1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

"how to post to usenet correctly"

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by wideglide01diespammers@cox.net, Apr 17, 2004.

  1. filed this sender to the trash since he won't post on topic for the
    newsgroup he is cluttering up.

    "chris" <see@reply.to.field> wrote in message
    news:1082232217.62657.0@despina.uk.clara.net...
    > On 2004-04-17, wideglide01diespammers@cox.net wrote:
    > > uh..yes.

    >
    > So, clever enough for the U.S Government, but not clever enough
    > to format a post to usenet correctly.
    >
    > >>a) to use a real usenet client

    > >
    > > ..and Linux is the industry standard for posting the USENET?

    >
    > No. Regardless of what usenet client I use (on a variety of platforms)
    > I still use one which I can drive correctly (you clearly dont know how
    > to harness the power of Agent) and allows properly formatted posts.
    > Can OE yet produce a non-broken sig. sep without a third party plugin?
    >
    > >>b) to format a from: header correctly

    > >
    > > ..actually I have. Check our your from line, it's the most hosed up
    > > one I've seen so far.

    >
    > It's not RFC compliant, yes. But then I don't want barrels of SPAM in my
    > inbox.
    >
    > > clue: check out everyone elses posts. See how it's supposed to work?

    >
    > Don't even think to lecture me on posting to usenet.
    >
    > >
    > >>c) to use a sig. file correctly

    > >
    > > my sig file is just fine thankyouverymuch.

    >
    > No, it really is not. I'm not the only one telling you this.
    >
    > > A two line text file?

    > <snip>
    > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
    > >
    > > People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's
    > > safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.
    > > -Unknown
    > >
    > >
    > > Remove "die spammers" to email

    >
    > That is 8 lines. Your sig should be no more than 4 lines of 72 chars.
    > Read the RFC dimwit.
    >
    > --
    > chris
     



    › See More: "how to post to usenet correctly"
  2. chris

    chris Guest

    On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 21:05:40 -0400 and in article <c5sk93$5behq$1@ID-
    192964.news.uni-berlin.de>, Thomas M. Goethe said...
    : filed this sender to the trash since he won't post on topic for the
    : newsgroup he is cluttering up.
    :
    Are *all* OE users clueless fuckwits? I have yet to find anyone to
    prove me wrong!

    --
    chris
     
  3. wideglide01

    wideglide01 Guest

    Previously in alt.tv.twenty-four, chris <see@reply.to.field>
    proclaimed :

    >On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 21:05:40 -0400 and in article <c5sk93$5behq$1@ID-
    >192964.news.uni-berlin.de>, Thomas M. Goethe said...
    >: filed this sender to the trash since he won't post on topic for the
    >: newsgroup he is cluttering up.
    >:
    >Are *all* OE users clueless fuckwits? I have yet to find anyone to
    >prove me wrong!


    *plonk*


    -------------------------------------------------------------------

    People are more violently opposed to fur than leather because it's
    safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs.
    -Unknown


    Remove "die spammers" to email
     
  4. werlax

    werlax Guest

    Chris,
    Perhaps you'd better read RFC 1855 again. Most importantly, it
    states:

    - Messages and articles should be brief and to the point. Don't
    wander off-topic, don't ramble and don't send mail or post
    messages solely to point out other people's errors in typing
    or spelling. These, more than any other behavior, mark you
    as an immature beginner.

    Also:

    - If you should find yourself in a disagreement with one person,
    make your responses to each other via mail rather than continue
    to
    send messages to the list or the group. If you are debating a
    point on which the group might have some interest, you may
    summarize for them later.

    The group would appreciate your adhering to both of the above
    etiquette guidelines.

    Thank you
     
  5. chris

    chris Guest

    On 17 Apr 2004 20:12:40 -0700 and in article
    <744cd116.0404171912.4f101b9f@posting.google.com>, werlax said...
    : Perhaps you'd better read RFC 1855 again. Most importantly, it
    : states:

    Lots of RFCs are out of date now. The weaker RFCs are not usually
    adhered to anymore, whilst the more prominent one's are. The RFC you
    quote really isn't applicable to the alt.* hierachy of groups, is it?

