On 2023-11-15 12:30, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/11/2023 01:13, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
>> Nice!
>>
>> I didn't even cared to check his email address for validity.
>>
>> ~$ host lenovo.lan
>> Host lenovo.lan not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>>
>> What a c**t! (Yeah, that's a flame)
>
> Well, amazingly idiotic, for sure.

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6762#appendix-G

Appendix G. Private DNS Namespaces

The special treatment of names ending in ".local." has been
implemented in Macintosh computers since the days of Mac OS 9, and
continues today in Mac OS X and iOS. There are also implementations
for Microsoft Windows [B4W], Linux, and other platforms.

Some network operators setting up private internal networks
("intranets") have used unregistered top-level domains, and some may
have used the ".local" top-level domain. Using ".local" as a private
top-level domain conflicts with Multicast DNS and may cause problems
for users. Clients can be configured to send both Multicast and
Unicast DNS queries in parallel for these names, and this does allow
names to be looked up both ways, but this results in additional
network traffic and additional delays in name resolution, as well as
potentially creating user confusion when it is not clear whether any
given result was received via link-local multicast from a peer on the
same link, or from the configured unicast name server. Because of
this, we recommend against using ".local" as a private Unicast DNS
top-level domain. We do not recommend use of unregistered top-level
domains at all, but should network operators decide to do this, the
following top-level domains have been used on private internal
networks without the problems caused by trying to reuse ".local." for
this purpose:

.intranet.
.internal.
.private.
.corp.
.home.
.lan.

:-)

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:04:34 +0100
Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> Are you completely new to the Usenet?
>

yep, i find it very interesting - low bandwidth usage, vast topic
coverage, decentralized architecture, though i expected more traffic

On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:56:07 +0100
"Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> On 2023-11-14 19:09, Nuno Silva wrote:
> > On 2023-11-14, vamastah wrote:
> >> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 12:12:07 +0100
> >> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > Now, as I think others are already mentioning, there's a difference
> > between quoting everything and narrowing it down to what is
> > relevant. Perhaps (in the first block of quoted text above) I could
> > have removed Joerg's reply, but it looked to me that it helped put
> > your latest reply in context. I personally usually put "[...]" when
> > I narrow down by removing lines in the middle, but that's up to
> > you: I've seen "<snip/>" used too, and there will surely be other
> > examples. (I mean doing something like:
> >
> > On 2023-11-14, vamastah wrote:
> >
> >>> On 14.11.23 12:08, vamastah wrote:
> >>>> btw, is it better to quote the original message or not? im quite
> >>>> confused when i read netiequette and see the actual customs.
> > [...]
> >> well, i find it superfluous and sometimes even messy but let it be
> >> *eot*
> >
> > )
> >
> > (If you find it superfluous, you could try looking at news clients
> > or extensions for news clients that offer the ability to collapse
> > quoted text by default. It's possible such a feature will have
> > issues in corner cases, or with less usual quoting indicators, but
> > should work well enough most of the time? (But I don't use a
> > feature like that myself, hopefully someone else will be able to
> > give you more or better advice on this topic.))
>
> I would advise against collapsing quotes by default, unless you find
> an IA for doing it. Yes, the quoted part can be overly too large
> often, but hiding it all removes the entire context for the answer
> and may lead the reader to understand it wrongly. I have seen it
> happen.
>

thank you for all the suggestions :)

On 15.11.23 13:56, vamastah wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:04:34 +0100
> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Are you completely new to the Usenet?
>>
>
> yep, i find it very interesting - low bandwidth usage, vast topic
> coverage, decentralized architecture, though i expected more traffic

Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
usually "Forums".

--
Sent with Betterbird by a Penguin.
Simply better. www.betterbird.eu

On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> On 15.11.23 13:56, vamastah wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:04:34 +0100
>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Are you completely new to the Usenet?
>>>
>>
>> yep, i find it very interesting - low bandwidth usage, vast topic
>> coverage, decentralized architecture, though i expected more traffic
>
> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
> usually "Forums".
>
Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
1000 words'.

But its nice to have the up-to-dateness of Usenet.

Choice is good.

