the other alex said:
If you expect politeness, you first need to be considerate yourself.
i haven't expected "politeness" from this list since the very first day that i came here, and the subsequent years have only confirmed it. i interact very politely with everyone who interacts politely with me... _everyone_... heck, i will even interact politely with people who have made me their "enemy" in the past, providing that they interact politely with me... i am also constantly amused by those people who tell me that i "first need to be considerate" myself, since they regularly fail to follow their own advice. i don't call people names. i don't do ad hominem. i make long posts that are elaborately documented. but some other people call _me_ names, and they do ad hominem on _me_, and they _never_ever_ seem to take much time to address my arguments. i don't do ad hominem, because i don't need to... even when i say something is _"stupid"_, i address _the_argument_ (or its absence), not _the_person_, unless pushed to the edge by excessive repetition. nobody here is stupid. i'd guess that you all score "above average" on an i.q. test. but _some_ of you do -- on occasion -- say some very stupid things...
Setting aside the flood of abuse you regularly hurl at respected members of this list
oh please. what, when, where. be specific, because _you_, alex -- right _now_ -- are doing ad hominem.
I asked you many months ago why you -- as the only person here, to my knowledge -- insist on contributing to this list in ugly, bloated HTML emails, instead of in plain-text, which is the gold standard of mailing-lists, especially (!) tech lists.
well, first of all, alex, i have informed you that you are in my kill-filter, which means that you shouldn't really expect a reply from me, ever... by the way, very few people make my kill-filter. you must have said some _very_ stupid things... i read this post of yours on the listserve website, more or less by accident, but if i had been reading my e-mail, i never ever would have seen your post. i _did_ see your earlier queston, and i chose not to answer it, because it wouldn't have done any good. yes, my posts to this listserve come here as .html, not because i "insist" on that, but simply because the a.o.l. client provides no way to make a choice as to what it sends out. and yes, that's backwards. but it is what it is. so you will have to live with it... so, do you feel like that answer did you any good? yeah, i didn't think so. so now you will pursue your attack tactics, and point out that i could use some other software, one which _did_ give me a choice in the matter, and you will ask me why i don't do that instead? so here's my answer to that -- _i_don't_want_to_. do you feel like _that_ answer did you any good? yeah, i didn't think that it would, either. so then you will proceed to escalate your attack. you'll say "the fact that you don't want to change indicates that you're doing all this on purpose..." and i'll say "if i could take an action that would make the a.o.l. client work correctly, i _would_. but i cannot. so that's just the way it is, alex." i could also point out that it's not even in _my_ best interests to have my posts fall outside the threads in which they belong... think about it... but that won't make you happy, so you'll repeat the thing that you just said... and so then i will repeat what i just said, so you'll repeat it again. and then i'll get bored with all of that, and say "ya know, that's what happens when technocrats try to force a 'standard' on everyone. i'm sure the people at a.o.l. thought they were moving _forward_ by using .html instead of plain-text, just like the e-book standards people thought they were moving forward by mandating that e-books should use .html format exclusively, and again when they updated that to .xhtml, and now when they are changing it to .html5. hey, they always think they know what's best!" so, you see, alex, part of this .html thing is rubbing your nose in the .html when all you _really_ want is just the good ol' plain-text. do you see the bigger point? the metaphor? at least i _could_ say that, if i _decided_ to. it's not true, but it _does_ have a nice ring. the truth is, i'd happily change it right away _if_ i could. but i can't. so live with it, alex, with the takeaway lesson that we all need to make demands that our systems are flexible.
you break a discussion thread, creating havon on (for example) my iPad and iPhone, etc.
alex, i'm sure you meant "havoc" there. typing on your ipad right now, are you? :+) hey, alex, i feel for you. i truly do. it's really very important for all of us to grok how _interdependent_ we are on each other, and how much we have riding on getting our systems to work correctly, for best usage... that's your lesson, alex: our systems _matter_.
