Our Worst Nightmare?

[alank]

Pick One :

1 - Avgas goes to $10
2 - User Fees
3 - Mxsmanic gets a AOPA membership (get a free hat), a pilots book (not a
simulated one), and finally, a "drive" in an actual airplane with an
instructor.......

[Steve Foley]

"alank" > wrote in message
...
> Pick One :
>
> 1 - Avgas goes to $10

That's my pick

> 2 - User Fees

I'd never ask for flight following again.

> 3 - Mxsmanic gets a AOPA membership (get a free hat), a pilots book (not a
> simulated one), and finally, a "drive" in an actual airplane with an
> instructor.......

The instructor states: "Here's one area where Microsoft does not accurately
simulate real flight", as he throws him out at 5000'

[Kev]

alank wrote:
> 1 - Avgas goes to $10
> 2 - User Fees
> 3 - Mxsmanic gets a AOPA membership (get a free hat), a pilots book (not a
> simulated one), and finally, a "drive" in an actual airplane with an instructor.......

I'd pick:

4 - Anonymous immature types like you continue to spam the group with
your strange teenager-like obsession over Mxsmanic.

But at least you didn't lazily top-post a hundred lines of postings
with a one-liner attempt at a joke, like a few infamous people here do.
Yet.

[PPSEL-student]

So what is wrong with top posting???


"Kev" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> alank wrote:
> > 1 - Avgas goes to $10
> > 2 - User Fees
> > 3 - Mxsmanic gets a AOPA membership (get a free hat), a pilots book (not
a
> > simulated one), and finally, a "drive" in an actual airplane with an
instructor.......
>
> I'd pick:
>
> 4 - Anonymous immature types like you continue to spam the group with
> your strange teenager-like obsession over Mxsmanic.
>
> But at least you didn't lazily top-post a hundred lines of postings
> with a one-liner attempt at a joke, like a few infamous people here do.
> Yet.
>

[Bob Noel]

In article <TC4nh.548121$1T2.152666@pd7urf2no>, "PPSEL-student" >
wrote:

> > 4 - Anonymous immature types like you continue to spam the group with
> > your strange teenager-like obsession over Mxsmanic.
> >
> > But at least you didn't lazily top-post a hundred lines of postings
> > with a one-liner attempt at a joke, like a few infamous people here do.
> > Yet.
> >
> So what is wrong with top posting???
>

you really don't know?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Matt Whiting]

PPSEL-student wrote:
> So what is wrong with top posting???

Do you read a book from the bottom of the page to the top? We tend to
read in chronological order and it is nice to post in that order as
well. If you are going to top post and assume that folks don't need to
read what has been written previously, then just snip the entire quote
and save the bandwidth.


Matt

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Do you read a book from the bottom of the page to the top? We tend to
> read in chronological order and it is nice to post in that order as
> well. If you are going to top post and assume that folks don't need to
> read what has been written previously, then just snip the entire quote
> and save the bandwidth.


My main complaint with either type of posting is where somebody is too lazy to
trim his quotation. You end up with an archive of the entire thread attached to
the post. You also end up with a message I won't read.

If I have to scroll down to see where your answer begins, I won't.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Kingfish]

alank wrote:
> Pick One :
>
> 1 - Avgas goes to $10
> 2 - User Fees
> 3 - Mxsmanic gets a AOPA membership (get a free hat), a pilots book (not a
> simulated one), and finally, a "drive" in an actual airplane with an
> instructor.......

I can top that - substitute Skylune for #3, get Phil Boyer to fly him
in his 172 & observe the time/space continuum dissolve : )

[Skylune]

Kingfish wrote:
> alank wrote:
> > Pick One :
> >
> > 1 - Avgas goes to $10
> > 2 - User Fees
> > 3 - Mxsmanic gets a AOPA membership (get a free hat), a pilots book (not a
> > simulated one), and finally, a "drive" in an actual airplane with an
> > instructor.......
>
> I can top that - substitute Skylune for #3, get Phil Boyer to fly him
> in his 172 & observe the time/space continuum dissolve : )

Skylune responding that, having seen pictures of the Destroyer's gut, I
would be the one landing the craft solo. Wouldn't even need the
Mossberg.

