FAQ - How do I block TOP POSTERS

I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. Seems like a good time to trial it!! http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders list. Warning for 56K dial-up users. It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size.

I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. Seems like a good time to trial it!! http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/blocking.htm It shows you how to "ignore" posts. Without resorting to using a blocked senders lists! * Warning * For 56K dial-up users. It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size.

Have you done one to block double posters? -- Steve "To put it in gentleman's terms - if you've been out for a night and you're looking for a young lady and you pull one, some weeks they're good looking and some weeks they're not the best. Our performance today would have been not the best looking bird but at least we got her in the taxi." Ian Holloway describing a recent win. "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3gD8b.9554$[email hidden]... > I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/blocking.htm > > It shows you how to "ignore" posts. > Without resorting to using a blocked senders lists! > > * Warning * > > For 56K dial-up users. > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > >

LOL. No, but if you had really read the first post (I've since deleted it) it has a typo in the link. It wouldn't have worked properly, thus the repost.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:53:22 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >LOL. > >No, but if you had really read the first post (I've since deleted it) it has >a typo in the link. >It wouldn't have worked properly, thus the repost. >So you double post and don't know how to quote when replying to a message. You don't do the cause of proper posting a very good service. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

Does it also include blocking cross posters?? "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:SyD8b.9558$[email hidden]... > LOL. > > No, but if you had really read the first post (I've since deleted it) ithas > a typo in the link. > It wouldn't have worked properly, thus the repost. > >

I did not "double post". I posted a single message, then noticed the typo in it (making it's contents useless), then I cancelled the first message. People coming in later wont even see the first one. I then reposted this very small 1K message back again using the same title. Sorry for trying to be helpful ... what have you done?

Cross posting isn't "illegal" last time I looked. Besides, it was cross posted to three groups, my gosh... Just trying to be helpful ... PS - Sorry to have pissed in a few peoples Corn Flakes this morning. Have a nice day guys.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:14:32 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Just trying to be helpful ... >Learn how to post properly yourself before telling others how to post. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

As I explained, IMO it was eventually posted properly. It was a repost, I cancelled the first one. You viewed that as a double post. I posted a small guide showing how to block "top posters" using OE using views. Your signature even hints that you don't like the practice (pot meet kettle). Why not expand on that sig. and create a guide for Forte Agent? "The critic doesn't create culture, the artist creates culture". David Bowie.

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:41:46 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >As I explained, IMO it was eventually posted properly. >You still don't know how to quote text in a reply. > >Why not expand on that sig. and create a guide for Forte Agent? >I f I added anything else to my .sig it would be too long. Most people who use Agent know enough about Usenet that they don't need to be told what to do. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

"Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:3gD8b.9554 $[email hidden]:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/blocking.htm > > It shows you how to "ignore" posts. > Without resorting to using a blocked senders lists! > > * Warning * > > For 56K dial-up users. > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > >

You may want to spend some time figuring out how to get that bug out of your ass. I think you'll miss a few good posts, but whatever floats your boat, Kev. Chuck -- Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. Benjamin Franklin

<[email hidden] > wrote in message >Most people who use Agent know enough about Usenet that they don't need >to be told what to do. Sharing knowledge isn't always telling people what to do, it's also about giving options.

"Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:BPD8b.9562$[email hidden]... > I did not "double post". > > I posted a single message, then noticed the typo in it (making it'scontents > useless), then I cancelled the first message. People coming in later wont > even see the first one. I did. > Sorry for trying to be helpful ... what have you done? Didn't double-post for a start. KK

"Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ISD8b.9563$[email hidden]... > Cross posting isn't "illegal" last time I looked. Nor is top-posting. > Besides, it was cross posted to three groups, my gosh... Nice double-standard you have there. KK

Nor is top-posting. Nice double-standard you have there. KK

"Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:egE8b.9572$[email hidden]... > As I explained, IMO it was eventually posted properly. > > It was a repost, I cancelled the first one. You viewed that as a double > post. You didn't proof-read your original post. One could argue that by having to correct yourself and post a repeat, you are wasting bandwidth, and not practicing good usenet etiquette yourself. > I posted a small guide showing how to block "top posters" using OE using > views. Some people get their knickers in a knot over famines in third world countries.... others post FAQs for dealing with top posters. Hmmmm... if I was a betting man, I'd be inclined to put money on you being a loser. KK

LOL, what an educated and mature rebuttal. "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message Hmmmm... if I was a betting man, I'd be inclined to put money on you being a loser.

"Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:W9F8b.9597$[email hidden]... > LOL, what an educated and mature rebuttal. > > "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > Hmmmm... if I was a betting man, I'd be inclined to put money on you beinga > loser. ...and a top-poster too. KK

Now , take the example of the Yard Sale post. That would be an obvious case of an unintentional error. Why would they want to advertise a one day yard sale for today, for two months. But then again, looks like this guy has more problems with dates. LOL Hawk "Chuck C." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (30 lines)

> "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:3gD8b.9554 > $[email hidden]: > > > I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/blocking.htm > > > > It shows you how to "ignore" posts. > > Without resorting to using a blocked senders lists! > > > > * Warning * > > > > For 56K dial-up users. > > > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > > > > > > You may want to spend some time figuring out how to get that bug out of > your ass. > > I think you'll miss a few good posts, but whatever floats your boat, > Kev. > > Chuck > -- > Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. > Benjamin Franklin

--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.510 / Virus Database: 307 - Release Date: 8/14/2003

hehe...What dweeb uses outlook. The Pussification of the net continues. PAPA DOC >For 56K dial-up users. > >It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > "There are too many people who imagine that there is something sophisticated about always believing the best of those who hate your country, and the worst of those who defend it." Former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher

What exactly is 'Top Posting'? Achim "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WcD8b.9551$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > > It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders > list. > > Warning for 56K dial-up users. > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > >

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:43:18 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> top posted: >LOL, what an educated and mature rebuttal. >What a twat. *plonk* -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

Neither is top posting. "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ISD8b.9563$[email hidden]... > Cross posting isn't "illegal" last time I looked.

Spoken like a true nerd. "PAPADOC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > hehe...What dweeb uses outlook. The Pussification of the net continues. >

True. I caused a bit of confusion with that one. I should have titled that "How do I block FUTURE POSTERS", as in future date changing one's posts. Not the classic meaning of Top Posting. "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Neither is top posting. > > "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ISD8b.9563$[email hidden]... > > Cross posting isn't "illegal" last time I looked. > >

Kevin - Get Forte Free Agent Newsreader. Icer

Quoted text (15 lines)

>On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:29:58 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > >Seems like a good time to trial it!! > >http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > >It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders >list. > >Warning for 56K dial-up users. > >It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. >

Thanks. I used it a lot years ago. "Icer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Kevin - > > Get Forte Free Agent Newsreader. > > Icer > > > >On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:29:58 GMT, "Kevin�"

<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > >I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > > >Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > > >http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > > > >It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders > >list. > > > >Warning for 56K dial-up users. > > > >It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > > >

1. By your subject header, you obviously haven't thought thru the differences between top and bottom posting as to which is more intelligent, effective, and efficient. 2. You double posted your message just four minutes after the first. 3. You use Outlook Express. No thanks Kevin, I don't think I need to see your guide. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:33:19 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/blocking.htm > >It shows you how to "ignore" posts. >Without resorting to using a blocked senders lists! > >* Warning * > >For 56K dial-up users. > >It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size.

4. You don't understand how canceling a post works. 5. You should have simply corrected the typo with a follow-up message rather posting the entire message again. Good grief, I'm almost curious as to what I might find in your OE guide. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:11:13 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>I did not "double post". > >I posted a single message, then noticed the typo in it (making it's contents >useless), then I cancelled the first message. People coming in later wont >even see the first one. > >I then reposted this very small 1K message back again using the same title. > >Sorry for trying to be helpful ... what have you done?

6. You most likely think top posting 'improper' or poor netiquette. 7. It's 'improper' to impose your bottom posting 'preference' on others. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 12:14:32 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >PS - Sorry to have pissed in a few peoples Corn Flakes this morning. >Have a nice day guys.

Youre an idiot! Plonk "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WcD8b.9551$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > > It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders > list. > > Warning for 56K dial-up users. > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > >

"PAPADOC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > hehe...What dweeb uses outlook. The Pussification of the net continues. >What dweeb puts "hehe" in their reply ? Who you calling pussy, pussy ? Do you realize that you/we are the minority ? Zillions of internet users have never even heard of usenet, let alone the programs available to run it.

I'll cite that as number 8 on my list. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:49:36 +0100, spamtrap@localhost wrote: >You still don't know how to quote text in a reply.

I'll cite that as number 8 on my list. >You still don't know how to quote text in a reply.

Number 9. Do I hear 10? On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:09:26 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You didn't proof-read your original post.

10. You advocate against top posting and then turn right around and do it yourself. You don't think things thru very well, do you. Don't you realize your practice of filtering out top posting just filtered your own reply? (hehheh-heh) This is becoming comical... On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:43:18 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >LOL, what an educated and mature rebuttal. >>"Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> >>Hmmmm... if I was a betting man, I'd be inclined to put money on you being a >>loser.

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

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Number 9. Do I hear 10? > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:09:26 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >You didn't proof-read your original post.

Lost all credibility when he top-posted in his replies? KK

Yup... On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 02:26:23 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Lost all credibility when he top-posted in his replies?

(hehheh-heh) I don't think I've seen so many blunders by the same person under a single subject header in my entire time on usenet. This is a hoot. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 23:06:32 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >"Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:ISD8b.9563$[email hidden]... >> Cross posting isn't "illegal" last time I looked. >Nor is top-posting.

