__/ [ John Bokma ] on Sunday 02 April 2006 21:22 \__
> www@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Matt Probert) wrote:
>> On Sun, 02 Apr 2006 06:19:14 -0600, hug
>> <contact_info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>AWW is one of the few groups on UseNet
>>>>that involves many intersting people and no immaturities.
>>>"no immaturities"? Earth to Roy, come in please... <g>
>> And I thought it was just me....Perhaps Roy has a VERY big kill file!
> :-D That was what I was thinking.
When a thread comes up, I usually tap (i)gnore, (w)atch or leave it as-is if
still uncertain and willing to give it a chance. If the subject line, sender
and headers (especially organisation and user-agent) seem reasonable, I go
for it. It's all about prejudice, sadly.
Anonymity, bad subjects and bad psoting tools are red flags. This helps a lot
in many groupswhich suffer from 'noise', but in certain groups, one can
oprate without filters. GG posts have their own indicator. They are coloured
in clue, which is bad. Short posts get marked in red. Then there are my
posts, followup to my posts and indirect follow up to my posts, which get
I don't know if my mouth droppings will be of any value to anyone. I also
wish that newsgroups stopped the one-liners, which make it reminiscent of a
chatroom and convey little of no information. *smile* (no offence intended)
Gaining a clue about context takes just about as much time as reading.
Roy S. Schestowitz | Disclaimer: no SCO code used to generate this post
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
9:45pm up 25 days 11:28, 10 users, load average: 0.52, 0.88, 0.90
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine