(?) for Jonathan Swift

Hey (another viewer), aka Jonathan swift, you were pretty civil in the
discussion on the thread where I allegedly caused a large amount of
unHappiness with 4 or 5 PC'ers, in your responses.
/
So, I wanted to ask ask you a question ?
Do you think that Google represents in any way, a comparison of what
your NewsReader sees, in the way ''NG posts'' appear in google?
/
I could work out of google, with my WTV,
participating in this group.
If google represents fairly close, to what a NewsReader does, then, I
don't see the
problem.
/
Undoubtely, google is different, because I went there, & into tx.moto,
and read my stuff, your stuff, their stuff, and it was pretty nice,
pretty easy to comprehend to me.
/
Like I stated B4, jonathan, other PC folks have said they don't have the
same problem that you & others complain about. I won't you to know,
that I know, that Not Every PC operator feels like you and about 5
others do.
/
It just ain't that way, my cyber friendly.
/
( I didn't crosspost this, cause I know you actually log on in here, and
you'll eventually see it, if not so be it)

 

no allegedly about it, continually and randomly changing topic headers
to suit yourself and no one else is simply bad form. the 4 or 5 are
just the ones you heard from, many others simply made you disappear
rather than spend any more time. just in tx.moto alone, fullstate and
morgan were complaining and rightfully so. i'm being patient with you
and trying to show you the ropes.

sort of , but not quite the same. you get to see the threading and the
way responses are done, but a good newreader gives you more options in
the way you want to see things presented and filtered, either for
recognition of a thread or author you are following or in eliminating
threads/authors. you also have much more information about the post and
the thread if you want to back track. there are many ways to do that
with a newsreader that aren't in google. WTV doesn't do them at all.

i think you would be way ahead of the game just to make that transition.
i don't know how google does quoting in responses, but it has to be
better than WTV.
you should also be aware that the use of * and > and - - characters
have specified functions in usenet text. they denote attribition degrees
in quoted documents. the way you are using them busts that system and
the way the automated responses work. my newsreader automatically
quotes what i want, but when you are using those characters in your
random manner, it messes up the response quoting. consequently, if i
want to quote something of yours, sometimes i have to spend much more
time and effort to do so, simply to accomodate the lack of that function
in WTV and subsequent misuse of the characters however well intended it
is. Again, it's not my responsibility to make your quotes to conform to
the established standards. it's yours, and that's why others wont'
waste their time on it.

ahhh, you got to ride down the freeway in a car instead of the moped for
a change. maybe you are beginning to get the idea of how much WTC lacks
and how much better things can be.

like i said, most people won't spend the time to respond to you if it's
any extra effort and just plonk you. i assure you, if you see 5
complaints online, there are likely 10 times many that thinking "what an
idiot" as they drop you permanently into the bit bucket, especially
after you have been asked to not do certain things yet you continue.
that makes people think you are deliberately messing things up for the
group. i don't think that is the response you are looking for and
hopefully not your intent to disrupt.

no, it's worse. if you were looking for good folks to correspond with,
you lost a bunch on this last round of topic shredding. you
successfully pissed fullstate off, smack in the middle of a discussion
he was having. changing the topic header on him into several different
ones destroyed his conversation thread whether you choose to believe it
or not. it's totally rude to make someone have to chase down his own
topic simply because you were too lazy or careless to follow long
established usenet protocols. he didn't get pissed for no reason and the
only person changing the topic around here has been you. fact of life
amigo. i'm tryin' real hard to help you, but you gotta cooperate a bit.
usenet won't bend to your will; you will simply find yourself very
ignored and with very few people responding to you. your posts will
simply not be seen by most readers who don't put up with non-standard
format posts and topic shredding. if that's what you want, keep on, it
is already happening.

what happened to trying a newsreader out on the wifes puter and doing a
little reading on nettiquette ? you should be able to pull up Netiquette
articles on the WTV. Read Them. There will be a test.

