[Scott Dorsey]

Peter Larsen wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:

Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

Dunno about Richard, but I refuse to set my computers to daylight saving
time.

That's just fine as long as the timestamp in the header indicates this.
They all get turned into UTC time for sorting anyway.
--scott

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

[None]

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Gary Eickmeier writes:

Not using Google, but I noticed that the forum in dpreview.com has
discussion threads that have a 150 post limit. This is programmed in by
their website, so it might not be possible here in Usenet.

It is not possible on Usenet.

Of course it's possible. There are many moderated Usenet newsgroups,
and many of them are moderated by bots.A mod-bot can easily be
configured to limit the number of posts on a thread. This group will
never be moderated, bit it's certainly possible to limit post count on a
thread in a Usenet nuwsgroup.

You're just waxing moronic on yet another subject on the long list
of things you don't understand. If your head weren't so far up your
asshole you'd consider shutting your fry hole on subjects that you
know nothing about, but making a spectacle of your ignorance is
what you do. Dude.

[Nil]

On 12 Apr 2012,
(Richard Webb) wrote in rec.audio.pro:

IT is set to correct time, coordinated universal time.
IT doesn't do daylight savings time, etc. etc. IT's set
with national bureau of standards 3 times weekly.

Since the subject of your posting style has already been raised, why do
you intentionally change the subject line to remove the "" portion?
I don't like it - it makes my reader present it as a new topic.

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 4/12/2012 11:59 PM, Richard Webb wrote:
On Thu 2012-Apr-12 17:08, mcp6453 writes;
Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

IT is set to correct time, coordinated universal time.
IT doesn't do daylight savings time, etc. etc. IT's set
with national bureau of standards 3 times weekly.

So it appears that you don't want to get in sync with the rest of the world.

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

On Thu 2012-Apr-12 17:08, mcp6453 writes;
Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

IT is set to correct time, coordinated universal time.
IT doesn't do daylight savings time, etc. etc. IT's set
with national bureau of standards 3 times weekly.


Regards,
Richard
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

On Thu 2012-Apr-12 21:51, Nil writes:
IT is set to correct time, coordinated universal time.
IT doesn't do daylight savings time, etc. etc. IT's set
with national bureau of standards 3 times weekly.

Since the subject of your posting style has already been raised, why
do you intentionally change the subject line to remove the ""
portion? I don't like it - it makes my reader present it as a new
topic.

I don't see a here, the gateway might strip that before i see it. I'm posting from my dial-up bbs.

And no, I'm not going to set the clock to cdt or cst when a
lot of other functions this machine does are handled easier
in utc. I've been running machines with clocks set to utc
for over a decade now.

I think the other reader I use strips the a lot of times as well. No I'm not using outlook, and have no intention of doing so.

I post from my dial-up bbs for a lot of reasons. Better
spam filtration; better killfile capabilities, and I archive this group via the bbs, at least people who are worth
archiving. I read this group also via Albasani
unfiltered but prefer to post from this one the mail server
has much better junk filtration, and those who wish to reply by email have a better chance of reaching me via this route.

What happens to posts going through the gateway from which I participate in this group I have no control over. Last i
knew it was basically what we call abandonware. ITs
operator could provide you more insight into that, if he
deigns to do so, but it probably isn't high on his priority
list.

Regards,
Richard
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[Mxsmanic]

None writes:

Of course it's possible. There are many moderated Usenet newsgroups,
and many of them are moderated by bots.

Only a handful of Usenet newsgroups are moderated, and most of them are
deserted. Additionally, Usenet servers are individually and autonomously
managed, and server operators are not required to recognize or act upon any
specific directives, although most do (except for cancel requests, as I
recall).

[Mxsmanic]

mcp6453 writes:

So it appears that you don't want to get in sync with the rest of the world.

I see no problem with the time stamps on his posts. They are threaded
correctly in my newsreader.

[Neil Gould]

mcp6453 wrote:

Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

The time stamp problem may not be on the users' end, as the usenet server
has ultimate control over the logging and displaying of the file.

--
best regards,

Neil

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 4/13/2012 5:58 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:

Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

The time stamp problem may not be on the users' end, as the usenet server
has ultimate control over the logging and displaying of the file.