--
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere,
diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.”
― Groucho Marx

On 15.11.23 16:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> On 15.11.23 13:56, vamastah wrote:
>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:04:34 +0100
>>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you completely new to the Usenet?
>>>>
>>>
>>> yep, i find it very interesting - low bandwidth usage, vast topic
>>> coverage, decentralized architecture, though i expected more traffic
>>
>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>> usually "Forums".
>>
> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
> 1000 words'.

I quite often link screenshots and other things to the Usenet. For this
a hoster for the pictures is needed.

> But its nice to have the up-to-dateness of Usenet.
>
> Choice is good.

+1

--
Sent with Betterbird by a Penguin.
Simply better. www.betterbird.eu

On 2023-11-15 16:34, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> On 15.11.23 13:56, vamastah wrote:
>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:04:34 +0100
>>> Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Are you completely new to the Usenet?
>>>>
>>>
>>> yep, i find it very interesting - low bandwidth usage, vast topic
>>> coverage, decentralized architecture, though i expected more traffic
>>
>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>> usually "Forums".
>>
> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
> 1000 words'.
>
> But its nice to have the up-to-dateness of Usenet.
>
> Choice is good.

Technically, Usenet is capable of html and pictures in context. I think
I tried on a private server long ago. Not allowed, but that's a
different issue.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/14/23 15:04, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-11-14 14:27, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> On 11/13/23 19:35, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 13:56:21 -0600, candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>
>>
>>> Can't other desktop manager's panels substitute functions tint2 comes
>>> with?
>
> What are those functions?
>
> That way we might offer better help.

"Displays list of windows, time, and systray".
I had tried polybar before, but decided against it because it has no
native window list support for some reason.

>>
>> I'm going to try xfce4-panel, as per Philipp's suggestion. For some
>> reason, trying to reply to their message spits an error?
>
> Ah, I see that. The message says:
>
>   Alert
>
>   The author of this message has requested that responses be
>   sent only to the author. If you also want to reply to the
>   newsgroup, add a new row to the addressing area, choose
>   Newsgroup from the recipients list, and enter the name
>   of the newsgroup.
>
> This is because he has this header:
>
>   Followup-To: poster
>
> I find this request ridiculous, and would click "ok", remove his
> address, and write the names of the newsgroups manually (you can copy
> paste them).
>
> It is in any case impossibly to honour his request, as most posters here
> are using faked email addresses on Usenet (including you and me).

Ohh, yeah that is pretty silly.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>> usually "Forums".
>>
> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
> 1000 words'.

On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.

One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
(including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
more.

Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

In comp.os.linux.misc Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.x, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
>> I was all excited about there being a new version of Tint, my
>> favourite Tetris clone. :)
>
> https://github.com/Eli-the-Bearded/notint

Neat. I wasn't really wanting anything more from Tint actually, but
your alternate game modes but it might be fun to try out one day.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

On 2023-11-15 22:34, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>> usually "Forums".
>>>
>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>> 1000 words'.
>
> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.

It is often insert a picture that links to an external image. Ie, the
image itself is not saved in the web forum server.

Otherwise, it is an admin choice. On one forum I use, I can post photos,
but they do not appear till approved by someone.

> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
> more.
>

Hosting photos is a load on the server. Bandwidth, cpu, storage.

> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.

They are not bad per se. Actually, it is possible to link a web forum
with an nntp server. When I need help with something and the people are
on a forum, I post on the forum, no problem.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/15/23 13:34, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>> usually "Forums".
>>>
>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>> 1000 words'.
>
> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>
> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
> more.
>
> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>
Some forums are bad is more accurate.

The PCLinuxOS Forum <https://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php> is
excellent and uses a separate image hosting service. I come to Usenet
because I have many interests beside PCLinuxOS and the excellent
images shared there by several good photographers and other graphic
artists. It even publishes a Monthyly Newletter in .pdf and other
e-book formats. In posting you can do some outrageous things including
Marquees.

bliss- Dell E7730- PCLinuxOS 64- Linux 6.4.11- KDE Plasma 5.27.9

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:05:42 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> On 2023-11-15 02:07, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
>> Now here's a flame. You should mention F'up2 poster if you set
>> it. Thus I
>> ignored it. Also did you not quote. Learn to post, newbie!
>
> Followup-To: poster
>
> Thunderbird replaces "poster" with the address in "From". Maybe Emacs
> is missing a feature :-p

Gnus (running on Emacs) is warning.