    --
    chris
     
  6. "Richard Ness" <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote in message
    news:BOSdnTMyzexV_xzdRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
    >
    > I personally prefer top posted messages.


    Yes please, milk and one sugar.

    Do you take sugar and milk?

    Yes I'd love one.

    Would you like a cup of tea?

    --
    Slartibartfast
    To reply by email, remove the FJORDS from my address
     
  7. Richard Ness

    Richard Ness Guest

    It is my policy NOT to respond to trolls and unbalanced, self important twits.
    But, I can make an exception in your case. Just this once.

    First, your 13 or so posts here say WAY more about you than I EVER could.
    There are clear signs of over compensation in your posts. It's very obvious that
    you have issues. BIG issues. Or, a lack of ANY maturity. More on that later.

    BTW, manually creating a separate data folder for each news server, copying
    agent.ini and creating shortcuts etc, is a big hassle. I know HOW to do it, I choose
    NOT to do it 'cause it's a PITA. Just like you are being.

    With OE, it's very simple to have multiple servers. Non-newb users can and DO use
    it also. Your characterization of OE as not being "proper' is utter stupidity. As with
    any tool, smart individuals use the best tool the job calls for. I use Agent for multi-part,
    Yenc and rar Usenet posts, OE for simple Usenet text posts, Outlook 2003/Exchange
    for e-mail, calendar and contacts, etc.

    In the business world, if you insisted on continually replying to messages in-line you
    would be rebuffed, chastised and told to cease immediately. Which again tells me
    volumes. You are too young and immature to have been in ANY business yet. The
    ONLY acceptable way in business e-mail is replying to the previous
    message on TOP. There is NO other acceptable way, period. There may be occasional
    exceptions, under certain circumstances, but if you "I e-mail exactly as I Usenet" like you
    say you do, you definitely don't conduct any business via e-mail. It wouldn't be tolerated.

    Go away now little man.... err sounds more like little BOY 12-13 yrs old maybe?
    The lack of ANY maturity in you posts says 12 (or younger) to me....



    "chris" <see@reply.to.field> wrote in message news:1082223429.29593.0@nnrp-t71-01.news.uk.clara.net...
    > On 2004-04-17, Richard Ness <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > I personally prefer top posted messages.

    >
    > But, then, you are an idiot. So thankfully no-one will listen to
    > you.
    >
    > > And, I'm nowhere near being a newb.

    >
    > Yes, you are. You're not even using a proper usenet client.
    >
    > > Oh, my bad... I also hijacked the thread....

    >
    > 'hijacked'? This is usenet, you can post whenever you like!
    >
    > > All this phooey about proper etiquette is pure and total crap.

    >
    > To you maybe, to the rest of the sane, intelligent, world it makes
    > completely sense.
    >
    > > I want to be able to read the newest content first.

    >
    > So use a proper usenet client where you can mute quoted text. You really
    > don't have a clue do you? You're just your average, OE using,
    > Windoze moron.
    >
    > > Just like e-mail.
    > > Do you, when you send e-mail, append your message to the bottom?

    >
    > I e-mail exactly as I usenet. I write beneath the section of quoted text
    > I am replying to. It makes perfect sense and makes my posts/e-mails 100%
    > readable.
    >
    > > No?

    >
    > Sorry, you're wrong. See above.
    >
    > > And, you'll see that I am also using Express to post this.

    >
    > Yes, I did notice the trail of newbie shit..
    >
    > > I have Agent (2.0/32.6525) and use it when Yenc/rars, etc. are involved
    > > and when using my Giganews account. For my Comcast and Qwest accounts
    > > and text groups, I use Express. It's just easier this way, better then having to
    > > change Agent's settings every time I want to switch.

