Lightspeed Battery Box Warning

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
I mean that they put it specifically into the FAQs, charters and other
supporting documentation that it was encouraged.

I've never seen anything like that. Do you happen to have an example or
two?

HTML posting and top posting are both symptoms of using inferior (ie
Windows) pseudo-newsreaders like Outhouse. When you find one, you usually
find the other.

Ahhh...I see. This is actually about your bias against Microsoft, rather
than an actual comment about Usenet habits. Nevermind then...

Pete

In a previous article, "Peter Duniho" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
I mean that they put it specifically into the FAQs, charters and other
supporting documentation that it was encouraged.

I've never seen anything like that. Do you happen to have an example or
two?

If you look at the source code for Cleanfeed, you'll see the microsoft.*
newsgroups are among the few where HTML is explicitly allowed. Or at
least that was the case 4 or 5 years ago. I was told that was a request
from Microsoft. I never actually verified it.

HTML posting and top posting are both symptoms of using inferior (ie
Windows) pseudo-newsreaders like Outhouse. When you find one, you usually
find the other.

Ahhh...I see. This is actually about your bias against Microsoft, rather
than an actual comment about Usenet habits. Nevermind then...

No, HTML and top-posting are both bad things - they decrease the
readability of postings while increasing the size of the articles. The
majority of mail clients and newsreaders for Windows encourage these
things. I'd blame Outhouse, but in actual fact in the email world it's
Bloated Stoats that seemed to have started the top posting crapola. But
Bloates doesn't do news, so it's not germaine to this discussion.


--
Paul Tomblin , not speaking for anybody
"The thing you don't check is the thing that will kill you."
-- Rick Grant (quoting RCAF pilot training)

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
If you look at the source code for Cleanfeed, you'll see the microsoft.*
newsgroups are among the few where HTML is explicitly allowed. Or at
least that was the case 4 or 5 years ago. I was told that was a request
from Microsoft. I never actually verified it.

So you have no evidence to support your claim. Given that you said "they
put it specifically into the FAQs, charters and other supporting
documentation that it was encouraged", my naive self thought that you would
actually be able to show me an FAQ, charter, or other supporting
documentation where Microsoft explicitly encourages the use of HTML when
posting to their newsgroups.

Permitting HTML is a far cry from encouraging it, and you don't even have
any evidence that it was Microsoft who asked Cleanfeed to permit it.

No, HTML and top-posting are both bad things - they decrease the
readability of postings while increasing the size of the articles.

I never said they weren't bad things. I wasn't commenting on HTML or
top-posting, but rather your accusation that "Outhouse" (by which I assume
you actually mean Outlook Express) is a) a "pseudo-newsreader" (whatever the
heck that is) and b) causes users to top-post and use HTML. Your
subjectiveness is plastered all over your post.

There is NOTHING about OE that causes users to top-post. Quoted text has to
go somewhere; only the user is capable of breaking it up and making the
reply flow correctly. Some newsreaders put the text at the top and the
insertion point below, while others (like OE) put the text at the bottom and
the insertion point above. The two behaviors are basically equivalent.
It's up to the user to do something useful with it.

Even the HTML behavior is completely optional. It's true that OE defaults
to HTML formatted messages (I think...it's been so long since I set up OE
from scratch, I'm not really sure). But what really causes HTML messages to
show up on Usenet is people who don't bother to watch and learn before they
post.

You will probably fall out of your chair in amazement to find out that I use
Outlook Express. After all, none of my posts exhibit these two Usenet faux
pas that you're talking about.

The
majority of mail clients and newsreaders for Windows encourage these
things. I'd blame Outhouse, but in actual fact in the email world it's
Bloated Stoats that seemed to have started the top posting crapola. But
Bloates doesn't do news, so it's not germaine to this discussion.

Your propensity toward conveying your biases with made-up names for products
has completely obfuscated this part of your post. I have no idea whatsoever
what product you're talking about here. "Bloated Stoats"? "Bloates"?

Pete

In a previous article, "Peter Duniho" said:
"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
If you look at the source code for Cleanfeed, you'll see the microsoft.*
newsgroups are among the few where HTML is explicitly allowed. Or at
least that was the case 4 or 5 years ago. I was told that was a request
from Microsoft. I never actually verified it.

So you have no evidence to support your claim. Given that you said "they

Yes, you're right. I meant to say I withdraw the claim in my previous
post, but I left it out.

There is NOTHING about OE that causes users to top-post. Quoted text has to

It sure seems like OE users top-post by default.

You will probably fall out of your chair in amazement to find out that I use
Outlook Express. After all, none of my posts exhibit these two Usenet faux

No, clueful users can overcome the limitations of their crappy software.

Your propensity toward conveying your biases with made-up names for products
has completely obfuscated this part of your post. I have no idea whatsoever
what product you're talking about here. "Bloated Stoats"? "Bloates"?

Lotus Notes. The worst piece of software ever written.


--
Paul Tomblin , not speaking for anybody
"You are in front of me. If you value your lives, be somewhere else." -
- Delenn, Babylon 5