Naaa, probably a 14 year old. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 16:41:38 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Youre an idiot!

Top posting, eh ? I didnt realize it was such a big issue. But to block a message just because of how its posted ? Thats so Anal and/or OC, i cant put it in words. Personally, i find cross-posting to be a more contemptible offense. Just dont forget to block the people who cant spell every single word perfectly too. Oh shit, i almost forgot curse words, and people who post (by accident and on purpose) in CAPS. Dont forget the low lifes who use way too many exclamation points, smileys, and improper punctuation. Jeez, im forgetting the LOLers and ROFLers, and those IMHO who use too many acronyms. Thanks Kev, i never realized how elitist i could become by blocking out things that dont meet my strict code of ethics. P.S. If you are prone to OCD behavior, dont forget to wash your hands after every vowel, and check those jars of urine in the trunk of your car once in a while. If you ar not OC, i recommend getting outside and going fishing or mountain biking or something. P.S.S Your code of proper posting forgot to put OT in the topic, and you double-posted (as some kind folks already pointed out). I also tossed out all those cross posted newsgroups i dont participate in too. Have a nice PLONK :) "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WcD8b.9551$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > > It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders > list. > > Warning for 56K dial-up users. > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > >

Awwww....Im in a minority...maybe I can put in for a Government program or declare some sort of injury because Im in the minority. Boohoo. I think there should be some sort of affirmative action for Agent Users. PAPA DOC >What dweeb puts "hehe" in their reply ? Who you calling pussy, pussy ? >Do you realize that you/we are the minority ? Zillions of internet users >have never even heard of usenet, let alone the programs available to run it. > "There are too many people who imagine that there is something sophisticated about always believing the best of those who hate your country, and the worst of those who defend it." Former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher

Im slain by your put down, Mr. Outlook Express user. PAPA DOC

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Spoken like a true nerd. > >"PAPADOC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> hehe...What dweeb uses outlook. The Pussification of the net continues. >> >

"There are too many people who imagine that there is something sophisticated about always believing the best of those who hate your country, and the worst of those who defend it." Former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher

We all see both of them. Besides what wrong with a little *top-posting* every now and then...? <g> -- eD_ "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding news:BPD8b.9562$[email hidden]... > I did not "double post". > > I posted a single message, then noticed the typo in it (making it's contents > useless), then I cancelled the first message. People coming in later wont > even see the first one. > > I then reposted this very small 1K message back again using the same title. > > Sorry for trying to be helpful ... what have you done? > >

IMO - top-posting is "legal" too.... (and far - FAR better than cross-posting!) So who's right and who's wrong? -- ed_ "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> skrev i melding news:egE8b.9572$[email hidden]... > As I explained, IMO it was eventually posted properly.

He actually means future dating not top posting. Funny he doesn't know the terms but tries to tech everyone and makes a million other mistakes along the way :-) "Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > 10. You advocate against top posting and then turn right around and > do it yourself. > > You don't think things thru very well, do you. Don't you realize your > practice of filtering out top posting just filtered your own reply? > (hehheh-heh) This is becoming comical... > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:43:18 GMT, "Kevin�"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted text (7 lines)

> wrote: > > >LOL, what an educated and mature rebuttal. > > >>"Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >> > >>Hmmmm... if I was a betting man, I'd be inclined to put money on you

being a > >>loser. >

Exactly. Some might think a big deal is being made out of nothing but misinformation is far from nothing to a newbie who is trying to learn what is correct and factual. But then no one should take seriously a kid who thinks it's cool to copyright the 'given name' Kevin. On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:54:47 -0300, "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Funny he doesn't know the >terms but tries to tech everyone

Icer wrote: > Kevin - > > Get Forte Free Agent Newsreader. > > Icer > Naaah. It runs only in Windows, unless you would use WINE. Why bother? I've got half a dozen or so e-mail and usenet readers right here. But, yes, that's pretty ridiculous to be caught using OE.

Cant believe I just read this thread tothe end oops spacebar infraction BTW if my post breaks any rules could someone please post them what is top posting? "Kevin�" wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > > It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders > list. > > Warning for 56K dial-up users. > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size.

>"Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote > It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders > list. <mark useless thread as read> -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"Brian" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Cant believe I just read this thread tothe end > oops spacebar infraction > BTW if my post breaks any rules could someone please post them > what is top posting? LOL ;o) Elrikk

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > "Kevin�" wrote: > > > I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > > > > It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked

senders > > list. > > > > Warning for 56K dial-up users. > > > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. >

And you're just sooo perfect Schooner. Kinda like your Eastlink connection??? ;-) "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NJJ8b.70014$[email hidden]... > He actually means future dating not top posting. Funny he doesn't knowthe > terms but tries to tech everyone and makes a million other mistakes along > the way :-)

Yes I sure did try and "tech" everyone! Misinformation? Bet you didn't even read the page Alan, it's reads factual. You sure are painting a nice mental picture of me. I guess it helps you to visualize things better while waiting for the fry machine buzzer. :-) "Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > Exactly. Some might think a big deal is being made out of nothing but > misinformation is far from nothing to a newbie who is trying to learn > what is correct and factual. But then no one should take seriously a > kid who thinks it's cool to copyright the 'given name' Kevin. > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 15:54:47 -0300, "Schooner" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Funny he doesn't know the > >terms but tries to tech everyone >

What putdown? I called you a nerd, which in some circles would be a compliment. Now, if I had said that you were an elitist fascist jerk for telling other people what newsreader to use, that would have been a putdown. But I didn't. Or if I called you a coward for calling other people pussies while hiding behind the anonimity of Usenet, that would have been a putdown. But I didn't do that either. So back off, I haven't said anything bad about you yet. "PAPADOC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Im slain by your put down, Mr. Outlook Express user. > > PAPA DOC >

Haqsau wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > What putdown? I called you a nerd, which in some circles would be a > compliment. Now, if I had said that you were an elitist fascist jerk for > telling other people what newsreader to use, that would have been a putdown. > But I didn't. Or if I called you a coward for calling other people pussies > while hiding behind the anonimity of Usenet, that would have been a putdown. > But I didn't do that either. So back off, I haven't said anything bad about > you yet. > > "PAPADOC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Im slain by your put down, Mr. Outlook Express user. > > > > PAPA DOC > >

Oooh, this could be good, things sure do liven up around here with NOS and PD joining in on the fun Btw, note the total lack of cross and top posting as well as liberal use of spel checker Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

"winsux" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6DK8b.1680$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Icer wrote: > > Kevin - > > > > Get Forte Free Agent Newsreader. > > > > Icer > > > Naaah. It runs only in Windows, unless you would use WINE. Why bother? > I've got half a dozen or so e-mail and usenet readers right here.

Linux user no doubt.... ? It speaks for itself that you have a dozen or so programs that do the same thing - not one of them good enough to do everything? And Linux users have the audacity to claim windows is bloated. > But, yes, that's pretty ridiculous to be caught using OE. At least its out of alpha... KK

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:17:20 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >At least its out of alpha... >Maybe but it still acts like a very early beta. Its a shame that MS have stopped development of OE, Usenet will have to put up with its terrible influence for years. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

Kasper Kowalski wrote:

Quoted text (19 lines)

> "winsux" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:6DK8b.1680$[email hidden]... > >>Icer wrote: >> >>>Kevin - >>> >>>Get Forte Free Agent Newsreader. >>> >>>Icer >>> >> >>Naaah. It runs only in Windows, unless you would use WINE. Why bother? >> I've got half a dozen or so e-mail and usenet readers right here. > > > Linux user no doubt.... ? It speaks for itself that you have a dozen or so > programs that do the same thing - not one of them good enough to do > everything?

Well, sure, lots of programs will do "everything." I still get to choose which one. > > And Linux users have the audacity to claim windows is bloated. > Do you mean Windows' Registry bloat, feature-bloat in programs (such as the dancing paper clip), or what? But, hey, if you like OE, then don't be offended by mockery. Or, if you don't really like OE, or dare to try something new, surf over to distrowatch.com or linuxiso.org. It's on me!

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >>But, yes, that's pretty ridiculous to be caught using OE. > > > At least its out of alpha... > > KK > >

"winsux" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:fwZ8b.2041$[email hidden]... > > > > Linux user no doubt.... ? It speaks for itself that you have a dozen orso > > programs that do the same thing - not one of them good enough to do > > everything? > > Well, sure, lots of programs will do "everything." I still get to > choose which one. But because no one program does everything you want, you have a dozen installed, and use each one depending on what 'feature' you want? If that isn't unnecessary bloat, I don't know what is.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > And Linux users have the audacity to claim windows is bloated. > > > > Do you mean Windows' Registry bloat, feature-bloat in programs (such as > the dancing paper clip), or what? But, hey, if you like OE, then don't > be offended by mockery. Or, if you don't really like OE, or dare to try > something new, surf over to distrowatch.com or linuxiso.org. It's on me!

