Sad Commentary on ABPA

Virtually all of the images posted on this NG are TOTALLY
USELESS due to their small size and resolution.

Usenet could be an extremely valuable historical repository
if only the posters had an inkling of knowledge about image
processing.

All images not in digital format should be scanned in at
least 600 dpi. Anything less is, at best, a ludicrous joke.

Sure, this will lead to large file sizes, but that issue is no
longer tenable, if it ever was tenable, on the contemporary
Internet.

It sickens me to think of the gigabytes of visual information
that have been totally squandered due to a lack of competence
on the part of the poster. The argument that such posts are
"better than nothing" is a feeble argument in response.

History cannot be adequately preserved with a "postage stamp"
image. All posters should educate themselves on proper digital
techniques or hire a competent consultant.

I make no apologies for my roughness. History is far too important
to be entrusted to ignoramuses.

In article , F. Russell says...

Virtually all of the images posted on this NG are TOTALLY
USELESS due to their small size and resolution.

YAWN...

Lead by example...

USENET was not meant to repository for the preservation of history.

To coin your phrase..."All users should educate themselves on proper digital
download techniques or hire a competent consultant."

....get a life





*








Usenet could be an extremely valuable historical repository
if only the posters had an inkling of knowledge about image
processing.

All images not in digital format should be scanned in at
least 600 dpi. Anything less is, at best, a ludicrous joke.

Sure, this will lead to large file sizes, but that issue is no
longer tenable, if it ever was tenable, on the contemporary
Internet.

It sickens me to think of the gigabytes of visual information
that have been totally squandered due to a lack of competence
on the part of the poster. The argument that such posts are
"better than nothing" is a feeble argument in response.

History cannot be adequately preserved with a "postage stamp"
image. All posters should educate themselves on proper digital
techniques or hire a competent consultant.

I make no apologies for my roughness. History is far too important
to be entrusted to ignoramuses.

On 17 Jul 2017 22:41:09 GMT, "F. Russell" wrote:

Virtually all of the images posted on this NG are TOTALLY
USELESS due to their small size and resolution.

Usenet could be an extremely valuable historical repository
if only the posters had an inkling of knowledge about image
processing.

All images not in digital format should be scanned in at
least 600 dpi. Anything less is, at best, a ludicrous joke.

Sure, this will lead to large file sizes, but that issue is no
longer tenable, if it ever was tenable, on the contemporary
Internet.

It sickens me to think of the gigabytes of visual information
that have been totally squandered due to a lack of competence
on the part of the poster. The argument that such posts are
"better than nothing" is a feeble argument in response.

History cannot be adequately preserved with a "postage stamp"
image. All posters should educate themselves on proper digital
techniques or hire a competent consultant.

I make no apologies for my roughness. History is far too important
to be entrusted to ignoramuses.

By definition, a scanned image comes from a source that has already
been preserved for history.

If photographers wish to essentially donate their work into the public
domain by posting full resolution originals, that is their choice,
unwise as it may be.

I don't recognize your nym as common here, much less attached to the
type of posts you describe; thus your "roughness" carries very little
weight.

In article , DAN says...

F. Russell wrote (misguided garbage)

Virtually all of the images posted on this NG are TOTALLY
USELESS due to their small size and resolution.
Especially the ones you have been posting, right?

Usenet could be an extremely valuable historical repository
No. Not a repository. Get yourself a lesson in Usenet basics.

All images not in digital format should be scanned in at least 600 dpi.
Hmm. The ones you have been posting are at which resolution ?

Anything less is, at best, a ludicrous joke.
So, contributing nothing at all makes you a ludicrous joke? At best.


It sickens me to think of the gigabytes of visual information
that have been totally squandered due to a lack of competence
What is sickening is your condescending arrogance, especially coming from an
ignorant boor.


History cannot be adequately preserved with a "postage stamp" image.
Preserve history? on a zero-quality-control, free-for-all internet forum?
Delusions of grandeur on top of total ignorance of the basics?

All posters should educate themselves
Advice which you could have heeded before posting here.


History is far too important to be entrusted to ignoramuses.
That's why it's not entrusted to you, however highly you think of yourself.

So far, you have simply shown yourself to be very ignorant about Usenet, about
History and about ways of preserving it. Arrogant and ill-mannered to boot.

_ _ _ _

Lest you'll wither away as one of the usual transient assholes polluting the
net, you are very much encouraged to start contributing. With relevant aviation
pictures and information tidbits, for instance.
We'll all love to be educated by example.


My guess is that the dumb**** is going thru Newsdawg and doesn't know how to get
his browser's images out of thumbnail mode.

Did a search for him and found him in a 'linux' programming group...constantly
railing about the evils of Microsoft. Got impression from some that they just
killfile the guy.




*

In article , not my real pseudonym
says...

On 17 Jul 2017 22:41:09 GMT, "F. Russell" wrote:

Virtually all of the images posted on this NG are TOTALLY
USELESS due to their small size and resolution.

Usenet could be an extremely valuable historical repository
if only the posters had an inkling of knowledge about image
processing.

All images not in digital format should be scanned in at
least 600 dpi. Anything less is, at best, a ludicrous joke.

Sure, this will lead to large file sizes, but that issue is no
longer tenable, if it ever was tenable, on the contemporary
Internet.

It sickens me to think of the gigabytes of visual information
that have been totally squandered due to a lack of competence
on the part of the poster. The argument that such posts are
"better than nothing" is a feeble argument in response.

History cannot be adequately preserved with a "postage stamp"
image. All posters should educate themselves on proper digital
techniques or hire a competent consultant.

I make no apologies for my roughness. History is far too important
to be entrusted to ignoramuses.

By definition, a scanned image comes from a source that has already
been preserved for history.

If photographers wish to essentially donate their work into the public
domain by posting full resolution originals, that is their choice,
unwise as it may be.

I don't recognize your nym as common here, much less attached to the
type of posts you describe; thus your "roughness" carries very little
weight.

"F. Russell" That's just ole "Fabian" Russell...well known
screamer in comp.os.linux.advocacy comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot sci.physics




*

On 17 Jul 2017 22:41:09 GMT, "F. Russell" wrote:

A load of ignorant rubbish.

I simply assumed the F was short for f*ckwit


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus