CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>
> ... snip ...
>>
>> Chuck: If you haven't complained to your Usenet provider, please
>> do so. Mention that their interface is causing problems for
>> others, not just for you, and is likely to discourage others from
>> using their services. They can put all the advertisements they
>> like in the header lines.
>
> Frankly I consider all this fuss ridiculous. A one line added sig
> by the news-server is not causing serious problems for anyone.
>
> --
> Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
> <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

It's adding *six* lines. After your own signature, there are three
blank lines, the "-- " delimiter, the "Posted via ..." message, and
another blank line.

I'm assuming the three blank lines aren't part of your own signature.
If they are, I suggest you remove them. Removing the trailing
new-line at the end of the last line of your own signature (if you can
do so) might also . (If you could fool teranews into putting the
"-- " on the end of the last line of your own signature, that would
probably silence most objections.)

If the teranews folks insist in adding an advertisement to each posted
article, I suppose that's not entirely unreasonable in exchange for a
(nearly) free account. But they *should* append no more than a line
or two, and they *shouldn't* append a "--" delimiter if the article
already has one. For example, if each of your articles ended with:

| --
| Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
| Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
| <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
| Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

that would be just fine.

I'd complain to teranews myself (and I still might), but I think a
complaint from one of their users would have more impact -- and, oddly
enough, I think you're the only teranews free account user I've seen.

So far, I've been mostly sympathetic to you on this issue. It will be
easier for me to continue being sympathetic if you're willing to take
the time to talk to teranews.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

Keith Thompson wrote:
>
.... snip ...
>
> If the teranews folks insist in adding an advertisement to each posted
> article, I suppose that's not entirely unreasonable in exchange for a
> (nearly) free account. But they *should* append no more than a line
> or two, and they *shouldn't* append a "--" delimiter if the article
> already has one. For example, if each of your articles ended with:
>
>| --
>| Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
>| Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
>| <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
>| Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>
> that would be just fine.
>
> I'd complain to teranews myself (and I still might), but I think a
> complaint from one of their users would have more impact -- and, oddly
> enough, I think you're the only teranews free account user I've seen.
>
> So far, I've been mostly sympathetic to you on this issue. It will be
> easier for me to continue being sympathetic if you're willing to take
> the time to talk to teranews.

Actually I have ISP problems with email, which I can only conquer
by sending email from yet another URL based system (and including
instructions about replies). I have emailed Teranews several
times, and never received an answer. One of these days I shall try
changing to Thunderbird, but so far I haven't found out how to make
it operate off-line and synchronize. I wouldn't even be using
teranews if my own ISPs linkage still worked. It used to, and then
they diddled something, which brought on all my troubles and work
arounds. Complaints to them don't work either, and I am reluctant
to change ISPs because the email address will foul up. It has
something to do with security. Also bear in mind that I connect
via the dial-up system, and want to keep the phone line free.

At any rate the history has made me extremely reluctant to change
anything.

(And yes - my sigs have no excess trailing blank lines.) Note that
a blank line adds only two bytes to the transmission, and to any
possible storage file. Trivial.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:47229043.7605F2D4@yahoo.com...
[snip]
> At any rate the history has made me extremely reluctant to change
> anything.
>
> (And yes - my sigs have no excess trailing blank lines.) Note that
> a blank line adds only two bytes to the transmission, and to any
> possible storage file. Trivial.
>
> --
> Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
> <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

I wonder if my teranews account will do the same goofy thing.
We'll know in a minute.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Dann Corbit wrote:
>
> I wonder if my teranews account will do the same goofy thing.
> We'll know in a minute.
>
It did. Time to pay news.individual.net a visit...

--
Ian Collins.

CBFalconer said:

> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>
> ... snip ...
>>
>> Chuck: If you haven't complained to your Usenet provider, please
>> do so. Mention that their interface is causing problems for
>> others, not just for you, and is likely to discourage others from
>> using their services. They can put all the advertisements they
>> like in the header lines.
>
> Frankly I consider all this fuss ridiculous. A one line added sig
> by the news-server is not causing serious problems for anyone.

Failure to snip sigs in a quote doesn't cause *serious* problems for anyone
either. And your point?

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> CBFalconer said:
>> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>
>> ... snip ...
>>>
>>> Chuck: If you haven't complained to your Usenet provider, please
>>> do so. Mention that their interface is causing problems for
>>> others, not just for you, and is likely to discourage others from
>>> using their services. They can put all the advertisements they
>>> like in the header lines.
>>
>> Frankly I consider all this fuss ridiculous. A one line added sig
>> by the news-server is not causing serious problems for anyone.
>
> Failure to snip sigs in a quote doesn't cause *serious* problems
> for anyone either. And your point?

