GPL 2004 Demo?

http://www.3dgamers.com/dlexit/inspan/games/grandprixlegends/Thirdparty/gpl_2004_demo.exe.html What's up with this? Downloading now (83MB).

http://www.3dgamers.com/dlexit/inspan/games/grandprixlegends/Thirdparty/gpl_2004_demo.exe.html What's up with this? Downloading now (83MB).

>What's up with this? Downloading now (83MB).http://www.3dgamers.com/dlexit/inspan/games/grandprixlegends/Thirdparty/gpl_2004_demo.exe.html Lets see. It's the GPL original demo with all/most of the updates ..patches etc already in place. No need to go looking for them all and then spend 2 hours trying to install them all correctly. It's all done for you. And you posted in HTML, which, I think, is still a no-no on Usenet.

It was posted in HTML because the link wouldn't have worked. And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa "redTed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >What's up with this? Downloading now (83MB). >http://www.3dgamers.com/dlexit/inspan/games/grandprixlegends/Thirdparty/gpl_2004_demo.exe.html > > Lets see. It's the GPL original demo with all/most of the updates..patches > etc already in place. No need to go looking for them all and then spend 2 > hours trying to install them all correctly. It's all done for you. > > And you posted in HTML, which, I think, is still a no-no on Usenet. > >

On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:37:11 -0400, "TDRacin�" <TDRacinnospamflashmail.com> wrote: >It was posted in HTML because the link wouldn't have worked. Links work fine in plain text. >And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa Oh dear. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

"TDRacin�" <TDRacinnospamflashmail.com> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > It was posted in HTML because the link wouldn't have worked. Sure it would have- why would you think that? Just copy and paste the link.

"TDRacin�" <TDRacinnospamflashmail.com> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > It was posted in HTML because the link wouldn't have worked. > > And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa You are a very bad boy!! :) > "redTed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > >What's up with this? Downloading now (83MB). > > >http://www.3dgamers.com/dlexit/inspan/games/grandprixlegends/Thirdparty/gpl_2004_demo.exe.html > > > > Lets see. It's the GPL original demo with all/most of the updates > ..patches > > etc already in place. No need to go looking for them all and then spend2

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > hours trying to install them all correctly. It's all done for you. > > > > And you posted in HTML, which, I think, is still a no-no on Usenet. > > > > > >

> It was posted in HTML because the link wouldn't have worked. > > And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa >You're welcome.

I did it too!!!!!!! Kerry Andrew <spamtrap@localhost> wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Mon, 31 May 2004 09:37:11 -0400, "TDRacin�" > <TDRacinnospamflashmail.com> wrote: > >>It was posted in HTML because the link wouldn't have worked. > > Links work fine in plain text. > >>And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa > > Oh dear.

TDRacin� <TDRacinnospamflashmail.com> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > It was posted in HTML because the link wouldn't have worked. > > And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa > Bunch of anal boys, don't worry about it. Picture of their life, when thats the crap they deem important.

Bunch of ***boys, don't worry about it. Picture of their life, when thats the ***they deem important.

> > And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa > > > > Bunch of anal boys, don't worry about it. Picture of their life, when > thats the crap they deem important. > It's not important numb-nuts, it just the standard way of things on here. Fuck, if everyone wants to top post in HTML with all manner of attachments, let's have a show of hands. Wankers like you probably eat with your fingers and scratch your arse in front of the Queen. In that order.

