Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.security.firewalls > #697
| From | homer@lightlink.com |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.security.firewalls, comp.misc, alt.anonymous, alt.anonymous.email, alt.computer.security, alt.privacy |
| Subject | Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? |
| Date | 2015-12-22 20:11 +0000 |
| Organization | I SPEAK ONLY FOR MYSELF |
| Message-ID | <n5capv$p9s$1@adore2.lightlink.com> (permalink) |
| References | <n3spqh$fer$1@news.albasani.net> <n3ul4q0i3c@news3.newsguy.com> <n41r72$qqr$1@news.albasani.net> |
Cross-posted to 6 groups.
A higher question might be what is this doing on alt.anonymous :)
My point of view is "do to others what you would have them to do
you." There are no rules for usenet about posting URL's, only rules that
you stay on topic and not spam with URL's to commercial sites.
SOME groups might have a collection of private rules agreed upon by
the usual members of the group, and these should be posted in the
charter for that group which of course would be posted to the group
periodically so that others might see.
That said some text bsed usenet news readers do not handle html
well, and URL's thus are not very useful to that reader.
On the other side of that, with more advanced news readers, URL's
can be quite useful pointing to highly complex html pages and graphics
which couldn't be replicated in the text groups of usenet at all. and
which direct the reader to a rich source of information beyond the
immediate posting in question.
A compromise might be to post the text part of the posting in
usenet along with the URL for 'more information'.
URL's are quite common and welcome in all the groups that I myself
participate in.
Its like the people who scream bloody murder when someone posts a
subject line in all caps, god what a sin.
Do well and keep posting, and do what you would have others do.
Homer
In alt.anonymous Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> wrote:
> Am 05.12.2015 um 13:26 schrieb David H. Lipman:
>
>> If you want the content on Usenet then just post the content, not the
>> Zeta Board links.
>
> I believed due to your strongly affirmative statements that I must have
> done something wrong and have posted the content of the URL to the group
> in compliance to your advice.
>
> I have nonetheless a couple of questions to ask you:
>
> (1) It sometimes occurs in Internet discussions that one has to ask
> the readers to view quite some stuffs in a paper that is available
> online. Elsewhere I used to simply give the corresponding URL. What
> should one correctly do in your opinion? (Note that the relevant stuffs
> concerned may be so voluminous such that it is barely possible to copy
> them all to the group.)
>
> (2) If the answer to (1) is just to provide the URL, why is it improper
> to provide the URL in the case of my OP (noting that in both cases the
> reader has to perform the same operation in practice in order to obtain
> the content)?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> M. K. Shen
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Back to comp.security.firewalls | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-04 20:33 +0100
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> - 2015-12-05 07:26 -0500
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-05 21:58 +0100
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-12-05 22:42 +0000
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-06 18:15 +0100
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-06 18:28 +0100
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-12-06 17:36 +0000
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-06 18:46 +0100
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-12-06 18:58 +0000
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-07 23:19 +0100
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-12-07 22:51 +0000
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-08 23:37 +0100
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? homer@lightlink.com - 2015-12-22 20:17 +0000
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? homer@lightlink.com - 2015-12-22 20:11 +0000
Re: How good is the chance of building a moderately sized quantum computer? Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> - 2015-12-20 15:35 +0100
csiph-web