    >
    > No, you're just fucking stupid enough to not know how to use Agent correctly!
    > I suggest you research Agent a bit more, you might just learn something!
    >
    > (hint: when using Windows I can get Agent to do everything listed above without
    > having to change *any* settings every time.)
    >
    >
    > --
    > chris
     
  8. Richard Ness

    Richard Ness Guest

    See...... Agent.

    Happy now?


    On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 18:37:09 +0100, chris <see@reply.to.field> wrote:

    >On 2004-04-17, Richard Ness <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> I personally prefer top posted messages.

    >
    >But, then, you are an idiot. So thankfully no-one will listen to
    >you.
    >
    >> And, I'm nowhere near being a newb.

    >
    >Yes, you are. You're not even using a proper usenet client.
    >
    >> Oh, my bad... I also hijacked the thread....

    >
    >'hijacked'? This is usenet, you can post whenever you like!
    >
    >> All this phooey about proper etiquette is pure and total crap.

    >
    >To you maybe, to the rest of the sane, intelligent, world it makes
    >completely sense.
    >
    >> I want to be able to read the newest content first.

    >
    >So use a proper usenet client where you can mute quoted text. You really
    >don't have a clue do you? You're just your average, OE using,
    >Windoze moron.
    >
    >> Just like e-mail.
    >> Do you, when you send e-mail, append your message to the bottom?

    >
    >I e-mail exactly as I usenet. I write beneath the section of quoted text
    >I am replying to. It makes perfect sense and makes my posts/e-mails 100%
    >readable.
    >
    >> No?

    >
    >Sorry, you're wrong. See above.
    >
    >> And, you'll see that I am also using Express to post this.

    >
    >Yes, I did notice the trail of newbie shit..
    >
    >> I have Agent (2.0/32.6525) and use it when Yenc/rars, etc. are involved
    >> and when using my Giganews account. For my Comcast and Qwest accounts
    >> and text groups, I use Express. It's just easier this way, better then having to
    >> change Agent's settings every time I want to switch.

    >
    >No, you're just fucking stupid enough to not know how to use Agent correctly!
    >I suggest you research Agent a bit more, you might just learn something!
    >
    >(hint: when using Windows I can get Agent to do everything listed above without
    >having to change *any* settings every time.)
     
  9. chris

    chris Guest

    On 2004-04-18, Richard Ness <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote:
    > In the business world, if you insisted on continually replying to messages in-line you
    > would be rebuffed, chastised and told to cease immediately. Which again tells me
    > volumes. You are too young and immature to have been in ANY business yet. The
    > ONLY acceptable way in business e-mail is replying to the previous
    > message on TOP. There is NO other acceptable way, period.


    Is this guy for real? The firm you work for obviously employs idiots.
    As for my career, i'm still reading for my Masters at a British Ivy League
    University. (we call them the Russell group over here though)

    re business, I will just killfile anyone who refuses to e-mail properly.
    Probably why I shall end up working for an ISP with a bit of luck. I'll
    only have to communicate with fellow clued up people, not utter *utter*
    windoze using, OE loving, Outlook appreciating *idiots* like you.

    --
    chris
     
  10. chris

    chris Guest

    On 2004-04-18, Richard Ness <richard@nessnet.com> wrote:
    > See...... Agent.
    >
    > Happy now?


    No! Because you haven't fucking figured out how to <SNIP> yet!
    You didn't need to quote all the previous text beneath, did you?

    You truly are a fucking *fucking* idiot. I have a good mind to
    x-post this to some flame ng's and let them take care of you.