Hmm, JP's point precisely, I think. 15-0 to him. Andi. -- Remove only one zero to reply. "redTed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa > > > > > > > Bunch of anal boys, don't worry about it. Picture of their life, when > > thats the crap they deem important. > > > > It's not important numb-nuts, it just the standard way of things on here. > Fuck, if everyone wants to top post in HTML with all manner of attachments, > let's have a show of hands. > Wankers like you probably eat with your fingers and scratch your arse in > front of the Queen. In that order. > >

Hehe.........shhh........reds trying to make the ng world safer. Loser with no life and all. p.s. red, fuck the queen Andi Cole <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aQKuc.9449$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Hmm, JP's point precisely, I think. 15-0 to him. > > Andi. > > > > -- > Remove only one zero to reply. > "redTed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa > > > > > > > > > > Bunch of anal boys, don't worry about it. Picture of their life, > when > > > thats the crap they deem important. > > > > > > > It's not important numb-nuts, it just the standard way of things on

here.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Fuck, if everyone wants to top post in HTML with all manner of > attachments, > > let's have a show of hands. > > Wankers like you probably eat with your fingers and scratch your arse in > > front of the Queen. In that order. > > > > > >

"Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aQKuc.9449$[email hidden]... > Hmm, JP's point precisely, I think. 15-0 to him. > > Andi. >You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ?

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:g0Luc.826$[email hidden]... > Hehe.........shhh........reds trying to make the ng world safer. Loser > with no life and all. > > p.s. red, fuck the queen Safer ? Care to explain how a newsgroup is unsafe ? I just like to keep things in some kind of legible order. Andi Cole shows clearly why top posting is not recommended practise. Don't worry though, we all had to learn the ropes sometime.

redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:aQKuc.9449$[email hidden]... > > Hmm, JP's point precisely, I think. 15-0 to him. > > > > Andi. > > > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ?

Then how did you read it ? > >

redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:g0Luc.826$[email hidden]... > > Hehe.........shhh........reds trying to make the ng world safer.Loser

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > with no life and all. > > > > p.s. red, fuck the queen > > Safer ? Care to explain how a newsgroup is unsafe ? I just like to keep > things in some kind of legible order. > Andi Cole shows clearly why top posting is not recommended practise. > Don't worry though, we all had to learn the ropes sometime.

Lol, whoosh. Not worried at all; thats your job, remember ? > >

Ok, enough of this crap. What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the discussion was REALLY about. -Larry "redTed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > And look, I top-posted to. OMG Call the ng police! waaaa > > > > > > > Bunch of anal boys, don't worry about it. Picture of their life,when > > thats the crap they deem important. > > > > It's not important numb-nuts, it just the standard way of things on here. > Fuck, if everyone wants to top post in HTML with all manner ofattachments, > let's have a show of hands. > Wankers like you probably eat with your fingers and scratch your arse in > front of the Queen. In that order. > >

> > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ? > > Then how did you read it ? > >There you go..you're getting the hang of it.

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:UHNuc.713$Y21.709@lakeread02: > Ok, enough of this crap. > > What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the > discussion was REALLY about. > > -Larry Some of the GPL faithful have take the original GPL demo and updated it so that users with modern systems can install and run it without patching and patching and patching. It still is the just the demo but some of the graphic enhancements and video improvements have been included so that new users can get a look at GPL, not as a 16 color dinosaur, but with a fairly modern presentation. I think Blackhole might have a link. dave henrie

redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ? > > > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny. >

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. > > > I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny. >

Next lesson..spell checking for dumb Americans : 101

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:dlOuc.835$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ? > > > > > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. > > > I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny.

That's "Too funny", if you want to split hairs ;-) Malc.

redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > > > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. > > > > > > I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny. > > > > Next lesson..spell checking for dumb Americans : 101

Next lesson for arrogant krauts; answering questions directed at them.

Malc <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8AOuc.8693$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:dlOuc.835$[email hidden]... > > > > redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ? > > > > > > > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > > > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. > > > > > > I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny. > > That's "Too funny", if you want to split hairs ;-) > > Malc.

Thanks, but that is red's job. Yours too I guess, eh ? > >

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:hFOuc.837$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > Malc <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8AOuc.8693$[email hidden]... > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:dlOuc.835$[email hidden]... > > > > > > redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ? > > > > > > > > > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. > > > > > > > > > I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny. > > > > That's "Too funny", if you want to split hairs ;-) > > > > Malc. > > Thanks, but that is red's job. Yours too I guess, eh ?