 

Jonathan, would you do me another favor?
Is it possible for you to send me a ''copy of a quote'' that I have
typed.
/
I would be interested to see my WTV
Text, including my typing style, in the raw.
This means before you have to doctor it up, in order for you to make
sense out of it.
You know, tha way it is interpreted by your NewsReader.

I reckon, you might have to go to the
''motorcycle'' thread that I screwed up, so I can really get a look at
what my stuff looks like from your viewPoint, and vantage point, huh?

I am not trying to get on your nerves, not trying to be a pest, just
trying to satisfy my self.

I sincerely appreciate your communication with me, in the last few days
about the WTV issue.

You can email it to me, if you like.
That might be better. thanks
--bjay---05.02.05

 

Not a problem Bjay...here it is right below this.

===============

Jonathan, would you do me another favor?
Is it possible for you to send me a ''copy of a
quote'' that I have
typed.
/
I would be interested to see my WTV
Text, including my typing style, in the raw.
This means before you have to doctor it up, in
order for you to make
sense out of it.
You know, tha way it is interpreted by your
NewsReader.

I reckon, you might have to go to the
''motorcycle'' thread that I screwed up, so I can
really get a look at
what my stuff looks like from your viewPoint, and
vantage point, huh?

I am not trying to get on your nerves, not trying
to be a pest, just
trying to satisfy my self.

I sincerely appreciate your communication with me,
in the last few days
about the WTV issue.

You can email it to me, if you like.
That might be better. thanks
--bjay---05.02.05

===============

Now I have NO problem with "stream of conciousnes"
writing as I am probally the most guilty of it.
BUT, the way you do it comes across VERY
disjointed and as hard to phathom as a drunken
friends 2am ramblings.


--
Keith Schiffner
RCOS #7
Assistant to the Assistant Undersecretary of the
Ministry of Silly Walks.
"terrorist organization" is a redundancy

 

tell ya what, rather than go back and dig thru posts, try this:
type up a post that quotes this line and abobe and then put

- -

to separate your response to the quoted original below that.

then i can probably show you what i'm talking about, ie, your response
will be snipped when i go to quote it automagically.

I definitely remember having some posts of yours like that and the lines
i wanted to respond to were automagically snipped because the newsreader
took your separated reply as a signature because of the delineation
with the - - - - -. i had to go back and copy and paste the part i
wanted.

is it a huge earthshaking deal ? no.
is it annoying to have to do it ? yah
there are other wierdnesses that happen with the > character and the *
character depending upon the newsreader.

mind you, this is different from changing the topics in mid thread. <g>
hopefully you've heard from enough people not to do that.

i thought you were going to be using google groups...
in general, not putting in the asci lines is a good idea. the way many
newsreaders present a threaded and quoted post looks similar this:

original response.
original response.
original response.

however, don't try to emulate that with the WTV or it may screw things
up again for some ppl! that's why i'be been saying to go with google
groups or a newsreader so you can see how it works for most ppl.

 

(another viewer)
tell ya what, rather than go back and dig thru posts, try this: type up
a post that quotes this line and abobe and then put
- -
to separate your response to the quoted original below that.
then i can probably show you what i'm talking about, ie, your response
will be snipped when i go to quote it automagically.
- -
- -
(bjay here)
Have I told you, that in order for me to
respond with others quotes attached to my response, I only can do it,
with the tech of cut copy & paste. (I'm still pondering the use of
google)
you're a good guy charlie brown.
PS, I have no idea what Keith was trying to demostrate with his response
to me in this thread line, go look at it. I suspect he was being
arrogent. bjkana

 

well, damn, this time it works. shades of the movie "Little Big Man"
where the old chief, at the end of the movie tries to die, it starts
raining on his face, disturbs him and he looks up at Hoffman and sez "
Is this the happy hunting ground?" Hoffman nods, no, and the old chief
sez,"sometimes the magic works, sometimes it doesn't"

i don't know what the hell you were typing BJ, but it made some parts of
your posts look like sig lines and they would disappear on people.
whatever, just skip the characters as you are doing now and it's cool.
maybe it was a _ _ for the sig line. just for giggles and
grins, try that in some post and lemme see if that triggers it.

do check out google groups, tho' i think you may have a better
experience there. thanks for hangin' in there with us and getting it
sorted out.

 

No, I was showing you how it appears to my news
reader. That's all, just trying to help like you
asked.
--
Keith Schiffner
RCOS #7
Assistant to the Assistant Undersecretary of the
Ministry of Silly Walks.
"terrorist organization" is a redundancy

 

(another viewer)
(to bjay in an earlier post)
- -
‘‘well, damn, this time it works’’. shades of the movie "Little
Big Man" where the old chief, at the end of the movie tries to die, it
starts raining on his face, disturbs him and he looks up at Hoffman and
sez " Is this the happy hunting ground?" Hoffman nods, no, and the old
chief sez,"sometimes the magic works, sometimes it doesn't"
i don't know what the hell you were typing BJ, but it made some parts of
your posts look like sig lines and they would disappear on people.
whatever, just skip the characters as you are doing now and it's cool.
maybe it was a     _ _   for the sig line. just for giggles and
grins, try that in some post and lemme see if that triggers it.
- -
- -
‘‘first, AV, I wanna comment about how much I like that Dustin
Hoffman movie you mentioned above in your nice metafore, about my doing
something better. I've seen that movie many times over, one of my
favorites. Do you remember how long the movie was, wow!
Second, thanks for your response.
_ _ bjayKana

 

Keith schiffer wrote)

‘‘Now I have NO problem with "stream of conciousnes" writing as I am
probally the most guilty of it. BUT, the way you do it comes across VERY
disjointed and as hard to phathom as a drunken friends 2am
ramblings.’’
Keith Schiffner
- -
- -
‘‘Keith, UP a post or two on this thread, you said you were just
trying to be helpful
And I posted to AV, that I didn't quite understand your reply, and that
you must be acting arrogent.
Okay, I'm sorry for that.
So, atleast explain what you meant above.
''I come across VERY disjointed and as hard to read as etc, etc.''
Are ya referring to my words of expression & or phrase style, or again
the WTV thang? thanks amigo
- - bjay

 

Keith schiffer wrote)

''Now I have NO problem with "stream of
conciousnes" writing as I am
probally the most guilty of it. BUT, the way you
do it comes across VERY
disjointed and as hard to phathom as a drunken
friends 2am
ramblings.''
Keith Schiffner
- -
- -
''Keith, UP a post or two on this thread, you said
you were just
trying to be helpful
And I posted to AV, that I didn't quite understand
your reply, and that
you must be acting arrogent.
Okay, I'm sorry for that.
So, atleast explain what you meant above.
''I come across VERY disjointed and as hard to
read as etc, etc.''
Are ya referring to my words of expression & or
phrase style, or again
the WTV thang? thanks amigo
- - bjay

Mostly it's a little of everything. But it's all
good and there's really nothing to apologize for.
You use the tech you choose to use and are dealing
with the limitations it imposes on you. I'm
wondering what I need to change so that the carats
would appear like for other replies.

--
Keith Schiffner
RCOS #7
Assistant to the Assistant Undersecretary of the
Ministry of Silly Walks.
"terrorist organization" is a redundancy

 

what a great flic. hoffman really turns on his abilities with the
various sorts of characters he plays thru the course of the movie.
"look at those bandy legs, captain, that man is a mule skinner". <g>

saw something interesting on the History Channel a couple of weeks ago.
It was about little big horn and the visions sitting bull saw before the
battle. sitting bull made a promise to the great spirit and danced non
stop for three days and then had 80 (yah eighty) pieces of skin cut off
by knife and awl. he then had visions of white men with their heads
rolling on teh ground and knew this meant victory for the gathered
oglala sioux and their pals. after dancing for 3 days and being sliced
up, i'd probably have some weird dreams too.

the us cavalry was split into three forces and were each in turn turned
back or killed before the planned attack could be organized. custer
went in full tilt ahead of any timing of reinforcements and ignorant
that the first arm of the cavalry force that was supposed to rejoin them
had already been turned back 3 days earler. it was a history of little
big horn from the indian perspective, very well done program if you
happen to catch it.