J3 - ENOUGH!!!

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 10:50:11 -0400, Alan Erskine wrote
(in article ):

"hielan' laddie" wrote in message
...
He didn't do a damn thing other than post a few .rars. Precisely because
you
have an inadequate newsreader, you saw _each separate part_ as a different
post. Precisely because _I_ have a real newsreader, _I_ saw the posts as
one.
Instead of 35 parts of a .rar, I saw a .rar. Those who had real
newsreaders
simply did not see the 'clutter' that those who have crippled newsreaders
saw. The problem is not J3. The problem is your crippled newsreader.

No, the problem was J3; he intentionally disrupted the majority of the users
of this forum, with images that aren't even his, and posting them in a
format that isn't known by most of the users of this forum. He could have
respected the majority of the users of this forum by simply posting links
for such a large group of images, or setting up his own website. Or, he
could have simply done as I suggested - post a few at a time (I suggested
between 4 and 40).

I don't think that you realise quite how many pix where in that collection.


Oh and the vast majority of users of this forum use the same "crippled
newsreader" that I use.

Popularity doesn't make it any less crippled.

It's not just me, or a small number of people who
were inconvenienced by J3, it was the overwhelming majority.

Tough. If you used a real newsreader you would have had no problems.


As for my question about video players; you still have to have the codecs.

For some formats. Not all. Standard .mpgs play just fine without any codecs
using Hogwasher and MTNW. I've never tried with Agent, so I don't know about
that app. Other video formats, especially some varieties of .avis, require
codecs.

Pix do not. I say again, pix do not.

If someone uploads a vid to a newsgroup, I can still click on it and play
it, as long as I have the right player (RealPlayer plays all but QT as far
as I have found).

I don't even need the player.


And I didn't say I didn't like J3's stuff; it was the quantity that bugs me,
not the format. Most people come here expecting to see pictures (that's the
name of the group, afterall - quite specific about it, really); .rar's
aren't pictures, they are a method of posting a large store of individual
images in one folder-like package.

Yes, they do. They make it convenient to upload, and, if you have a real
newsreader, download a large amount of data. That is precisely the point
behind using .rars.

Mitchell does quite will just with
.jpg/jpeg format and so have all previous posters.

I repeat: you don't seem to realise just how many pix there were in that
collection. At 40/day it would have taken nearly four months to upload
them... and, as many of them would be sufficiently large that they'd have to
be split up to upload anyway, the screams of 'clutter' would have been
deafening.

Considering the number
of parts, he could have just as easily posted individual images, just like
Mitchell does; there are methods of multiple posts, but I've never had a
need to use them.

Actually, no, not really. And, again, if you had a real newsreader _you would
not have seen the individual parts, you would have seen just one file... and
would have easily been able to download or kill that one file at will_.

Your problem is your crippled newsreader.


I don't have any delusions of any kind.

You have delusions that your newsreader isn't crippled.

The group name includes "pictures"
in its title; there is a multi-media group as well, if someone wishes to
post video or audio.

These are individual pix. They're not audio or video.


As I said before, I can control exactly what I see (you support that view
also), so why do you mention this again ("One reason why _I_ use a real
newsreader is _precisely_ so that I have _complete_ control over what _I_
see in the newsgroup. If I don't want to see something, that something is
_gone_. Unlike some, I _don't care if anyone else sees it_. I only care that
_I_ don't.")?

Then killfilter the files. Problem done.


As for yEnc, it's used by porno posters for the very reason that it's not
very popular - most people, again the vast majority, won't be able to decode
it.

Bull****. Anyone who uses a real newsreader can decode it.

Gee, I don't really get off on rockets either but knowing the effort
put forth by J3, and since rockets and such seem to qualify as on
topic, seems like a ton of hysteria goes into the thread doesn't it?

I really don't get off on jet fighters, (worked on fighters for 20
years and only a few really blow my skirt up),...

....rockets are somewhat boring to me, (but man oh man some of the
pictures of rockets, rocket flights, and even attempts at rocket
flight are just amazing),...

....models and R/C planes don't do anything for me, (but there is
little that can provide the level and variety of entertainment to
match watching otherwise perfectly normal grownups, especially men,
gathering in a large field, acting like ten year olds, excited as all
get out when their plane flies the way they intended and crying when
the inevitable crash happens and destroys hundreds of hours of work,
and ya gotta admit they have the ability to crash them into any type
of object including moving ones)...

....not wild about most general aviation stuff (although growing up
with Sky King does make the old Beech an attractive plane),...

....flying trash cans, (known as targets to fighter pilots) don't get
me excited (but an old workhorse like the C-47 deserves everyones
respect and to me the there were a few beauties among the breed like
the C-124, C-133 and others),...

....helicopters, for the most part, leave me high and dry, (but after
watching rocket and gun attacks performed by these machines in Viet
Nam the Cobra is a remarkable, agile, ass kickin' machine and I'll
take those too),...

....airliners are so boring, (but sure handy when you want to travel
long distances in a hurry), so I usually don't grab those, (although
when I see a thread that refers to some of the art work on them I just
can't help myself),...

....most of the really early flying machines don't excite me either but
ya look at them and wonder "what ever made them think this was a good
idea, (since no one had done it before there were a lot of really
interesting ideas tried out, some still working on todays aircraft,
others making a comeback, and some so outrageously whacked out that
even though they might not have resulted in flight they have provided
generations of entertainment)...

So let's see now... that leaves my primary interests which revolve
around prop driven WWII fighter aircraft and especially those with
huge engines, quirky handling, and requiring pilots with balls the
size of watermellons, and WWII bombers which were produced is such
rapid timeframes and in such quantities you wonder why it is that in
todays 'market' it takes several years to get the simplest idea off
the ground.

Ok, post the pictures I like best and I will accept those I am not
wild about with grace, dignity, and with good manners. After all,
those are likely someone else's cup of tea, what turns their crank,
reminds them of a better time, gives them the pictures to explain to
their kids and grand kids what they did in the war, etc.

One of the greatest things about this group is the diversity,
interesting technical information and dialog, and great photos.

J3 probably won't download most of the rocket stuff, but I do
appreciate the posts since they are the dreams of others.

Stayfree