Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #104616

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say.

Cross-posted to 6 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/16/17, 5:38 PM, in article op.yytddpjmjs98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 23:58:01 +0100, Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 4/16/17, 3:16 PM, in article op.yys6s4g1js98qf@red.lan, "James Wilkinson
>> Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> wrote:
>> 
>> ...
>>>>> It split into two.  There's a browser based on Chrome, and a
>>>>> newsreader/mail
>>>>> client called "M2" which used to be part of the browser.
>>>> 
>>>> Playing with it now... does not seem to let me select text and respond to
>>>> just that... have to hit reply and then delete what I do not want,
>>> 
>>> It will do that fine (in the windows version anyway).  I highlight any text,
>>> then press reply.  Only that text is quoted, the rest disappears.
>> 
>> Might be a setting somewhere?
> 
> I've never set it to do that, it did it out of the box.  It's possible they
> fucked it up on the Mac version.

Quit and re-launched and it was fine. Cannot replicate the broken behavior.
Call it a bizarre quirk I ran into... if I do not see it again it is a
non-issue (though still odd it was happening).

>>>> and even then have to be very careful to select the front of a line.
>>> 
>>> Not sure what you mean there.
>> 
>> Say I am selecting the start of line 10... if I am too far to the left it
>> selects from the very top of the post. Have to position my mouse very
>> carefully before the text.
> 
> That's a known bug that's pissed off many people.  I often find myself
> clicking below all the text to type at the bottom, only to find the cursor's
> at the top.  The text editing function is apparently taken from something
> else, and they never fixed it.

It is pretty bad -- might be a deal breaker. If the rest is great, though, I
can live with it. The not having colored text in replies is pretty annoying
for me, too, though.

Still, the better filtering, etc. is appealing.

Also do not like how you add and remove buttons, but how often do you have
to do that? Would like to make list text smaller and did not see that in the
font options but that is pretty minor.

>>>> Also does not
>>>> let me open the saved searches in their own windows, but I can live without
>>>> that (seems fast enough at going back and forth).
>>> 
>>> Dunno what you mean by "saved searches".
>> 
>> Do a search and click "save" -- I have a lot of these, with rules such as
>> contains word Snit, is unread, is not from Snit, is not in such-and-such
>> threads, etc.
>> 
>> But Opera handles this reasonably well. I like to be able to have them in
>> their own floating windows which it does not allow (that I saw) but hardly a
>> deal-breaker. It does show a count of messages in the search. That is fine.
> 
> I do a similar thing using labels.  It's how I look at all replies to me.  I
> only search when I'm looking at something in the past I remember sending a
> week ago and want to find the thread.  I have no need to save it.

With the saved searched they get placed with the labels... maybe they call
them that? But you do a search and hit "save" as one way to get them. :)

>>>> Also does not have colors in responses, only in reading.
>>>> 
>>> Agreed, although I've never needed them in reading.  I find the number of >
>>> is enough for me.
>>> 
>> I prefer the colors... helps to keep track. DOES have them in reading, just
>> not replying.
> 
> I guess it would be useful.  I didn't realise any other newsreader did
> colours.  People are usually surprised when I mention it.

Many do not... I really like the feature. It is one thing that has kept me
in Entourage. I think Thunderbird does it too, but their font rendering at
least used to be pretty bad. They did not use the OS rendering.

>>>> But only used it for a few moments... maybe there are ways to fix that?
>>>> Does seem to have a good basic look and it easy to use.
>>>> 
>>> I like the killfile and filter options the most.  Easy to use and able to
>>> filter on all sorts.
>>> 
>> Similar to what I am used to and does work well.
>> 
> I used to use Forte Agent and the filters were far too complicated and rather
> limited.

Entourage is OK but does not handle headers well.

>>> For example I've set up a folder which contains all posts made in reply to
>>> me or thereafter.  I can respond to those first before looking elsewhere.
>>> 
>> Sounds like a saved search. And it allows for looking at headers my current
>> one does not. That would be a BIG advantage to what I have.
> 
> I created a label called "replies to me" with:
> 
> entire message contains red.lan
> or entire message contains James Wilkinson
> and from header does not contain James Wilkinson
> 
> I.e. anything quoting me that isn't written by me, plus people who don't quote
> my name but the reference header contains my message ID, which always has
> red.lan in it.

Makes sense. Others have actually tracking of the thread, but what you
describe would work well, too.

>>> And I can killfile people and any replies to them.  Some newsreaders are
>>> incapable of both of those things, as they won't look at the body of the
>>> message.
>> 
>> Mine does not handle the replies... so it clearly had benefits I would use,
>> but is quirky enough I doubt I will move to it. Will certainly give it a
>> shot -- like it more, I think, than I did Thunderbird.
>> 
>> Even if I do not move to it thanks for pointing me to it.
> 
> Seeing people replying to someone I've killfiled is irritating.  I couldn't
> live without this function.

I can set to auto-read any post that mentions a given word which allows me
to sorta do that.

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-13 18:55 +0100
  Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-13 23:44 +0000
    Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-13 23:48 +0000
      Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 00:53 +0100
        Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 00:07 +0000
          Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 16:49 +0100
            Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 18:41 +0000
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 12:12 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 19:20 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 12:39 -0700
              Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 20:31 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 12:50 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:13 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:13 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:24 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:27 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:17 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:50 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:54 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:12 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:28 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:16 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 15:58 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 01:38 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 19:26 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-23 17:50 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-23 10:02 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:15 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:24 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:27 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:17 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:31 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:10 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:43 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:48 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:15 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:26 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-22 23:25 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-22 15:44 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:11 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 21:24 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:26 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:17 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:44 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:16 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:29 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 13:52 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 20:53 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:12 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:26 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 14:34 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:34 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-04-16 16:03 -0700
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:10 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 22:16 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-17 01:43 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 22:12 +0100
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. Sprang <spring@sprung.invalid> - 2017-04-16 21:29 +0000
                Re: Smokers are smarter, I say. "James Wilkinson Sword" <imvalid@somewear.com> - 2017-04-16 23:11 +0100

csiph-web