[Skylune]

Skylune wrote:
> Kingfish wrote:
> > alank wrote:
> > > Pick One :
> > >
> > > 1 - Avgas goes to $10
> > > 2 - User Fees
> > > 3 - Mxsmanic gets a AOPA membership (get a free hat), a pilots book (not a
> > > simulated one), and finally, a "drive" in an actual airplane with an
> > > instructor.......
> >
> > I can top that - substitute Skylune for #3, get Phil Boyer to fly him
> > in his 172 & observe the time/space continuum dissolve : )
>
> Skylune responding that, having seen pictures of the Destroyer's gut, I
> would be the one landing the craft solo. Wouldn't even need the
> Mossberg.

Just to be cautious, however, I'd bring along a good friend who would
wait on the ground until I got back safely. He looks something like
this (I own a smaller version of the same t-shirt):

http://www.thoseshirts.com/atf.html

;-)

[John T]

PPSEL-student wrote:
>
> So what is wrong with top posting???

http://www.html-faq.com/etiquette/?toppost

Top-posting became a larger problem when Outlook Express (as you used to
post this) was released. It does not have an option to bottom-post
automatically and USENET newbies didn't know any better.

I recommend installing OE-QuoteFix to resolve this discrepancy:
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[Gig 601XL Builder]

John T wrote:
> PPSEL-student wrote:
>>
>> So what is wrong with top posting???
>
> http://www.html-faq.com/etiquette/?toppost
>
> Top-posting became a larger problem when Outlook Express (as you used
> to post this) was released. It does not have an option to bottom-post
> automatically and USENET newbies didn't know any better.
>
> I recommend installing OE-QuoteFix to resolve this discrepancy:
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/


Well. That's kinda cool. This is my first message using Quote-Fix.

[Montblack]

(John T wrote)
> Top-posting became a larger problem when Outlook Express (as you used
> to post this) was released. It does not have an option to bottom-post
> automatically and USENET newbies didn't know any better.
>
> I recommend installing OE-QuoteFix to resolve this discrepancy:
> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/


VERY COOL!

I just installed it.

Only issue: Posted links don't show up blue anymore - they do in the quoted
material, but not when I'm seeing a post for the first time. They're still
underlined and they still work ...I just miss the pretty blue links, that's
all.


Montblack

[Andrew Sarangan]

If you are using google groups via a web browser, top posting works
better because it hides the quoted text and presents an option to
expand the hidden text. Bottom posting displays the entire message
with the quoted text.

[Montblack]

(PPSEL-student wrote:)
> So what is wrong with top posting???


You're jumping the gun by five months.

June is Top-Posting Month at rec.aviation.*


Montblack
"June, June, June
Just because it's June, June, June!"

[Peter Duniho]

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> If you are using google groups via a web browser, top posting works
> better because it hides the quoted text and presents an option to
> expand the hidden text. Bottom posting displays the entire message
> with the quoted text.

Well, for better or for worse (mostly for better, IMHO) most people aren't
using Google Groups via a web browser to read the newsgroups. There is
absolutely no reason for people to conform their posting method to
accomodate Google's poor sense of how Usenet should look.

And of course, if people would *trim* long quotes, it wouldn't be an issue
for Google to display the entire message with the quoted text, and in fact
it would be the way everyone would want to read their Usenet messages, so
they know what the heck someone is responding to, rather than just reading
the entire multi-paragraph post being reposted.

Pete

[Tom Conner]

Montblack wrote:
> (John T wrote)
>> Top-posting became a larger problem when Outlook Express (as you used
>> to post this) was released. It does not have an option to bottom-post
>> automatically and USENET newbies didn't know any better.
>>
>> I recommend installing OE-QuoteFix to resolve this discrepancy:
>> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
>
>
> VERY COOL!
>
> I just installed it.
>
> Only issue: Posted links don't show up blue anymore - they do in the
> quoted material, but not when I'm seeing a post for the first time.
> They're still underlined and they still work ...I just miss the
> pretty blue links, that's all.
>

Same here. I have to admit I hated the way OE formatted Usenet replies.
Now, if this thing really works, and combined with yProxy from Brawny Lads,
www.brawnylads.com, for viewing yEncoded binaries, OE is usable.

Why in the world the great MS cannot incorporate these two technologies is
beyond me. It is as if MS goes out of their way to irritate people. I bet
they also top-post.

[Kingfish]

Skylune wrote:
> > Skylune responding that, having seen pictures of the Destroyer's gut, I
> > would be the one landing the craft solo. Wouldn't even need the
> > Mossberg.
>
> Just to be cautious, however, I'd bring along a good friend who would
> wait on the ground until I got back safely. He looks something like
> this (I own a smaller version of the same t-shirt):
>

Funny shirts. Where ya been? Warm weather flush you out of hibernation?

[John T]

"Montblack" > wrote in message

>
> Only issue: Posted links don't show up blue anymore...

Dunno what's different, but links do appear blue and underlined for me.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Tom Conner wrote:
> Montblack wrote:
>> (John T wrote)
>>> Top-posting became a larger problem when Outlook Express (as you
>>> used to post this) was released. It does not have an option to
>>> bottom-post automatically and USENET newbies didn't know any better.
>>>
>>> I recommend installing OE-QuoteFix to resolve this discrepancy:
>>> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
>>
>>
>> VERY COOL!
>>
>> I just installed it.
>>
>> Only issue: Posted links don't show up blue anymore - they do in the
>> quoted material, but not when I'm seeing a post for the first time.
>> They're still underlined and they still work ...I just miss the
>> pretty blue links, that's all.
>>
>
> Same here. I have to admit I hated the way OE formatted Usenet
> replies. Now, if this thing really works, and combined with yProxy
> from Brawny Lads, www.brawnylads.com, for viewing yEncoded binaries,
> OE is usable.
>
> Why in the world the great MS cannot incorporate these two
> technologies is beyond me. It is as if MS goes out of their way to
> irritate people. I bet they also top-post.

All the links work for me.

[Matt Whiting]

John T wrote:

> PPSEL-student wrote:
>
>>So what is wrong with top posting???
>
>
> http://www.html-faq.com/etiquette/?toppost
>
> Top-posting became a larger problem when Outlook Express (as you used to
> post this) was released. It does not have an option to bottom-post
> automatically and USENET newbies didn't know any better.

You do raise a good point about top posting. It does provide a quick
way to know who the newbies are! :-)

Matt

[Stefan]

Gig 601XL Builder schrieb:

[a lot of text deleted]

> All the links work for me.

Now as the next step you should learn to delete unneeded quotes.

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote:

> My main complaint with either type of posting is where somebody is too lazy
> to
> trim his quotation.

As much as I despise top-posting, I agree that failure to trim is worse.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[mike regish]

Bottom posting sux.

mike

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
news:ihatessppaamm->> So what is wrong with top posting???
>>
>
> you really don't know?
>
> --
> Bob Noel
> Looking for a sig the
> lawyers will hate
>

[mike regish]

Loads of bandwidth wasted with text. (sheesh) If you can't surmise a post at
a glance, you're too dumb to be posting to begin with.

mike

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> PPSEL-student wrote:
>> So what is wrong with top posting???
>
> Do you read a book from the bottom of the page to the top? We tend to
> read in chronological order and it is nice to post in that order as well.
> If you are going to top post and assume that folks don't need to read what
> has been written previously, then just snip the entire quote and save the
> bandwidth.
>
>
> Matt

[Tom Conner]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> "Mortimer Schnerd, RN" <mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> My main complaint with either type of posting is where somebody is
>> too lazy to trim his quotation.
>
> As much as I despise top-posting, I agree that failure to trim is
> worse.

True, but then there are those who delete everything, and then post a reply.
So, anyone who has a newsreader that "hides" previously read posts is left
wondering what in the hades the post is referring to.

