rec.autos.simulators

by AD » Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:59:57

Well said Andi i 100% agree that the bottom posting 'standard' stinks.

I just want to read new replies not scroll down for no reason whatsoever.

AD

p.s I also top post and always will

> So if I read this right, I'm a lame brain because I want to be efficient
in
> my time and not to scroll down through stuff I've already read and I'm a
> moron because the 'right' way to do things is also badly done by others.
> What sort of community is this?

> Why would it not be nice to change the standard? If we all top posted we
> could ignore the stuff we've already read and quickly scan through what
> others have posted. That seems a much more efficient way to me.

> --
> Remove only one zero to reply.

> > >Nope, I don't see bottom posts, have to scroll down, so top posts work
> for
> > >me. If I'm actively involved in a thread I just want to see the next
post
> I
> > >don't want to scroll down all the rubbish that people tend to put out.

> > Moronic excuse for top posting #1. The problem you are stating is with
> > poorly formed bottom posted messages.
> > --

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

by **Andi Col** » Wed, 09 Jun 2004 22:38:43

Cool, some support, change is good.

Andi.

--
Remove only one zero to reply.

> Well said Andi i 100% agree that the bottom posting 'standard' stinks.

> I just want to read new replies not scroll down for no reason whatsoever.

> AD

> p.s I also top post and always will

> > So if I read this right, I'm a lame brain because I want to be efficient
> in
> > my time and not to scroll down through stuff I've already read and I'm a
> > moron because the 'right' way to do things is also badly done by others.
> > What sort of community is this?

> > Why would it not be nice to change the standard? If we all top posted we
> > could ignore the stuff we've already read and quickly scan through what
> > others have posted. That seems a much more efficient way to me.

> > --
> > Remove only one zero to reply.

> > > >Nope, I don't see bottom posts, have to scroll down, so top posts
work
> > for
> > > >me. If I'm actively involved in a thread I just want to see the next
> post
> > I
> > > >don't want to scroll down all the rubbish that people tend to put
out.

> > > Moronic excuse for top posting #1. The problem you are stating is with
> > > poorly formed bottom posted messages.
> > > --

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

by **Andre** » Wed, 09 Jun 2004 22:46:08

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:59:57 +0100, another moron called "AD"

So why are you quoting 44 lines to say that?
--

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

by AD » Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:46:06

Err coz i want to..?
That comes about because i am at my keyboard and you are not,you low life
pedant.

AD

> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:59:57 +0100, another moron called "AD"

> >Well said Andi i 100% agree that the bottom posting 'standard' stinks.

> >I just want to read new replies not scroll down for no reason whatsoever.

> So why are you quoting 44 lines to say that?
> --

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

by **Andre** » Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:56:46

>Err coz i want to..?
>That comes about because i am at my keyboard and you are not,you low life
>pedant.

Pedant, "one who makes a show of knowledge". Something you will never
have to worry about. *plonk*
--

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

by **Andi Col** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:24:04

Probably because he can but possibly because IF we all top posted and left
everyting in the thread we would just have to read the latest posting,
knowing no one had 'edited' things.

Are you one of these people who haven't work out disk space and download
speeds are no longer a problem. What's up with 44 lines when we get to
download an 85MB GPL demo.

Your sig is rather authoratative and you give no reasons for your
suggestions, because that is all they are. Usenet would be a better place if
it was left to it's own devices, it is not better because of a set of
unnecessary rules.

Andi.

--
Remove only one zero to reply.

> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:59:57 +0100, another moron called "AD"

> >Well said Andi i 100% agree that the bottom posting 'standard' stinks.

> >I just want to read new replies not scroll down for no reason whatsoever.

> So why are you quoting 44 lines to say that?
> --

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

begin 666 and.bin
`
end

by **Andre** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:31:20

And none of us would know what exact point you were referring to.

That's very kind of you to make that decision for people who are still
on dial up or on broadband accounts that limit the amount of data they
can download a month.

My .sig is written to fit in with accepted standards, I am not going
to put a full explanation into every message I write, especially when
they are based on common sense and courtesy.

That's why kill files were invented. *plonk*
--

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

by **Mitch_** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 05:37:03

Amen. Someone complaining about "common sense" shows they havent any.

> Well said Andi i 100% agree that the bottom posting 'standard' stinks.

> I just want to read new replies not scroll down for no reason whatsoever.

> AD

> p.s I also top post and always will

> > So if I read this right, I'm a lame brain because I want to be efficient
> in
> > my time and not to scroll down through stuff I've already read and I'm a
> > moron because the 'right' way to do things is also badly done by others.
> > What sort of community is this?

> > Why would it not be nice to change the standard? If we all top posted we
> > could ignore the stuff we've already read and quickly scan through what
> > others have posted. That seems a much more efficient way to me.

> > --
> > Remove only one zero to reply.

by **Mitch_** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 05:38:38

If Andy would say ANYTHING that made any sense whatsoever I'd be amazed.
All he's capable of is ***ing about top posting.

> >Probably because he can but possibly because IF we all top posted and
left
> >everyting in the thread we would just have to read the latest posting,
> >knowing no one had 'edited' things.

> And none of us would know what exact point you were referring to.

> >Are you one of these people who haven't work out disk space and download
> >speeds are no longer a problem.

> That's very kind of you to make that decision for people who are still
> on dial up or on broadband accounts that limit the amount of data they
> can download a month.

> >Your sig is rather authoratative and you give no reasons for your
> >suggestions, because that is all they are.

> My .sig is written to fit in with accepted standards, I am not going
> to put a full explanation into every message I write, especially when
> they are based on common sense and courtesy.