I use OE, it's fine.. does everything I need, and integrates well with the other software I use. But because it' s made by Microsoft, I should be mocked? Dare to try something new? I was using BeOS for ages, toyed with slackware and am currently using Redhat with Ximian Desktop and Evolution for mail. I'm no stranger to alternatives. However, as an all-in-one, it falls well short of my XP install which does almost every(but one)thing I need from a computer. Just because something is made by someone other than MS, does not make it a worthwhile alternative. KK

Kasper Kowalski wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> "winsux" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:fwZ8b.2041$[email hidden]... > >>>Linux user no doubt.... ? It speaks for itself that you have a dozen or > > so > >>>programs that do the same thing - not one of them good enough to do >>>everything? >> >>Well, sure, lots of programs will do "everything." I still get to >>choose which one. > > > But because no one program does everything you want,

Note false premise: using multiple programs to enjoy this or that "'feature.'" We're just posting stuff on usenet, not embedding animations or who knows what. Today I feel like using Mozilla for posting. Maybe tomorrow I'll wish to try something else, just for novelty and fun. Your remark reminds me, instead, of the debate (loosely enough defined) on Photoshop versus GIMP. Some say that GIMP lacks enough features, such that one must supplement it, if using it at all. Now, if I needed e-mail and a nice calendar at the same time, I might prefer Evolu ... (oops, scroll down) > you have a dozen > installed, and use each one depending on what 'feature' you want? If that > isn't unnecessary bloat, I don't know what is. We were just talking about it ...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > >>>And Linux users have the audacity to claim windows is bloated. >>> >> >>Do you mean Windows' Registry bloat, feature-bloat in programs (such as >>the dancing paper clip), or what? But, hey, if you like OE, then don't >>be offended by mockery. Or, if you don't really like OE, or dare to try >>something new, surf over to distrowatch.com or linuxiso.org. It's on me! > > > I use OE, it's fine.. does everything I need, and integrates well with the > other software I use. But because it' s made by Microsoft, I should be > mocked? > > Dare to try something new? I was using BeOS for ages, toyed with slackware > and am currently using Redhat with Ximian Desktop and Evolution for mail.

Why didn't you say so? It's a great wide world out there, as well you know. Of course, one would point to Evolution as exemplifying the all-in-one approach, something that opens e-mail, lets you look at the calendar, tells the weather wherever (Who cares? How much harm could it do?), suggests surfing to salon.com (time-wasting but fun, like what we're doing right now), and so forth. > I'm no stranger to alternatives. However, as an all-in-one, it falls well > short of my XP install (Not clear, whether this compares Evolution to Outlook, or Red Hat to Windows XP.) > which does almost every(but one)thing I need from a > computer. Just because something is made by someone other than MS, does not > make it a worthwhile alternative. That's logically sturdy, but heuristically suspect. (Or, as we said to our friend with the new Mac: "At least Microsoft doesn't make it; how bad could it be?") But, granted, it's pretty hard to play games, in Windows, and post to the newsgroups, in Linux, at the same time. I couldn't much disagree with shutting down Red Hat and booting Windows for that. Sometimes those fancy games are fun, too. Somehow I did wander into one of these newsgroups. > > KK > >

The integration is a very good point but I kindly suggest using Forte Agent. OE habitually drops messages regardless of what server you're using and its filtering capability is inferior to Agent. Agent isn't as pretty or modern looking but it's simply the best. Also, the more modern looking, Outlook like, 2.0 version will be out soon. On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:42:33 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I use OE, it's fine.. does everything I need, and integrates well with the >other software I use.

Huh? What does me posting issues with my ISP have to do with your crossposting and not understanding basic terminology? I guess attempt to change the subject to deflect it away from the mistakes made. Good try. "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:CcN8b.9793$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> And you're just sooo perfect Schooner. Kinda like your Eastlink > connection??? > ;-) > > > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:NJJ8b.70014$[email hidden]... > > He actually means future dating not top posting. Funny he doesn't know > the > > terms but tries to tech everyone and makes a million other mistakes

along > > the way :-) > >

No, just to highlight that no one is perfect Schooner, technology included. I guess you've never made a mistake I guess. Must be nice.

PS - I know why I'm inside on this nice sunny day in Halifax. No beer in the fridge or what?

Well between NASCAR, NFL, and work to do I know why I am. Plus if I go outside I would have to cut the grass. :) "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xN29b.10315$[email hidden]... > PS - I know why I'm inside on this nice sunny day in Halifax. No beer in > the fridge or what? > >

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 16:20:58 GMT, Alan Jones <[email hidden]> wrote: >OE habitually drops messages I already use Agent, but what do you mean OE drops messages? That would be a symptom of a crap news server and nothing to do with the newsreader you choose.

Can't say that I have ever seen a message dropped by my OE. Yes.. I would know by broken threads, etc.. I do not understand why anyone would care what someone else uses through to read their ng messages. You can have a neighbor relay messages to you via smoke signals, I don't care. I would definitely never criticize someone for it "Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > The integration is a very good point but I kindly suggest using Forte > Agent. OE habitually drops messages regardless of what server > you're using and its filtering capability is inferior to Agent. Agentisn't

Quoted text (7 lines)

> as pretty or modern looking but it's simply the best. Also, the more > modern looking, Outlook like, 2.0 version will be out soon. > > On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:42:33 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I use OE, it's fine.. does everything I need, and integrates well with

the > >other software I use. >

I've used Agent since it first came out and I tried OE, on various servers, when it came out. OE will habitually drop messages and that fact is known by many. Just recently this week, I had a online racing friend ask me what reader I recommend. He wanted to switch because his OE was dropping messages. Maybe the problem isn't so apparent on your server but it is a very well known fact. On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 12:37:21 -0700, Steve Jones <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 16:20:58 GMT, Alan Jones <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>OE habitually drops messages > >I already use Agent, but what do you mean OE drops messages? That >would be a symptom of a crap news server and nothing to do with the >newsreader you choose.

I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- savvy or well informed in computing. It's akin to using AOL or WebTV. My mother uses AOL because that's about all she can handle or manage technically. Pointing this out to others may seem a bit rude but it's the hard truth. On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:48:57 GMT, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I do not understand why anyone would care what someone else uses through to >read their ng messages. You can have a neighbor relay messages to you via >smoke signals, I don't care. I would definitely never criticize someone >for it

Alan Jones wrote: > > I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- > savvy or well informed in computing. It's akin to using AOL or WebTV. > My mother uses AOL because that's about all she can handle or manage > technically. Pointing this out to others may seem a bit rude but it's the > hard truth. And continuos cross posting is a sign of "net saviness" ? Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Yes it is. In fact, it shows 'your' lack of experience if you think there's anything wrong with cross-posting. I wonder if you understand how it works or how it's used it in discussion. Cross-posting serves a very useful purpose. On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:43:44 +0200, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote: >And continuos cross posting is a sign of "net saviness" ?

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:33:34 GMT, Alan Jones <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- >savvy or well informed in computing. It's akin to using AOL or WebTV. >My mother uses AOL because that's about all she can handle or manage >technically. Pointing this out to others may seem a bit rude but it's the >hard truth. >

And you use........??????

Quoted text (7 lines)

>On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:48:57 GMT, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>I do not understand why anyone would care what someone else uses through to >>read their ng messages. You can have a neighbor relay messages to you via >>smoke signals, I don't care. I would definitely never criticize someone >>for it

On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:28:20 +0000, ResQTech wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:33:34 GMT, Alan Jones <[email hidden]> wrote: > >> >>I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- >>savvy or well informed in computing. It's akin to using AOL or WebTV. >>My mother uses AOL because that's about all she can handle or manage >>technically. Pointing this out to others may seem a bit rude but it's the >>hard truth. >> > > And you use........?????? >

Verizon Internet, and Forte Agent, by the looks of it....

The same reader 'you' use. On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:28:20 GMT, ResQTech <[email hidden]> wrote: >And you use........??????

Presumably unless they commit, as you see it, the heinous crime of top-posting, in which case they are given no options AND told what to do? On Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:26:27 GMT, "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Sharing knowledge isn't always telling people what to do, it's also about >giving options. >

Misunderstanding, I meant future date posting, not top posting in the classic sense. "John Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Presumably unless they commit, as you see it, the heinous crime of > top-posting, in which case they are given no options AND told what to > do? >

Not very net savvy? That makes me laugh. That's like saying if you don't use Pine you're not cool. I suppose you're still using packet drivers? Are you composing your messages with VI? I mean really, if you didn't write your NG reader yourself, why are you breathing my air? What RFC specs the kind of News Reader and OS you use anyway? Who cares what you use? SmokeRelay 1.0 sounds like fun. Might have to try it some time:) I've been around computers and the net for a long time and could really care less what you or anyone else uses or how savvy they are. I'm more interested in what they have to say. Kind of like if I order a pizza, I don't care what they drive up in as long as the pizza's good. The same pizza doesn't taste any better delivered in BMW vs. a 65' VW bug. Though I do find a '65 bug with deadhead stickers and psychedelic paint more interesting than the thousands of the run of the mill BMW's I see all the time. So are those who use AOL or WebTV bad people? Are they of less character and intelligence than the rest of us? And on the topic of top vs. bottom posting I don't care if the pizza driver pulled right in or backed up the driveway either:) I'm interested in the pizza not the delivery, but then again I have a life:) -- ... Carl Frisk "Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- > savvy or well informed in computing. It's akin to using AOL or WebTV. > My mother uses AOL because that's about all she can handle or manage > technically. Pointing this out to others may seem a bit rude but it's the > hard truth. > > On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 19:48:57 GMT, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >I do not understand why anyone would care what someone else uses through to > >read their ng messages. You can have a neighbor relay messages to you via > >smoke signals, I don't care. I would definitely never criticize someone > >for it >