[mike regish]

I hate having to scroll to the bottom to get to the answer. And I have NEVER
(let me repeat that for you lesser beings) NEVER had a problem knowing what
the post was a response to.

mike

"John T" > wrote in message
m...
>
> Top-posting became a larger problem when Outlook Express (as you used to
> post this) was released. It does not have an option to bottom-post
> automatically and USENET newbies didn't know any better.
>
>

[mike regish]

Twit.

mike

P.S. Could you figure out what the response was to, or does your head get
all hurty having to read the whole bottom part before you read the top.


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>
> You do raise a good point about top posting. It does provide a quick way
> to know who the newbies are! :-)
>
> Matt

[Peter Duniho]

"Tom Conner" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> True, but then there are those who delete everything, and then post a
> reply.
> So, anyone who has a newsreader that "hides" previously read posts is left
> wondering what in the hades the post is referring to.

And for that matter, even those using newsreader settings that preserve the
previous message may still be in the dark as to what the post is referring
to. Between people replying to the wrong post and people replying to a post
that has several points without clarifying which point they are responding
to, lack of quotes can cause a great deal of difficulty understanding a post
for lots of people, whether they have the previous message in view or not.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"mike regish" > wrote in message
. ..
> Loads of bandwidth wasted with text. (sheesh) If you can't surmise a post
> at a glance, you're too dumb to be posting to begin with.

I suppose the same could be said of someone who can't be bothered to delete
text that was quoted for no good reason. Especially if your argument hinges
on wasted bandwidth (which frankly, is not really the issue here).

See your previous post for an example of what I mean.

[Peter Duniho]

"mike regish" > wrote in message
. ..
>I hate having to scroll to the bottom to get to the answer.

When a response includes properly trimmed quotes, the amount of additional
scrolling is insignificant.

> And I have NEVER (let me repeat that for you lesser beings) NEVER had a
> problem knowing what the post was a response to.

Then why do you quote the previous post at all? Personally, I think it's
more likely that you do have a problem sometimes knowing what the post was a
response to, but that you simply don't realize it. You just *think* your
assumption is correct, when it turns out not to be.

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

mike regish > wrote:
> Loads of bandwidth wasted with text. (sheesh) If you can't surmise a post at
> a glance, you're too dumb to be posting to begin with.
>
> mike

Yet if you top post, you're too stupid to realize that you've
violated RFC 1855[1], which is a Netiquette guideline that states the
following:

If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure
readers understand when they start to read your response.

It also goes on to say the following about not editing out
irrelevant text:

When replying to a message, include enough original material to be
understood but no more. It is extremely bad form to simply reply to a
message by including all the previous message: edit out all the
irrelevant material.


Pot. Kettle. Black. Check yourself and RTFM, Mike.

BL.

[1]http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD4DBQFFnaDzyBkZmuMZ8L8RAngvAJ9O7tm6yPTOHGULPJDSFP zC+XFWbQCY/kM8
Hw1i9lC9L8nBzioCGCawQA==
=uKsz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[John T]

"mike regish" > wrote in message

>
> I hate having to scroll to the bottom to get to the answer. And I
> have NEVER (let me repeat that for you lesser beings) NEVER had a
> problem knowing what the post was a response to.

Let me know how far down you had to scroll to see my response to either you
or PPSEL-student.

Regardless, it's amusing to find the occasional quixotic quest to change the
rules of the 'Net. :)

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________

[Matt Whiting]

John T wrote:

> "mike regish" > wrote in message
>
>
>>I hate having to scroll to the bottom to get to the answer. And I
>>have NEVER (let me repeat that for you lesser beings) NEVER had a
>>problem knowing what the post was a response to.
>
>
> Let me know how far down you had to scroll to see my response to either you
> or PPSEL-student.
>
> Regardless, it's amusing to find the occasional quixotic quest to change the
> rules of the 'Net. :)
>

Yes, but thankfully we have twit filters to handle these modern day
Dons. :-)


Matt

[mike regish]

You mean my snipped post?