If you don't give a damn about messing up other people's inboxes on a daily basis,
see, there you go again, alex, blaming _me_ for some "decision" that i supposedly made, thinking that it means i "don't give a damn". social psychologists have a name for that -- "the fundamental attributional error". we attribute the behavior of other people to _their_character_, something about _them_. not completely, but we error in that direction. our own behavior, on the other hand, we tend to attribute to environmental factors. again, not completely, but it's the tendency. we know all of the factors impinging on us, and how they have impacted our behavior... we know the reason _why_ we did something, and it rarely has to do with "our character"... (particularly not when that'd be unflattering.) and we rarely know the external factors that were acting on somebody else, and might have been _the_ reason for their behavior. instead we say "that's just the way they are". the reality is that most of us are quite plastic, so situations can make us do almost anything. even including herding jews into gas showers. that's how pliable we can be, as human beings. kinda scary to think about, isn't it? very scary.
you can't be surprised at the lack of civility you're experiencing,
i haven't been "surprised" by the lack of civility since my very first day on this listserve, alex... (marcello, that's your cue... don't be late...)
or the lack of interest in your innumerable projects.
when i want to stir up interest in my projects, i'll release them publicly. that time will come. -bowerbird p.s. and once again, for alex and everyone else who gets irritated by reading my posts: _stop._ just stop! don't read them! i don't care! really! indeed, i'd much rather have you not read them than read them and get yourself all worked up... seriously. none of us needs the drama. nobody. put me in your kill-file if you can't resist my posts. you will be doing a favor to me, you, and everyone.
On Wednesday, 26th October 2011 at 18:18:04 (GMT -0400), Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
[blah, blah, blah, blah, blah]
Egomania in action. It's always "me, me, me first, and I don't give a damn about anyone else". We can only continue ignoring all of that. Although it's regrettable this is an unmoderated list, which tends to lead to such sad results. I'm a member of several tech lists where the requirement to post in plain-text is strictly enforced. The first post submitted in HTML would result in a warning from moderator, and a second post sumbitted in HTML would get the recalcitrant list member banned until they switched to plain-text. Too bad we've had to put up with all this here for so many years. :-( -- Yours, Alex. www.aboq.org [processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:36:31 +0200, a@aboq.org wrote:
Egomania in action. It's always "me, me, me first, and I don't give a damn about anyone else". We can only continue ignoring all of that. Although it's regrettable this is an unmoderated list, which tends to lead to such sad results. I'm a member of several tech lists where the requirement to post in plain-text is strictly enforced. The first post submitted in HTML would result in a warning from moderator, and a second post sumbitted in HTML would get the recalcitrant list member banned until they switched to plain-text. Too bad we've had to put up with all this here for so many years. :-(
Ignoring is the best option. Otherwise you are feeding a persecution complex, I suspect somewhere in my deleted mailfolder there is already a mail shouting 'I told you so, Michael is gone for only a few weeks and they are ganging up against me' by the self-designated 'intelligentleman' who is neither intelligent nor a gentleman. Just a filtering rule for him, the occasional time he is right does not justify the bile you have to wade through if you don't killfile him. Regards, Walter
On 10/27/2011 11:36 AM, a@aboq.org wrote:
On Wednesday, 26th October 2011 at 18:18:04 (GMT -0400), Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
[blah, blah, blah, blah, blah]
Egomania in action. It's always "me, me, me first, and I don't give a damn about anyone else". We can only continue ignoring all of that. Although it's regrettable this is an unmoderated list, which tends to lead to such sad results. I'm a member of several tech lists where the requirement to post in plain-text is strictly enforced. The first post submitted in HTML would result in a warning from moderator, and a second post sumbitted in HTML would get the recalcitrant list member banned until they switched to plain-text. Too bad we've had to put up with all this here for so many years. :-(
You can always add a message filter: if from: or body contains 'Bowerbird' then delete message That rids you of all messages by BB and all answers to BB. You can do that with thunderbird, and I'm quite sure you can do that with "the bat" too. -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org
On Thursday, 27th October 2011 at 12:48:56 (GMT +0200), Marcello Perathoner wrote:
You can always add a message filter
Thank you, Marcello, but I don't need advice on how to set up filters. :-) (Indeed, The Bat's filtering capabilities are better than any other mail client's out there.) It's a question of list management. I'm convinced that the proper way to deal with list offenders is not to advise the non-offenders to set up killfiles, but to ban the offenders until they comply with list rules and/or common sense. You may prefer the round-about way of dealing with list abuse, but I don't. :-) Not dealing with list offenders creates a bad image for mailing lists. For one thing, their offending posts remain in a list's archives that are usually publicly accessible. For another, list newcomers may get the wrong impression about what the list is supposed to be about, if they see abusive messages posted to a list on a daily basis, but no one saying anything about the abuse (presumably because the offender is in everyone else's killfiles). But the newcomers may decide that this is not an environment they wish to spend any time in, and just leave. Which would be too bad! -- Yours, Alex. www.aboq.org [processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]
Looking at BB's email, it's sent in both HTML and plain text. If his HTML bothers you that much, why not turn off HTML rendering in your client? It's a pretty good security practice, regardless. On a side note, your "[processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]" message annoys me. I'm on several technical mailing lists where that would be considered unacceptable. Perhaps you could change that? (Although it doesn't actually bother me. Neither do BB's posts. This is the internet.) Alex On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:20 AM, <a@aboq.org> wrote:
On Thursday, 27th October 2011 at 12:48:56 (GMT +0200), Marcello Perathoner wrote:
You can always add a message filter
Thank you, Marcello, but I don't need advice on how to set up filters. :-) (Indeed, The Bat's filtering capabilities are better than any other mail client's out there.)
