http://www.audio-forum.net/

http://www.audio-forum.net/pro/

While it might be useful for some people in certain situations it seems a
lot less useful than using Google. Are they just trying to build up a site
using Usenet content so they can get advertising money or?

--
John L Rice

"John L Rice" wrote in message
...
http://www.audio-forum.net/

http://www.audio-forum.net/pro/

While it might be useful for some people in certain situations it seems a
lot less useful than using Google. Are they just trying to build up a site
using Usenet content so they can get advertising money or?

--
John L Rice





Actually, alot of sites are doing this. There is one that mirrors the Car
Audio group too, I personally consider this bad practice. The point is to
pretty much start a forum with no work involved.


Jim

"Jim" wrote...
Actually, alot of sites are doing this. There is one that mirrors the Car
Audio group too, I personally consider this bad practice. The point is to
pretty much start a forum with no work involved.

It might help people participate who can't figure how to use
Usenet directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote...
Actually, alot of sites are doing this. There is one that mirrors the Car
Audio group too, I personally consider this bad practice. The point is to
pretty much start a forum with no work involved.

It might help people participate who can't figure how to use
Usenet directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

Well, there's also the fact that your words are being posted on web sites
without your permission. Google does this, but they also allow you to remove
your posts from their archives. They also abide by the no-archive directive. I'm
wondering what happens when you request your posts be deleted from one of those
web sites.

John

In article writes:

It might help people participate who can't figure how to use
Usenet directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

Definitely not a good thing. I'm getting more e-mail that starts out
"I saw your post on . . . . . (someplace I've never posted) and maybe
you can help me." I've become accustomed to "I saw your post on
Google..." but this is something new.

To anyone not reading this post on the real rec.audio.pro Usenet
newsgroup, get your ass over there and get real.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:33:05 -0600, "John_LeBlanc"
wrote:


"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...
"Jim" wrote...
Actually, alot of sites are doing this. There is one that mirrors the Car
Audio group too, I personally consider this bad practice. The point is to
pretty much start a forum with no work involved.

It might help people participate who can't figure how to use
Usenet directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

Well, there's also the fact that your words are being posted on web sites
without your permission. Google does this, but they also allow you to remove
your posts from their archives. They also abide by the no-archive directive. I'm
wondering what happens when you request your posts be deleted from one of those
web sites.

Probably what happens is a bit of demonic laughter (add reverb to
taste, over-the-top is okay here) just before they delete your email.
If they have time, more laughter after they delete it as well.

Here's a similar site, ISTR we've discussed it before, it likely
has the very same soundtrack:

http://talkaboutaudio.com/

John

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

Here's a similar site, ISTR we've discussed it before, it likely
has the very same soundtrack:

http://talkaboutaudio.com/

I've just registered, it was easier than I thought, just nickname and
email address, then it emails you your password, though it didn't take the
email address shown, apparently it has a database of addresses already
posted to Usenet and you can't use any of those. I used a different one
(that also gets to me), then did the thing where it allows you to mung
("modify public email") your posting address.


And no, in case you're wondering, this is NOT a test message, it's a
message in which I'm informing RAP readers about this service. ;-)

Hmm, it only has "Submit Message" and "Reset" buttons, no "Preview"
button. What if I make a typo...

[Fletcher]

Originally Posted by Richard Crowley

It might help people participate who can't figure how to use Usenet directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years... hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

I bumped into a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back to rec.audio.pro... is this a good thing? ...or a bad thing? I'm not sure... but here I am particpating on r.a.p for the first time in a few years.

http://www.audiobanter.com/showthread.php?t=52544

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 13:53:00 +0000, Fletcher
wrote:


Richard Crowley Wrote:
It might help people participate who can't figure how to use Usenet
directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

I bumped into a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back to
rec.audio.pro... is this a good thing? ...or a bad thing? I'm not
sure... but here I am particpating on r.a.p for the first time in a few
years.

http://www.audiobanter.com/showthread.php?t=52544

Welcome back,Fletcher.It just isnt the same unless we get to se ya
tell someone to go F their mother on occasion ! Adds a little
character to the group.
peace
Randall

John_LeBlanc wrote:
Well, there's also the fact that your words are being posted on web
sites
without your permission. Google does this, but they also allow you to
remove
your posts from their archives. They also abide by the no-archive
directive. I'm
wondering what happens when you request your posts be deleted from
one of those
web sites.