I like Microsoft products, Office, FrontPage, etc. and OE is a pretty good email program but it's 'terrible' with usenet messages. If you don't mind a reader that can't effectively filter, or even delete, and persistently drops messages; go right ahead but it doesn't say much for you as being a knowledgeable computer user. Especially for someone as you who is supposed to be knowledgeable in the first place. But then, a tirade about a pizza delivery, BMW, and '65 VW bug with deadhead stickers and psychedelic paint doesn't speak well for a person either. I'm not trying to change your mind or force my will on you. I'm simply informing you of the problems with OE and, 'God forbid', telling you how you're being perceived by many on usenet. If you don't care, fine, move on with yourself but the fact is people automatically assume you don't know any better and are ignorantly using what came with Windows. Or even worse, you know of the problems but continue to use it because you like the way it looks. You're an adult and capable of making your own decisions, and you shouldn't have a problem with others pointing out the consequences and realities. On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:38:46 GMT, "Carl Frisk" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (35 lines)

>Not very net savvy? That makes me laugh. That's like saying if you don't >use Pine you're not cool. I suppose you're still using packet drivers? Are >you composing your messages with VI? I mean really, if you didn't write >your NG reader yourself, why are you breathing my air? What RFC specs the >kind of News Reader and OS you use anyway? > >Who cares what you use? SmokeRelay 1.0 sounds like fun. Might have to try >it some time:) > >I've been around computers and the net for a long time and could really care >less what you or anyone else uses or how savvy they are. I'm more >interested in what they have to say. Kind of like if I order a pizza, I >don't care what they drive up in as long as the pizza's good. The same >pizza doesn't taste any better delivered in BMW vs. a 65' VW bug. Though I >do find a '65 bug with deadhead stickers and psychedelic paint more >interesting than the thousands of the run of the mill BMW's I see all the >time. So are those who use AOL or WebTV bad people? Are they of less >character and intelligence than the rest of us? > >And on the topic of top vs. bottom posting I don't care if the pizza driver >pulled right in or backed up the driveway either:) I'm interested in the >pizza not the delivery, but then again I have a life:) > >-- >... Carl Frisk > > >"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> >> I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- >> savvy or well informed in computing. It's akin to using AOL or WebTV. >> My mother uses AOL because that's about all she can handle or manage >> technically. Pointing this out to others may seem a bit rude but it's the >> hard truth.

"Alan Jones" wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > I like Microsoft products, Office, FrontPage, etc. and OE > is a pretty good email program but it's 'terrible' with > usenet messages. If you don't mind a reader that can't > effectively filter, or even delete, and persistently drops > messages; go right ahead but it doesn't say much for you > as being a knowledgeable computer user.

Whatever there may be the technical shortcomings of OE, there is no other news program for PC and Windows OS in particular that comes close to matching its ease of browsing/reading messages and the intuitiveness of its interface for me. I sometimes use Free Agent to download stuff off binary newsgroups, but I can't stand it as a "news reader" in the literal sense. But this is just the opinion of a computer user who's experience with computers and networking goes back to the 70's, so it doesn't count, obviously. Please continue to project and enjoy the sysadmin image. Jan. =---

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:50:28 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Whatever there may be the technical shortcomings of OE, there is no other >news program for PC and Windows OS in particular that comes close to >matching its ease of browsing/reading messages and the intuitiveness of its >interface for me. I sometimes use Free Agent to download stuff off binary >newsgroups, but I can't stand it as a "news reader" in the literal sense. >What is more intuitive that Agents simple keystrokes - N for next unread, I to ignore thread and Backspace to go back to a previous message? -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

"ease of browsing/reading messages and the intuitiveness of its interface" ?!?!? You've got to be kidding. OE is just a threaded list of messages just like any other reader. "ease of browsing" (hehheh-heh) good grief... In your opinion, and experience with computers and networking that goes back to the 70's, please tell me how you think OE is more 'intuitive' than Forte Agent. What does OE do and Agent does not do? On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:50:28 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >that comes close to >matching its ease of browsing/reading messages and the intuitiveness of its >interface

Exactly. Agent is by far the most direct, streamlined, 'intuitive', efficient, and effective newsreader 'ever made'. It was the first 'offline' reader and it's basically the standard. Something is very wrong with a reader that can't even delete a message from the list. You have to use a poorly designed and clumsy filtering system to compensate and move unwanted messages out of view, which means the message and 'size of the database' remains. On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 17:57:17 +0100, spamtrap@localhost wrote: >What is more intuitive that Agents simple keystrokes - N for next >unread, I to ignore thread and Backspace to go back to a previous >message?

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote... > What is more intuitive that Agents simple keystrokes > - N for next unread, I to ignore thread and Backspace > to go back to a previous message? LOL... good one. Jan. =---

"Alan Jones" wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > <snip> > (hehheh-heh) good grief... > > In your opinion, and experience with computers and > networking that goes back to the 70's, please tell > me how you think OE is more 'intuitive' than Forte > Agent. What does OE do and Agent does not do?

It's not what either program does or does not (BTW: seing as OE is free, it makes sense only to compare it to _Free_ Agent), it's how it does it. In other words, OE fits my way of working better and, having tried the alternatives, I find it easier and more intuitive to use than anything on Tucows. Seeing as I'm an experienced computer user that undermines your "OE=moron at the keyboard" statement. You attach a totally unwarrented stigma to using OE and I had to respond to that. If you think you can't be seen dead using it for fear of using your credibility then that's fine. Silly, but fine. Jan. =---

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:24:49 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> What is more intuitive that Agents simple keystrokes >> - N for next unread, I to ignore thread and Backspace >> to go back to a previous message? > >LOL... good one. >Whats so funny? -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote... > > <snip> > Whats so funny? Oh, I'm sorry. I thougth you were being sarcastic. Jan. =---

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:24:49 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It's not what either program does or does not (BTW: seing as OE is free, it >makes sense only to compare it to _Free_ Agent), it's how it does it. Well as the interface in FreeAgent is the same as Agent, are you going to tell us why OE is more intuitive? -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:42:05 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Oh, I'm sorry. I thougth you were being sarcastic. >I was merely stating the wonderfully simple and intuitive Agent control system. I can see it would confuse someone who thinks OE is intuitive. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

Can it block cross posters too?? Using OE, isn't top posting a good thing? -Tim "Kevin�" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WcD8b.9551$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I wrote this Outlook Express guide up a few weeks ago. > > Seems like a good time to trial it!! > > http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/kevinspeichts/faq/blocking news posts.htm > > It shows how to block posts, without resorting to using a blocked senders > list. > > Warning for 56K dial-up users. > > It contains a few screen shots, and is around 1.7MB in size. > >

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote... > > <snip> > I was merely stating the wonderfully simple and > intuitive Agent control system. I can see it would > confuse someone who thinks OE is intuitive. How intuitive is having to look up a keyboard command compared to a big button with a green down arrow on it labeled next? But I guess you consider something easily available and clearly visibly suggesting its function to be condescending... Jan. =---

"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I'm not trying to change your mind or force my will on you. I'm simply > informing you of the problems with OE and, 'God forbid', telling you > how you're being perceived by many on usenet. LOL. Do you really think it's really important how you are "perceived by many on usenet" by people who think this is an issue? Oh nevermind, that's right you do. BTW, you might be perceived as a little more intelligent if you simply imformed people about the shortcomings of OE and did it in a less insulting manner. As it stands you look like an idiot.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 18:24:49 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It's not what either program does or does not (BTW: seing as OE is free, it >makes sense only to compare it to _Free_ Agent), it's how it does it. In >other words, OE fits my way of working better and, having tried the >alternatives, I find it easier and more intuitive to use than anything on >Tucows. Okay, 'HOW' does it do what you like. In what way or method. Either come up with something valid and substantial, rather than meaningless rhetoric, or admit you only use it because you like the way it looks. > Seeing as I'm an experienced computer user that undermines your >"OE=moron at the keyboard" statement. I didn't say that. Show me where I said that. Please don't misrepresent what I've said. Btw, my mother has been using a personal computer for well over 15 years but that doesn't mean she's particularly knowledgeable about them or the available software. In fact, she uses AOL, which clearly demonstrates how years at the terminal has very little if not nothing to do with the accumulation of knowledge. >You attach a totally unwarrented stigma to using OE and I had to respond to >that. If you think you can't be seen dead using it for fear of using your >credibility then that's fine. Silly, but fine. I haven't 'attached' the stigma. The stigma existed long before I learned of it.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:21:43 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >How intuitive is having to look up a keyboard command compared to a big >button with a green down arrow on it labeled next? > >But I guess you consider something easily available and clearly visibly >suggesting its function to be condescending... >You can use an icon in Agent if you are retarded enough to need one, I couldn't imagine having to use a GUI to navigate hundreds of messages, life is too short. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

I'm not the one getting defensive and upset over the issue. Those such as you and Carl are... You act like this is the first time you've heard of this so I guess it is. You feel insulted by what I'm saying but the way I've said it has not been particularly rude or offensive. In fact, at the very most, I've only given back the same attitude taken with me. On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:23:29 GMT, "FLY135" <[email hidden]> wrote: >LOL. Do you really think it's really important how you are "perceived by >many on usenet" by people who think this is an issue? Oh nevermind, that's >right you do. BTW, you might be perceived as a little more intelligent if >you simply imformed people about the shortcomings of OE and did it in a less >insulting manner. As it stands you look like an idiot.