You really are a berk JP ;-) Malc.

Malc <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:dcPuc.8696$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:hFOuc.837$[email hidden]... > > > > Malc <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8AOuc.8693$[email hidden]... > > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:dlOuc.835$[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny. > > > > > > That's "Too funny", if you want to split hairs ;-) > > > > > > Malc. > > > > Thanks, but that is red's job. Yours too I guess, eh ? > > You really are a berk JP ;-) > > Malc.

hehe > >

It looks great...but it sounds awful! What have they done to the SOUND! (And as to the readme: of COURSE they had seatbelts! Who makes this stuff up?) "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:UHNuc.713$Y21.709@lakeread02: > > > Ok, enough of this crap. > > > > What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the > > discussion was REALLY about. > > > > -Larry > > > Some of the GPL faithful have take the original GPL demo and updated

it

Quoted text (7 lines)

> so that users with modern systems can install and run it without patching > and patching and patching. It still is the just the demo but some of the > graphic enhancements and video improvements have been included so that new > users can get a look at GPL, not as a 16 color dinosaur, but with a fairly > modern presentation. I think Blackhole might have a link. > > dave henrie

Just for ducks: Original GPL demo: 80 files and 40 Mb (if you subtract the DirectX 5.0[!] folder) vs. 2004 version: 1,741 files and 243 Mb. Redmond would be proud! "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xtPuc.114253$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> It looks great...but it sounds awful! What have they done to the SOUND! > > (And as to the readme: of COURSE they had seatbelts! Who makes this stuff > up?) > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:UHNuc.713$Y21.709@lakeread02: > > > > > Ok, enough of this crap. > > > > > > What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the > > > discussion was REALLY about. > > > > > > -Larry > > > > > > Some of the GPL faithful have take the original GPL demo and updated > it > > so that users with modern systems can install and run it without

patching > > and patching and patching. It still is the just the demo but some ofthe > > graphic enhancements and video improvements have been included so thatnew > > users can get a look at GPL, not as a 16 color dinosaur, but with afairly > > modern presentation. I think Blackhole might have a link. > > > > dave henrie > >

Quoted text (7 lines)

>"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote > Original GPL demo: 80 files and 40 Mb (if you subtract the DirectX 5.0[!] > folder) > vs. > 2004 version: 1,741 files and 243 Mb. > > Redmond would be proud!

<devil's advocate> Well, the guys that did the demo simply didn't concentrate their files inside the specific *.dat of each directory like Papyrus does in their sims. There are almost as much files in the original demo. It's also pretty hard to keep a small size on textures when you can't use much compression. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Thanks for the explanation! -Larry "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:UHNuc.713$Y21.709@lakeread02: > > > Ok, enough of this crap. > > > > What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the > > discussion was REALLY about. > > > > -Larry > > > Some of the GPL faithful have take the original GPL demo and updated

it

Quoted text (7 lines)

> so that users with modern systems can install and run it without patching > and patching and patching. It still is the just the demo but some of the > graphic enhancements and video improvements have been included so that new > users can get a look at GPL, not as a 16 color dinosaur, but with a fairly > modern presentation. I think Blackhole might have a link. > > dave henrie

"redTed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > > Then how did you read it ? > > > > > > > > > > > There you go..you're getting the hang of it. > > > > > > I already knew dumbass, lol. To funny. > > > > Next lesson..spell checking for dumb Americans : 101 >

Let's be careful about whom we call dumb. Actually the "to" for "too" is more of an error in recognizing different homonyms than it is a spelling error. But then your ellipsis was wrong; it's "..." not "..". But then that's not covered until 102, so you're excused. Alanb