I'm not so sure I like the fact that you can request your posts be
archived. Part of the appeal of Usenet discourse (for me) is
accountability; stupid folks are forever punished by an eternal
archived reminder of their stupidity!

In article writes:

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

I bumped into a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back to
rec.audio.pro... is this a good thing? ...


For you, I'll make an exception - If it gets you back into the fray,
it's a good thing.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Buster Mudd" wrote in message
oups.com...

I'm not so sure I like the fact that you can request your posts be
archived. Part of the appeal of Usenet discourse (for me) is
accountability; stupid folks are forever punished by an eternal
archived reminder of their stupidity!

Well, no-archive has been part of Usenet for quite a while, but I'm with you on
this. But I'd go a step further and suggest people should be using their real
names when posting, too. But back here in the real world...

So far as I know, posting to Usenet is not deemed putting something in the
public domain. You have to do that explicitly. What you write is yours and
covered by copyright.

There is a distinction to be made, though: providing transitive, temporary web
access to Usenet, and maintaining an archive. The former, in my opinion, is just
another color of Usenet. You post to Usenet, you expect other machines to play
the store-and-forward game until messages expire. (Expiration is another matter.
My news service has some 200,000 RAP posts going back nearly a year still ready
to download as though they were posted yesterday.) The latter -- archiving -- on
the other hand, is something altogether different. Add in commercial gain and
that's yet another layer.

While Google -- and Deja before them -- used Usenet archives for commercial
purposes, they were very clear that you may remove anything you yourself have
posted. Now, removing follow-ups that quote what you wrote is between you and
the guy(s) who quoted you.

Given the climate over the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and NET act, my guess
is these independent web sites would do well to happily honor removal requests
on any archived material. DMCA is a big, long, heavy stick. I can't imagine any
of those sites sell enough banner ads to make a challenge worth the trouble.

John

Great to see you back, Fletcher!


Fletcher wrote:
Richard Crowley Wrote:
It might help people participate who can't figure how to use Usenet
directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

I bumped into a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back to
rec.audio.pro... is this a good thing? ...or a bad thing? I'm not
sure... but here I am particpating on r.a.p for the first time in a
few
years.

http://www.audiobanter.com/showthread.php?t=52544


--
Fletcher

On 11 Mar 2005 15:42:58 -0500, (Mike Rivers)
wrote:


In article writes:

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

I bumped into a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back to
rec.audio.pro... is this a good thing? ...


For you, I'll make an exception - If it gets you back into the fray,
it's a good thing.

Amen to that!

Al

Hi Fletcher,

Good to see you around these parts again. I tried to email you once or
twice ( and Sue to find out if the girls were selling cookies! ) but they
would always bounce. I assumed that maybe you changed your email addresses
because of spam etc.

Anyway AudioBanter appears to be set up nicer and more functional than the
one I mentioned.

FYI : If you want to use Google to hit rec.audio.pro just go to
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.pro You can browse all you
like but to reply you'll need to sign up for a user ID just like AudioBanter
etc.

--
John L Rice


"Fletcher" wrote in message
...

Richard Crowley Wrote:
It might help people participate who can't figure how to use Usenet
directly. Not sure that is a good thing. :-)

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

I bumped into a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back to
rec.audio.pro... is this a good thing? ...or a bad thing? I'm not
sure... but here I am particpating on r.a.p for the first time in a few
years.

http://www.audiobanter.com/showthread.php?t=52544


--
Fletcher

In article ,
play on wrote:

On 11 Mar 2005 15:42:58 -0500, (Mike Rivers)
wrote:


In article
writes:

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

I bumped into a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back to
rec.audio.pro... is this a good thing? ...


For you, I'll make an exception - If it gets you back into the fray,
it's a good thing.

Amen to that!

Al

Fletcher, you've been sorely missed....

Jeff C. (you probably don't know me...)

--
Anti-Spam email address in effect.
My real email should be pretty obvious to an actual human being.

Fletcher wrote:

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

You talk as if this **** is rocket surgery.

--
ha

In article
writes:

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

This is funny as **** . There was not a nanosecond of doubt in my mind
that Fletcher had left because of the signal/noise ratio on this
group. It simply was taking too much to flame every asshole who
wandered into these parts and ****ed him off.

Now it turns out he just couldn't figger out out to use Usenet.


Willie K. Yee, M.D. http://users.bestweb.net/~wkyee
Developer of Problem Knowledge Couplers for Psychiatry http://www.pkc.com
Webmaster and Guitarist for the Big Blue Big Band http://www.bigbluebigband.org

"Willie K.Yee, M.D." wrote in message
...

In article

writes:

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able
to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of
years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

This is funny as **** . There was not a nanosecond of doubt in my mind
that Fletcher had left because of the signal/noise ratio on this
group. It simply was taking too much to flame every asshole who
wandered into these parts and ****ed him off.

Now it turns out he just couldn't figger out out to use Usenet.

I think he is trolling us. I don't believe it for a moment.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 09:12:03 -0800, "Richard Crowley"
wrote:

he just couldn't figger out out to use Usenet.

I think he is trolling us. I don't believe it for a moment.


That would be just like Fletcher. Get some slightly gullible person to
make a complete asshole of himself. Wouldn't be the first time for me.

Willie K. Yee, M.D. http://users.bestweb.net/~wkyee
Developer of Problem Knowledge Couplers for Psychiatry http://www.pkc.com
Webmaster and Guitarist for the Big Blue Big Band http://www.bigbluebigband.org

Lines: 28
Message-ID:
X-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling
X-Trace: bhmkggakljkaanefdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcbogj cefclhcckccbjfalcpdfdfhdacgfjanljolglmcppjjnmgjjgh nelkageagdaenomfelohmhimpblmmdbmdmcieodlflkdjcinkb kbgoimmfac
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:14:59 EST
Organization: BellSouth Internet Group
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:14:59 GMT
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.audio.pro:1157947


On 2005-03-11 said:
Richard Crowley Wrote: It might help people participate who can't
figure how to use Usenet directly. Not sure that is a good Maybe
you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able tofigure
out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of I bumped into
a site called "audiobanter" that lead me back torec.audio.pro... is
this a good thing? ...or a bad thing?
In your case a good thing. You've been missed.

Thank God Bellsouth still offers a regular nntp access to usenet or
I'd be SOL here as well.

For most however I'd say that for folks who aren't familiar with how
to use usenet it's not a good thing.
Btw welcome back, however you interface with usenet!!!



Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



Braille: support true literacy for the blind!

Lines: 32
Message-ID:
X-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling
X-Trace: bhmkggakljkaanefdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcboaj ffddifkjbiidiodekajmggfglicjiinljolglmcppjjnmgjjgh nelkageagdaenomfelohmhimpblmahapljanclfaiknlkajlpc kgmehklioh
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:15:01 EST
Organization: BellSouth Internet Group
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:15:01 GMT
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.audio.pro:1157948


On 2005-03-11 said:
I'm not so sure I like the fact that you can request your posts be
archived. Part of the appeal of Usenet discourse (for me) is
accountability; stupid folks are forever punished by an eternal
archived reminder of their stupidity!
Well, no-archive has been part of Usenet for quite a while, but I'm
with you on this. But I'd go a step further and suggest people
should be using their real names when posting, too. But back here
in the real world... So far as I know, posting to Usenet is not
deemed putting something in the public domain. You have to do that
explicitly. What you write is yours and covered by copyright.
I'm curious how this no archive is supposed to work. I understand it
to be the dash followed by the letter x then a space then
no-archive=yes or something. SCott or one of the old timers can
correct me as I'd really like to know.

REgards,




Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



if its supposed to move but doesn't, use wd40
if it moves but shouldn't use duct tape

In article wkyeeATbestwebDOTnet writes:

That would be just like Fletcher. Get some slightly gullible person to
make a complete asshole of himself. Wouldn't be the first time for me.

Maybe someone should tell the real Fletcher that someone is doing a
pretty good job of impersonating him on this web forum version of
rec.audio.pro.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

--
John L Rice


"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1110669762k@trad...

In article wkyeeATbestwebDOTnet
writes:

That would be just like Fletcher. Get some slightly gullible person to
make a complete asshole of himself. Wouldn't be the first time for me.

Maybe someone should tell the real Fletcher that someone is doing a
pretty good job of impersonating him on this web forum version of
rec.audio.pro.




Yeah, I started thinking that myself. I'm just initially gullible.

John

Willie K.Yee, M.D. wrote:

That would be just like Fletcher. Get some slightly gullible person to
make a complete asshole of himself. Wouldn't be the first time for me.

He psyched ya, eh?

--
ha

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 03:30:23 GMT, (hank alrich)
wrote:
Willie K.Yee, M.D. wrote:
That would be just like Fletcher. Get some slightly gullible person to
make a complete asshole of himself. Wouldn't be the first time for me.

He psyched ya, eh?

--
ha

Back when I first logged on to this group, I made the presumptuous
move of emailing F saying that his writing style might put off
potential customers. He blistered my screen with a message flaming me,
my town, my ancestors, my private parts, etc. etc. etc.

I still ended up doing some business with him.


Willie K. Yee, M.D. http://users.bestweb.net/~wkyee
Developer of Problem Knowledge Couplers for Psychiatry http://www.pkc.com
Webmaster and Guitarist for the Big Blue Big Band http://www.bigbluebigband.org

Willie K.Yee, M.D. wrote:

Back when I first logged on to this group, I made the presumptuous
move of emailing F saying that his writing style might put off
potential customers. He blistered my screen with a message flaming me,
my town, my ancestors, my private parts, etc. etc. etc.


Tough to teach an old dog new tricks.

X-No-archive: yes
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:15:01 GMT, wrote:


On 2005-03-11 said:
I'm not so sure I like the fact that you can request your posts be
archived. Part of the appeal of Usenet discourse (for me) is
accountability; stupid folks are forever punished by an eternal
archived reminder of their stupidity!
Well, no-archive has been part of Usenet for quite a while, but I'm
with you on this. But I'd go a step further and suggest people
should be using their real names when posting, too. But back here
in the real world... So far as I know, posting to Usenet is not
deemed putting something in the public domain. You have to do that
explicitly. What you write is yours and covered by copyright.
I'm curious how this no archive is supposed to work. I understand it
to be the dash followed by the letter x then a space then
no-archive=yes or something. SCott or one of the old timers can
correct me as I'd really like to know.

Google documents it he
http://groups.google.com/googlegroups/help.html#prevent

In short, do what I did (as an example) in the first line of this
post.



REgards,




Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



if its supposed to move but doesn't, use wd40
if it moves but shouldn't use duct tape

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

writes:

On 2005-03-11 said:

I'm not so sure I like the fact that you can request your posts be
archived. Part of the appeal of Usenet discourse (for me) is
accountability; stupid folks are forever punished by an eternal
archived reminder of their stupidity!

Well, no-archive has been part of Usenet for quite a while, but I'm
with you on this. But I'd go a step further and suggest people
should be using their real names when posting, too. But back here
in the real world... So far as I know, posting to Usenet is not
deemed putting something in the public domain. You have to do that
explicitly. What you write is yours and covered by copyright.

I'm curious how this no archive is supposed to work. I understand
it to be the dash followed by the letter x then a space then
no-archive=yes or something. SCott or one of the old timers can
correct me as I'd really like to know.

X-any word is reserved as a `user header' that will never be RFCed. It
can be differently defined by someone else though, so you are on your
own.

The X-no-archive is *by convention* a header that indicates the post
should not be archived. Some honour it, others dummy the post to a zeroed
stub to keep references etc intact, some ignore it.

If you REALLY want to keep it out of archive, add a X-Copyright header as
well.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.

But the problem is lots of people do what I just did; quote the entire article.
And now it gets archived anyway.

The "gentleman's agreement" system that used to be part and parcel of the
Internet is not only dead and gone, but many never even knew it existed to begin
with.