But many readers do not, although abiding it. Then people wonder where
their posting ended up. Thus one should always mention a "F'up2 poster".
--
Andreas

Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2023-11-15 22:34, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>
> They are not bad per se. Actually, it is possible to link a web forum
> with an nntp server. When I need help with something and the people are
> on a forum, I post on the forum, no problem.

I do give in and post on forums too, but only while grumbling
loudly to myself. I don't actually grumble to the people there
because they're sure to say that suggesting everyone switch to
Usenet is a bad idea. However here on Usenet I can state that I
think using web forums is a bad idea, for me at least, proven by
the fact that I spend more time on Usenet even if it mainly seems
to be just reading/writing _about_ Usenet these days.

Anyway linking web forums to news servers is actually something I
asked about in news.software.nntp last month. Presumably you mean
where it's part of the forum configuration, but I'm interested in
scraping forums client-side and turning their posts into news
articles in a news spool, which could then be hosted over NNTP or
browsed directly in a news reader. From that discussion I gather
that this hasn't been done before. I'm not decided whether to write
the software for it myself or not. Keeping up with forum software
changes would make it an endless project.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _# | Note: I won't see posts made from Google Groups |

On 2023-11-16 06:52, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2023-11-15 22:34, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

....

> Anyway linking web forums to news servers is actually something I
> asked about in news.software.nntp last month. Presumably you mean
> where it's part of the forum configuration, but I'm interested in
> scraping forums client-side and turning their posts into news
> articles in a news spool, which could then be hosted over NNTP or
> browsed directly in a news reader. From that discussion I gather
> that this hasn't been done before. I'm not decided whether to write
> the software for it myself or not. Keeping up with forum software
> changes would make it an endless project.

The old openSUSE web forum was linked to a private nntp server (Novell
infraestructure). You could read or post on any of the two, and it would
be seen on both. The forum software was vbulletin, if memory serves,
with a custom made bridge to the nntp server (vBulletin USENET gateway,
I see on saved old messages).

Then the forum was migrated to another software (vbulletin is not
gratis), and then to discourse, I think. The gateway could not be
migrated, but we believe it is feasible

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>> usually "Forums".
>>>
>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>> 1000 words'.
>
> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>
> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
> more.
>
> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.

How often does a webforum support threading? That, to me, is a key
feature that is frequently (in my experience, maybe my sample size is
too small?) missing.

--
Nuno Silva

On 2023-11-16 23:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>
>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>> 1000 words'.
>>
>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>
>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>> more.
>>
>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>
> How often does a webforum support threading? That, to me, is a key
> feature that is frequently (in my experience, maybe my sample size is
> too small?) missing.

Good ones do, but in my experience it becomes very difficult to know
what posts you have read or which are new.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 16/11/2023 22:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>
>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>> 1000 words'.
>>
>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>
>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>> more.
>>
>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>
> How often does a webforum support threading?

All web forums support threading.

> That, to me, is a key
> feature that is frequently (in my experience, maybe my sample size is
> too small?) missing.
>

--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

On 17.11.23 09:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 16/11/2023 22:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
>> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>>
>>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>>> 1000 words'.
>>>
>>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>>
>>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>>> more.
>>>
>>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>>
>> How often does a webforum support threading?
>
> All web forums support threading.

That is not true. Most do not.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

On 17/11/2023 08:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> On 17.11.23 09:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 16/11/2023 22:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>>>
>>>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>>>> 1000 words'.
>>>>
>>>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>>>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>>>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>>>
>>>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>>>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>>>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>>>> more.
>>>>
>>>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>>>
>>> How often does a webforum support threading?
>>
>> All web forums support threading.
>
> That is not true. Most do not.
>
>
Without threading they would be useless

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.
-- Yogi Berra

On 17.11.23 10:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 17/11/2023 08:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>> On 17.11.23 09:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 16/11/2023 22:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>>> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>>>>> 1000 words'.
>>>>>
>>>>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>>>>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>>>>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>>>>
>>>>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>>>>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>>>>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>>>>> more.
>>>>>
>>>>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>>>>
>>>> How often does a webforum support threading?
>>>
>>> All web forums support threading.
>>
>> That is not true. Most do not.
>>
>>
> Without threading they would be useless

Perhaps for *your* brainstructure but obviously not for others.
Most forums are moderated. Subthreads with OT discussions are eliminated
or separated.