It's a question of list management. I'm convinced that the proper way to deal with list offenders is not to advise the non-offenders to set up killfiles, but to ban the offenders until they comply with list rules and/or common sense. You may prefer the round-about way of dealing with list abuse, but I don't. :-)
Not dealing with list offenders creates a bad image for mailing lists. For one thing, their offending posts remain in a list's archives that are usually publicly accessible. For another, list newcomers may get the wrong impression about what the list is supposed to be about, if they see abusive messages posted to a list on a daily basis, but no one saying anything about the abuse (presumably because the offender is in everyone else's killfiles). But the newcomers may decide that this is not an environment they wish to spend any time in, and just leave. Which would be too bad!
-- Yours, Alex. www.aboq.org
[processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
On Thursday, 27th October 2011 at 08:48:22 (GMT -0400), Alex Buie wrote:
If his HTML bothers you that much, why not turn off HTML rendering in your client?
You're kidding, right? You can't seriously be suggesting that because of a few non-compliant individuals, people should switch off HTML rendering in their software, thus making HTML unreadable in emails where it *is* justified, such as in newsletters (and I receive dozens of those daily). Also, you're forgetting not every email program gives you that option. I follow this mailing list in 3 places: on my Windows PC, on the iPad, and on the iPhone. The iPad and the iPhone don't give you the option to switch off HTML. (And why should they?) Also, Alex, you're disregarding the main issue with those AOL emails: they break the proper threading of messages from this list. Maybe you enjoy chaos in your inboxes, but I don't.
On a side note, your "[processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]" message annoys me. I'm on several technical mailing lists where that would be considered unacceptable. Perhaps you could change that?
Sure! The Bat allows you to set up folder-level and/or addressee-level reply templates. However, if you truly are on several tech mailing lists, you might have noticed that including one's software specs in one's signature is a fairly common practice. (In fact, all of us might expand our signatures on this list to include data on our OSs and the readers we use for e-books, which might provide interesting insight into how each of us accesses Project Gutenberg material.)
(This is the internet.)
Perhaps the "internet" is synonymous with "anarchy" and "willfulness" for you, but I see that differently. My first association for "Internet communication" is "netiquette". And the basic principle of netiquette is: "Before you oblige your own wishes and preferences regarding Internet communication, first think of how your Internet communication will affect *others*." Here's another example of the harmfulness of HTML in emails. It's an age-old convention in mailing lists to quote someone else's text by prefacing it with a ">" sign at the beginning of every line. This works beautifully in plain-text -- but only in plain-text, not in HTML. That's because in plain-text, all quality email software recognizes the quote sign and colour-codes it accordingly, making the overall text very nice to read. So, here is the nice colour-coding of a plain-text message showing a quotation: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10440809/misc/quoting_in_plain-text.png And here is the unspeakable ugliness produced by HTML emails: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10440809/misc/quoting_in_HTML.png.gif Besides enforcing your own choice of font (and its size!) onto your readers, you're also breaking the colour coding of the messages, you're breaking (if you use AOL) every thread into which you submit a message, you potentially make your message unreadable for some list members or in the message archives, etc. etc. Now if you were to proceed according to netiquette, you'd say: "Yeah, even though I prefer HTML myself, it seems like it's creating problems for the folks I'm talking to... so I guess I'll just abandon HTML and switch over to plain-text like everyone else." PS: As to your own top-posting, Alex... I know quite a few tech lists where that is a big no-no as well, and would get a list member banned in no time. ;-))) -- Yours, Alex. www.aboq.org [processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]
On 27 October 2011 17:46, <a@aboq.org> wrote:
On Thursday, 27th October 2011 at 08:48:22 (GMT -0400), Alex Buie wrote:
On a side note, your "[processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]" message annoys me. I'm on several technical mailing lists where that would be considered unacceptable. Perhaps you could change that?