Your reasoning is you like to use a mouse? Your 'experience' is showing Jan. You haven't learned that your keyboard is 'faster', more efficient, and more 'intuitive' than a mouse. Sure you have to learn the key combos but they're right there, easy to find and learn, as you click on the drop down menus with your 'mouse'. Many of the most used functions are single keystroke letters. It doesn't take that long to learn them and once you do you wonder how you ever got along without them. After using and learning Agent, navigating with a slow and cumbersome mouse would be a nightmare while dealing with the hundreds, sometimes thousands, of messages in the four groups in which I participate. On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:21:43 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >How intuitive is having to look up a keyboard command compared to a big >button with a green down arrow on it labeled next? > >But I guess you consider something easily available and clearly visibly >suggesting its function to be condescending...

Sicks years ago I cud not evan spel compooter oparater and now I r won!

Yes it is. On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:09:35 -0700, "Tim Miser" <[email hidden]> wrote: >isn't top posting a good thing?

"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Your reasoning is you like to use a mouse? > Your 'experience' is showing Jan. It's bad enough that you consistently poison rec.autos.sport.nascar, now your condescending pomposity is a blight on yet another newsgroup. Sigh.

No, it's totally wrong. On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 21:05:15 GMT, Alan Jones <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >Yes it is. > >On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:09:35 -0700, "Tim Miser" <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>isn't top posting a good thing?

No, it's totally wrong.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Yes it is. >>isn't top posting a good thing?

"Alan Jones" wrote... > > Your reasoning is you like to use a mouse? No my reasoning is that if I would like the program to select the next message I read instead of scanning the headers and double clicking the one I *want* to read, I don't want to have to look up or know a keyboard command. BTW: Free Agent only has a button for "next", whereas I frequently start with a reply in a thread from someone I know and go up to find how the thread progressed as it has. > Your 'experience' is showing Jan. You haven't learned that > your keyboard is 'faster', more efficient, and more > 'intuitive' than a mouse. Bullshit... I know keyboard shortcuts are a faster and more efficient way of doing things you know how to do via buttons or menu commands. "Intuitive" means the software makes is easy/self-evident enough to accomplish a task even if you don't know exactly how to do it. Except for most applications supporting ctrl-c/ctrl-x/ctrl-v for copy/cut/paste, application specific keyboard shortcuts do not fall under "intuitive features". I bet you wish programs were still run from the command line too. Great days, weren't they? -I remember when I studied to be an engineer all the CAE (Computer Aided Engineering) tools were on a big Unix minicomputer by Sun with HP workstations. I don't remember the system's name... something to do with elephants (I kid ye not). The programs themselves were GUI but one needed to start them from the command line, specifying which libraries and schematic you wanted to use. So what did I, having some knowledge of UNIX shell, do? -I wrote macros and handed them around to my classmates so we wouldn't have to type in the system directory where the component libraries were stored, nor our user directories where our designs were stored. Next year the teacher handed them to the next class (without crediting me, which irks me to this day). Now I open the project management application for my EDA (Electronic Design Application) package (which runs a single computer system using any recent Windows OS), click on the "open" button (which defaults to a directory of my choosing) and select the file I want to edit. If I select a schematic, it opens the schematic editor with the schematic for editing, if I select a PCB layout it opens the PCB editor and so on... What actually happens here? -Well, clicking the button or double clicking the file, launches a macro one of the programmers of this application wrote, saving me from having to actually know how to do this by typing in a command. The more things change, the more they stay the same. I'm just able to do more stuff without knowing the ins and outs. I used to be uncomfortable with this, I'm not anymore. Perhaps it's time for the so-called knowledgable users to throw away the comfort blanket of low level control and admit point and click really is easier, instead of "easy once you know". When I'm editing my electronic designs I use keyboard shortcuts to accomplish routine tasks without having to take the mouse out of the work area. I get paid to produce designs, not to fart about with a mouse. However, when I have to do something out of the ordinary, like inserting nodes for automatic testing machines (most of my clients don't have that kind of equipment, to date none have asked me for this kind of information), I would look under the most likely menu and, having paid nearly $9000 for the software and knowing it incorporates this feature, I would be very annoyed not to find the command there.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Sure you have to learn the key combos but they're right there, > easy to find and learn, as you click on the drop down menus > with your 'mouse'. Many of the most used functions are single > keystroke letters. It doesn't take that long to learn them and > once you do you wonder how you ever got along without them. > After using and learning Agent, navigating with a slow and > cumbersome mouse would be a nightmare while dealing with the > hundreds, sometimes thousands, of messages in the four groups > in which I participate.

I guess it boils down to what you expect your software to do. I follow some 7 newsgroups, most on private servers where the message traffic is low. In fact RAS is has by far the largest message traffic of all and even that's not unmanagable at an average of 50 headers per day. I can configure all of them in OE and browse the messages in a way that comes natural to me. In fact, I've yet to try a newsreader that does it better and I've tried all of 'm (at Tucows) in order to find one that combines the ease of use I find in OE with the effortless ability to cull binary newsgroups that is present in Agent. I haven't been successfull and that is why I use each program for what it's good at. Whether this conformes to any standard for computer proficiency as you see it is beyond any of my concerns. Jan. =---

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote... > > <snip> > You can use an icon in Agent if you are retarded enough to need one, Excuse me? -Using a user friendly feature makes me a retard? -I too am in favour of a minimum of computer savvy on the part of the user, but this does not mean using a program has to be difficult or obscure to use. > I couldn't imagine having to use a GUI to navigate hundreds > of messages, life is too short. Eh... how do you browse messages then? -Command line DOS or Linux? -Do you blindy download and read everything that is posted in the newsgroups you follow? -Life is too short for that!! Jan. =---

"blah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > No, it's totally wrong. Come on people! Let's articulate!

"Alan Jones" wrote... > > <snip> > > Okay, 'HOW' does it do what you like. In what way or method. > Either come up with something valid and substantial, rather > than meaningless rhetoric, or admit you only use it because > you like the way it looks. Ok, I'll play along. I like the ability to configure multiple servers. I like the way the messages are brought up as independant windows that can be used even if the news client is minimized. Basically, I like the interface, which I find easier to use and more intuitive than anything else I've tried. That's not empty rethoric, that's my experience. Looks do factor into it. The way a program looks has to match the way it acts. That's one of the problems I have with the other programs I tried. OE acts more like other windows and Microsoft program I use than any other news client I've tried (duh!!). > I didn't say that. Show me where I said that. > Please don't misrepresent what I've said. "I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- savvy or well informed in computing." Which is bullshit and it appears you subscribe to this line of thought. OE is not a security risk because it allows people to open infected messages. If one is stupid enough to open a message from a stranger, flagged as having an attachment, then one deserves what happens next, regardless of which program one uses. I don't even open a message, flagged as having an attachment, sent by someone that's on my address list if I'm not expecting this person to send me an attachment. I always allow people to choose whether I send them an attachment or not. This has become standard practise on the internet and there's no reason to act superior because another, less popular program has not been targeted by hackers yet. Any program can be exploited, it's just matter of whether someone can be arsed to find out how to do it. If your program of choice is not the target of a hacking attempt this just means you're the weirdo minority, not that everyone else is wrong. > Btw, my mother has been using a personal computer for well > over 15 years but that doesn't mean she's particularly > knowledgeable about them or the available software. In fact, > she uses AOL, which clearly demonstrates how years at the > terminal has very little if not nothing to do with the > accumulation of knowledge. That's because "admins" prefer to keep them dumb and dependant. I've been striving to "blow up the myth" about using computers since I came into contact with them almost 26 years ago. It is not difficult to use computers safely and effectively... it's just the "magicians circle" likes to perpetuate the myth and expects software to do the same. > > <snip> > I haven't 'attached' the stigma. The stigma existed long before > I learned of it. Yet you choose to perpatuate it, regardless of whether it's warranted or not. Obviously, the largest user base will attract those who want to subvert the workings of the internet and I cringe when well meaning, less computer knowledgable friends and relations send me virus warnings (be they hoax or otherwise) which I long since know about, but this doesn't deter me from using and recommending the software I like using. I configure ever machine I set up not to use the message preview pane in OE and I tell people not to open unexpected messages carrying attachments. I also set up ZoneAlarm and FreeAV anti-virus software (set to auto update) for them. So far there have been no infestations on the machines I "support". Any claims use of any news client indicates a certain level of computer knowledgability on the part of he user is simply false. I don't care what most of the "l33t" community thinks, the premise is, IMO, unsupported (unsupportable, in fact) and that is that. Jan. =---