WTF.

mike

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
>
> I suppose the same could be said of someone who can't be bothered to
> delete text that was quoted for no good reason. Especially if your
> argument hinges on wasted bandwidth (which frankly, is not really the
> issue here).
>
> See your previous post for an example of what I mean.
>

[mike regish]

Nope. Don't think so.

mike

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
>
> Then why do you quote the previous post at all? Personally, I think it's
> more likely that you do have a problem sometimes knowing what the post was
> a response to, but that you simply don't realize it. You just *think*
> your assumption is correct, when it turns out not to be.
>

[mike regish]

Watta maroon.

mike

"A Guy Called Tyketto" > wrote in message
et...
>
> Yet if you top post, you're too stupid to realize that you've
> violated RFC 1855[1], which is a Netiquette guideline that states the
> following:

[mike regish]

And I didn't even have to read what you were responding to.

mike

"John T" > wrote in message
m...

> Let me know how far down you had to scroll to see my response to either
> you or PPSEL-student.
>
> Regardless, it's amusing to find the occasional quixotic quest to change
> the rules of the 'Net. :)
>
> --
> John T
> http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
> Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
> ____________________
>

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

mike regish > wrote:
> Watta maroon.
>
> mike

Yet you have no proof to refute my claim. So you resort to
sledging. Typical.

One post away from my killfile. Do keep it up.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFneY/yBkZmuMZ8L8RArUFAJ9E29URx9izo7jtO06M/jzaRlmAGgCgt5g8
Ru3qLY3FG4wEYLgCqYntQeI=
=jGja
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[mike regish]

And you have no proof OF your claim.

Killfile me, maroon.

mike

"A Guy Called Tyketto" > wrote in message
...
>
> Yet you have no proof to refute my claim. So you resort to
> sledging. Typical.
>
> One post away from my killfile. Do keep it up.
>
> BL.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Stefan wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder schrieb:
>
> [a lot of text deleted]
>
>> All the links work for me.
>
> Now as the next step you should learn to delete unneeded quotes.

Well in this case they were not really unneeded. It was somewhat of a test
to see if they carried over to the my reply as well.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Tom Conner wrote:
> to.

I know, I hate that.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> that.


Me too.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Skylune]

Kingfish wrote:
> Skylune wrote:
> > > Skylune responding that, having seen pictures of the Destroyer's gut, I
> > > would be the one landing the craft solo. Wouldn't even need the
> > > Mossberg.
> >
> > Just to be cautious, however, I'd bring along a good friend who would
> > wait on the ground until I got back safely. He looks something like
> > this (I own a smaller version of the same t-shirt):
> >
>
> Funny shirts. Where ya been? Warm weather flush you out of hibernation?

I promised last year to stop posting here, but I felt compelled to jump
in when my nom de guerre was mentioned. ;-)

Odd thing is that I have not been flying since then: weather did not
cooperate the last two times. I won't fly in marginal weather
conditions, even if my pilot friend insists its safe.

[Kingfish]

Skylune wrote:
>
> Odd thing is that I have not been flying since then: weather did not
> cooperate the last two times. I won't fly in marginal weather
> conditions, even if my pilot friend insists its safe.

Understandable. I won't fly VFR in marginal conditions either. Then
again, if the purpose is joyriding/sight-seeing, putzing around in low
vis or clouds is counterproductive. I am curious as to how "marginal"
the weather was that your pal was insisting as safe?

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

mike regish > wrote:
> And you have no proof OF your claim.
>
> Killfile me, maroon.


Actually, I do.

RFC1855, at http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html.

Section 3.1.1, 10th bullet. It states:

If you are sending a reply to a message or a posting be sure you
summarize the original at the top of the message, or include just
enough text of the original to give a context. This will make sure
readers understand when they start to read your response. Since
NetNews, especially, is proliferated by distributing the postings from
one host to another, it is possible to see a response to a message
before seeing the original. Giving context helps everyone. But do not
include the entire original!

Consider yourself pwned.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFnpmDyBkZmuMZ8L8RAuV1AJ9bOyO2cge4pfA3SimVr8 bVw8wWvwCeNGys
KZPlmCvSdtj6FKJzf5txZUY=
=+rAD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[mike regish]

What an ass.

