In article <1137094757.839495.327...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, Darren <dagz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joe Butler wrote: > > What a total waste of time that clip is.
Hello. Hope you are well. I don't normally reply to people who top post but I'll assume you are new to computers and make an exception this once. If you would like a link to the newsgroup charter then let me know and I'll dig it out for you (or you could get a friend to show you how to do it)
> > It tells you nothing about moodle - why is moodle like some > > secret club, where you cannot find out what it does without > > knowing the secret handshake?.
There is a search engine that a lot of us more experienced users use called google. There are others available but google is the most popular. If you wish to find something out about moodle in google then load your web browser (I'm guessing it's Internet Explorer) and go to http://www.google.co.uk and type moodle into the empty box in the centre of your screen. If you would more help on accessing webpages or searching for more information then give me a nod. I have some resources I have been using with my year 7s which you could work through.
[Snip rest of similar] ......................................................................
Made me laugh anyway, having just read the 'Want to read an old disc' thread in here, which was more about how to stop top-posting than about reading old discs!!!
-- Chris de Cordova
The severity of the itch is proportional to the reach.
In article <4de9bc2221decord...@ukgateway.net>, Chris de Cordova <decord...@ukgateway.net> wrote:
> Here's another way of doing it!! (from uk.education.schools-it)
Yes...
Kept for future use, as and when it becomes necessary.
-- John Ward in Medway, Kent - using RISC OS since 1987 Now using an Iyonix, an A9home, 2 RiscPCs and Virtual-RPC! Acorn/RISC OS web page: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/computers Read my "Councilling RISC OS" series in Qercus, from Issue 276 onward
In article <4de9bea196j...@acornusers.org>, John M Ward <j...@acornusers.org> wrote:
> In article <4de9bc2221decord...@ukgateway.net>, > Chris de Cordova <decord...@ukgateway.net> wrote: > > Here's another way of doing it!! (from uk.education.schools-it) > Yes... > Kept for future use, as and when it becomes necessary.
It was used against someone who did know better! ;-)
-- John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing
In article <1137417753.799698.232...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Dave Braine <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote:
> Could someone explain top-posting to me please,
Top-posting is when someone replies at the top of a message/posting, reproducing the (often entire) message they are replying to (and sometimes all the previous messages) underneath.
It is due to thoughtless acceptance of where some software places the cursor/caret and ignorance. Ignorance of the following points:
> and what is wrong with it.
1. It is wasteful of bandwidth, in that (often) far more of the previous message(s) is reproduced than is necessary, wasting 'bandwidth'. ('bandwidth' often equates to 'money' for those on dial-up).
2. It is less clear exactly which bit of the message is being replied to - one has to search below to find the context of the message for each point.
3. It is nowhere near as clear as properly snipped interleaved replying, which allows logical response to material point-by-point.
4. It (here) contravenes the established practice and gets up everyone's nose.
Having said that, it seems to be perfectly acceptable on some news groups (I have heard), and there the advice of 'lurking' before posting to find out the accepted method of posting is wise counsel.
That doesn't make it 'right', though.
John
-- John Williams, Wirral, Merseyside, UK - no attachments to these addresses! Non-RISC OS posters change user to johnrwilliams or put 'risc' in subject for reliable contact! Who is John Williams? http://www.picindex.info/author/
In article <1137417753.799698.232...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Dave Braine <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote:
> Chris de Cordova wrote:
> > Made me laugh anyway, having just read the 'Want to read an old disc' > > thread in here, which was more about how to stop top-posting than > > about reading old discs!!!
> Could someone explain top-posting to me please, and what is wrong with > it.
-- John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822 Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing
John Williams (News) wrote: > In article <1137417753.799698.232...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > Dave Braine <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote:
> > Could someone explain top-posting to me please,
Thanks for that John. Immediately after I posted, I looked at the "Want to read old discs" thread where it explained it. Which is why I deleted my post from here.
In message <1137417753.799698.232...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Dave Braine" <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote:
> Chris de Cordova wrote:
>> Made me laugh anyway, having just read the 'Want to read an old disc' >> thread in here, which was more about how to stop top-posting than >> about reading old discs!!!
> Could someone explain top-posting to me please, and what is wrong with > it.
John Williams (News) wrote: > 4. It (here) contravenes the established practice and gets up > everyone's nose.
5. Message the of flow the follow *impossible* is it responses inline and bottom, top of mixture a use thread a on respondents where.
6. Whilst posting without quoting any context (aka misuse of Google Groups) is common it must be remembered that top posting encourages quoting of the complete context of *EVERY* message in reverse order - without the respondent displaying any brain power. It is far too common to see two words of new content top posted over several kilobytes of unedited previous context.
6a. How many people scroll up and down in a message and *DO NOT* notice your response because the first line is:
Me too!XXX wrote in message...
7. If you want people to respond to your post it is unreasonable to expect them to spend an inordinate amount of time rearranging your response in query your answer to order.
8. Top posting, common on M$ Usenet groups, is not the expected practice due to the way that people want to respond to messages but rather due to a specific fault in popular M$ Usenet packages which by default place the input focus above the message being responded to.
9. Bored now...
> Having said that, it seems to be perfectly acceptable on some news groups > (I have heard), and there the advice of 'lurking' before posting to find > out the accepted method of posting is wise counsel.
Accepted or not there is a discontinuity that is introduced through top posting that personally I find unacceptable.
Anyways, Jon Ripley -- http://jonripley.com/ Winner of all the 1-2K classic text adventure competitions.
> John Williams (News) wrote: >> 4. It (here) contravenes the established practice and gets up >> everyone's nose.
> 5. Message the of flow the follow *impossible* is it responses inline > and bottom, top of mixture a use thread a on respondents where.
> 6. Whilst posting without quoting any context (aka misuse of Google > Groups) is common it must be remembered that top posting encourages > quoting of the complete context of *EVERY* message in reverse order - > without the respondent displaying any brain power. It is far too common > to see two words of new content top posted over several kilobytes of > unedited previous context.
> 6a. How many people scroll up and down in a message and *DO NOT* notice > your response because the first line is:
> Me too!XXX wrote in message...
> 7. If you want people to respond to your post it is unreasonable to > expect them to spend an inordinate amount of time rearranging your > response in query your answer to order.
> 8. Top posting, common on M$ Usenet groups, is not the expected practice > due to the way that people want to respond to messages but rather due to > a specific fault in popular M$ Usenet packages which by default place > the input focus above the message being responded to.
You were doing quite well until you got to this point. It applies to *all* usenet packages on all platforms including RISC OS ! Its not a fault, it the way they all work since we have not yet got AI usenet packages!!
> 9. Bored now...
>> Having said that, it seems to be perfectly acceptable on some news groups >> (I have heard), and there the advice of 'lurking' before posting to find >> out the accepted method of posting is wise counsel.
> Accepted or not there is a discontinuity that is introduced through top > posting that personally I find unacceptable.
You might but others don't - personal opinion. If other usenet groups top post, then you follow that groups convention in that group and inline groups you follow that convention. Its called using common sense. You may not personally like it, but if that is the way the that group is working so be it.
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 13:22:33 +0000, Dave Braine wrote (in article <1137417753.799698.232...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
> Chris de Cordova wrote:
>> Made me laugh anyway, having just read the 'Want to read an old disc' >> thread in here, which was more about how to stop top-posting than >> about reading old discs!!!
> Could someone explain top-posting to me please, and what is wrong with > it.
I don't mean to be in any way inflammatory, but I have always been curious why this particular group is more offended than most by top-posting. Are there any technical reasons associated with the client software available or is more historical than anything else?
I subscribe to a variety of OS- and software-related groups but rarely see such a strong consensus within them.