As I was referring to the delivery vehicle and wasn't in the least bit angry anywhere in my message I believe the part about the VW was more of an analogy than a tirade. Are you saying that since I find old VeeDubs more interesting than yuppie cars because I feel that they retain a certain uniqueness about them that I ceased drawing an analogy and that paragraph became a tirade? I don't think so. I think if you re-read my message in a state of good humor and not defensively you'll see I was more often than not tongue-in-cheek. I use OE for reading NG's because like my TV when I turn it on it works, first time everytime. When I bought this computer and went to check my newsgroups it took less than two minutes to set it up and I was back online reading my mail and NG's long before I could have installed another reader. I like MS products also though I don't use FrontPage. I do use Visual Studio. I wouldn't recommend VS for home casual use. I would recommend FrontPage or Dreamweaver maybe. The first editor I used for HTML was notepad. If you want to learn HTML use notepad or some other straight ASCII editor. I for one would never judge someone's ability or 'net savvy' by the tool they choose to communicate with. Oh and when was the last time I used notepad to do a quick edit on an .asp page? Yesterday. To do a quick edit on an XML page - today. I needed to up the request buffer in IIS 6 and quickest way was to just open the XML config file in notepad and edit it. I had VS open at the time also but when you have three live sites open with 50 + files I tend not to want to clutter VS up any more with something as important as the web servers configuration file. BONUS QUESTION: What was the attribute I changed in IIS 6 to increase the request buffer? 10 Points Extra if you got the answer deciphering your neighbors smoke signals:) -- ... Carl Frisk "Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > I like Microsoft products, Office, FrontPage, etc. and OE is a pretty > good email program but it's 'terrible' with usenet messages. If you > don't mind a reader that can't effectively filter, or even delete, and > persistently drops messages; go right ahead but it doesn't say much > for you as being a knowledgeable computer user. Especially for > someone as you who is supposed to be knowledgeable in the first > place. But then, a tirade about a pizza delivery, BMW, and '65 VW > bug with deadhead stickers and psychedelic paint doesn't speak well > for a person either. > > I'm not trying to change your mind or force my will on you. I'm simply > informing you of the problems with OE and, 'God forbid', telling you > how you're being perceived by many on usenet. If you don't care, fine, > move on with yourself but the fact is people automatically assume you > don't know any better and are ignorantly using what came with > Windows. Or even worse, you know of the problems but continue to > use it because you like the way it looks. You're an adult and capable > of making your own decisions, and you shouldn't have a problem with > others pointing out the consequences and realities. > > On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 06:38:46 GMT, "Carl Frisk" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Not very net savvy? That makes me laugh. That's like saying if you don't > >use Pine you're not cool. I suppose you're still using packet drivers? Are > >you composing your messages with VI? I mean really, if you didn't write > >your NG reader yourself, why are you breathing my air? What RFC specs the > >kind of News Reader and OS you use anyway? > > > >Who cares what you use? SmokeRelay 1.0 sounds like fun. Might have to try > >it some time:) > > > >I've been around computers and the net for a long time and could really care > >less what you or anyone else uses or how savvy they are. I'm more > >interested in what they have to say. Kind of like if I order a pizza, I > >don't care what they drive up in as long as the pizza's good. The same > >pizza doesn't taste any better delivered in BMW vs. a 65' VW bug. Though I > >do find a '65 bug with deadhead stickers and psychedelic paint more > >interesting than the thousands of the run of the mill BMW's I see all the > >time. So are those who use AOL or WebTV bad people? Are they of less > >character and intelligence than the rest of us? > > > >And on the topic of top vs. bottom posting I don't care if the pizza driver > >pulled right in or backed up the driveway either:) I'm interested in the > >pizza not the delivery, but then again I have a life:) > > > >-- > >... Carl Frisk > > > > > >"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> > >> I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- > >> savvy or well informed in computing. It's akin to using AOL or WebTV. > >> My mother uses AOL because that's about all she can handle or manage > >> technically. Pointing this out to others may seem a bit rude but it's the > >> hard truth. >

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:50:28 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Whatever there may be the technical shortcomings of OE, there is no other > >news program for PC and Windows OS in particular that comes close to > >matching its ease of browsing/reading messages and the intuitiveness ofits > >interface for me. I sometimes use Free Agent to download stuff offbinary > >newsgroups, but I can't stand it as a "news reader" in the literal sense. > > > What is more intuitive that Agents simple keystrokes - N for next > unread, I to ignore thread and Backspace to go back to a previous > message? keystrokes??? bugger that. I don't use a GUI so that I'm still reliant on the keyboard for basic functionality. KK

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 20:21:43 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >How intuitive is having to look up a keyboard command compared to a big > >button with a green down arrow on it labeled next? > > > >But I guess you consider something easily available and clearly visibly > >suggesting its function to be condescending... > > > You can use an icon in Agent if you are retarded enough to need one, I > couldn't imagine having to use a GUI to navigate hundreds of messages, > life is too short.

If you find a GUI taxing, I know someone with a TI-99/4A that needs a home... amazing how some people want computers to regress. KK

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:27:32 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >keystrokes??? bugger that. I don't use a GUI so that I'm still reliant on >the keyboard for basic functionality. >I read/filter through over a 1000 messages a day, it would take me at least twice as long to do that using a GUI over the great (optional) keyboard interface of Agent. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

Yeah! On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Tim Miser wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> "blah" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > No, it's totally wrong. > > > Come on people! Let's articulate! > > > > >

Yeah! > > No, it's totally wrong. > Come on people! Let's articulate!

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

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Your reasoning is you like to use a mouse? Your 'experience' is showing > Jan. You haven't learned that your keyboard is 'faster', more efficient, > and more 'intuitive' than a mouse. Sure you have to learn the key combos > but they're right there, easy to find and learn, as you click on the drop > down menus with your 'mouse'. Many of the most used functions are single > keystroke letters. It doesn't take that long to learn them and once you

do > you wonder how you ever got along without them. After using and learning > Agent, navigating with a slow and cumbersome mouse would be a nightmare > while dealing with the hundreds, sometimes thousands, of messages in the > four groups in which I participate. The whole point of a GUI is that you dont need to memorise keystrokes, everything is truly 'intuitive' and does not require rote-learning of commands to get functionality - common sense gets you there. The only people that think that is a bad thing, are snobs.... funny how many 'nix users fall into that category. KK

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:31:36 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >If you find a GUI taxing, I know someone with a TI-99/4A that needs a >home... amazing how some people want computers to regress. >A GUI is great for a lot of things, but in the case of reading a large amount of Usenet messages, it is horribly inefficient. -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:27:32 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >keystrokes??? bugger that. I don't use a GUI so that I'm still reliant on > >the keyboard for basic functionality. > > > I read/filter through over a 1000 messages a day, it would take me at > least twice as long to do that using a GUI over the great (optional) > keyboard interface of Agent.

so your mouse coordination isn't great... nobody's perfect. KK

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:34:32 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The whole point of a GUI is that you dont need to memorise keystrokes, Oh my god, it is so hard to remember N for next and I for ignore! To move this back closer to the relevence of the newsgroup you think a driving game would be better controlled on track with a GUI? -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

<spamtrap@localhost> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:34:32 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >The whole point of a GUI is that you dont need to memorise keystrokes, > > Oh my god, it is so hard to remember N for next and I for ignore! ... applied to every other piece of software, you'd be remembering dozens of keystrokes. Frankly, its a waste of time. > To move this back closer to the relevence of the newsgroup you think a > driving game would be better controlled on track with a GUI? wheel... not that your analogy is even remotely relevant. who would use a keyboard in a *simulation*? KK

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:26:41 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >wheel... not that your analogy is even remotely relevant. who would use a >keyboard in a *simulation*? >And in exactly the same way, why would I want to use a mouse for reading Usenet when my keyboard is far for efficient and time saving? -- Andrew. To email unscramble [email hidden] & remove spamtrap. Help make Usenet a better place: Check groups.google.com before asking a question. Don't top post. Trim your messages to include only relevent text.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 01:16:08 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>"Alan Jones" wrote... >> > <snip> >> >> Okay, 'HOW' does it do what you like. In what way or method. >> Either come up with something valid and substantial, rather >> than meaningless rhetoric, or admit you only use it because >> you like the way it looks. > >Ok, I'll play along. I like the ability to configure multiple servers.

Although the need to use more than one server is rare, Agent version 2.0 will do that as well as handle multiple email accounts. >I >like the way the messages are brought up as independant windows that can be >used even if the news client is minimized. I see no benefit in that at all. In fact, it seems less efficient. >Basically, I like the interface, >which I find easier to use and more intuitive than anything else I've tried. >That's not empty rethoric, that's my experience. Basically, you like the way it looks. >Looks do factor into it. The way a program looks has to match the way it >acts. That's one of the problems I have with the other programs I tried. > >OE acts more like other windows and Microsoft program I use than any other >news client I've tried (duh!!). That supports my point. You think other programs are too difficult, confusing. >> I didn't say that. Show me where I said that. >> Please don't misrepresent what I've said. > >"I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as being net- >savvy or well informed in computing." Where is my, "OE=moron at the keyboard" statement? Please do not misquote what others say. I haven't done that to you. >Any program can be exploited, it's just matter of whether someone can be >arsed to find out how to do it. If your program of choice is not the target >of a hacking attempt this just means you're the weirdo minority, not that >everyone else is wrong. Agent is the best at containing attachments and protecting against attacks. And, Forte Agent users are far from 'the weirdo minority'. That sounds like the 'OE=moron at the keyboard' statement you made up. >> > <snip> Indicating a snip. What an experienced thing to do. >> I haven't 'attached' the stigma. The stigma existed long before >> I learned of it. > >Yet you choose to perpatuate it, regardless of whether it's warranted or >not. Using the word 'stigma' is too strong but what I'm saying is warranted and very 'true'.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Obviously, the largest user base will attract those who want to subvert the >workings of the internet and I cringe when well meaning, less computer >knowledgable friends and relations send me virus warnings (be they hoax or >otherwise) which I long since know about, but this doesn't deter me from >using and recommending the software I like using. I configure ever machine I >set up not to use the message preview pane in OE and I tell people not to >open unexpected messages carrying attachments. I also set up ZoneAlarm and >FreeAV anti-virus software (set to auto update) for them. So far there have >been no infestations on the machines I "support".