Sure! The Bat allows you to set up folder-level and/or addressee-level reply templates. However, if you truly are on several tech mailing lists, you might have noticed that including one's software specs in one's signature is a fairly common practice. (In fact, all of us might
It is? In years of working with open source, I've never seen that before your mails. Not once. Perhaps some .sig witticism that alludes to the use of a particular piece of software, or something like a Linux counter number, but never .sig spam. Maybe it's a Windows thing. -- <Sefam> Are any of the mentors around? <jimregan> yes, they're the ones trolling you
[snip]Stuff about threading/quotes[/snip] My client quotes both the html and the plaintext emails the same, and beautifully. Sure it's not just a problem with your iDevices? -- -- Alex Buie Network Coordinator / Server Engineer KWD Services, Inc Media and Hosting Solutions +1(703)445-3391 +1(480)253-9640 +1(703)919-8090 abuie@kwdservices.com
On Thursday, 27th October 2011 at 18:05:08 (GMT +0100), Jimmy O'Regan wrote:
never .sig spam. Maybe it's a Windows thing.
Yeah, maybe. And maybe it's no spam because it's not trying to sell anything. On Thursday, 27th October 2011 at 13:14:59 (GMT -0400), Alex Buie wrote:
My client quotes both the html and the plaintext emails the same, and beautifully. Sure it's not just a problem with your iDevices?
Quite sure, because I can see the same thing on Windows PCs. What client "quotes HTML emails beautifully" for you? Don't be too bashful about sharing its name (and a screenshot) with us. :-) By the way, each of those AOL emails is introduced by, <HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT COLOR="#000000" FACE="Lucida Grande" LANG="0" SIZE="4">..... Congratulations... Don't know about you guys, but I don't feel like being preached to (and regularly being reminded of, and reprimanded for, being "stupid") by anyone who sends such trash to the list many times every day. Anyone who does this has lost the right to speak on any IT-related matters, period, but should instead join mailing lists on gardening, football, etc. -- Yours, Alex. www.aboq.org [processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]
On Oct 27, 2011, at 4:23 PM, a@aboq.org wrote:
Don't know about you guys, but I don't feel like being preached to (and regularly being reminded of, and reprimanded for, being "stupid") by anyone who sends such trash to the list many times every day. Anyone who does this has lost the right to speak on any IT-related matters, period, but should instead join mailing lists on gardening, football, etc.
It is only slightly sad that this situation has gone on for as many time-consuming threads as it has already, when On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Michael S. Hart wrote:
It should be about the eBooks. New stuff about eBooks.
… Is anybody working on *those*, these days? ;-) -- b
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Benjamin Klein <ben@silver-chalice.com> wrote:
On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Michael S. Hart wrote:
It should be about the eBooks. New stuff about eBooks.
…
Is anybody working on *those*, these days?
I'm prepping some random fiction that Marcello will hate, I'm sure. One of them, PEACHMONK A SERIO-COMIC DETECTIVE TALE IN WHICH NO FIRE-ARMS ARE USED AND NO ONE IS KILLED BEING A THREE DAYS EPISODE IN THE LIFE OF THE DUKE OF BELLEVILLE AS RELATED BY LORD EDWARD LYNDON has this in the forward: "The fabric of this tale is based largely upon the use of Book-Titles, and the names, several names in connection, or expressions in CAPITALS, which indicate these titles, should in no way interfere with the continuous reading of the story. No Title, of either one or more words, is used more than once, unless such title is represented by more than one Author. Approximately, Nine Hundred Book-Titles have been used. No Literary Merit is claimed for this Tale, as none has been attempted." Short, single signature book, no publisher willing to claim it, not even a vanity press. :) -R C
On 10/27/2011 6:18 PM, Robert Cicconetti wrote:
I'm prepping some random fiction that Marcello will hate, I'm sure. One of them,
PEACHMONK A SERIO-COMIC DETECTIVE TALE IN WHICH NO FIRE-ARMS ARE USED AND NO ONE IS KILLED BEING A THREE DAYS EPISODE IN THE LIFE OF THE DUKE OF BELLEVILLE AS RELATED BY LORD EDWARD LYNDON
has this in the forward:
"The fabric of this tale is based largely upon the use of Book-Titles, and the names, several names in connection, or expressions in CAPITALS, which indicate these titles, should in no way interfere with the continuous reading of the story. No Title, of either one or more words, is used more than once, unless such title is represented by more than one Author. Approximately, Nine Hundred Book-Titles have been used. No Literary Merit is claimed for this Tale, as none has been attempted."