> > Next lesson..spell checking for dumb Americans : 101 > > > Next lesson for arrogant krauts; answering questions directed at them. > >You new guy's and your superior powers of detection. I'm in Manchester, England. Please go to the back of the clue queue. You're not related to J. Simmons by ant chance ?

redTed <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > Next lesson..spell checking for dumb Americans : 101 > > > > > > Next lesson for arrogant krauts; answering questions directed atthem. > > > > > You new guy's and your superior powers of detection. > I'm in Manchester, England. Please go to the back of the clue queue. > You're not related to J. Simmons by ant chance ? <shrug> Big deal. Saw the uni-berlin, etc. and took a guess. Not being a no life loser net nerd like yourself, and all. Don't you have to go wash your hands after touching a keyboard about now ? > >

TDRacin� wrote: > http://www.3dgamers.com/dlexit/inspan/games/grandprixlegends/Thirdparty/gpl_2004_demo.exe.html > > What's up with this? Downloading now (83MB). Thanks for the link, TD. I spent 5 hours downloading it, and I'm happy that I can finally play with it on XP. I remember way back when, when I downloaded the demo from the Papy site and had /so/ much trouble keeping control of the car. Now, after with great sims like NR2002 and 2003, I can't believe how much trouble I had. :) -Will

On Mon, 31 May 2004 17:55:56 -0400, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Ok, enough of this crap. > >What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the >discussion was REALLY about. Have they added tire wear and pit stops, fixed the general shittiness of the tire/suspension models, completely redone all of the tracks that were really inaccurate in the original release, and added a new (and XP friendly) video renderer? Or is it just a bunch of superficial patches that don't really affect the game at all?

On Mon, 31 May 2004 23:46:37 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It looks great...but it sounds awful! What have they done to the SOUND! > >(And as to the readme: of COURSE they had seatbelts! Who makes this stuff >up?) Didn't a lot of mid 50's GP drivers not use seatbelts because they were afraid of being stuck in the cars during a fire? Masten Gregory comes to mind (it was he who was famous for the mid-air leaps during particularly nasty crashes wasn't it?) Jason

[email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote in news:40bd6077.22724046 @news.telerama.com: > Have they added tire wear and pit stops, fixed the general shittiness > of the tire/suspension models, completely redone all of the tracks > that were really inaccurate in the original release, and added a new > (and XP friendly) video renderer? Or is it just a bunch of > superficial patches that don't really affect the game at all? > It does have the XP friendly video updates...but in the end...it still is GPL...not GPL 2k4, not GPLxx just GPL, now available for the masses. dh

Yes, but by '67 tout le monde was wearing 'em. "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 31 May 2004 23:46:37 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >It looks great...but it sounds awful! What have they done to the SOUND! > > > >(And as to the readme: of COURSE they had seatbelts! Who makes thisstuff

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >up?) > > Didn't a lot of mid 50's GP drivers not use seatbelts because they > were afraid of being stuck in the cars during a fire? > > Masten Gregory comes to mind (it was he who was famous for the mid-air > leaps during particularly nasty crashes wasn't it?) > > Jason

Jeez, Jason, try the lithium Ultra Pro Titanium Turbo. "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Mon, 31 May 2004 17:55:56 -0400, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Ok, enough of this crap. > > > >What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the > >discussion was REALLY about. > > Have they added tire wear and pit stops, fixed the general shittiness > of the tire/suspension models, completely redone all of the tracks > that were really inaccurate in the original release, and added a new > (and XP friendly) video renderer? Or is it just a bunch of > superficial patches that don't really affect the game at all?

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Mon, 31 May 2004 17:55:56 -0400, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Ok, enough of this crap. > > > >What about the original subject, the GPL 2004 thing. That's what the > >discussion was REALLY about. > > Have they added tire wear and pit stops, fixed the general shittiness > of the tire/suspension models, completely redone all of the tracks > that were really inaccurate in the original release, and added a new > (and XP friendly) video renderer? Or is it just a bunch of > superficial patches that don't really affect the game at all?