Ah, but that piles up and interferes with further correspondence.
The extra lines simply require a slightly longer snip, or a
complaint to the newsreader programmer that they do not delete
complete sigs in a reply, or an actual snip by the poor overworked
replier.

Unless they are involved in the discussion, I don't think you will
ever find unsnipped sigs in my replies, and very rarely (usually to
make a point) overlong lines. This doesn't occupy reams of time,
and is fully within the capabilities of the poorest typist.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article <471E6DC4.D4ED34AB@yahoo.com>, CBFalconer
<cbfalconer@yahoo.com> writes
>Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> CBFalconer said:
>>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> Whilst this is
>>>> perfectly understandable in your situation, it significantly
>>>> weakens your justification for criticising other people's
>>>> netiquette breaches.
>>>
>>> I'll go along with 'weakens slightly'. The slightly is because
>>> the so-called 4 line maximum is only a recommendation, not a
>>> requirement.
>>
>> So are the behaviours about which you often complain, such as the
>> failure to snip signatures.
>
>And you may have noticed I don't make demands. I advise and
>request. The typical message is of the form "Please do (or don't)
><whatever>".
>
>--
> Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
> <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>


I notice that in this way OT thread it is mainly the people who used to
shout OT the most :-)))))

However as far as I am concerned a little OT social interaction by the
regulars doesn't hurt. Most groups are better for it. It seems to
happen in many groups on a Friday Afternoon...

The good news is that as we don't have an OT argument ensuing the thread
is some 250 posts shorter than it might have been :-)

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ chris@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

CBFalconer said:

> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> CBFalconer said:
>>> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>>
>>> ... snip ...
>>>>
>>>> Chuck: If you haven't complained to your Usenet provider, please
>>>> do so. Mention that their interface is causing problems for
>>>> others, not just for you, and is likely to discourage others from
>>>> using their services. They can put all the advertisements they
>>>> like in the header lines.
>>>
>>> Frankly I consider all this fuss ridiculous. A one line added sig
>>> by the news-server is not causing serious problems for anyone.
>>
>> Failure to snip sigs in a quote doesn't cause *serious* problems
>> for anyone either. And your point?
>
> Ah, but that piles up and interferes with further correspondence.
>
> The extra lines simply require a slightly longer snip,

Chuck, it's special pleading.You're saying "it's okay for me to breach
netiquette because I don't see it as being any kind of big deal in my
case", but precisely the same argument can be made by anyone on any
breach, with just as much validity (or invalidity, rather).

It is evident, however, that you are not amenable to persuasion on this
matter, and I'm simply not interested enough to flog this dead horse any
further. But until you either fix your sig or stop complaining about other
people's netiquette breaches, your hypocrisy remains.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> writes:

> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>
> ... snip ...
>>
>> Chuck: If you haven't complained to your Usenet provider, please
>> do so. Mention that their interface is causing problems for
>> others, not just for you, and is likely to discourage others from
>> using their services. They can put all the advertisements they
>> like in the header lines.
>
> Frankly I consider all this fuss ridiculous. A one line added sig
> by the news-server is not causing serious problems for anyone.

Wrong. As has been explained many, many times. And considering you are
the one constantly whining about people breaking conventions by using
words like "prog" then it becomes even more obvious that you are
somewhat selfish and self absorbed.

>
> --
> Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
> <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>

The solution is simple : sign up for another free news server.

[snips]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:56:05 +0000, Kenny McCormack wrote:

> I see. Still, I'm a little surprised. While I personally don't think
> riding on the sidewalk is a good idea, I would say that it is believed
> by many that it is safer (particularly for children and other infirmed
> types) and it is generally not discouraged.

Around here, it tends to be discouraged. Usual reasons apply: you're a
comparatively fast-moving, slow-reacting vehicle, travelling in close
proximity to many hidden doors and the like; a perfect place to mow down
unwary pedestrians, particularly kids.

Heck, most places I'm aware of tend to require most vehicular traffic -
cars, trucks, scooters, bikes, skateboards, etc, etc, etc, - stay on the
road.

Rationale seems to be it's okay if you want to risk your neck, not so much
if you want to risk other peoples' necks, and the folks in the cars are
somewhat less likely to get mangled by you running into them.

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:55:30 +0000, Kenny McCormack wrote:

> In article <AJ6dnQO-__D5urzanZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@bt.com>,
> Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> ...
>>Again, I don't do this. As it happens, I don't actually have a bicycle, but
>>if I did have one, I would not ride it on the pavement except where it is
>>permitted (e.g. a cycle track). I know from first-hand experience how
>>irritating and indeed dangerous pavement-using cyclists can be.
>
> (This is not a troll - which is to say, this post is out-of-character
> for me)

Whereas you're admitting your usual posts - the ones in character - *are*
in fact trolls.