Short, single signature book, no publisher willing to claim it, not even a vanity press. :)
I love it already! Is it going to be available somewhere in a rich text format?
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Lee Passey <lee@novomail.net> wrote:
On 10/27/2011 6:18 PM, Robert Cicconetti wrote:
I'm prepping some random fiction that Marcello will hate, I'm sure. One of them,
PEACHMONK
Short, single signature book, no publisher willing to claim it, not even a vanity press. :)
I love it already! Is it going to be available somewhere in a rich text format?
There will be an HTML edition... it has decorative caps. I'm running it through DP, though, so it'll take quite some time to pass through F2 (unless a PPer decides to skip it.) It's an IA/LoC book: http://www.archive.org/details/peachmonkserioco00eyer -R C
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011, Robert Cicconetti wrote:
There will be an HTML edition... it has decorative caps. I'm running it through DP, though, so it'll take quite some time to pass through F2 (unless a PPer decides to skip it.)
It's an IA/LoC book:
Oh my gosh..... that is bizarre. I was ready to believe that you had made all that up as a practical joke. --Andrew
Has anyone considered researching which of Peachmonk's "Book-titles" are not in PG, and making them DP projects? Al
-----Original Message----- From: gutvol-d-bounces@lists.pglaf.org [mailto:gutvol-d-bounces@lists.pglaf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Cicconetti Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 5:19 PM To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] sometimes i despair
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Benjamin Klein <ben@silver-chalice.com> wrote:
On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Michael S. Hart wrote:
It should be about the eBooks. New stuff about eBooks.
.
Is anybody working on *those*, these days?
I'm prepping some random fiction that Marcello will hate, I'm sure. One of them,
PEACHMONK A SERIO-COMIC DETECTIVE TALE IN WHICH NO FIRE-ARMS ARE USED AND NO ONE IS KILLED BEING A THREE DAYS EPISODE IN THE LIFE OF THE DUKE OF BELLEVILLE AS RELATED BY LORD EDWARD LYNDON
has this in the forward:
"The fabric of this tale is based largely upon the use of Book-Titles, and the names, several names in connection, or expressions in CAPITALS, which indicate these titles, should in no way interfere with the continuous reading of the story. No Title, of either one or more words, is used more than once, unless such title is represented by more than one Author. Approximately, Nine Hundred Book-Titles have been used. No Literary Merit is claimed for this Tale, as none has been attempted."
Short, single signature book, no publisher willing to claim it, not even a vanity press. :)
-R C _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
It could be done, partially, at least, but there aren't any footnotes indicating authors, and some of those titles have been used many times over the years. -Bob On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Al Haines <ajhaines@shaw.ca> wrote:
Has anyone considered researching which of Peachmonk's "Book-titles" are not in PG, and making them DP projects?
Al
-----Original Message----- From: gutvol-d-bounces@lists.pglaf.org [mailto:gutvol-d-bounces@lists.pglaf.org] On Behalf Of Robert Cicconetti Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 5:19 PM To: Project Gutenberg Volunteer Discussion Subject: Re: [gutvol-d] sometimes i despair
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Benjamin Klein <ben@silver-chalice.com> wrote:
On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:42 PM, Michael S. Hart wrote:
It should be about the eBooks. New stuff about eBooks.
.
Is anybody working on *those*, these days?
I'm prepping some random fiction that Marcello will hate, I'm sure. One of them,
PEACHMONK A SERIO-COMIC DETECTIVE TALE IN WHICH NO FIRE-ARMS ARE USED AND NO ONE IS KILLED BEING A THREE DAYS EPISODE IN THE LIFE OF THE DUKE OF BELLEVILLE AS RELATED BY LORD EDWARD LYNDON
has this in the forward:
"The fabric of this tale is based largely upon the use of Book-Titles, and the names, several names in connection, or expressions in CAPITALS, which indicate these titles, should in no way interfere with the continuous reading of the story. No Title, of either one or more words, is used more than once, unless such title is represented by more than one Author. Approximately, Nine Hundred Book-Titles have been used. No Literary Merit is claimed for this Tale, as none has been attempted."
Short, single signature book, no publisher willing to claim it, not even a vanity press. :)
-R C _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
On 10/27/2011 3:36 PM, Benjamin Klein wrote:
Is anybody working on *those*, these days?
