine that people did it this way, though.

Regards,

Tom

Tom Pabs

What would be better

by Tom Pabs » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:50:04

I know you weren't calling me the "bad guy."  I was just fooling.....I
really don't sweat this at all, was just teasing you a little bit.

I here you about the "elitist" attitude.....been accused of that myself a
few million times in here.

Thanks for the explanation, you were right....I didn't have a clue.

Regards,

Tom

Tom Pabs

What would be better

by Tom Pabs » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:02:38

Andrew,

I don't think I was "preaching."  All I originally said to Larry was not to
sweat "snipping" my post from his reply.  How is that preaching?  On the
other hand, your remarks (all of them in this string) are quite acid in
tone.....and add nothing to the conversation including that they are totally
irrelevant to the string topic.

And, by the looks of your auto-signature......you are another one of those
Usenet "nazis" we used to throw out of our newsgroups....back in the old
days when we could do that sort of thing quite easily.  If your presence in
this string is typical of your posts, you've probably been thrown out of a
few newsgroups yourself, huh?

Enjoy your day, Andrew....and try to get a life somewhere off your
computer.....it would do you wonder.

Regards,

Tom

Andre

What would be better

by Andre » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:09:08

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 08:02:38 GMT, "Tom Pabst"


>I don't think I was "preaching."  All I originally said to Larry was not to
>sweat "snipping" my post from his reply.  How is that preaching?  On the
>other hand, your remarks (all of them in this string) are quite acid in
>tone.....and add nothing to the conversation including that they are totally
>irrelevant to the string topic.

I wish you would stop demonstrating your Usenet ignorance by talking
about string.

And how exactly does someone get thrown out of a newsgroup?

I, and others in the thread, are just trying to explain to you why you
need to quote the text you are replying to. You refuse to take the
hint and continue to post moronic messages that have no context.
--

Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.

Jan Verschuere

What would be better

by Jan Verschuere » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:40:59

Maybe, but I still prefer it over Agent for non-binary groups.

Jan.
=---

Andre

What would be better

by Andre » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:51:36

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 09:40:59 GMT, "Jan Verschueren"


>Maybe, but I still prefer it over Agent for non-binary groups.

Huh? Agent's main weakness (although it is still miles better than OE)
is with binaries. It is predominently designed and used for text
groups. Agent's main problem is that the default settings it installs
with are terrible, and gives people a bad first impression of it.
--

Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
Jan Verschuere

What would be better

by Jan Verschuere » Sat, 03 Jan 2004 20:49:34

Strange how people can perceive the same program differently. Select a range
of messages and Free Agent automatically combines, decodes and saves any
attachments into a directory I selected when configuring the group. That's
pretty darn easy/usefull in my book. I don't really see how that can be
improved upon,  certainly seeing as I only need this ability once or twice
per year.

You're right there...

Jan.
=---

McWho

What would be better

by McWho » Sun, 04 Jan 2004 01:07:10


> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:40:15 GMT, "Tom Pabst"

>> Configure your newsreader properly, then!  LOL.....  I'm pretty sure
>> its in the "options" tab under "tools"....at least it is for Outlook
>> Express.  Not sure what you are using, though.

> Some of us understand Usenet and know how ***OE is.

That is where your whole attitude bothers me.   OE is not crap, in fact it
is one of the best news readers out there!  Of course that is my opinion and
I am allowed to have it.   I hope you understand my point.

Sean

McWho

What would be better

by McWho » Sun, 04 Jan 2004 01:28:01




>> I think he deserves all he gets. He was the one who started preaching
>> about posting style when he hasn't got a clue himself.

> I was talking about his and Sean's comments towards those of us on
> the other side.

> Eldred

Eldred,
  I hope you do not think I was making any snide remarks towards you.   My
point was to allow folks to post the way they are comfortable.  As this
thread has gone on I think Tom may want to consider at least indicating who
the poster is he is replying to.  My settings allow me to follow that quite
easily but there is that courtesy to consider others.  I also think that
Andrew could stand to be a little less confrontational and may find he is
given more of the credit I am sure he deserves.

So as to be on topic with this:

What the hell was the topic??

oh, yeah, driving views!  hehe  :-)

I drive from the***pit without the steering wheel.  It looks funny but
have gotten to the point I don't even notice the steering post sticking out
there.  I like Tom***pit though I have not dl'd it yet.  I also like the
FF feature of my wheel, I do not know about accuracy of feel but I have
played with the settings and time/practice now have my using the same style
I use on the highway.  I hold pressure against the forces on the wheel and
that allows me to make small adjustments by the (percieved) movements of the
car.  I am learning to interpret the movements I see in the sim with the
movements I feel with my ***in the real car.  Of course these are normal
cars on normal highways but driving is driving.  Perhaps one day I will sit
in a real race car but until that happens I will not know what I am missing.
It was very hard to get used to***pit view and ff steering but just like
anything else, I got used to it and now it seems to be the only way to go.
using the rearview mirror and sounds I am able to *know* where the other
cars are around me and drive accordingly.
My vote:  ***pit and FF
Of course, I am not a great driver either  :)

Sean

Mario Petrinovic

What would be better

by Mario Petrinovic » Sun, 04 Jan 2004 16:57:42

Tom Pabst :

        : ) Drivers are cheap these days (I have 80 Gb). It is that it is
easier when I don't have to scroll through message headers. And it isn't
always easy to connect the links between them. And I would need to open both
of them (original and answer). I have opened messages, and a preview pane
bellow them. When I have only unread messages shown it is easy for me to
simply pick one of them (because there is not much of them to choose), and
read it in preview pane. If I do it your way I would need a lot of scrolling
in messages pane, if there are a lot of messages there I would have hard
time to connect links, then I would need to click firstly on the original,
and then finally on answer. And I do have a 21" monitor, and still it is a
lot of work. But, as I said, do however you like. I'll cope with it, : ).
 -- Mario


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.