Jason, you know damn well they didnt pit for tires or fuel in '67...

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 16:10:44 GMT, "Biz" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Jason, you know damn well they didnt pit for tires or fuel in '67... Well, they didn't have *scheduled* pitstops. Seems like everybody but the top 4 cars at Nurby pitted that year for various reasons. The reason I'd *really* like pitstops in GPL is for the planned 50's mod, since they often did pit for fuel and tires then. Tire wear would be nice just because, while they didn't often change tires in the early mid engined cars, they weren't exactly riding on fresh rubber after 2 hours. Jason

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. Why do you think I'm a lame brain? you nothing of my educational background, why be rude? Andi. -- Remove only one zero to reply. "redTed" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:aQKuc.9449$[email hidden]... > > Hmm, JP's point precisely, I think. 15-0 to him. > > > > Andi. > > > You see now why top posting doesn't work, lame brain ? > >

"Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:N9hxc.12358$[email hidden]... > Nope, I don't see bottom posts, have to scroll down, so top posts workfor > me. If I'm actively involved in a thread I just want to see the nextpost I > don't want to scroll down all the rubbish that people tend to put out. I would suggest that your problem is with improper quoting of previous text then rather than top-posting itself. From your comments I would suggest that you are simply too lazy to bother scrolling down, so in that context "lame-brain" fits quite nicely imo ;-) It is polite to edit the quote & bottom-post, it's generally regarded as impolite to top-post, not edit quoted material or pick up on typo's. While no one can stop you doing whatever you want, don't be surprised if people get a little antagonistic ;-) Malc.

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 12:11:52 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote: >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. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

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. "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 12:11:52 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >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. > -- > Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

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 "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:5Gixc.12387$[email hidden]... > So if I read this right, I'm a lame brain because I want to be efficientin

Quoted text (18 lines)

> 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. > "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 12:11:52 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >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

Quoted text (12 lines)

> 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. > > -- > > Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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. > >

Cool, some support, change is good. Andi. -- Remove only one zero to reply. "AD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ca4d8e$o1p$[email hidden]... > 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 > "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:5Gixc.12387$[email hidden]... > > 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. > > "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 12:11:52 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >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. > > > -- > > > Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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. > > > > > >

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:59:57 +0100, another moron called "AD" <[email hidden]> piped up with: >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? -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

Err coz i want to..? That comes about because i am at my keyboard and you are not,you low life pedant. AD "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:59:57 +0100, another moron called "AD" > <[email hidden]> piped up with: > > >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? > -- > Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 15:46:06 +0100, "AD" <[email hidden]> wrote: >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* -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

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. "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 13:59:57 +0100, another moron called "AD" > <[email hidden]> piped up with: > > >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? > -- > Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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. begin 666 and.bin ` end

On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:24:04 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote: >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* -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

Amen. Someone complaining about "common sense" shows they havent any. "AD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ca4d8e$o1p$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> 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 > "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:5Gixc.12387$[email hidden]... > > 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.

If Andy would say ANYTHING that made any sense whatsoever I'd be amazed. All he's capable of is bitching about top posting. "Andrew" <spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 8 Jun 2004 16:24:04 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Probably because he can but possibly because IF we all top posted andleft

Quoted text (29 lines)

> >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* > -- > Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

"Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:itpxc.7378$[email hidden]... > If Andy would say ANYTHING that made any sense whatsoever I'd beamazed. > All he's capable of is bitching about top posting. Maybe he hopes that some day you'll take the hint ;-) I'm not that optimistic ;-) Malc.

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 20:37:03 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote something like:

Quoted text (22 lines)

>Amen. Someone complaining about "common sense" shows they havent any. > >"AD" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:ca4d8e$o1p$[email hidden]... >> 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 >> "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:5Gixc.12387$[email hidden]... >> > 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 >'s... 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

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 08:44:26 GMT, Jussi Koukku <[email hidden]> wrote: <gratuitous quoting snipped> >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 trimming your posts, ho hum. >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. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove 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.