Cheers,
Steve
PS I think I did once top-post here, but it was an very long time ago when I first attempted to get away from Windows. -- The reply-to email address is a spam trap. Email steve 'at' shodgson 'dot' org 'dot' uk
Chris de Cordova wrote: > In article <1137434330.280799.258...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > Dave Braine <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote: > > Which is why I deleted my post from here.
On 17 Jan 2006 as I do recall, Steve Hodgson wrote:
> I don't mean to be in any way inflammatory, but I have always been curious > why this particular group is more offended than most by top-posting. Are > there any technical reasons associated with the client software available or > is more historical than anything else?
> I subscribe to a variety of OS- and software-related groups but rarely see > such a strong consensus within them.
I subscribe to a variety of non-computer related discussion groups, and see a similar consensus in almost all of them -- in the ones where a small number of people *do* top-post without being jumped on, it is very noticeable that they are the ones with little or nothing to contribute.
I have a nasty feeling this may be due to the fact that their preferred posting style makes detailed analysis rather difficult.
It does, of course, mean that one has nothing to lose by kill-filing them!
I'm not waiting two and a half months to reply to this... ;-)
> I don't mean to be in any way inflammatory, but I have always > been curious why this particular group is more offended than > most by top-posting. Are there any technical reasons associated > with the client software available or is more historical than > anything else?
It's technical.
There's a 'feature' in the system, relating to the way it handles disc partitioning. Specifically, the end of a partition is marked by a particular sequence of characters on the disc.
Unfortunately, this was all devised before mass take up of the internet, so this problem wasn't forseen...
A top posted reply causes a very specific group of characters to appear in a post, and that group matches the end of partition marker. The unfortunate result is that when that post is commited to disc, those characters are thereafter [mis]interpreted as marking the end of a partition.
So, if someone has (say) a 20GB disc, with only 1GB of data on it and receives a top posted reply, thereafter that disc will be seen as having only a 1GB partition, due to where the post is put on disc, and the other 19GB can no longer be used.
This is one of the reasons why, for example, back in the early Argonet days, one of our number patched the newsreader to work with the RAM disc; it neatly bypassed the problem (the RAM disc can't be partitioned, so an end-of-partition marker is meaningless).
Other more modern solutions include Druck's DiscKnight, which can be set to routinely scan for erroneous end-of-partition markers, and in Druck's personal version will then read the surrounding file and automatically send his standard "please don't top-post" email to the poster.
Honestly. It's all true. Would I lie about something like this?
On 17 Jan 2006 "Dave Braine" <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote:
> Chris de Cordova wrote: > > In article <1137434330.280799.258...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > > Dave Braine <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote: > > > Which is why I deleted my post from here.
You do realise that google is just a viewer and archiver of news postings, and has absolutely no effect on actual usenet news system, in which posts are propagated to hundreds of thousands of servers world wide.
There is a mechanism to send cancel and supercede messages, but due to widespread abuse of the system it is almost never honoured these days, and stands no chance deleting the message from more than a tiny fraction of servers, never mind all the copies stored on individual users machines.
When you 'delete' from google, the only affect is google wont find it for you any more. Its not even certain google deletes it from its internal database, it doesn't when you deleted your email if you are foolish enough to use the insidious gmail service, it continues to be used to profile you and anyone who sends email to you.
druck wrote: > You do realise that google is just a viewer and archiver of news postings, > and has absolutely no effect on actual usenet news system, in which posts are > propagated to hundreds of thousands of servers world wide.
Yes, I have started to realise that. So how do you see/recieve these postings then? Are they sent by email?
In article <4deae19579evanal...@onetel.net.uk>, Barry Allen (news) <evanal...@onetel.net.uk> wrote, in part:
> The worst a top poster can get is to be ignored, kill-filed or > Drucked.
...in increasing order of severity ;->
-- John Ward in Medway, Kent - using RISC OS since 1987 Now using an Iyonix, an A9home, 2 RiscPCs and Virtual-RPC! Acorn/RISC OS web page: www.john-ward.org.uk/personal/john/computers Read my "Councilling RISC OS" series in Qercus, from Issue 276 onward
> druck wrote: > > You do realise that google is just a viewer and archiver of news > > postings, and has absolutely no effect on actual usenet news > > system, in which posts are propagated to hundreds of thousands of > > servers world wide.