He says he has his time set the way he wants it, so I solved the problem by kill
filing him. It's too bad because he posts some good stuff.

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 4/13/2012 5:58 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:

Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

The time stamp problem may not be on the users' end, as the usenet server
has ultimate control over the logging and displaying of the file.

By the way, Richard's posts are the only ones with the problem, so either it's
his computer or his usenet provider. He's in control of his computer and his
choice of usenet providers.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

mcp6453 wrote:

On 4/13/2012 5:58 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:

Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

The time stamp problem may not be on the users' end, as the usenet
server has ultimate control over the logging and displaying of the
file.

By the way, Richard's posts are the only ones with the problem, so
either it's his computer or his usenet provider. He's in control of
his computer and his choice of usenet providers.

You are less than optimally wise. Richard is blind and uses special
software. Also he is one of the guys with a better than average vision of
what pro audio is around.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 4/13/2012 8:35 AM, Peter Larsen wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:

On 4/13/2012 5:58 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:

Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

The time stamp problem may not be on the users' end, as the usenet
server has ultimate control over the logging and displaying of the
file.

By the way, Richard's posts are the only ones with the problem, so
either it's his computer or his usenet provider. He's in control of
his computer and his choice of usenet providers.

You are less than optimally wise. Richard is blind and uses special
software. Also he is one of the guys with a better than average vision of
what pro audio is around.

I'm aware that he is blind, but that doesn't stop him from setting his clock
correctly. One of my friends is blind. He uses special software, too, and his
clock is set correctly. I do all of his computer work.

As I posted previously, I appreciate and benefit from his posts, but they screw
up the threads when he changes the subject, and they're in the wrong order in
the feed. He's happy with his arrangement, but I'm not.

The problem is solved, and we can all remain friends.

[John Williamson]

mcp6453 wrote:
On 4/13/2012 8:35 AM, Peter Larsen wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:

On 4/13/2012 5:58 AM, Neil Gould wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:
Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.
The time stamp problem may not be on the users' end, as the usenet
server has ultimate control over the logging and displaying of the
file.
By the way, Richard's posts are the only ones with the problem, so
either it's his computer or his usenet provider. He's in control of
his computer and his choice of usenet providers.
You are less than optimally wise. Richard is blind and uses special
software. Also he is one of the guys with a better than average vision of
what pro audio is around.

I'm aware that he is blind, but that doesn't stop him from setting his clock
correctly. One of my friends is blind. He uses special software, too, and his
clock is set correctly. I do all of his computer work.

As I posted previously, I appreciate and benefit from his posts, but they screw
up the threads when he changes the subject, and they're in the wrong order in
the feed. He's happy with his arrangement, but I'm not.

The problem is solved, and we can all remain friends.

IMHO, it's your loss. Richard has more of use to say than a certain
group of posters put together.

His reason for not setting his computer to local time is that it would
probably break important software that many others rely on.

As I don't experience the problem of which you speak, and you are the
only person complaining about it, then might I respectfully suggest you
contact the administrator of your news server (Giganews?) about it?

I am using Thunderbird 2.0.24 and news.individual.net, and have no
problem keeping all threads, including those where Richard or others
have changed the thread title, in the correct order.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article ,
Richard Webb wrote:
On Thu 2012-Apr-12 17:08, mcp6453 writes;
Speaking of Usenet etiquette, Richard, is there some reason why you
refuse to set your computer clock to the correct time? Posts having
incorrect times cause sorting problems in many news reader.

IT is set to correct time, coordinated universal time.
IT doesn't do daylight savings time, etc. etc. IT's set
with national bureau of standards 3 times weekly.

The header says it's EDT, though.

Date: Thu Apr 12 23:59:06 EDT 2012

So I'm thinking you need to change the time zone variable or some such thing.
--scott

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

[Neil Gould]

Richard Webb wrote:
On Fri 2012-Apr-13 09:50, Scott Dorsey writes:
The header says it's EDT, though.

Ah, that's the gateway I'm using, that's where he's located. It keeps
my time/date stamp but wrongly interprets it to local time where the
server is. ,hmmm Interesting.