<gratuitous quoting snipped> 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.

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 10:07:39 +0100, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost> wrote something like:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 08:44:26 GMT, Jussi Koukku <[email hidden]> wrote: >>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 trimming your posts, ho hum.

Did you miss my point accidentaly or on purpose?

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>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 untrimming 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

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. "Jussi Koukku" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 10:07:39 +0100, Andrew <spamtrap@localhost> wrote > something like: > > >On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 08:44:26 GMT, Jussi Koukku <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>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 trimming 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 untrimming 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

"Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:lLBxc.12780$[email hidden]... > OK, Bored now 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.

"Jussi Koukku" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 20:37:03 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> > wrote 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.

This is my view too. It seems to work so why change something so basic to usenet? Malc.

But it doesn't work 'cos no half the people don't follow it and I think there's better reasons to do it differently. Andi. -- Remove only one zero to reply. "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:XSCxc.12804$[email hidden]... > "Jussi Koukku" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 20:37:03 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> > > wrote 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. > > This is my view too. It seems to work so why change something so basic > to usenet? > > Malc. > >

I am thinking of my readers, those who think like me and just want to read the last comment posted. Why is that so hard for you guys to grasp. And you labelling me inconsiderate and lame is a good thing for this newsgroup because? You think you're right and I'm wrong? Andi. -- Remove only one zero to reply. "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WSCxc.12803$[email hidden]... > "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:lLBxc.12780$[email hidden]... > > > OK, Bored now > > 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. > >

"Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:SeExc.12822$[email hidden]... > I am thinking of my readers, those who think like me and just want toread > the last comment posted. Why is that so hard for you guys to grasp. Your point is very easy to understand, but I disagree. Do you understand the concept that someone may have a different agenda from yourself? ;-) > And you labelling me inconsiderate and lame is a good thing for this > newsgroup because? You think you're right and I'm wrong? It's not a matter of my opinion really, it's simply considered good manners to snip your quote (which you still fail to do). If you unknowingly behave in an impolite way someone will probably tell you. It's you're lucky they will be polite but it's not a given. If you knowingly behave in an impolite manner (as is common with 'rebellious' teenagers) then your behaviour will either be ignored along with your opinion (which may be a good one) or picked up and commented on, as is the case here. There are many, many newsgroups out there & this is a very polite one relatively speaking. As I & someone else mentioned before, it doesn't matter which method is used as long as we all do the same. On usenet the accepted standard is to bottom post, and usenet posting ettiquette advice is generally considered on-topic for any newsgroup. There are plenty of newsgroups where top-posting is the norm, and in this one either posting method is usually accepted simply to be polite. I accept that your opinion may differ, but I'm not stating opinion, simply the way it is ;-) I don't really care which method you use, but it would be nice to see some glimmer of recognition that you are driving on the wrong side of the street ;-) If you want to change the standard find out how & go do it. Posting on RSC isn't the best way ;-) Malc.

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 20:41:14 +0100, "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>As I & someone else mentioned before, it doesn't matter which method is >used as long as we all do the same. On usenet the accepted standard is >to bottom post, and usenet posting ettiquette advice is generally >considered on-topic for any newsgroup. There are plenty of newsgroups >where top-posting is the norm, and in this one either posting method is >usually accepted simply to be polite. >

The problem with bottom posting being that most people are too lazy to snip the parts of a message that aren't relevant to their answer, in which case top posting makes it easier to avoid unnecessarily traversing the whole bunch of quoted (and presumably, already previously read) parts... No problem with bottom posting when someone is replying to a certain paragraph (or paragraphs) of the previous message, of course (like I'm doing right now). -- __________ ____---____ Marco Antonio Checa Funcke \_________D /-/---_----' Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru _H__/_/ http://machf.tripod.com '-_____|( remove the "no_me_j." and ".sons.of" parts before replying

