Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #54360 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-01-05 08:52 -0800 |
| Last post | 2014-01-13 15:36 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 70 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-01-05 08:52 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-01-05 11:55 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-05 19:35 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-01-05 19:55 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-06 16:06 +1300
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-10 17:42 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-01-05 22:56 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-06 03:34 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-01-05 22:58 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-06 12:04 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-01-05 12:06 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-05 13:00 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-01-05 10:11 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-05 13:42 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-01-05 13:53 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-01-05 12:13 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-06 09:24 +1300
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-05 15:31 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-01-05 22:08 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-06 16:26 +1300
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-06 03:36 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Larry Gusaas <larry.gusaas@gmail.com> - 2014-01-05 14:20 -0600
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-01-05 16:20 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-06 03:37 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-01-05 22:43 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-01-06 21:32 -0700
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2014-01-10 13:38 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-07 08:38 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-07 13:41 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-07 15:18 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-08 03:09 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-01-07 22:56 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-01-08 01:44 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-08 18:30 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-01-09 09:03 +1300
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Bread <BreadWithSpam@Fractious.net> - 2014-01-10 13:47 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put a MacBook Pro to a long sleep/hibernation (close its lid) and moving it for a long time (e.g., over a day) instead of powering off? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-01-10 19:51 -0500
Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... billy@MIX.COM - 2014-01-07 03:02 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-01-07 06:18 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... billy@MIX.COM - 2014-01-09 17:20 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-09 23:25 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-01-10 11:44 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... billy@MIX.COM - 2014-01-11 19:06 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-09 19:14 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2014-01-09 22:29 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-10 09:28 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-01-10 10:25 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-11 07:26 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-01-11 10:50 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-11 13:57 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-11 22:24 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-11 23:10 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-11 15:12 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-12 00:28 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2014-01-11 17:54 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-12 01:57 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-12 09:17 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-12 22:05 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-12 04:56 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-12 05:16 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-12 18:38 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-12 22:07 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-01-12 22:28 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2014-01-13 14:51 +1100
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-01-13 04:28 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-01-13 05:46 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2014-01-13 02:49 -0500
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... billy@MIX.COM - 2014-01-13 15:48 +0000
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-01-14 00:41 -0800
Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... billy@MIX.COM - 2014-01-13 15:36 +0000
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 23:25 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <090120142325215392%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #54538 |
In article <lamlor$alf$1@reader2.panix.com>, <billy@MIX.COM> wrote: > In comp.sys.mac.system Ant <ant@zimage.comant> asked, > quoting me: > > > > ...and post it to non-relevant groups? > > > > No. > > > > Why not? > > It's sloppy, and not only that - it also generates > yet more slop. Observe what happens on a properly > written news reader (tin) - > > http://MIX.COM/Sloppy.jpg And, en plus, once a subject gets too long I say fuck that and move on. Your post and its thread never get read. -- Tim "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 11:44 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <U_WdncEw45Q10E3PnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #54538 |
On 1/9/2014 9:20 AM PT, billy@MIX.COM typed:
> It's sloppy, and not only that - it also generates
> yet more slop. Observe what happens on a properly
> written news reader (tin) -
>
> http://MIX.COM/Sloppy.jpg
Tin rocks! Weird, I don't see that problem in my Tin through SSH2
connections.
--
"It is certain that there may be extraordinary mental activity with an
extremely small absolute mass of nervous matter: thus the wonderfully
diversified instincts, mental powers, and affections of ants are
notorious, yet their cerebral ganglia are not so large as the quarter of
a small pin's head. Under this point of view, the brain of an ant is one
of the most marvelous atoms of matter in the world, perhaps more so than
the brain of a man." --Charles Darwin (from The Origin of Species, 1859)
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | billy@MIX.COM |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 19:06 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <las4oc$4lq$1@reader2.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #54561 |
Ant <ant@zimage.comant> writes, quoting me:
> > It's sloppy, and not only that - it also generates
> > yet more slop. Observe what happens on a properly
> > written news reader (tin) -
> >
> > http://MIX.COM/Sloppy.jpg
>
> Tin rocks! Weird, I don't see that problem in my Tin through
> SSH2 connections.
Those of us who don't want to sort threads by references do.
And, assuming you are, if you "l"ist a thread, you will too.
Billy Y..
--
sub #'9+1 ,r0 ; convert ascii byte
add #9.+1 ,r0 ; to an integer
bcc 20$ ; not a number
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 19:14 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <bj8ao3F9pcU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #54475 |
I've noticed you seem to make a habit of filling every possible character available in subject lines. Perhaps you are unaware that using such long subjects makes reading your messages more difficult for others, because a lot of news / email clients truncate long subjects for display, forcing readers to scroll or widen windows to read the entire thing. Note that this typically happens *before* they have had a chance to decide whether they actually *want* to read your message. The subject field is meant to be a short synopsis of the message contents - the purpose of which is to give the reader a good idea of what the message is about, so that they can more accurately decide whether further reading is desireable for them. It's best to use just a handful of words, typed properly, that accurately indicate the message content – and nothing more. Supplying concise, accurate subjects is simply good etiquette. You should reconsider your position on this, IMO. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-09 22:29 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <52cf22dd$0$52825$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #54541 |
In article <bj8ao3F9pcU2@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > >The subject field is meant to be a short synopsis of the message >contents - the purpose of which is to give the reader a good idea of >what the message is about, so that they can more accurately decide >whether further reading is desireable for them. It's best to use just a >handful of words, typed properly, that accurately indicate the message >content – and nothing more. E.g., "MBP long hibernation" or "Wordwrap in TextEdit". Patty
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 09:28 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <slrnlcvfam.2li6.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #54541 |
In message <bj8ao3F9pcU2@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > Supplying concise, accurate subjects is simply good etiquette. You > should reconsider your position on this, IMO. Not to mention that a lot of people simply do not see the subject lines at all. For example, the csm hierarchy gets little enough traffic and i have decent enough kill files that I simply start at the first message and read to the end, if something is in the subject *only* I will probably never see it, and if the intent of the message isn't clear from the body of the post, I skip to the next message. I will never scroll to read a subject line. -- Wife: Who are you talking to? Husb: [on phone] Jon Wife: Aren't you going to talk to me? Husb: I talked to you at dinner, do I need to talk to you again?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-10 10:25 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <barmar-195649.10255410012014@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #54553 |
In article <slrnlcvfam.2li6.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > In message <bj8ao3F9pcU2@mid.individual.net> > Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > > Supplying concise, accurate subjects is simply good etiquette. You > > should reconsider your position on this, IMO. > > Not to mention that a lot of people simply do not see the subject lines > at all. For example, the csm hierarchy gets little enough traffic and i > have decent enough kill files that I simply start at the first message > and read to the end, if something is in the subject *only* I will > probably never see it, and if the intent of the message isn't clear from > the body of the post, I skip to the next message. > > I will never scroll to read a subject line. That seems like a misfeature of your newsreader if it doesn't at least show a the truncated subject line along with the post. -- Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 07:26 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #54556 |
In message <barmar-195649.10255410012014@news.eternal-september.org> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > In article <slrnlcvfam.2li6.g.kreme@amelia.local>, > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> In message <bj8ao3F9pcU2@mid.individual.net> >> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: >> > Supplying concise, accurate subjects is simply good etiquette. You >> > should reconsider your position on this, IMO. >> >> Not to mention that a lot of people simply do not see the subject lines >> at all. For example, the csm hierarchy gets little enough traffic and i >> have decent enough kill files that I simply start at the first message >> and read to the end, if something is in the subject *only* I will >> probably never see it, and if the intent of the message isn't clear from >> the body of the post, I skip to the next message. >> >> I will never scroll to read a subject line. > That seems like a misfeature of your newsreader if it doesn't at least > show a the truncated subject line along with the post. I didn't say it doesn't show it. -- Well, I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state I finally won out over it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 10:50 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <barmar-4B8C54.10500111012014@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #54571 |
In article <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > In message <barmar-195649.10255410012014@news.eternal-september.org> > Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > In article <slrnlcvfam.2li6.g.kreme@amelia.local>, > > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > >> In message <bj8ao3F9pcU2@mid.individual.net> > >> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: > >> > Supplying concise, accurate subjects is simply good etiquette. You > >> > should reconsider your position on this, IMO. > >> > >> Not to mention that a lot of people simply do not see the subject lines > >> at all. For example, the csm hierarchy gets little enough traffic and i > >> have decent enough kill files that I simply start at the first message > >> and read to the end, if something is in the subject *only* I will > >> probably never see it, and if the intent of the message isn't clear from > >> the body of the post, I skip to the next message. > >> > >> I will never scroll to read a subject line. > > > That seems like a misfeature of your newsreader if it doesn't at least > > show a the truncated subject line along with the post. > > I didn't say it doesn't show it. That seemed to be the implication. Does it show it at the bottom, so you have to scroll to see it? Weird. -- Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 13:57 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <2014011113571021872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #54572 |