John


"Ben Bradley" wrote in message
...
X-No-archive: yes
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:15:01 GMT, wrote:


On 2005-03-11 said:
I'm not so sure I like the fact that you can request your posts be
archived. Part of the appeal of Usenet discourse (for me) is
accountability; stupid folks are forever punished by an eternal
archived reminder of their stupidity!
Well, no-archive has been part of Usenet for quite a while, but I'm
with you on this. But I'd go a step further and suggest people
should be using their real names when posting, too. But back here
in the real world... So far as I know, posting to Usenet is not
deemed putting something in the public domain. You have to do that
explicitly. What you write is yours and covered by copyright.
I'm curious how this no archive is supposed to work. I understand it
to be the dash followed by the letter x then a space then
no-archive=yes or something. SCott or one of the old timers can
correct me as I'd really like to know.

Google documents it he
http://groups.google.com/googlegroups/help.html#prevent

In short, do what I did (as an example) in the first line of this
post.



REgards,




Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



if its supposed to move but doesn't, use wd40
if it moves but shouldn't use duct tape

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

Some newsreaders such as Agent (which I use) can automatically add the
x-no archive command to all your posts. You can choose do it globally,
or just for certain groups. I've been using Agent for years and it's
really a nice piece of shareware. You can demo the free version for
as long as you like to check out the interface but the advanced
functions such as kill-file, no archive, etc you have to pay for.
Well worth it IMO.

Al

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 14:15:01 GMT, wrote:


On 2005-03-11 said:
I'm not so sure I like the fact that you can request your posts be
archived. Part of the appeal of Usenet discourse (for me) is
accountability; stupid folks are forever punished by an eternal
archived reminder of their stupidity!
Well, no-archive has been part of Usenet for quite a while, but I'm
with you on this. But I'd go a step further and suggest people
should be using their real names when posting, too. But back here
in the real world... So far as I know, posting to Usenet is not
deemed putting something in the public domain. You have to do that
explicitly. What you write is yours and covered by copyright.
I'm curious how this no archive is supposed to work. I understand it
to be the dash followed by the letter x then a space then
no-archive=yes or something. SCott or one of the old timers can
correct me as I'd really like to know.

REgards,




Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



if its supposed to move but doesn't, use wd40
if it moves but shouldn't use duct tape

On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:28:47 +0800, wrote:

If you REALLY want to keep it out of archive, add a X-Copyright header as
well.

Can you give an example of that header?

Al

wrote:
writes:

I'm curious how this no archive is supposed to work.

X-any word is reserved as a `user header' that will never be RFCed. It
can be differently defined by someone else though, so you are on your
own.

The X-no-archive is *by convention* a header that indicates the post
should not be archived.

As I recall from reading RFC822 *quite* some time ago, mail headers
and news headers are supposed to have every word start with a capital
letter. So, it would be "X-No-Archive" and not "X-no-archive".

And of course it should go in the header, not the body. Hopefully
everyone's news programs are smart enough to allow you to add a custom
header automatically...

- Logan

Lines: 32
Message-ID:
X-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling
X-Trace: ofjmidbaofeaohdodbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcbohm kddhjallophehndekajmggfglicjiioflklaoogikgdpeadhfp konoianenokidpmadndknodlchpnolpepgjgjhmbnmonimchne mfnfpnnfkc
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 11:10:21 EST
Organization: BellSouth Internet Group
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 16:10:21 GMT
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.audio.pro:1158180


On 2005-03-13 said:
X-No-archive: yes

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005
Google documents it he
http://groups.google.com/googlegroups/help.html#prevent
In short, do what I did (as an example) in the first line of this
post.
That's the way I've seen it most often. NO real access to google
here, no real browser, just email usenet and ftp with the ancient
software I'm using so somebody will have to tell me if google followed
the instructions.
That will change once I've a linux box online but for now this old dos
box doesn't give me a browesr that will fight through the
advertisements.

IF it works as it's supposed to it will be helpful for a couple of
newsgroups I read and post to occasionally where I'd rather not have
my posts archived as I happen to like to rip the village idiot
locally a new one g.




Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--

On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 22:28:11 GMT, Logan Shaw
wrote:

wrote:
writes:

I'm curious how this no archive is supposed to work.

X-any word is reserved as a `user header' that will never be RFCed. It
can be differently defined by someone else though, so you are on your
own.

The X-no-archive is *by convention* a header that indicates the post
should not be archived.

As I recall from reading RFC822 *quite* some time ago, mail headers
and news headers are supposed to have every word start with a capital
letter. So, it would be "X-No-Archive" and not "X-no-archive".