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > The problem with bottom posting being that most people are too lazy to snip the > parts of a message that aren't relevant to their answer, in which case top > posting makes it easier to avoid unnecessarily traversing the whole bunch of > quoted (and presumably, already previously read) parts... > No problem with bottom posting when someone is replying to a certain paragraph > (or paragraphs) of the previous message, of course (like I'm doing right now). > >

It's all Outlook Express's fault (it defaults to top for replies)! And yes, Andi is using Outlook Express. Shock! Horror! Surprise! Oh, hey, so is Mitch. Whatever makes it easier for them; fuck everyone else. Internet argument #2357. -- MRSisson LOAD "GPL",8,1 RUN

Excellant a sensible answer at last, its Bill Gates' fault. Actually if Bill Gates Top posts then why can't I. Look guys, my 'teenage' comments started when I was labelled a lame barin and a moron for ignoring unwritten rules. So lets not start with the 'adult' thing, I'm probably older than most of you. As I said this is not a club with agreed rules just some of you guys deciding something's a good idea. It may have been a good idea when the internet was young and slow. But now the so called rules are not of any value. It gets very juvenile in my opinion when you lot start calling me names and ignoring posts because you don't like how I post. If you want rules then lets lock this down to a private club. Andi. -- Remove only one zero to reply. "Michael R Sisson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPG.1b3188be68f9661e989698@nntp... > In article <[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > > > The problem with bottom posting being that most people are too lazy to snip the > > parts of a message that aren't relevant to their answer, in which case top > > posting makes it easier to avoid unnecessarily traversing the whole bunch of > > quoted (and presumably, already previously read) parts... > > No problem with bottom posting when someone is replying to a certain paragraph > > (or paragraphs) of the previous message, of course (like I'm doing right now). > > > > > > > It's all Outlook Express's fault (it defaults to top for replies)! And > yes, Andi is using Outlook Express. Shock! Horror! Surprise! Oh, hey, so > is Mitch. Whatever makes it easier for them; fuck everyone else. > > Internet argument #2357. > > -- > MRSisson > > LOAD "GPL",8,1 > RUN

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 05:59:22 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote something like: >Look guys, my 'teenage' comments started when I was labelled a lame barin >and a moron for ignoring unwritten rules. So lets not start with the 'adult' Unwritten? http://www.html-faq.com/etiquette/?toppost http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html http://www.xs4all.nl/%7ewijnands/nnq/nquote.html ... just a few examples. Well, they are more like suggestions than strict rules, but they are well argumented and widely used throughout the usenet. I'm sorry about the name calling (not that I did any). That too is against the policies of newsgroups. Some ppl just tend to use name calling as an exclamation mark. >thing, I'm probably older than most of you. As I said this is not a club >with agreed rules just some of you guys deciding something's a good idea. It >may have been a good idea when the internet was young and slow. But now the >so called rules are not of any value. It gets very juvenile in my opinion So, on a narrow country road rules apply, but if a motorway is wide enough, it doesn't matter which lane you drive on? Ok, this might work up to a point, but occasional collisions can't be avoided. >when you lot start calling me names and ignoring posts because you don't >like how I post. If you want rules then lets lock this down to a private >club. IIRC the name calling wasn't done by "lot of us". Please don't judge the whole newsgroup by individuals who also go against known policies. -- Jussi 'Igor' Koukku

