From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19941 invoked by alias); 25 May 2006 15:19:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 19933 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2006 15:19:21 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 May 2006 15:19:18 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FjHc9-0008Ps-Gq for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:19:05 +0200 Received: from 65.207.213.226 ([65.207.213.226]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:19:05 +0200 Received: from mwoehlke by 65.207.213.226 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 25 May 2006 17:19:05 +0200 To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com From: mwoehlke Subject: Re: No postnews or other Usenet news utilities? Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 15:19:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <4474D825.3000203@tibco.com> <007c01c67f9e$1eef7e10$3100000a@microline.mtc> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060420) In-Reply-To: <007c01c67f9e$1eef7e10$3100000a@microline.mtc> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List X-SW-Source: 2006-q2/txt/msg00339.txt.bz2 Bruce Wehr wrote: > Matthew wrote: >> Bruce Wehr wrote: >>> I was introduced to Usenet on or about 1985. >>> See how many times I've been flamed. >> Ok, I accept your challenge. This post, and the previous one, >> are at fault. I don't know what reputation you have on >> USENET, and I don't have time to kill "finding out", but >> you've already grossly violated netiquette for *this* list >> not once, but twice. > > Twice? Interesting ... Yup, but welcome to the club of TITTTL violators. I think we've come to consensus on the first one. >> First off, go read (which you >> should have read before posting *anything*) > > Hmmm ... I did so, and find your assumption otherwise very presumptuous. I > hope you don't mind, but I'd like to share with the group that which I said > to you in a private email. Nope, I was tempted to ask to FW my reply to it here. :-) And #1 wasn't an OT, it was, as GHVS pointed out the backstory (which is now beating a dead horse, as per the above comment). The original post was on-topic. > <- begin email quote -> > > I did read that page, front to back, top to bottom and left to right before > I posted. I searched the list archives, feeling *sure* that this question > *had* to have been addressed already. I was truly surprised that, in all > these years, nobody seemed to raise the question. > > I used to be an HP-UX admin, so I *know* the headaches associated with > administering mailing lists and newsgroups. I *know* how tiresome > inappropriate, off-topic and repeat questions can be, and how often an > "RTFM!" reply is the best I could squeak out. I thought I had done my due > diligence, chose the right mailing list and shown the proper respect before > posting. No, I am not a spammer. Would a spammer bother to take the time > to do all I have done? I think my only violation [ed: in my original post] > was being too long winded (as you pointed out), but that's just me (and I > even apologized for that at the end of my original post). > > <- end email quote -> > >> >> which describes what you should have done with this latest >> post. > > Okay, as a new visitor to the Cygwin web site and mailing lists, I never saw > a reference to this. This is an appropriate, informative page for newbies. > Perhaps a more prominent pointer on the web site is called for? See above; "welcome to the club". ;-) I just picked up the gauntlet you dropped; sorry if I was a little rough with it. >> To summarize: we didn't need three pages of hysterics and >> back-story to come with your question. > > Three pages of back-story was probably inappropriate, I will give you that. Dead horse, dead horse. ;-) I think I'll stop replying to these as we are in violent agreement. :-) > I did apologize for that. As for hysterics, I didn't see any in my original > post; those all came later. "", etc. A little goes a long way. >> There, see? That was *much* easier and more pleasant to read, > > Agreed, and point taken. Apologies to all. Happily accepted (on my end, at least, can't speak for anyone else). >> was not hysterical, and summarized both your problem (which, >> incidentally, has nothing at all to do with Cygwin) and the > > Nothing at all to do with Cygwin? It *is* a Cygwin question! No, your *problem* is that you are trying to post a message to a large list of newsgroups. If this has anything to do with Cygwin, perhaps you can enlighten me. However, because you know that Cygwin is a very good POSIX environment on Windows, and that POSIX is very script-friendly, you are looking for a Cygwin *solution* to your problem. Thus, you are 100% correct that your question is a Cygwin question, but refer again to ... I'm not saying that your post was out of line, just that you should keep an open mind and realize that the best *solution* might not involve Cygwin. > As for my second post (which indeed *did* contain hysterics!), if that was > inappropriate for the main Cygwin list, all I can say is: pointing my finger at Dave> "He started it!" :) Yes, he did (and I see I do not hold that opinion alone), and this is why TITTTL is so often used. :-) This is probably exasperated by the old hats simultaneously tending to not do it under the belief that the new folks won't realize they did (which is why I CC'd you my reply), and expecting the new (i.e. inexperienced) folks to know to do it (even though that contradicts the first assumption). IOW, it's either lose-lose or relies on the new folks to do their homework (but specifically, to find the descriptions of the cygwin-talk ML and "TITTTL"). And most people don't. My own belief, based on the other newbies I've seen drop in, is that you've done better than average. >> IANAUU (I am not a USENET user), but I would think the >> purpose of regional groups is to post about items that *are* >> specific to a region. >> If your item is *not* specific to a region, then IMO you >> should restrict yourself to posting in non-regional forums. > > Well, that's one interpretation. Things like cars and houses and such. If > you live in Florida, you don't want to be bothered with ads for used cars > for sale in California. Completely understood. > > Another interpretation says, the item I'm selling *is* available to > Floridians (even though I don't live there), because I ship there. > Floridians deserve to know that this is available. (It is a rather rare > item.) > > There will be many folks who use the first interpretation; others who use > the second. If you side with the first, then the best we can do is agree to > disagree. WFM. >> I'll concede that *.forsale sounds like >> a bunch of groups whose purpose of existence is to be the >> target of directed spam. > > To me, "spam" is like a shotgun. Indiscriminate blasting that not only > covers the intended target, but wholly inappropriate targets too. Hmm, by that definition I would argue that this mailing list constitutes "spam". :-) I'm not particularly interested in "Using gutenprint IJS drivers with ghostscript.", but that message was sitting in Thunderbird along with the rest of the traffic. I guess my initial reaction is to consider all blatant advertising "spam". I will certainly concede that in this instance it would appear to be solicited, so I guess by a more typical definition that is "not spam". See what you're doing, you're using reason and logic to make me question my own beliefs; stop that! ;-) >> As for your impression of Dave Korn, you might want to >> re-read your OP, read >> and then >> ask yourself (especially considering that many people >> consider such excessive cross-posting to be spam) if you're >> still surprised by Dave's response. > > As I told you in private email, Matthew, I consider your response much more > civil and helpful to me than the keyboard-lashing I got from Dave. Yes, I > may have broken ML etiquette with my original post (though it was not for > lack of effort, and I still think my only crime was being too long winded), > but there are more considerate and polite ways of letting me know I did so > (such as yours). I'm glad you feel that way... I think. :-) I know I'm being a bit knee-jerk as well, and I'm trying, though not very consistently, to not be. ;-) > As for my second post, my only regret was calling Dave an uncivil name. I > should never have stooped that low. Dave, you may read this list, but I'm > CCing you too (just in case), because I would like to apologize for that. > > Anyway, I just ran out of wind. I think I just ran out of smileys. :-) -- Matthew ...Ruthlessly beating Windows with a hammer until it looks like POSIX.