    --
    chris
     
  11. Asmodeus

    Asmodeus Guest

    "Richard Ness" <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote in
    news:9aWdndJIDsCSXB_dRVn-hg@comcast.com:

    > In the business world, if you insisted on continually replying to
    > messages in-line you would be rebuffed, chastised and told to cease
    > immediately. Which again tells me volumes. You are too young and
    > immature to have been in ANY business yet. The ONLY acceptable way in
    > business e-mail is replying to the previous message on TOP. There is
    > NO other acceptable way, period. There may be occasional exceptions,
    > under certain circumstances, but if you "I e-mail exactly as I Usenet"
    > like you say you do, you definitely don't conduct any business via
    > e-mail. It wouldn't be tolerated


    You have no idea what you're talking about. There are plenty of
    folks in business who aren't top-posting idiots, and yes, it is
    tolerated. Lots of them.

    This, however, isn't business. It's usenet. Top-post and you
    get flamed--quite appropriately so. Live with it.

    --
    "It's obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into
    two camps - the wimps and the warriors. The ones who want to argue
    and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to
    our enemies and kill them before they kill us."
    --The Hon. Zell Miller
     
  12. Asmodeus

    Asmodeus Guest

    chris <see@reply.to.field> wrote in news:1082312116.5029.1@nnrp-t71-
    01.news.uk.clara.net:

    > No! Because you haven't fucking figured out how to <SNIP> yet!
    > You didn't need to quote all the previous text beneath, did you?


    Like all top-posters, he's too damned stupid to know how to
    edit articles.

    --
    "It's obvious to me that this country is rapidly dividing itself into
    two camps - the wimps and the warriors. The ones who want to argue
    and assess and appease, and the ones who want to carry this fight to
    our enemies and kill them before they kill us."
    --The Hon. Zell Miller
     
  13. BTR1701

    BTR1701 Guest

    In article <1082312116.5029.1@nnrp-t71-01.news.uk.clara.net>,
    ahxcjb@REMOVEntlworld.com wrote:

    > On 2004-04-18, Richard Ness <richard@nessnet.com> wrote:
    > > See...... Agent.
    > >
    > > Happy now?

    >
    > No! Because you haven't fucking figured out how to <SNIP> yet!
    > You didn't need to quote all the previous text beneath, did you?
    >
    > You truly are a fucking *fucking* idiot. I have a good mind to
    > x-post this to some flame ng's and let them take care of you.


    Wow, you really have serious control issues, don't you?
     
  14. BTR1701

    BTR1701 Guest

    In article <MPG.1aec0adca9d9053c989dac@dyke.uk.clara.net>,
    ahxcjb@REMOVETHISntlworld.com wrote:

    > On 17 Apr 2004 20:12:40 -0700 and in article
    > <744cd116.0404171912.4f101b9f@posting.google.com>, werlax said...
    > : Perhaps you'd better read RFC 1855 again. Most importantly, it
    > : states:
    >
    > Lots of RFCs are out of date now. The weaker RFCs are not usually
    > adhered to anymore, whilst the more prominent one's are. The RFC you
    > quote really isn't applicable to the alt.* hierachy of groups, is it?


    So basically you only whine about adhering to "etiquette" when it goes
    in your favor?

    I see.
     
  15. chris

    chris Guest

    On 2004-04-18, Asmodeus <asmodeus@REMOVEinsightbb.com> wrote:
    > "Richard Ness" <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote in
    > news:9aWdndJIDsCSXB_dRVn-hg@comcast.com:
    >
    >> In the business world, if you insisted on continually replying to
    >> messages in-line you would be rebuffed, chastised and told to cease
    >> immediately. Which again tells me volumes. You are too young and
    >> immature to have been in ANY business yet. The ONLY acceptable way in
    >> business e-mail is replying to the previous message on TOP. There is
    >> NO other acceptable way, period. There may be occasional exceptions,
    >> under certain circumstances, but if you "I e-mail exactly as I Usenet"
    >> like you say you do, you definitely don't conduct any business via
    >> e-mail. It wouldn't be tolerated

    >
    > You have no idea what you're talking about. There are plenty of
    > folks in business who aren't top-posting idiots, and yes, it is
    > tolerated. Lots of them.
    >
    > This, however, isn't business. It's usenet. Top-post and you
    > get flamed--quite appropriately so. Live with it.