You see I don't actually agree with the logic behind the 'rules'. I can't accept we should do things 'because we always have done' I'm not even going to bother citing why change is sometimes necessary and beneficial. I don't accept that bottom posting is 'better' because that's how English is read and written. The advantage of top posting is that people following a thread can just simply read the last comment, those comments will be presented by the default settings in things like Outlook Express at the top. As very few people follow the complete 'rules' bottom posting can lead to scrolling through the same stuff left by other sorts of lazy posters. Yes I'm a lazy poster. I don't even find the sort of reply below easy to extract what was said, one or two chevrons can be difficlut to differentiate when your eyes are as old as mine. My original comment was that I hate having to scroll down past text that I've already read, just as several people here hate what I do. Why can't I suggest a change and support a different way. I know the name calling wasn't perpertrated by everyone here, but it was by a strong advocate of the 'rules' ie a hypocrite. I'm probably not going to get things changed here but at least some people may understand that the 'rules' do have some opposition and that opposition has some support. BTW where did the etiquette come from, who decided this was 'good', why can't it be changed? Andi. -- Remove only one zero to reply. "Jussi Koukku" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 05:59:22 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> > wrote something like: > >Look guys, my 'teenage' comments started when I was labelled a lame barin > >and a moron for ignoring unwritten rules. So lets not start with the 'adult' > > Unwritten? > > http://www.html-faq.com/etiquette/?toppost > http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html > http://www.xs4all.nl/%7ewijnands/nnq/nquote.html > > ... just a few examples. Well, they are more like suggestions than > strict rules, but they are well argumented and widely used throughout > the usenet. > > I'm sorry about the name calling (not that I did any). That too is > against the policies of newsgroups. Some ppl just tend to use name > calling as an exclamation mark. > > >thing, I'm probably older than most of you. As I said this is not a club > >with agreed rules just some of you guys deciding something's a good idea. It > >may have been a good idea when the internet was young and slow. But now the > >so called rules are not of any value. It gets very juvenile in my opinion > > So, on a narrow country road rules apply, but if a motorway is wide > enough, it doesn't matter which lane you drive on? Ok, this might work > up to a point, but occasional collisions can't be avoided. > > >when you lot start calling me names and ignoring posts because you don't > >like how I post. If you want rules then lets lock this down to a private > >club. > > IIRC the name calling wasn't done by "lot of us". Please don't judge > the whole newsgroup by individuals who also go against known policies. > -- > Jussi 'Igor' Koukku

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 08:53:08 +0100, "Andi Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote something like: >I don't accept that bottom posting is 'better' because that's how English is >read and written. The advantage of top posting is that people following a >thread can just simply read the last comment, those comments will be Yes, top posting has that advantage, in theory. It may happen (and often does) that there are different "sub-threads" in one thread. E.g. four ppl posting to one thread, but #1 is replying to #2's last post and #3 is replying to #4's last post. Now if all four were top posting, then you'd still have to scoll down to see which message was being quoted. A bit like your reply to mine... I couldn't see who's message you were replying to without scrolling down. >I'm a lazy poster. I don't even find the sort of reply below easy to extract >what was said, one or two chevrons can be difficlut to differentiate when >your eyes are as old as mine. If you have trouble reading replies posted in the "de facto standard" way then maybe you, sir, should stick to web boards and leave the complicated newsgroup stuff to us young ones (30y/o here). Or perhaps configure your newsreader to show different levels of replies in different colours and/or indent. Any half decent newsreader should be capable of that. Wouldn't that be a better solution than making replies harder to read for everyone else by top posting (when the vast majority still bottom posts)? >My original comment was that I hate having to scroll down past text that >I've already read, just as several people here hate what I do. I hate to scroll down past text that I have not yet read, and then scroll back up again to read the actual reply. So yes, I do hate what you do. >Why can't I suggest a change and support a different way. Of course you can. But don't be surprised if you get flamed. Big wheels turn slowly. >I'm probably not going to get things changed here but at least some people >may understand that the 'rules' do have some opposition and that opposition >has some support. Ok, it's understood. Can we move on? >BTW where did the etiquette come from, who decided this was 'good', why >can't it be changed? I believe it was mentioned in the links I posted. I take it that you couldn't be bothered to read them? -- Jussi 'Igor' Koukku