Have me arrested, dip****.

mike

"A Guy Called Tyketto" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Actually, I do.
>
> RFC1855, at http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html.
>
> Section 3.1.1, 10th bullet. It states:

[Dave[_3_]]

Agreed... One of my frustrations as well... :(

Dave


On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 19:27:58 -0500, "mike regish" >
wrote:

>Bottom posting sux.
>
>mike
>
>"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
>news:ihatessppaamm->> So what is wrong with top posting???
>>>
>>
>> you really don't know?
>>
>> --
>> Bob Noel
>> Looking for a sig the
>> lawyers will hate
>>
>

[Danny Deger]

You have my permission to top post all you want to. It doesn't bother me a
bit.

Danny Deger


"mike regish" > wrote in message
. ..
> What an ass.
>
> Have me arrested, dip****.
>
> mike
>
> "A Guy Called Tyketto" > wrote in message
> om...
>>
>> Actually, I do.
>>
>> RFC1855, at http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html.
>>
>> Section 3.1.1, 10th bullet. It states:
>
>

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

mike regish > wrote:
> What an ass.
>
> Have me arrested, dip****.
>
> mike

Once again, with the insults. You must do that quite a lot when
you bend over and take it, don't you? Ahh well.. Do keep it up. You me
some love!

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFnuddyBkZmuMZ8L8RApLdAJ48HjcVm77ylctHGnc0y7 msFrU/xgCg6L7e
gbdKI2poEI/2iMkKIWidR/0=
=NS0h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Al Borowski]

"A Guy Called Tyketto" > wrote

> Yet if you top post, you're too stupid to realize that you've
> violated RFC 1855[1],
[...]

I'm sure the RFC's state you should have a valid reply-to address as
well.

Cheers,

Al

[Stefan]

Al Borowski schrieb:

> "A Guy Called Tyketto" > wrote

> I'm sure the RFC's state you should have a valid reply-to address as
> well.

Actually, no. There's an RFC (forgot the number) which explicitely
recommends to add the fake domain .invalid when posting to Usenet.

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stefan > wrote:
> Al Borowski schrieb:
>
>> "A Guy Called Tyketto" > wrote
>
>> I'm sure the RFC's state you should have a valid reply-to address as
>> well.
>
> Actually, no. There's an RFC (forgot the number) which explicitely
> recommends to add the fake domain .invalid when posting to Usenet.

You're right. There is. RFC 2606. It also handles testing for
reverse top level DNS names.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFopocyBkZmuMZ8L8RAnMdAJ9ttgWUNMp/00UhaNbzNnHcbUC7vwCbBpF8
ddxU1vz6dH8TdlqdSxmfOEc=
=OJUV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

A Guy Called Tyketto wrote:
>
> You're right. There is. RFC 2606. It also handles testing for
> reverse top level DNS names.
>
> BL.
> - --
> Brad Littlejohn | Email:
> Unix Systems Administrator, |
> Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
> PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFFopocyBkZmuMZ8L8RAnMdAJ9ttgWUNMp/00UhaNbzNnHcbUC7vwCbBpF8
> ddxU1vz6dH8TdlqdSxmfOEc=
> =OJUV
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Is there an RFC for 1980's style sigs that are 10 times as long as the
post? <G>

[Stefan]

B A R R Y schrieb:

> Is there an RFC for 1980's style sigs that are 10 times as long as the
> post? <G>

:-)))

This is by far the best joke I've read in this group. Thanks.

[A Guy Called Tyketto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stefan > wrote:
> B A R R Y schrieb:
>
>> Is there an RFC for 1980's style sigs that are 10 times as long as the
>> post? <G>
>
> :-)))
>
> This is by far the best joke I've read in this group. Thanks.

It would be longer, but I used up my last case of Aqua Net 3
days ago. ;)

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! :) | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFotdpyBkZmuMZ8L8RAtibAKDLjOprfUE8b25dPQNigZ diy+l6/wCguSA8
HGJq0heLGF1jf0Oas/36fZY=
=lVmd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Roger[_4_]]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:13:43 +0100, Stefan >
wrote:

Some groups want top, some want bottom, I prefer interspersed except
when top of bottom is more appropriate.

>B A R R Y schrieb:
>
>> Is there an RFC for 1980's style sigs that are 10 times as long as the
>> post? <G>
>
>:-)))
>
>This is by far the best joke I've read in this group. Thanks.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com