    Thankyou! At last, someone with some clue!

    *punches air*

    --
    chris
     
  16. chris

    chris Guest

    On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 20:51:27 GMT and in article <BTR1702-
    340819.16521618042004@news.west.earthlink.net>, BTR1701 said...
    : In article <MPG.1aec0adca9d9053c989dac@dyke.uk.clara.net>,
    : ahxcjb@REMOVETHISntlworld.com wrote:
    :
    : > On 17 Apr 2004 20:12:40 -0700 and in article
    : > <744cd116.0404171912.4f101b9f@posting.google.com>, werlax said...
    : > : Perhaps you'd better read RFC 1855 again. Most importantly, it
    : > : states:
    : >
    : > Lots of RFCs are out of date now. The weaker RFCs are not usually
    : > adhered to anymore, whilst the more prominent one's are. The RFC you
    : > quote really isn't applicable to the alt.* hierachy of groups, is it?
    :
    : So basically you only whine about adhering to "etiquette" when it goes
    : in your favour

    No, times change. Times, otoh, have *not* changed with regards to not-
    snipping, top posting and having broken sigs.

    *That* is the difference.
    --
    chris
     
  17. Richard Ness

    Richard Ness Guest

    Real? Absolutely!

    You are still in school. No 'real world' experience. Yet you arrogantly want to
    tell everyone else how to properly do e-mail?

    Let's see...... I negotiate multiple, million dollar deals weekly via e-mail. Both
    my clients and I pretty much ALWAYS follow the same format when sending messages.
    ALL my customers, fellow co-workers and virtually all of the Internet business community
    I deal with use the same format consistently and have for years, with very few, specific exceptions.
    Real Networks, Amazon.com, Microsoft, major 'content' providers and ISPs are all my customers.
    Some very recognizable Heavy Hitters of the Internet. Yet, we are ALL wrong....??

    Yep...., MAJOR Internet companies and I are all wrong and YOU are right?
    Just a tad bit full of....... yourself, are you?

    I will decline to mention my employer. This is a personal, not business 'discussion'.
    Let's just say that you definitely have heard of us. Your nastygram messages probably
    traveled over our network somewhere along the way. Even from Winnersh, Wokingham,
    UK. Or where ever the hell you actually are on NTL Internet's network. Yep, a bunch of
    "idiots' built one of the world's largest Internet backbones. And me, also being such an "idiot"
    am very well respected in the Internet community. Paid very well also, I might add....

    You want to "end up working for an ISP"? I've been there, done that for many years.
    You won't last a week with your attitude. I'd fire you in a second.

    Take it from an insider. Grow up and maybe...


    "chris" <see@reply.to.field> wrote in message news:1082312053.5029.0@nnrp-t71-01.news.uk.clara.net...
    > On 2004-04-18, Richard Ness <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote:
    > > In the business world, if you insisted on continually replying to messages in-line you
    > > would be rebuffed, chastised and told to cease immediately. Which again tells me
    > > volumes. You are too young and immature to have been in ANY business yet. The
    > > ONLY acceptable way in business e-mail is replying to the previous
    > > message on TOP. There is NO other acceptable way, period.

    >
    > Is this guy for real? The firm you work for obviously employs idiots.
    > As for my career, i'm still reading for my Masters at a British Ivy League
    > University. (we call them the Russell group over here though)
    >
    > re business, I will just killfile anyone who refuses to e-mail properly.
    > Probably why I shall end up working for an ISP with a bit of luck. I'll
    > only have to communicate with fellow clued up people, not utter *utter*
    > windoze using, OE loving, Outlook appreciating *idiots* like you.
    >
    > --
    > chris
    >
    >
     
  18. chris

    chris Guest

    On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 15:12:04 -0700 and in article <Nv-
    dne_BXKfTYB_d4p2dnA@comcast.com>, Richard Ness said...
    : Yep...., MAJOR Internet companies and I are all wrong and YOU are right?