Hmm, I copy-pasted the header in my earlier message from Google's
example, and it doesn't have the word archive capitalized...

And of course it should go in the header, not the body. Hopefully
everyone's news programs are smart enough to allow you to add a custom
header automatically...

Yes, but google and IIRC Deja also honored it if it's the first
line in the body, for the users who don't know how to operate their
newsreaders, or (more pertinently) if the 'newsreader' is
groups.google.com or that Audiobanter webinterface thing Flether posts
through, with which (AFAIK) you can't add a header to posts.

I can only imagine rare use for it, when I would also want to be
anonymous. I haven't wanted to be anonymous in a long while.

- Logan

-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

John_LeBlanc wrote:
But the problem is lots of people do what I just did; quote the entire article.
And now it gets archived anyway.

That's rude. Also top-posting is a bad idea.

The "gentleman's agreement" system that used to be part and parcel of the
Internet is not only dead and gone, but many never even knew it existed to begin
with.

And so what are we doing about it? SOMEBODY has to keep it alive.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Fletcher]

Originally Posted by Willie K.Yee, M.D.

[color=blue][i]

This is funny as **** . There was not a nanosecond of doubt in my mind
that Fletcher had left because of the signal/noise ratio on this
group. It simply was taking too much to flame every asshole who
wandered into these parts and ****ed him off.

Now it turns out he just couldn't figger out out to use Usenet.

It was two fold... the signal to noise thing was absolutely abysmal with they myriad of 'politico' theads bouncing around... coupled with a new internet service at the house led to the ah who needs that **** in my life approach.

BTW, John [as in Mr. Rice]... my email address hasn't changed in years... ; Sue's is: they're in the final stages of Girl Scout cookie mode... I don't think it's done yet but I have a feeling it's close. If you're jonsing [as some folks are] just email Sue and she'll get you squared away. We used to have it up on the website but the national GS office harassed Sue into pulling it off [I'd a said '**** um'... but it's her gig so down it came].

It's nice to be back... it's even nicer that the political bull**** seems to have died down a bit.

"hank alrich" wrote in message . ..
Fletcher wrote:

Maybe you're right... I'm one of the people who hasn't been able to
figure out how to use Usenet directly for the past couple of years...
hence my lack of participation in rec.audio.pro.

You talk as if this **** is rocket surgery.


He talks as if he's not the Fletcher we all remember as being able to
incinerate the entirety of Usenet with a single flaming response with
which probably simultaneously included the best overall reply to the
original question. I miss it....

DM

There is a menu in Agent newsreader that allows the no-archive command
to apply to followups.

Al

On 14 Mar 2005 08:47:03 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

John_LeBlanc wrote:
But the problem is lots of people do what I just did; quote the entire article.
And now it gets archived anyway.

That's rude. Also top-posting is a bad idea.

The "gentleman's agreement" system that used to be part and parcel of the
Internet is not only dead and gone, but many never even knew it existed to begin
with.

And so what are we doing about it? SOMEBODY has to keep it alive.
--scott

Fletcher wrote:
[color=blue][i]
Willie K.Yee, M.D. Wrote:



This is funny as **** . There was not a nanosecond of doubt in my mind
that Fletcher had left because of the signal/noise ratio on this
group. It simply was taking too much to flame every asshole who
wandered into these parts and ****ed him off.

Now it turns out he just couldn't figger out out to use Usenet.


It was two fold... the signal to noise thing was absolutely abysmal
with they myriad of 'politico' theads bouncing around... coupled with a
new internet service at the house led to the ah who needs that **** in
my life approach.

BTW, John [as in Mr. Rice]... my email address hasn't changed in
years... ; Sue's is: they're
in the final stages of Girl Scout cookie mode... I don't think it's
done yet but I have a feeling it's close. If you're jonsing [as some
folks are] just email Sue and she'll get you squared away. We used to
have it up on the website but the national GS office harassed Sue into
pulling it off [I'd a said '**** um'... but it's her gig so down it
came].

It's nice to be back... it's even nicer that the political bull****
seems to have died down a bit.


So what's with the *****? The Fletcher I remember would just let it all
hang out.