> Yes, I have started to realise that. So how do you see/recieve these > postings then? Are they sent by email?
Have a Google for newsreader and look at http://www.newsreaders.com/ It's a well kept secret nowadays so don't tell anybody else :-)
If it's RISC OS that is of particular interest then Google for 'Pluto RISC OS' and 'Messenger RISC OS', that'll get you started.
-- Jeff Gaines - Damerham Hampshire UK Using XanaNews 1.17.6.5
In article <0001HW.BFF322F0000A1146F0284...@news.individual.net>, Steve
Hodgson <ham...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't mean to be in any way inflammatory, but I have always been > curious why this particular group is more offended than most by > top-posting.
Back in days of yore the only net users were technical, they produced standards and guidelines and those are the interleave recommendations you see. The RISC OS oriented newsgroups have always been a bastion of technically oriented people and a few others who just liked the platform. Since most of the techies used the approved layout the done thing round here is the standards approved thing.
> Are there any technical reasons associated with the client > software available or is more historical than anything else?
The technical reason applies more to the rather awful client that Microsoft managed to produce which makes selecting text to be replied to more difficult than it should be: Outlook succeeds in driving me mad every time I select text from the original by highlighting it and then click reply and the bloody thing quotes everything rather than just my selected section.
Until relatively recently it was pretty well impossible to quote text even remotely properly using OE or Outlook. ("Properly" being the > marked fashion I have here - other characters are permissible)
Any time you have the odd day to waste people can list the faults in OE, but I suspect you already know them.
> I subscribe to a variety of OS- and software-related groups but rarely > see such a strong consensus within them.
Most of the others are probably commonly populated with users who came into net use with top posting common in the first groups they used. (Many of these net users probably think "kewl" is a real word.) Old habits and all that. The converse applies, those who commonly use groups where the longer standing members read the guidelines were told early on what the correct version was.
In article <679bd6ea4d.pprew...@Chariot.net.au>, Peter Prewett <nos...@chariot.net.au> wrote:
> It helps a lot by net nannies sending out ARROGANT emails to those who > top post accidently and or had not bothered to actually read the > email. > That just gets peoples backs up.
Would sir care to provide some kind of context to his statements, or is he trying to start a small conflict?
Bear in mind that even in Fourecks trolls caught out in the sunlight suffer outrageously. :-)
On 18 Jan 2006 "Dave Braine" <d...@pilot.pprune.com> wrote:
> druck wrote: >> You do realise that google is just a viewer and archiver of news postings, >> and has absolutely no effect on actual usenet news system, in which posts >> are propagated to hundreds of thousands of servers world wide.
> Yes, I have started to realise that. So how do you see/recieve these > postings then? Are they sent by email?
As you are using google, why not search for "How Newsgroups Work".
In message <4deadc30acsteve.pampl...@dsl.pipex.com> Steven Pampling <steve.pampl...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:
> Outlook succeeds in driving me mad every time I select text from the > original by highlighting it and then click reply and the bloody thing > quotes everything rather than just my selected section.
Neat idea, I didn't know you could do that with Messenger Pro.
Dave Braine wrote: > druck wrote: > > You do realise that google is just a viewer and archiver of news postings, > > and has absolutely no effect on actual usenet news system, in which posts are > > propagated to hundreds of thousands of servers world wide.
> Yes, I have started to realise that. So how do you see/recieve these > postings then? Are they sent by email?
No, it's not by email (though the google web interface blurs the distinction a bit!). News has it's own protocol and you need specific software to connect to a news server (your isp might have one) and download/submit articles.
I use google groups a lot when I'm not at home and it's OK as a stop-gap, but if you use newsgroups at all frequently you should find accessing them via a proper newsreader far more pleasant :-)
|