> > Usenet would be a better place if
> >it was left to it's own devices, it is not better because of a set of
> >unnecessary rules.

> That's why kill files were invented. *plonk*
> --

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

by **Malc** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 08:16:35

Maybe he hopes that some day you'll take the hint ;-)

I'm not that optimistic ;-)

Malc.

by **Jussi Koukk** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:44:26

wrote something like:

>Amen. Someone complaining about "common sense" shows they havent any.

>> Well said Andi i 100% agree that the bottom posting 'standard' stinks.

>> I just want to read new replies not scroll down for no reason whatsoever.

>> AD

>> p.s I also top post and always will

>> > So if I read this right, I'm a lame brain because I want to be efficient
>> in
>> > my time and not to scroll down through stuff I've already read and I'm a
>> > moron because the 'right' way to do things is also badly done by others.
>> > What sort of community is this?

>> > Why would it not be nice to change the standard? If we all top posted we
>> > could ignore the stuff we've already read and quickly scan through what
>> > others have posted. That seems a much more efficient way to me.

Do you know what would be great? Everyone just post the way they want.
Some posting top, some bottom. Makes it easy to see to what they are
referring to and so on. Also easy for ppl who happen to pick up on a
thread half way through; you can jugde the order of the messages by
simply counting the >'s in the front of the lines. Unless of course
someone would decide that that's an obsolete standard and stop using

Seriously speaking, I don't think that it really matters whether we
use top or bottom posting (although I believe that netiquette suggests
one of those methods...) as long as everyone posts the same way.
Right? Otherwise it'll be a mess. Well, it already is.

IMHO ppl have been "spoiled" by the configurability of the web boards;
you can arrange the messages in descending or ascending order and it
doesn't affect other users. But newsgroups lack this configurability
and they rely on the mutual understanding of the users.

Just my 0.02???
--
Jussi 'Igor' Koukku

by **Andre** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:07:39

Netiquette also suggests t*** your posts, ho hum.

You can sort your messages how you want them in any half decent news
client.
--

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

by **Jussi Koukk** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:00:15

something like:

>>Seriously speaking, I don't think that it really matters whether we
>>use top or bottom posting (although I believe that netiquette suggests
>>one of those methods...) as long as everyone posts the same way.
>>Right? Otherwise it'll be a mess. Well, it already is.

>Netiquette also suggests t*** your posts, ho hum.

Did you miss my point accidentaly or on purpose?

Ok, I wasn't clear enough. I meant that you can't configure the
newsreader to show the posts (=quotes) in the preferred order within
one message. It can get confusing when there are both top and bottom
posting in the same message (thus the unt*** in my previous post,
trying to make a point, to no avail apparently).

In web boards quoting in almost always unnecessary as the messages
are that you reply to always appear right before or right after your's
(depending on your preferences). Thus you don't have to worry about
top or bottom posting there, you just set your preferences and forget
about it. Although I don't think that I've ever seen anyone top
posting while quoting in web boards...
--
Jussi 'Igor' Koukku

by **Andi Col** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:37:28

OK, Bored now, just seeing how far people would go on this, no one picked up
on the .bin attachment, oh well. No matter how many rules or 'sig files' try
to brain wash us it doesn't work, people will do what comes naturally to
them. Newsgroups aren't a club with rules that you have to sign up to it's a
'centre of excellance', well they used to be but all you seem to get these
days is abuse if you disagree with the 'norm'. Why was I called a 'lame
brain' and a 'moron' for voicing an opinion. These days advice on auto
simulators is much better served by specialist forums where you can admit to
not knowing or being a noob without the associated abuse you get here. I
remember the days that you could hardly keep up with the posts on this
newsgroup, nowadays, once a week is sufficient to keep up. It's obviosly not
the place to be these days.

Anyway, keep up the good work guys it's entertaining at least.

Andi.

--
Remove only one zero to reply.

> something like:

> >>Seriously speaking, I don't think that it really matters whether we
> >>use top or bottom posting (although I believe that netiquette suggests
> >>one of those methods...) as long as everyone posts the same way.
> >>Right? Otherwise it'll be a mess. Well, it already is.

> >Netiquette also suggests t*** your posts, ho hum.

> Did you miss my point accidentaly or on purpose?

> >>IMHO ppl have been "spoiled" by the configurability of the web boards;
> >>you can arrange the messages in descending or ascending order and it
> >>doesn't affect other users. But newsgroups lack this configurability
> >>and they rely on the mutual understanding of the users.

> >You can sort your messages how you want them in any half decent news
> >client.

> Ok, I wasn't clear enough. I meant that you can't configure the
> newsreader to show the posts (=quotes) in the preferred order within
> one message. It can get confusing when there are both top and bottom
> posting in the same message (thus the unt*** in my previous post,
> trying to make a point, to no avail apparently).

> In web boards quoting in almost always unnecessary as the messages
> are that you reply to always appear right before or right after your's
> (depending on your preferences). Thus you don't have to worry about
> top or bottom posting there, you just set your preferences and forget
> about it. Although I don't think that I've ever seen anyone top
> posting while quoting in web boards...
> --
> Jussi 'Igor' Koukku

by **Malc** » Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:54:57

You give up too easily ;-)

Which side of the road does your country drive on? It doesn't matter
which side it is, just as long as everyone uses the same method.

If you are happy to be labelled inconsiderate or a lame brain then carry
on, but if you don't, try to think about your readers before you click
'send' ;-)

Malc.

rec.autos.simulators

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?

GPL 2004 Demo?