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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #54360 > unrolled thread

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?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  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 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

#54645 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

In message <bjemp6Fb0mgU1@mid.individual.net> 
  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> 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.

As I explained up thread I generally just start reading the first
message and move on to the next until the end. I don't look at the
subjects first.

> 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. 

Again, as I said previously, the csm* hierarchy gets few enough posts and
I have good enough filters that yes, I start at the first and read to
the end. If a thread I am reading gets especially dull, then I may mark
it read. But I'm still not paying the slightest attention to the
subjects.

-- 
But just because you've seen me on your TV Doesn't mean I'm any more
enlightened than you

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54660 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

On 2014-01-12, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <bjemp6Fb0mgU1@mid.individual.net> 
>   Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> As I explained up thread I generally just start reading the first
> message and move on to the next until the end. I don't look at the
> subjects first.
>
>> 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. 
>
> Again, as I said previously, the csm* hierarchy gets few enough posts and
> I have good enough filters that yes, I start at the first and read to
> the end. If a thread I am reading gets especially dull, then I may mark
> it read. But I'm still not paying the slightest attention to the
> subjects.

Ok. While that's great for you, the rest of us still care about the
length of subjects. : )

-- 
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]

#54680 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

In article <bjgi05FnaunU3@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2014-01-12, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> > In message <bjemp6Fb0mgU1@mid.individual.net> 
> >   Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> >> 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.
> >
> > As I explained up thread I generally just start reading the first
> > message and move on to the next until the end. I don't look at the
> > subjects first.
> >
> >> 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. 
> >
> > Again, as I said previously, the csm* hierarchy gets few enough posts and
> > I have good enough filters that yes, I start at the first and read to
> > the end. If a thread I am reading gets especially dull, then I may mark
> > it read. But I'm still not paying the slightest attention to the
> > subjects.
> 
> Ok. While that's great for you, the rest of us still care about the
> length of subjects. : )

I thought he was on your side, agreeing that the important information 
should be in the post, not the subject. He wasn't saying that the length 
of the subject is unimportant because he doesn't read them. He's saying 
that if you put the point of your thread in the subject rather than the 
message, it makes the post unintelligible.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54681 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

In article <barmar-D5D946.22282212012014@news.eternal-september.org>,
 Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> I thought he was on your side, agreeing that the important information 
> should be in the post, not the subject. He wasn't saying that the length 
> of the subject is unimportant because he doesn't read them. He's saying 
> that if you put the point of your thread in the subject rather than the 
> message, it makes the post unintelligible.

Where do you get your patience from Barry? Is it genetic? Next time I 
return home, I'm going to to ask my makers to give me those mechanisms 
before returning to earth to give that twit JR a serve... I mean to 
patiently talk to the f... I mean to explain to him a few things 
calmly without rancour...

-- 
dorayme

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54685 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

On 2014-01-13, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <bjgi05FnaunU3@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-01-12, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> > In message <bjemp6Fb0mgU1@mid.individual.net> 
>> >   Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> >> 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.
>> >
>> > As I explained up thread I generally just start reading the first
>> > message and move on to the next until the end. I don't look at the
>> > subjects first.
>> >
>> >> 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. 
>> >
>> > Again, as I said previously, the csm* hierarchy gets few enough posts and
>> > I have good enough filters that yes, I start at the first and read to
>> > the end. If a thread I am reading gets especially dull, then I may mark
>> > it read. But I'm still not paying the slightest attention to the
>> > subjects.
>> 
>> Ok. While that's great for you, the rest of us still care about the
>> length of subjects. : )
>
> I thought he was on your side, agreeing that the important information 
> should be in the post, not the subject. He wasn't saying that the length 
> of the subject is unimportant because he doesn't read them. He's saying 
> that if you put the point of your thread in the subject rather than the 
> message, it makes the post unintelligible.