[...]

Always thought it was passing strange that any net connected server
didn't just use utc as that would eliminate confusion.

Just to add a little more noise to this signal, I haven't seen anyone else
complaining about the order of threads being impacted by your or anyone
else's timestamp, so if I were bothered by such a thing, I'd consider
changing newsreaders.

--
best regards,

Neil

[Mxsmanic]

Richard Webb writes:

Always thought it was passing strange that any net connected server
didn't just use utc as that would eliminate confusion.

A server that is properly designed, configured, and administered will indeed
use UTC, and many modern operating systems (including Windows and UNIX) use
UTC internally.

On gadgets I have that put time stamps on files (video cameras, still cameras,
audio recorders) I set the time to UTC, that way I never have to worry about
daylight saving time or time zones.

[Mxsmanic]

mcp6453 writes:

He says he has his time set the way he wants it, so I solved the problem by kill
filing him. It's too bad because he posts some good stuff.

Curious priorities.

[Mxsmanic]

mcp6453 writes:

By the way, Richard's posts are the only ones with the problem, so either it's
his computer or his usenet provider. He's in control of his computer and his
choice of usenet providers.

I don't see any problem with his time stamps.

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

On Fri 2012-Apr-13 09:50, Scott Dorsey writes:
The header says it's EDT, though.

Ah, that's the gateway I'm using, that's where he's located. It keeps my time/date stamp but wrongly interprets it to
local time where the server is. ,hmmm Interesting.

And yes, to reply to JOhn Williamson, the conversion back
and forth would negatively impact other software, which
interacts with other software via the net. This is one
reason I keep this thing set to utc. NEver a confusion
issue when interacting with data from other time zones when
using this software. iT expects postings of information
regarding vessels at sea to be time/date stamped utc, which
is used not just by myself from local console but other
people residing here. Instead of confusing them with time
conversions to be compliant with it, we let the computer do
the work, and the time stamp for it is *always correct*
because it doesn't use email headers, but the time stamp in
the proper field in the body of the email post.

So, even if I were to set this thing to local time zone, the gateway would still grunge the time/date stamp. oh well

Always thought it was passing strange that any net connected server didn't just use utc as that would eliminate
confusion.

Regards,
Richard
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[Mxsmanic]

John Williamson writes:

His reason for not setting his computer to local time is that it would
probably break important software that many others rely on.

I hope he's not setting the BIOS time to UTC. Windows expects the BIOS time to
be set to local time. If it is set to UTC, and the local time zone is not GMT,
bad things can happen.

The greatest risk with this sort of thing is e-mail and scheduling
applications, such as Outlook, which can become very messed up if the time on
the local machine is not set to local time, with the correct time zone.

Nevertheless, I don't see a problem with his time stamps here.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Richard Webb wrote:

Always thought it was passing strange that any net connected server
didn't just use utc as that would eliminate confusion.

My level of information is that it ought to work provided utc offset is
correctly specified AND parsed. But not all software knows when to use a
plus-sign and when to use a minus-sign in specifying utc offset, there are
too many ways it can to wrong for it to be worth worrying about.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

Regards,
Richard
Remove .my.foot for email
via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

On Fri 2012-Apr-13 17:17, Peter Larsen writes:

Always thought it was passing strange that any net connected server
didn't just use utc as that would eliminate confusion.

My level of information is that it ought to work provided utc offset
is correctly specified AND parsed. But not all software knows when
to use a plus-sign and when to use a minus-sign in specifying utc
"L offset, there are too many ways it can to wrong for it to be worth
worrying about.

YEah I see threads out of order all the time via my otehr
method of reading this group, but it never concerned me too
much. SOmetimes it helps get through threads of moderate
interest quicker in fact g.

Since you're somewhat familiar Peter, this is a fidonet
technology network to usenet gateway. I'm trying one
version of a control line that's supposed to convey proper
information so that timestamps are interpreted and conveyed
correctly, but the version I'm using is a 2003 FIdonet
standards document's implementation.