On 2014-01-11 15:50:01 +0000, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> said: > In article <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local>, > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > >> In message <barmar-195649.10255410012014@news.eternal-september.org> >> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >>> In article <slrnlcvfam.2li6.g.kreme@amelia.local>, >>> Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >> >>>> In message <bj8ao3F9pcU2@mid.individual.net> >>>> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote: >>>>> Supplying concise, accurate subjects is simply good etiquette. You >>>>> should reconsider your position on this, IMO. >>>> >>>> Not to mention that a lot of people simply do not see the subject lines >>>> at all. For example, the csm hierarchy gets little enough traffic and i >>>> have decent enough kill files that I simply start at the first message >>>> and read to the end, if something is in the subject *only* I will >>>> probably never see it, and if the intent of the message isn't clear from >>>> the body of the post, I skip to the next message. >>>> >>>> I will never scroll to read a subject line. >> >>> That seems like a misfeature of your newsreader if it doesn't at least >>> show a the truncated subject line along with the post. >> >> I didn't say it doesn't show it. > > That seemed to be the implication. Does it show it at the bottom, so you > have to scroll to see it? Weird. With Unison, hovering the cursor on the subject field will reveal the full content of the subject line. No scrolling involved. < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_525.jpg > -- Regards, Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 22:24 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <bjduk3F6hpqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #54581 |
On 2014-01-11, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
> With Unison, hovering the cursor on the subject field will reveal the
> full content of the subject line. No scrolling involved.
>< https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_525.jpg >
Still inconvenient though, which is the point.
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.
JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 23:10 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <110120142310229365%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #54581 |
In article <2014011113571021872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2014-01-11 15:50:01 +0000, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> said:
>
> > In article <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local>,
> > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> >> I didn't say it doesn't show it.
> >
> > That seemed to be the implication. Does it show it at the bottom, so you
> > have to scroll to see it? Weird.
>
> With Unison, hovering the cursor on the subject field will reveal the
> full content of the subject line. No scrolling involved.
How unbelievably irritating.
--
Tim
"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 15:12 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <2014011115124598603-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #54585 |
On 2014-01-11 23:10:22 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:
> In article <2014011113571021872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-01-11 15:50:01 +0000, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> said:
>>
>> > In article <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local>,
>> > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>> >> I didn't say it doesn't show it.
>> > > That seemed to be the implication. Does it show it at the bottom, so you
>> > have to scroll to see it? Weird.
>>
>> With Unison, hovering the cursor on the subject field will reveal the
>> full content of the subject line. No scrolling involved.
>
> How unbelievably irritating.
Yup!
...but not unsurmountable.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-12 00:28 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <bje5t6F7vefU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #54586 |
On 2014-01-11, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2014-01-11 23:10:22 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:
>
>> In article <2014011113571021872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2014-01-11 15:50:01 +0000, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> said:
>>>
>>> > In article <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local>,
>>> > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>> >> I didn't say it doesn't show it.
>>> > > That seemed to be the implication. Does it show it at the bottom, so you
>>> > have to scroll to see it? Weird.
>>>
>>> With Unison, hovering the cursor on the subject field will reveal the
>>> full content of the subject line. No scrolling involved.
>>
>> How unbelievably irritating.
>
> Yup!
> ...but not unsurmountable.
I haven't seen anyone in this thread claim the problem is
insurmountable; what we *are* saying is that exceedingly long subjects
are inconvenient for those reading such posts.
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.
JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-11 17:54 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <2014011117542311433-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
| In reply to | #54592 |
On 2014-01-12 00:28:22 +0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> said:
> On 2014-01-11, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> On 2014-01-11 23:10:22 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:
>>
>>> In article <2014011113571021872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2014-01-11 15:50:01 +0000, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> said:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local>,
>>>>> Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> I didn't say it doesn't show it.
>>>>>> That seemed to be the implication. Does it show it at the bottom, so you
>>>>> have to scroll to see it? Weird.
>>>>
>>>> With Unison, hovering the cursor on the subject field will reveal the
>>>> full content of the subject line. No scrolling involved.
>>>
>>> How unbelievably irritating.
>>
>> Yup!
>> ...but not unsurmountable.
>
> I haven't seen anyone in this thread claim the problem is
> insurmountable; what we *are* saying is that exceedingly long subjects
> are inconvenient for those reading such posts.