;-)
If you look back, you'll see that that's what this whole discussion started about. I told people about the development I was doing on an ePub editor/creator, BowerBird asked for examples, I commented that I couldn't get good HTML from Internet Archive, Alex pointed to a script that would generate complete but complex HTML output, BowerBird started whining, in a polite, respectful and non-name-calling way, about how Internet Archive (the organization you know, not the people) is stupid, in kindergarten, and floating mindlessly in it's own little bubble. Things kind of went downhill from there, and the original discourse kind of got lost in the noise. This is not BowerBird's fault. He consistently asserts he is "a real nice guy," and always responds politely. I've been around long enough to come to the conclusion that he really /believes/ that. No rational argument can convince him to improve his "abrasive," "abusive" or "anti-social" behavior, because he cannot see that his posts /are/ abrasive, abusive or anti-social. He's just wired that way, so all the posts intended to change that behavior, whether couched as derisive or helpful, are doomed to fail. BowerBird is just the curmudgeonly old uncle in our family tree (you know what I'm talking about, you've all got one ...), and we should just tolerate him for what he is. Yes, he's hopelessly technologically out of date, but we knew that and he's doing the best he can. Don't keep rubbing his nose in it. Hopefully, the rest of us are wired differently (although sometimes I have my doubts). When he goes off on his little rants, just roll your eyes, mumble some apology for "Uncle Bruce" and go on about your business. That alone would greatly increase the signal to noise ratio. But enough about that, it seems like I, too, am becoming part of the problem. So Alex, I've been looking closer at the output from those scripts and I'm beginning to find more and more value in them. We'll have to talk...
Is anybody working on *those*, these days?
Yes, when reading this thread leads me to despair I go off and work on a book or two. Good therapy, and tends to drive one towards a return to sanity -- because when one actually takes notice of the work it takes to actually produce *something* one realizes what total BS this thread really is. Too bad once one produces a work it still gets ground to a soft pulp by the PG mechanizations.
On 10/28/2011 11:54 PM, Jim Adcock wrote:
Too bad once one produces a work it still gets ground to a soft pulp by the PG mechanizations.
Is there not some archive where you could put your finished product, and then just send a message to the PGer's to the effect of "I put this book there, if you want to add it to your archive, go get it"? That way, a degraded version could be published by PG, but we would still have a source for the enhanced version.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 3:23 PM, <a@aboq.org> wrote:
Congratulations... Don't know about you guys, but I don't feel like being preached to (and regularly being reminded of, and reprimanded for, being "stupid") by anyone who sends such trash to the list many times every day. Anyone who does this has lost the right to speak on any IT-related matters, period, but should instead join mailing lists on gardening, football, etc.
You know. I don't see trash when I look at BB's e-mails. I see text that's a little bit bigger than everyone else's. Big deal. If you're seeing something monsterous, maybe it's an issue with your e-mail client. I'm pretty sure Gmail is sending this e-mail in HTML format. I've seen other contributers whose e-mails are sent in HTML format. Why do you only pick out BB to yell at?
On Thursday, 27th October 2011 at 15:41:38 (GMT -0600), Scott Olson wrote:
I don't see trash when I look at BB's e-mails.
I was quoting from the message source, to illustrate what nonsense HTML in emails is.
I see text that's a little bit bigger than everyone else's. Big deal.
What about the broken colour-coding of quoted passages? (For those of us who don't use Alex Buie's magical HTML client.) What about all the broken threads every day?
I'm pretty sure Gmail is sending this e-mail in HTML format.
Only because you let it. You could switch to plain-text with a click of the mouse.
Why do you only pick out BB to yell at?
BB regularly reminds the list membership of how stupid they supposedly are, while himself being disruptive in many ways described above and elsewhere (even on Marcello's dedicated webpage). But if it's going to be "blame the victim" now, by all means be my guests and continue as before for many years to come. :-) We've put up with all this for perhaps a dozen years, so why not for another 50 years? Issue closed for me, I've got to work instead of arguing. ;-) -- Yours, Alex. www.aboq.org [processed by "The Bat!", Version 4.2.44.2]
Enforcing "no HTML" in mailman mailing lists is easy, just an option in the content filters section. This would be fully in line with the philosophy of Michael (only text matters) that BB too preaches. Carlo
participants (14)
-
a＠aboq.org -
Al Haines -
Alex Buie -
Andrew Sly -
Benjamin Klein -
Bowerbird＠aol.com -
Jim Adcock -
Jimmy O'Regan -
Lee Passey -
Marcello Perathoner -
Robert Cicconetti -
Scott Olson -
traverso＠posso.dm.unipi.it -
Walter van Holst