I've also a query in to the operator of the gateway as to
whether it understands and acts upon the older standard, but weekends are his major work shifts, so might not hear until
early next week, as he might have to dig deep to find out
himself. But for those who were moaning about it, I'm
researching a fix.

If this one shows a UTC time stamp then we've licked it.

I spent my afternoon cracking the FIdonet technical
standards docs grin.

And, btw got to agree with your
comment re reading usenet and drinking coffee. My keyboard
here gets a good coffee bath from my nose about once a week.



Regards,
Richard
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

[Steve King]

"Richard Webb" wrote in
message ...

On Fri 2012-Apr-13 17:17, Peter Larsen writes:

Always thought it was passing strange that any net connected server
didn't just use utc as that would eliminate confusion.

My level of information is that it ought to work provided utc offset
is correctly specified AND parsed. But not all software knows when
to use a plus-sign and when to use a minus-sign in specifying utc
"L offset, there are too many ways it can to wrong for it to be worth
worrying about.

YEah I see threads out of order all the time via my otehr
method of reading this group, but it never concerned me too
much. SOmetimes it helps get through threads of moderate
interest quicker in fact g.

Since you're somewhat familiar Peter, this is a fidonet
technology network to usenet gateway. I'm trying one
version of a control line that's supposed to convey proper
information so that timestamps are interpreted and conveyed
correctly, but the version I'm using is a 2003 FIdonet
standards document's implementation.

I've also a query in to the operator of the gateway as to
whether it understands and acts upon the older standard, but weekends are
his major work shifts, so might not hear until
early next week, as he might have to dig deep to find out
himself. But for those who were moaning about it, I'm
researching a fix.

If this one shows a UTC time stamp then we've licked it.


I'm in the Central time zone on Daylight time, -5 hrs referenced to GMT.
Properties on your post show that it was written at 11:26 PM. Details in
your post header show that it was written at 04:26 GMT. That seems right to
me. However, I don't know if my news server (Albasani) or my computer is
doing that conversion from GMT (UTC) to CDT.

Steve King

[Richard Webb[_3_]]

On Sat 2012-Apr-14 10:00, Steve King writes:

snip

YEah I see threads out of order all the time via my other
method of reading this group, but it never concerned me too
much. SOmetimes it helps get through threads of moderate
interest quicker in fact g.
I've also a query in to the operator of the gateway as to
whether it understands and acts upon the older standard, but weekends are
his major work shifts, so might not hear until
early next week, as he might have to dig deep to find out
himself. But for those who were moaning about it, I'm
researching a fix.

If this one shows a UTC time stamp then we've licked it.
I'm in the Central time zone on Daylight time, -5 hrs referenced to
GMT. Properties on your post show that it was written at 11:26 PM.
Details in your post header show that it was written at 04:26 GMT.
That seems right to me. However, I don't know if my news server
(Albasani) or my computer is doing that conversion from GMT (UTC)
to CDT.

YEp, which is strange, because my local time stamp shows
02:?? GMT, but not uploaded until about then. At least,
not to the gateway.

Closer anyway.

There are two fidonet standards for conveying time zone
information via control lines in messages, an early '90's
standard, and the 2003 standard I mentioned in snipped
portion. HE's replied that he'll research it, but gateway
is at least recognizing gmt, and think it's now using its
mosting time, which at least seems to correspond with my
posting date so it shouldn't grunge sorting as bad. So, the control line i"m embedding in the body is osmewhat
instructing software that handles my posts in transit
correctly it appears. I dont' mind if it uses gmt time when it hits the gateway, because that will usually coincide with date part of my timestamps which it otherwise does seem to
transfer across. and folks wonder why I'm an analog audio
guy.


Regards,
Richard
--
| Remove .my.foot for email
| via Waldo's Place USA Fidonet-Internet Gateway Site
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
#! rnews 4115
Path: ftn!116-901!NOT-FOR-MAIL
From: R

[geoff]

YEp, which is strange, because my local time stamp shows
02:?? GMT, but not uploaded until about then. At least,
not to the gateway.

Closer anyway.

There are two fidonet standards for conveying time zone
information via control lines in messages, an early '90's


Surely it's the SERVER that timestamps ?

geoff