Here we go with yet another waste of bandwidth post, but anyway... If you've got more than 4 lines of sig, make a web page, put your paradigm-shifting, world-altering, crime-ending, poverty-fixing, homeless-sheltering information on that, and GIVE US A LINK. And when you reply to a post that has excess verbiage for a sig, CUT IT OFF before sending the reply. I just read 4 lines of reply on a post that had something like 30 lines of sig. Gimme a break. (I guess I should be grateful that at least the response I just read was on the bottom of the original post, and not on the top.) And note that this IS perfectly relevant to THIS list, and therefore NOT off-topic, and so it's not marked that way. While I'm at it, if your company forces every email you send to have 30 lines of legal-disclaiming boilerplate, at least GET A FREE ACCOUNT somewhere to handle your mailing list traffic. None of us care. Does anyone honestly look for answers from this list that need not be checked for veracity before putting them into production? Again, gimme a break. On second thought, I take it back. The _least_ you could do is figure out how to configure your email client on your SuSE GNU/Linux wokstation to just use binmail and avoid your company's additions. Regards all, dk
David Krider wrote:
If you've got more than 4 lines of sig, make a web page, put your
I'll second that
While I'm at it, if your company forces every email you send to have 30 lines of legal-disclaiming boilerplate, at least GET A FREE ACCOUNT
Didn't someone just post a pretty good reason why using the company e-mail was the only practical solution? If only it were a usenet group... Yes, I know that has been discussed before and reasons have been given for why this isn't a good idea. I would like to ask Ben and others, could the usenet idea work if it was setup like the Borland groups instead of being in the normal usenet? If limiting the list to only subscribed users is the issue, can the usenet group be made moderated with the moderation being automated? Damon Register
Anders Johansson wrote:
On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 18:30, Damon Register wrote:
If only it were a usenet group...
There already are usenet news groups devoted to SuSE. Why do you feel
I'll have to check from outside since our usenet server is very limited. I don't see any SuSE groups there. Do you know of any specific group names?
you have to deny those of us who prefer email this medium?
Who said anything about denying? What I was hoping to get is answers from guys like Ben who are willing to explain in rational and logical terms why something is good or bad. Can you or anyone else reading this please explain why some type of usenet group with appropriate junk control measures (if they exist) is not as good or better than e-mail? I use the Borland groups http://newsgroups.borland.com and I have not found them to be plagued with those problems that I have heard used as arguements against usenet Damon Register
* Damon Register (damon.w.register@lmco.com) [030626 11:46]:
Can you or anyone else reading this please explain why some type of usenet group with appropriate junk control measures (if they exist) is not as good or better than e-mail? I use the Borland groups http://newsgroups.borland.com and I have not found them to be plagued with those problems that I have heard used as arguments against usenet
Well, a lot of groups are moderated. And have strict guidelines as to what you can do and when you can do it and if one deviates from this then one will get blocked or flamed so badly that it's embarrassing to return. For the most part the Linux usenet groups that I sometimes read aren't moderated at all and have a huge amount of trolls and ill tempered people on them. I read them when I'm bored. -- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org ----------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail and any attachment is intended for anyone with an email address and does not contain information that is confidential and privileged or that is of any intrinsic value to anyone.
On Fri, 2003-06-27 at 04:55, Ben Rosenberg wrote:
Well, a lot of groups are moderated. And have strict guidelines as to what you can do and when you can do it and if one deviates from this then one will get blocked or flamed so badly that it's embarrassing to return. For the most part the Linux usenet groups that I sometimes read aren't moderated at all and have a huge amount of trolls and ill tempered people on them. I read them when I'm bored.
-- Ben Rosenberg ---===---===---===--- mailto:ben@whack.org
If anyone wants to experience strict guidelines and ridiculous email
problems, there's always Yahoo groups :-) I just quit from some
graphical artist groups, not because of the email problems (continual
email bouncing on my account, despite being connected 24/7), but because
of the attitudes of the group owners and their so called moderators.
suse-linux-e is absolute pleasure compared to them :-)
--
Patrick Heffernan
Ben Rosenberg wrote:
Well, a lot of groups are moderated. And have strict guidelines as to what you can do and when you can do it and if one deviates from this
Perhaps I am not explaining very well. Are you familiar with the Borland newsgroups? They are not part of the normal usenet. Borland has its own NNTP server at newsgroups.borland.com. To use it, you point your favorite newsgroup tool to that server. Is it technically possible (forget for the moment why some might not like it)? If it is possible for SuSE to set up their own NNTP server like Borland's, could unmoderated groups be sufficient to server the community without the noise/spam that plagues the normal usenet? If the answer to the above is no, then could some sort of automated moderation be setup with a subscriber list just like the current e-mail lists? Wouldn't that effectively be the same as the current e-mail lists, differing only in tools used to accomplish it? I have used several of the borland groups for some years and have not found any of the problems found in normal usenet groups. Nearly _all_ messages have been on topic, much more so than in the SuSE groups Damon Register
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 19:42:32 +0100
Damon Register
Do you know of any specific group names?
alt.os.linux.suse, but there are more. Charles -- "Are [Linux users] lemmings collectively jumping off of the cliff of reliable, well-engineered commercial software?" (By Matt Welsh)
I guess I should be grateful that at least the response I just read was on
Hmmm... I much prefer to have the response at the top, so that I only need to scroll through the other parts if I want to learn something of the background. :-) On Thursday 26 June 2003 12:04 pm, David Krider wrote: the bottom of the original post, and not on the top.
Could we create a list for anal topics? We could call it suse-linux-anal-e.
Hmmm... I much prefer to have the response at the top, so that I only need to scroll through the other parts if I want to learn something of the background. :-)
I guess I should be grateful that at least the response I just read was on
On Thursday 26 June 2003 12:04 pm, David Krider wrote: the bottom of the original post, and not on the top.
-- Check the headers for your unsubscription address For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@suse.com Also check the archives at http://lists.suse.com Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com
Could we create a list for anal topics? We could call it suse-linux-anal-e Just some humor for the humor impaired.
On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 13:13, Jim Norton wrote:
Could we create a list for anal topics? We could call it suse-linux-anal-e.
Alight. That DOES IT! I'm going to "middle-post" from now on! Kindly, dk
Could we create a list for anal topics? We could call it suse-linux-anal-e
Just some humor for the humor impaired.
participants (8)
-
Anders Johansson -
Ben Rosenberg -
Charles Philip Chan -
Damon Register -
David Krider -
jrn＠oregonhanggliding.com -
Mike Green -
Patrick Heffernan