Re: C.Dewick has a dummy spit! (was: do NOT, EVER, post messages containing HTML (was: "City Rail Security Guards"))

[Rob Kearey <r.kearey@mailbox.uq.edu.au>]

WhaleOilBeefHooked wrote:

> C. Dewick wrote in message <7nqg9a$1tv$1@lios.apana.org.au>...

> >And the second half of it was a repeat of the first half, but in damn HTML!
> >grrrr.. It's about time I reminded everyone about *NOT* posting messages
> >with HTML content in newsgroups...

> And who appointed you guardian of this newsgroup?

Oh dear. This old chestnut again. Feeling defensive today?

The enlightened anarchy that is usenet is stressed when self-regulation
does not occur. Someone's gotta do it somethime.

> >Most of us don't look kindly on people who post messages to this newsgroup
> >when the whole message is *repeated at the end* in bloody HTML! Do NOT EVER
> >post news articles containing copies of the text in HTML please.

> Gonna make us?

How badly do you want to be killfiled?

> >It makes messages twice as large, harder to read, and very annoying to the
> >majority of people who read news using text-based newsreaders. HTML makes
> >normal text impossible to read...

> So they should update. This is 1999 after all, and there are plenty of
> newsreaders, available for free, which can read HTML. Why should some
> posters be restricted from using the full capabilities available to them
> purely and simply because some people prefer programs which are less
> capable.

Absolute bollocks, David. What about the needs of the handicapped? What
about people restricted to Lynx? What about conservation of backbone
capacity? What about lessening the load on nntp servers?

There are very good reasons why plain text is the preferred medium for
usenet interaction by all reasonable people, and you know it. The high
dudgeon you're expressing here just makes you look like a teenager
sprung smoking in the school toilets again. You can do better.

> >If you want to post to newsgroups, which are a *text-based* medium, do
> *NOT*

> It is only a "test-based medium" because Usenet evolved at a time when that
> was the norm. At the time, the whole of the internet was text-based. The web
> evolved into a graphical medium, there is no reason why Usenet cannot evolve
> into one as well (well, there is a reason, the pigheadedness of some of its
> users).

Free Clue: Usenet is not the WWW. 

Please read the above line untill your neural net is sufficiently
programmed.

> >post messages containing copies of the actual text appended at the end in
> >HTML. Most of us will ignore any HTML content.

> So ignore it, and stop subjecting us to your tirades.

Stop subjecting us to your apparent lack of care and attention to detail
with regards to your news postings, or be ignored.

> >Related to this, either configure your software properly so it doesn't
> >include HTML in news articles, or get different software which works
> >properly and doesn't irritate us with stuff we can't read outside of a
> >web-browser's news reading window.

> Why not get a newsreader that can handle HTML?

Why not read the relevant RFC and become enclued? It's no skin off your
nose, after all.

http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/rfc/rfc1855.txt

> DaveP

-- 
Robert Kearey           Network Services        
ITS                     University of Queensland
Sentence fragment	I don't speak for my employer