As if this wasn't sufficiently clear already.

Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> writes:

> [snips]
>
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 06:56:05 +0000, Kenny McCormack wrote:
>
>> I see. Still, I'm a little surprised. While I personally don't think
>> riding on the sidewalk is a good idea, I would say that it is believed
>> by many that it is safer (particularly for children and other infirmed
>> types) and it is generally not discouraged.
>
> Around here, it tends to be discouraged. Usual reasons apply: you're a
> comparatively fast-moving, slow-reacting vehicle, travelling in close
> proximity to many hidden doors and the like; a perfect place to mow down
> unwary pedestrians, particularly kids.
>
> Heck, most places I'm aware of tend to require most vehicular traffic -
> cars, trucks, scooters, bikes, skateboards, etc, etc, etc, - stay on the
> road.
>
> Rationale seems to be it's okay if you want to risk your neck, not so much
> if you want to risk other peoples' necks, and the folks in the cars are
> somewhat less likely to get mangled by you running into them.

That being not the point of course. The big risk is cars running into
bikes.

All towns should have bike lanes on the paths as they do here in
Northern Germany. Pedestrians learn quick enough to stay away from the
parallel lines.

Mark McIntyre wrote, On 25/10/07 22:20:
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 22:56:55 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Richard
> Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Mark McIntyre said:
>>
>>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:51:49 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Richard
>>> Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:

<snip>

>>> Perhaps you would, perhaps you wouldn't. Would you break a 12-month
>>> contract?
>> No, I'd find a different news service.
>
> Even if it cost you several hundred quid?

Chuck has been pointed at and offered one that would cost him exactly
nothing.

>>> What if it was tied to a deal for cheap webhosting?
>> I do my own webhosting. Kind of hard to beat free.
>
> I'll just point out here that you have deliberately ignored the
> question - presumably because you have no answer.

I doubt that anything is provided on the condition that he use the news
server. It might be provided as part of a package, but that would not
prevent him from using a different free alternative for Usenet access.

>>> What if your ISP blocked port 119 except for this particular service?
>> In that case I'd find a different ISP.
>
> And lost your email / webhost / 12 months contract / tied voip deal ?

Well, I can run my news server on any port I choose and I have offered
access to it.

> Richard, you frequently tell JN not to keep digging - why not take
> your own advice?

Personally I wish that people would stop arguing about Chuck's
signature. Either killfile him or don't argue about it. I also wish he
would change to something else, but I don't think it is worth the level
of argument it gets.
--
Flash Gordon

Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:55:30 +0000, Kenny McCormack wrote:
[snip]
> Whereas you're admitting your usual posts - the ones in character - *are*
> in fact trolls.
>
> As if this wasn't sufficiently clear already.

KM has always been a self-proclaimed troll. Please don't feed him.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

In article <otsev4-bu1.ln1@spanky.localhost.net>,
Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:55:30 +0000, Kenny McCormack wrote:
>
>> In article <AJ6dnQO-__D5urzanZ2dnUVZ8uadnZ2d@bt.com>,
>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
>> ...
>>>Again, I don't do this. As it happens, I don't actually have a bicycle, but
>>>if I did have one, I would not ride it on the pavement except where it is
>>>permitted (e.g. a cycle track). I know from first-hand experience how
>>>irritating and indeed dangerous pavement-using cyclists can be.
>>
>> (This is not a troll - which is to say, this post is out-of-character
>> for me)
>
>Whereas you're admitting your usual posts - the ones in character - *are*
>in fact trolls.
>
>As if this wasn't sufficiently clear already.

Your grasp of the obvious is underwhelming. Good show, old boy!

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:44:02 -0700, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
wrote:

> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> writes:

> > Frankly I consider all this fuss ridiculous. A one line added sig
> > by the news-server is not causing serious problems for anyone.
<snip example>
> It's adding *six* lines. After your own signature, there are three
> blank lines, the "-- " delimiter, the "Posted via ..." message, and
> another blank line.
>
> I'm assuming the three blank lines aren't part of your own signature.
> If they are, I suggest you remove them. Removing the trailing
> new-line at the end of the last line of your own signature (if you can
> do so) might also . (If you could fool teranews into putting the
> "-- " on the end of the last line of your own signature, that would
> probably silence most objections.)
>
I very much doubt he could do that last. <ObSlightlyTopic> C makes it
implementation-defined whether a 'partial' last line (no newline) is
supported but </> NNTP only supports complete lines. Ditto vanilla
SMTP. With mail-MIME _some_ encodings of (text) content-types can have
partial last line, but going news-MIME to solve this tiny problem is
like chopping your head off to solve a slight headache.

- formerly david.thompson1 || achar(64) || worldnet.att.net