--
"Gutta cavat lapidem." (Ovid)

On 17/11/2023 11:35, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
> On 17.11.23 10:54, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 17/11/2023 08:38, Jörg Lorenz wrote:
>>> On 17.11.23 09:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 16/11/2023 22:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>>>> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>>>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>>>>>> 1000 words'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>>>>>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>>>>>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>>>>>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>>>>>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>>>>>> more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>>>>>
>>>>> How often does a webforum support threading?
>>>>
>>>> All web forums support threading.
>>>
>>> That is not true. Most do not.
>>>
>>>
>> Without threading they would be useless
>
> Perhaps for *your* brainstructure but obviously not for others.
> Most forums are moderated. Subthreads with OT discussions are eliminated
> or separated.
>

So they *are* threaded then?

--
"An intellectual is a person knowledgeable in one field who speaks out
only in others...”

Tom Wolfe

On 2023-11-17 09:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 16/11/2023 22:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
>> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>
>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>>
>>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>>> 1000 words'.
>>>
>>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>>
>>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>>> more.
>>>
>>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>>
>> How often does a webforum support threading?
>
> All web forums support threading.

I know one that doesn't :-p

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 17/11/2023 12:33, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-11-17 09:26, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 16/11/2023 22:23, Nuno Silva wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-15, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 15/11/2023 15:05, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>>>>> Usenet is from the early days of the Internet. Younger users prefer
>>>>>> usually "Forums".
>>>>>>
>>>>> Forums are also very very good, especially where a 'picture is worth
>>>>> 1000 words'.
>>>>
>>>> On most forum posts I read people just post image hosting links
>>>> like they do on Usenet. Sometimes you see that spammers have
>>>> figured out how to post visible images but the regulars haven't.
>>>>
>>>> One did change their platform to Discourse and start supporting
>>>> image hosting, but that upgrade came with lots of Javascript
>>>> (including for lazy-loading those images) that annoys me even
>>>> more.
>>>>
>>>> Forums are bad, that's why I'm here.
>>>
>>> How often does a webforum support threading?
>>
>> All web forums support threading.
>
> I know one that doesn't :-p
>
>
I am surprised. I have never found one.

--
“I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the
greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most
obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of
conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which
they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by
thread, into the fabric of their lives.”

― Leo Tolstoy

Groovy hepcat vamastah was jivin' in comp.os.linux.misc on Tue, 14 Nov
2023 10:08 pm. It's a cool scene! Dig it.

> btw, is it better to quote the original message or not? im quite
> confused when i read netiequette and see the actual customs.

Quoting can help people understand what you're talking about. Threads
aren't always so clearly defined. For example, sometimes due to
glitches or whatever, news posts go missing or wind up in the wrong
order. And someone may miss the post you're responding to if the person
who sent it is in the reader's killfile. Then that person won't know
what you're refering to.
And even when it's clear what you're following up to, the exact
context of the reply may be unclear.
Posting without quoting, especially in a long or complex thread, can
lead to misunderstanding. But posting your comments after those to
which they apply will usually aid understanding, even if the original
post is MIA.
Also, if you have multiple points to make in response to multiple
points in the quoted text, then separate the quoted text into smaller
portions based on those points, and follow each with your relevant
comments.
Of course, there is such a thing as too much. So if the quoted text is
long or mostly irrelevant, cut out the cruft to make things clearer and
easier to read. It is also a good idea sometimes to include an
indication that you've done so, usually by putting the word "Snip" in
square brackets in place of the removed text. This is a common Usenet
idiom.

--

----- Dig the NEW and IMPROVED news sig!! -----

-------------- Shaggy was here! ---------------
Ain't I'm a dawg!!