Agreed.
Sometimes it might just be a Usenet newcomer who needs help and you can
give him the benefit of doubt and provide the information requested.
However, this time it is "Ant" who has been posting to this NG since at
least 2007 with the same long narative subject lines. It is time he
learned that his actions are a PIA.
--
Regards,
Savageduck
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-12 01:57 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <bjeb53F8k9cU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #54599 |
On 2014-01-12, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2014-01-12 00:28:22 +0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> said:
>
>> I haven't seen anyone in this thread claim the problem is
>> insurmountable; what we *are* saying is that exceedingly long subjects
>> are inconvenient for those reading such posts.
>
> Agreed.
> Sometimes it might just be a Usenet newcomer who needs help and you can
> give him the benefit of doubt and provide the information requested.
> However, this time it is "Ant" who has been posting to this NG since at
> least 2007 with the same long narative subject lines. It is time he
> learned that his actions are a PIA.
Unfortunately, I haven't seen any indication from "Ant" that he
understands or cares about this issue. : /
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.
JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-12 09:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <120120140917516337%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #54600 |
In article <bjeb53F8k9cU2@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2014-01-12, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> > On 2014-01-12 00:28:22 +0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> said:
> >
> >> I haven't seen anyone in this thread claim the problem is
> >> insurmountable; what we *are* saying is that exceedingly long subjects
> >> are inconvenient for those reading such posts.
> >
> > Agreed.
> > Sometimes it might just be a Usenet newcomer who needs help and you can
> > give him the benefit of doubt and provide the information requested.
> > However, this time it is "Ant" who has been posting to this NG since at
> > least 2007 with the same long narative subject lines. It is time he
> > learned that his actions are a PIA.
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't seen any indication from "Ant" that he
> understands or cares about this issue. : /
In that case his posts will get ignored. Simples.
--
"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to
lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores
the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them
into it in the first place." - Douglas Adams
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-12 22:05 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <bjghu4FnaunU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #54623 |
On 2014-01-12, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> In article <bjeb53F8k9cU2@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-01-12, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> > On 2014-01-12 00:28:22 +0000, Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> said:
>> >
>> >> I haven't seen anyone in this thread claim the problem is
>> >> insurmountable; what we *are* saying is that exceedingly long subjects
>> >> are inconvenient for those reading such posts.
>> >
>> > Agreed.
>> > Sometimes it might just be a Usenet newcomer who needs help and you can
>> > give him the benefit of doubt and provide the information requested.
>> > However, this time it is "Ant" who has been posting to this NG since at
>> > least 2007 with the same long narative subject lines. It is time he
>> > learned that his actions are a PIA.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I haven't seen any indication from "Ant" that he
>> understands or cares about this issue. : /
>
> In that case his posts will get ignored. Simples.
Indeed. I've got a filter demoting posts with subjects longer than 75
characters.
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.
JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-12 04:56 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <slrnld4830.12iv.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #54586 |
In message <2014011115124598603-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> On 2014-01-11 23:10:22 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> said:
>> In article <2014011113571021872-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,
>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2014-01-11 15:50:01 +0000, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> said:
>>>
>>> > In article <slrnld1sgu.144.g.kreme@amelia.local>,
>>> > Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>> >> I didn't say it doesn't show it.
>>> > > That seemed to be the implication. Does it show it at the bottom, so you
>>> > have to scroll to see it? Weird.
>>>
>>> With Unison, hovering the cursor on the subject field will reveal the
>>> full content of the subject line. No scrolling involved.
>>
>> How unbelievably irritating.
> Yup!
> ...but not unsurmountable.
Reading the subject is usually way more than I am willing to do. If the
content is not clear from the body, I move on.
--
I draw the line at 7 unreturned phone calls.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-01-12 05:16 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject... |
| Message-ID | <bjemp6Fb0mgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #54610 |
On 2014-01-12, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > > Reading the subject is usually way more than I am willing to do. If the > content is not clear from the body, I move on. Huh? Your statment doesn't make much sense to me. You act as if you can read a message without seeing the subject, which is certainly not the case if you are using slrn, since slrn (like most news clients) display a list of message subjects before you are allowed to see the bodies. Now, you may choose to ignore the subject, but you can't unsee it once you've seen it, and something tells me, whether you admit to it or not, that you don't read every single message that is posted in every news group without deciding first, based on the subjects, whether you want to read them or not. Or were you trying to say something different? -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web