Perhaps so. If so, great!  : )

-- 
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]

#54690 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

In message <barmar-D5D946.22282212012014@news.eternal-september.org> 
  Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <bjgi05FnaunU3@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

>> On 2014-01-12, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> > In message <bjemp6Fb0mgU1@mid.individual.net> 
>> >   Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> >> 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.
>> >
>> > As I explained up thread I generally just start reading the first
>> > message and move on to the next until the end. I don't look at the
>> > subjects first.
>> >
>> >> 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. 
>> >
>> > Again, as I said previously, the csm* hierarchy gets few enough posts and
>> > I have good enough filters that yes, I start at the first and read to
>> > the end. If a thread I am reading gets especially dull, then I may mark
>> > it read. But I'm still not paying the slightest attention to the
>> > subjects.
>> 
>> Ok. While that's great for you, the rest of us still care about the
>> length of subjects. : )

> I thought he was on your side, agreeing that the important information 
> should be in the post, not the subject. He wasn't saying that the length 
> of the subject is unimportant because he doesn't read them. He's saying 
> that if you put the point of your thread in the subject rather than the 
> message, it makes the post unintelligible.

Yes.

OTOH, while others are annoyed at long subjects because they read them
(I guess, but why?) I don't care if the subject is 1000 characters, as I
am very unlikely to see any of the characters at all.

For example, I haven't a clue what the subject to this post is because
the headers have scrolled up off my vim buffer.

-- 
In my world there are people in chains and you can ride them like ponies

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54694 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

In article <slrnld6vcs.1chu.g.kreme@amelia.local>,
 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> For example, I haven't a clue what the subject to this post is because
> the headers have scrolled up off my vim buffer.

That's one of the nice things about using a GUI newsreader instead of a 
text-mode reader. MT-NW puts the subject line in the window title, and I 
suspect most others do similarly.

I remember when I used to use trn to read news 20 years ago. I'm not 
going back.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#54701 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> writes:

> That's one of the nice things about using a GUI newsreader instead of a 
> text-mode reader. MT-NW puts the subject line in the window title, and I 
> suspect most others do similarly.
> 
> I remember when I used to use trn to read news 20 years ago. I'm not 
> going back.

trn and nn are no longer being maintained -

-rwxr-xr-x  14 news  news  269347 Nov 20  2006 /usr/local/bin/nn
-rwxr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  237568 Jan 17  2000 /usr/local/bin/trn

So... Although I think it's rude to suggest anyone change newsreaders,
the age of these means they are not without some problems now.  nn in
particular has trouble with string lengths.

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]

#54727 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

On 1/13/2014 7:48 AM PT, billy@MIX.COM typed:

> trn and nn are no longer being maintained -
>
> -rwxr-xr-x  14 news  news  269347 Nov 20  2006 /usr/local/bin/nn
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  237568 Jan 17  2000 /usr/local/bin/trn
>
> So... Although I think it's rude to suggest anyone change newsreaders,
> the age of these means they are not without some problems now.  nn in
> particular has trouble with string lengths.

No forks? :( I am glad Tin is still updated, but rarely.
-- 
"If someone makes you angry, I think the thing to do is tie them down to 
the ground, cover them in honey, and then release a swarm of killer ants 
on them. That way, you can hit them over and over again and say, 'Hey! 
I'm just trying to help!' and they can't really get mad at you." --R.M. 
Weiner
    /\___/\         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]

#54700 — Re: Is it OK/safe to put an entire news article in the subject...

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> writes:

> Again, as I said previously, the csm* hierarchy gets few enough posts and
> I have good enough filters that yes, I start at the first and read to
> the end. If a thread I am reading gets especially dull, then I may mark
> it read. But I'm still not paying the slightest attention to the
> subjects.

You're not alone - I know other people who don't look at subjects, too.
There's nothing wrong with that, by the way...

Billy Y..
-- 
        sub     #'9+1   ,r0             ; convert ascii byte
	add     #9.+1   ,r0             ; to an integer
	bcc     20$                     ; not a number

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web