Do you realize your tendency to ramble? I'm not trying to be mean but it's very time consuming and distracting. >Any claims use of any news client indicates a certain level of computer >knowledgability on the part of he user is simply false. I don't care what >most of the "l33t" community thinks, the premise is, IMO, unsupported >(unsupportable, in fact) and that is that. I would love to see Microsoft turn OE into a truly intelligent and intuitive newsreader rather something remedial and borderline childish but, until they do, Agent will remain far superior. Certain software is simply better. Forte Inc. specializes in the making of newsreader software and that is very apparent to the experienced usenet member.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 00:08:37 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>"Alan Jones" wrote... >> >> Your reasoning is you like to use a mouse? > >No my reasoning is that if I would like the program to select the next >message I read instead of scanning the headers and double clicking the one I >*want* to read, I don't want to have to look up or know a keyboard command.

You don't have to 'look up' the keyboard commands. As I said, you take your little mousie and click on the menu at the top. The commands are right there plain as day. Besides, if it's so hard for you to remember a half dozen key commands, you can still navigate Agent by using only your mouse. Just click on the pretty buttons with pictures on them. If the pictures aren't remedial enough for you, hover the mouse over the button for a split second and a little bubble description pops up. With a mouse, Agent is just as easy as OE, which brings me back to you simply liking the way it looks. OE is pretty while Agent is plain and utilitarian. My mother likes AOL for the same reason. >BTW: Free Agent only has a button for "next", whereas I frequently start >with a reply in a thread from someone I know and go up to find how the >thread progressed as it has. So using your mouse and scroll bar is more efficient than the arrow keys and page up/down? Oh that's right, you would have to 'remember' the arrow and page up/down keys!

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> Your 'experience' is showing Jan. You haven't learned that >> your keyboard is 'faster', more efficient, and more >> 'intuitive' than a mouse. > >Bullshit... I know keyboard shortcuts are a faster and more efficient way of >doing things you know how to do via buttons or menu commands. "Intuitive" >means the software makes is easy/self-evident enough to accomplish a task >even if you don't know exactly how to do it.

Intuitive also means the program is smart and 'knows' what you want and how to provide such with efficiency; 'intuitively'. >Except for most applications supporting ctrl-c/ctrl-x/ctrl-v for >copy/cut/paste, application specific keyboard shortcuts do not fall under >"intuitive features". They most certainly are. Program specific key commands are just as intuitive as OS-wide commands. It's the same principle, logic, and benefit. OS key commands 'as a standard' impacts a broad range of programs but that in no way makes program specific commands any less intuitive.

Quoted text (39 lines)

>I bet you wish programs were still run from the command line too. Great >days, weren't they? -I remember when I studied to be an engineer all the CAE >(Computer Aided Engineering) tools were on a big Unix minicomputer by Sun >with HP workstations. I don't remember the system's name... something to do >with elephants (I kid ye not). The programs themselves were GUI but one >needed to start them from the command line, specifying which libraries and >schematic you wanted to use. So what did I, having some knowledge of UNIX >shell, do? -I wrote macros and handed them around to my classmates so we >wouldn't have to type in the system directory where the component libraries >were stored, nor our user directories where our designs were stored. Next >year the teacher handed them to the next class (without crediting me, which >irks me to this day). > >Now I open the project management application for my EDA (Electronic Design >Application) package (which runs a single computer system using any recent >Windows OS), click on the "open" button (which defaults to a directory of my >choosing) and select the file I want to edit. If I select a schematic, it >opens the schematic editor with the schematic for editing, if I select a PCB >layout it opens the PCB editor and so on... > >What actually happens here? -Well, clicking the button or double clicking >the file, launches a macro one of the programmers of this application wrote, >saving me from having to actually know how to do this by typing in a >command. The more things change, the more they stay the same. I'm just able >to do more stuff without knowing the ins and outs. I used to be >uncomfortable with this, I'm not anymore. Perhaps it's time for the >so-called knowledgable users to throw away the comfort blanket of low level >control and admit point and click really is easier, instead of "easy once >you know". > >When I'm editing my electronic designs I use keyboard shortcuts to >accomplish routine tasks without having to take the mouse out of the work >area. I get paid to produce designs, not to fart about with a mouse. >However, when I have to do something out of the ordinary, like inserting >nodes for automatic testing machines (most of my clients don't have that >kind of equipment, to date none have asked me for this kind of information), >I would look under the most likely menu and, having paid nearly $9000 for >the software and knowing it incorporates this feature, I would be very >annoyed not to find the command there.

Good grief!, how about some brevity. I didn't read all of this so let me know if there was a relevant point in there somewhere.

Quoted text (21 lines)

>> Sure you have to learn the key combos but they're right there, >> easy to find and learn, as you click on the drop down menus >> with your 'mouse'. Many of the most used functions are single >> keystroke letters. It doesn't take that long to learn them and >> once you do you wonder how you ever got along without them. >> After using and learning Agent, navigating with a slow and >> cumbersome mouse would be a nightmare while dealing with the >> hundreds, sometimes thousands, of messages in the four groups >> in which I participate. > >I guess it boils down to what you expect your software to do. I follow some >7 newsgroups, most on private servers where the message traffic is low. In >fact RAS is has by far the largest message traffic of all and even that's >not unmanagable at an average of 50 headers per day. I can configure all of >them in OE and browse the messages in a way that comes natural to me. In >fact, I've yet to try a newsreader that does it better and I've tried all of >'m (at Tucows) in order to find one that combines the ease of use I find in >OE with the effortless ability to cull binary newsgroups that is present in >Agent. I haven't been successfull and that is why I use each program for >what it's good at. Whether this conformes to any standard for computer >proficiency as you see it is beyond any of my concerns.

If you think intuitive means your mouse, big buttons, and pretty pictures because you're not computer literate enough to reference the menu bar and/or remember key commands, yeah, I guess OE is the program for you. However, I think 'remedial' better describes that way of using a computer. As I said in the beginning, that reflects on you as a computer user.

"Alan Jones" wrote... > <snip> I'll be brief: you don't like OE and consider those who do lesser mortals. I say this is falacy. You don't want to accept that, so I am perfectly happy to allow you to continue feeling superior. Enjoy, it's on me. Jan. =---

"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >I > >like the way the messages are brought up as independant windows that canbe > >used even if the news client is minimized. > > I see no benefit in that at all. In fact, it seems less efficient. Because *you* can't think of a reason, does not mean there isn't one. > >Basically, I like the interface, > >which I find easier to use and more intuitive than anything else I'vetried. > >That's not empty rethoric, that's my experience. > > Basically, you like the way it looks. Pfffft... talk about trying to put words into someone's mouth. He prefers the interface... it's a subjective choice - your opinion is just that, and NOT fact. > >OE acts more like other windows and Microsoft program I use than anyother > >news client I've tried (duh!!). > > That supports my point. You think other programs are too difficult, > confusing. What rubbish. Clearly, he prefers a more unified approach to the way the programs are used to simplify the use of each of them. How is that a bad thing??? > >"I'm sorry but, if you use OE, it doesn't reflect well on you as beingnet- > >savvy or well informed in computing." > > Where is my, "OE=moron at the keyboard" statement? Please do not > misquote what others say. I haven't done that to you. You all but implied it. At least have the balls to stand behind what you clearly meant. > >Yet you choose to perpatuate it, regardless of whether it's warranted or > >not. > > Using the word 'stigma' is too strong but what I'm saying is warranted > and very 'true'. I find only a very small minority care one way or the other. Like the PC vs Mac argument, it is largely a matter of personal preference and almost entirely subjective. What difference should it make to you what someone else chooses to use? In fact, what concern is it of yours? People that force their opinion on others are just preachers, and noone likes preachers. > I would love to see Microsoft turn OE into a truly intelligent andintuitive > newsreader rather something remedial and borderline childish but, until > they do, Agent will remain far superior. Certain software is simplybetter. > Forte Inc. specializes in the making of newsreader software and that is > very apparent to the experienced usenet member. Cue thinly veiled insult. Pathetic really. Why don't you admit it? You really just prefer the way Forte looks? KK

"Kasper Kowalski" wrote...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > <snip> > Because *you* can't think of a reason, does not mean there > isn't one. > > > <snip> > Pfffft... talk about trying to put words into someone's mouth. > He prefers the interface... it's a subjective choice - your > opinion is just that, and NOT fact. > > > <snip> > What rubbish. Clearly, he prefers a more unified approach to > the way the programs are used to simplify the use of each of > them. How is that a bad thing???

I guess it's not supposed to be easy. <g> Seriously, thanks for the effort, but I don't think we're getting through. Jan. =---

You can kick, scream, and stomp your feet all you want but OE is inferior as a newsreader program. The more experienced usenet user is net- savvy enough to realize this and hence uses another program like Forte Agent. You use it because you like the way it looks but you shouldn't whine when someone tells you it's inferior. Whether you like it or not, they're just telling you the truth. On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:10:50 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>"Alan Jones" wrote... >> <snip> > >I'll be brief: you don't like OE and consider those who do lesser mortals. I >say this is falacy. You don't want to accept that, so I am perfectly happy >to allow you to continue feeling superior. Enjoy, it's on me. > >Jan. >=--- >

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:34:32 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The whole point of a GUI is that you dont need to memorise keystrokes, The point of a GUI is you can use a mouse 'if you're inclined too'. The graphical user interface doesn't mean a mouse is better, faster, and certainly not 'intuitive'. A mouse simply makes the concept of computing easier and 'more pleasant' for the less advanced, the beginner, which increases personal computer sales. >everything is truly 'intuitive' Making something overly simplistic does not mean intuitive. You and Jan need to stop using that word in regard to clicking with a mouse. That's not what is meant by intuitive computing.