    Yes, I am right. They, especially Microsoft (who try and re-write *all*
    standards) are wrong.

    Incidentally, why do you think M$'s shitware is so bugged? Because they
    try and take short cuts around RFCs, and look what happens..

    : Just a tad bit full of....... yourself, are you?

    No. I just know what I am talking about. They day I listen and take
    the advice of a top poster is a long way off i'm afraid.

    : Or where ever the hell you actually are on NTL Internet's network

    I dont even use NTL, idiot.

    : You want to "end up working for an ISP"? I've been there, done that for many years.

    Yet you still can't adhere to specific RFCs when it comes to posting to
    usenet and formatting an e-mail correctly. Why do you think all the
    major e-mail clients (with the exception of Outlook - well, it *is* MS
    after all!) encourage you not to top post? When I reply in Mutt (you
    ever used that?) I am encouraged to bottom post, same with The Bat on
    Windows.

    Out of interest, seeing as you've worked for an ISP..what linux/unix
    experience do you have? I'm intereted in which kernel's you've used
    mainly.

    : You won't last a week with your attitude. I'd fire you in a second.

    ...but then again, i'd never work for an idiot like you would i?

    --
    chris
     
  19. BTR1701

    BTR1701 Guest

    In article <MPG.1aed0569d26035a9989dad@dyke.uk.clara.net>,
    ahxcjb@REMOVETHISntlworld.com wrote:

    > On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 20:51:27 GMT and in article <BTR1702-
    > 340819.16521618042004@news.west.earthlink.net>, BTR1701 said...
    > : In article <MPG.1aec0adca9d9053c989dac@dyke.uk.clara.net>,
    > : ahxcjb@REMOVETHISntlworld.com wrote:
    > :
    > : > On 17 Apr 2004 20:12:40 -0700 and in article
    > : > <744cd116.0404171912.4f101b9f@posting.google.com>, werlax said...
    > : > : Perhaps you'd better read RFC 1855 again. Most importantly, it
    > : > : states:
    > : >
    > : > Lots of RFCs are out of date now. The weaker RFCs are not usually
    > : > adhered to anymore, whilst the more prominent one's are. The RFC you
    > : > quote really isn't applicable to the alt.* hierachy of groups, is it?
    > :
    > : So basically you only whine about adhering to "etiquette" when it goes
    > : in your favour
    >
    > No, times change. Times, otoh, have *not* changed with regards to not-
    > snipping, top posting and having broken sigs.
    >
    > *That* is the difference.


    It just sucks that you can't control everyone, everywhere, doesn't it?
     
  20. IMHO

    IMHO Guest

    When going thru a lot of replies to a message it makes it a lot easier to
    see what each person has written if the last reply is top posted. My News
    program and E-mail program always open the message at the top which requires
    me to scroll thru all the previous postings to get to the current reply.
    This happens with Outlook, Outlook Express & Lotus Notes. Is there some
    way to get messages to open at the bottom?

    <confuzed@no.spam.com> wrote in message
    news:d8e680t7m0e43pkdd5au0e7qfih8qovpev@4ax.com...
    > On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 10:00:40 -0700, "Richard Ness"
    > <richardno@damnspam.nessnet.com> wrote:
    > >I personally prefer top posted messages.
    > >And, I'm nowhere near being a newb.
    > >Oh, my bad... I also hijacked the thread....
    > >
    > >All this phooey about proper etiquette is pure and total crap.
    > >I want to be able to read the newest content first. Just like e-mail.
    > >Do you, when you send e-mail, append your message to the bottom?
    > >No? Why should a newsgroup post be any different?

    >
    > Yes I do append my email to the bottom. You made a fatal error in

    assuming
    > that I use Outlook. In fact, my email program appends to the bottom by
    > default.



    ---
    This E-Mail Is Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?