So you can't memorize key strokes, nobody's perfect... On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 21:44:47 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >so your mouse coordination isn't great... nobody's perfect.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 06:59:14 GMT, "Carl Frisk" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I like MS products also though I don't use FrontPage. I do use Visual >Studio. I wouldn't recommend VS for home casual use. I would recommend >FrontPage or Dreamweaver maybe. I use FP for commercial website development and maintenance in my home office. >The first editor I used for HTML was >notepad. If you want to learn HTML use notepad or some other straight ASCII >editor. I know HTML. >I for one would never judge someone's ability or 'net savvy' by the >tool they choose to communicate with. In this case, OE is a good indication or general rule.

"Alan Jones" wrote... > <snip> > You and Jan need to stop using that word in regard to clicking > with a mouse. That's not what is meant by intuitive computing. Negative, you need to get a clue as to what intuitive means. And, BTW, it has nothing to do with using a mouse. Jan. =--- PS.: I do have one of those UF store Big Foam Clue Bats knocking about here... don't make me look for it.

"Alan Jones" wrote...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > You can kick, scream, and stomp your feet all you want but OE > is inferior as a newsreader program. The more experienced > usenet user is net-savvy enough to realize this and hence uses > another program like Forte Agent. You use it because you like > the way it looks but you shouldn't whine when someone tells you > it's inferior. Whether you like it or not, they're just > telling you the truth.

And you can wear yourself out trying to prove you're a more computer and internet knowledgable person than I am because you use Agent. You may or may not be, I don't know. But it sure isn't because of the news reader you prefer. Have a nice day. Jan. =---

"Alan Jones" wrote... > > <snip> > I use FP for commercial website development and maintenance > in my home office. You have got to be kidding me... FP produces code that makes any serious web developer barf. Dreamweaver is by far the superior product as the code it produces is just about acceptable next to hand crafted and optimised code. > > <snip> > I know HTML. And you can stand the sort of crap FP produces (which only looks anywhere near right in IE, BTW)? BTW2: who in his right mind uses Notepad to edit plain text? > > <snip> > In this case, OE is a good indication or general rule. LOL ;-) -This from a guy that uses FP... Jan./ turning the tables. <g> =---

I haven't said that, now have I? You're the one who took this as a personal challenge. I have only said OE users are 'perceived' to be less experienced. That in no way means each and every OE user. On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 01:04:34 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >And you can wear yourself out trying to prove you're a more computer and >internet knowledgable person than I am

According to what you've said, that is exactly your understanding of intuitive computing. On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:57:52 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >And, BTW, it has nothing to do with using a mouse.

"Alan Jones" wrote... > I haven't said that, now have I? You're the one who > took this as a personal challenge. I have only said > OE users are 'perceived' to be less experienced. > That in no way means each and every OE user. The cop-out meter on my copy of OE just maxed out. Jan./ betcha ya didn't know about *that* feature. <vbg> =---

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 01:23:02 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>"Alan Jones" wrote... >> > <snip> >> I use FP for commercial website development and maintenance >> in my home office. > >You have got to be kidding me... FP produces code that makes any serious web >developer barf. Dreamweaver is by far the superior product as the code it >produces is just about acceptable next to hand crafted and optimised code.

I have found FP to be a more serious and 'professional' web development platform than DW. FP has a minor flaw or two but I've also found flaws with DW. I learned on FP and I stay with it since DW came along as a program trying to catch-up with and be like FP. >> > <snip> >> I know HTML. > >And you can stand the sort of crap FP produces (which only looks anywhere >near right in IE, BTW)? FP produces code that works best on IE, which is by far (90%+) the dominant browser on the web. I simply have no interest in worrying about the less than ten percent of the market. >BTW2: who in his right mind uses Notepad to edit plain text? Maybe you could answer that as I've missed your point.

"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > FP produces code that works best on IE, which is by far (90%+) the > dominant browser on the web. Frontpage also screws up webpages for everything apart from IE, it seems it is you who arent "net savvy" I simply have no interest in worrying > about the less than ten percent of the market. Thats not true, for example. Opera (by default) user agent reports as IE and Mozilla can be changed to look like IE so they can access pages made by idiots like you. I find it hyprocritical that you look down on OE users yet you use FP which the whole web building business looks down on. -- Steve "To put it in gentleman's terms - if you've been out for a night and you're looking for a young lady and you pull one, some weeks they're good looking and some weeks they're not the best. Our performance today would have been not the best looking bird but at least we got her in the taxi." Ian Holloway describing a recent win.

This guy is contradicting himself so many times he almost confusing me! -- Steve "To put it in gentleman's terms - if you've been out for a night and you're looking for a young lady and you pull one, some weeks they're good looking and some weeks they're not the best. Our performance today would have been not the best looking bird but at least we got her in the taxi." Ian Holloway describing a recent win. "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:X_7ab.25728$[email hidden]... > The cop-out meter on my copy of OE just maxed out. > > Jan./ betcha ya didn't know about *that* feature. <vbg> > =--- > >

Edgecrusher wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> This guy is contradicting himself so many times he almost confusing > me! > > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in > message news:X_7ab.25728$[email hidden]... >> The cop-out meter on my copy of OE just maxed out. >> >> Jan./ betcha ya didn't know about *that* feature. <vbg> >> =---

He confused me days ago, but hey that isn't too hard, I use Outlook Express right ? ;) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spammers>

Ian P wrote: > > He confused me days ago, but hey that isn't too hard, I use Outlook Express > right ? ;) Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000, but that's just a hunch Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Cite one contradiction. On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:56:38 +0100, "Edgecrusher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >This guy is contradicting himself so many times he almost confusing me!

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:55:36 +0100, "Edgecrusher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I simply have no interest in worrying >> about the less than ten percent of the market. > >Thats not true, for example. Opera (by default) user agent reports as IE and Mozilla can be changed >to look like IE so they can access pages made by idiots like you. All browsers other than IE make up less than ten percent of the market. That has been a long standing fact. I'm interested in any info you may have to the contrary. >I find it hyprocritical that you look down on OE users yet you use FP which the whole web building >business looks down on. A small segment of developers are critical of FP because of its disregard for browser compatibility but it remains as the most widely used and 'respected' web development program. There's not a great improve- ment to be had with other programs like Dreamweaver. A substantial improvement would be moving to a programming platform like Visual Studio. Though I haven't physically checked each one, I believe all of my websites appear correctly in all browsers. I don't do anything so special that they shouldn't but I really don't care if there is one or two that do not. The W3C does not have final say and has absolutely no business dictating HTML to Microsoft. Like it or not, HTML is non-proprietary and open source and Microsoft just happens to be the dominant player in the browser and web development markets. As the leader, it's not their responsibility to be compatible with every other smaller browser. It's up to the other browsers to be compatible with MS if they expect to be a viable competitor.

You say people who use OE are looked down on and yet you use FP which everyone looks down on. A bit hyprocritical? -- Steve "To put it in gentleman's terms - if you've been out for a night and you're looking for a young lady and you pull one, some weeks they're good looking and some weeks they're not the best. Our performance today would have been not the best looking bird but at least we got her in the taxi." Ian Holloway describing a recent win. "Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Cite one contradiction. > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:56:38 +0100, "Edgecrusher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >This guy is contradicting himself so many times he almost confusing me! >

Many look down upon OE users and 'some' also do the same with FP users but it is far from 'everyone' in both cases. And, the FP opinion is far from being a majority. I would say only a small 20-30 percent of all web developers have a negative view of FP. On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 21:03:37 +0100, "Edgecrusher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You say people who use OE are looked down on and yet you use FP which everyone looks down on.

"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > >everything is truly 'intuitive' > > Making something overly simplistic does not mean intuitive. You and > Jan need to stop using that word in regard to clicking with a mouse. > That's not what is meant by intuitive computing. How is having to memorise key commands inuitive? In the absence of a manual or trial and error, the program would be close to useless. KK

"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Many look down upon OE users and 'some' also do the same with FP > users but it is far from 'everyone' in both cases. And, the FP opinion > is far from being a majority. I would say only a small 20-30 percent > of all web developers have a negative view of FP. And many look down on IE and persist with Nutscrape, despite the competition having been decided long ago. I've never had anyone mention using OE as a bad thing until this thread. Then again, in most of the NG's I frequent, people are more concerned with what I post, not what I post with. KK

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:14:28 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >How is having to memorise key commands inuitive? In the absence of a manual >or trial and error, the program would be close to useless. >In common with any decently written Windows applications, Agent can be driven by mouse or keyboard methods, and the keyboard shortcuts are indicated in the menu options alongside the action, so it takes about 10 seconds to work out the common keyboard controls. No trial and error or manual needed. -- 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 relevent text. Check groups.google.com before asking a question.

And you've been on usenet how long? On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:19:49 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I've never had anyone mention using OE as a bad thing until this thread.

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:14:28 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >How is having to memorise key commands inuitive? As one example, you can move to the next unread message by pressing a single key. That is what's meant by intuitive computing. The program knows what you want and provides it quickly and efficiently. >In the absence of a manual >or trial and error, the program would be close to useless. You haven't paid attention to what has already been said.

"Alan Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > And you've been on usenet how long? 7 years... no doubt nowhere near as long as some people here, but more than long enough to sample whether or not OE was considered good or bad. > On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:19:49 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I've never had anyone mention using OE as a bad thing until this thread.

OE has been out for 8 years so I agree it is strange that you haven't heard the complaints. Oh well, I guess it's a good time to drop the subject. On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:20:38 +0930, "Kasper Kowalski" <[email hidden]> wrote: >7 years... no doubt nowhere near as long as some people here, but more than >long enough to sample whether or not OE was considered good or bad.