If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:29:05 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote:
Is it too late to try, Ron? Her is what trimming looks like. It takes 10 times as long, and results in little information for the person who reads the post. What were we talking about? Sigh. ASAAR, are you sure about his age? Considering his childish behaviour, he still has a lot of growing up to do. OTOH, Ron seems to care a lot about the two seconds it takes to quote properly, which suggests he doesn't have much time left... -- Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
John McWilliams wrote:
Ron Hunter wrote: ASAAR wrote: Is it too late to try, Ron? Her is what trimming looks like. It takes 10 times as long, and results in little information for the person who reads the post. What were we talking about? Sigh. We're talking etiquette for one thing. The ten seconds it takes you will save each of your thousands- or dozens- of readers a second or two. That's being thoughtful. Courteous. Whatever. Chances are they have more time that I do. I'm not going to take the time to do that editing to save readers 1 or two keystrokes. All it takes me to get to the bottom of a long post is one press on my multi-button pointing device. Hardly an imposition. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
Robert Spanjaard wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:29:05 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote: Is it too late to try, Ron? Her is what trimming looks like. It takes 10 times as long, and results in little information for the person who reads the post. What were we talking about? Sigh. ASAAR, are you sure about his age? Considering his childish behaviour, he still has a lot of growing up to do. OTOH, Ron seems to care a lot about the two seconds it takes to quote properly, which suggests he doesn't have much time left... Two seconds? I have to select the text to be quoted, copy to the clipboard, select 'reply', delete old quoted data, dropdown a menu, and select past as quotation. If can do that in two seconds, you are much faster than this semi-handicapped 66 year old. More power to you. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
Jürgen Exner wrote:
Oh, you mean your readers are using newsreader, which automatically jump the end of posting if and only if the posting originates from Ron Hauser? jue Who is Ron Hauser? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
John Navas wrote:
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:31:19 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote in : John Navas wrote: Please trim huge quotes to just a relevant portion, not the whole thing. Thanks. Maybe you have the time to do that, or a newsreader that makes it easy, but I have neither. Your headers say Thunderbird, which can do it easily. Would you like some help? Skipping to the end is vastly easier, and For you. unless you are one of the 5% of people who are still using dialup for newsgroup access, why bother? Because it's both wasteful and rude to others, who may be paying for metered Internet access, and who may have to manually scroll down to see your response -- I'll often not bother, especially when I'm on a small screen device. If you don't care about your audience, why bother posting at all? Come on, Ron, you're better than that. Actually, I don't care if you, or anyone else reads my posts, likes my posts, or likes the way I post. I express my opinion, or I give advice, or provide information. What you chose to do with it is your business. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:50:14 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote:
OTOH, Ron seems to care a lot about the two seconds it takes to quote properly, which suggests he doesn't have much time left... Two seconds? I have to select the text to be quoted, copy to the clipboard, select 'reply', delete old quoted data, dropdown a menu, and select past as quotation. If can do that in two seconds, you are much faster than this semi-handicapped 66 year old. More power to you. No, I can't do _that_ in two seconds, but that would be a very foolish way to select the text you want to quote. In any case, you can just delete the quotes you're _not_ replying to from the 'old quoted data'. And in most newsreaders, you can select the desired quotes first, press "reply" (or something similar) next, and your reply- window will open containing just the selected quotes. If I say I can cross the street in three seconds, that doesn't mean I can do it on hands and knees. -- Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
Ron Hunter wrote:
Robert Spanjaard wrote: OTOH, Ron seems to care a lot about the two seconds it takes to quote properly, which suggests he doesn't have much time left... Two seconds? I have to select the text to be quoted, copy to the clipboard, select 'reply', delete old quoted data, dropdown a menu, and select past as quotation. Well, of course you have any right to deliberately choose an awkward and inefficient way to accomplish a task. But if you do so then complaining about how inconvenient and time consuming it is sounds kind of silly. jue |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
On 2009-06-25 15:50:14 -0700, Ron Hunter said:
Robert Spanjaard wrote: On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:29:05 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote: Is it too late to try, Ron? Her is what trimming looks like. It takes 10 times as long, and results in little information for the person who reads the post. What were we talking about? Sigh. ASAAR, are you sure about his age? Considering his childish behaviour, he still has a lot of growing up to do. OTOH, Ron seems to care a lot about the two seconds it takes to quote properly, which suggests he doesn't have much time left... Two seconds? I have to select the text to be quoted, copy to the clipboard, select 'reply', delete old quoted data, dropdown a menu, and select past as quotation. If can do that in two seconds, you are much faster than this semi-handicapped 66 year old. More power to you. Why do it that way? In Thunderbird, hit the "Reply" button; highlight the text you are going to remove - delete. (or add some snide note that you have snipped the superfluous text.) All you should have left is the text your response is aimed at - add your response below that and post. No copy & paste is required. ....and old fartdom is also one of my problems so don't use that excuse. :-) -- Regards, Savageduck |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
On 2009-06-25 15:53:02 -0700, Ron Hunter said:
John Navas wrote: On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:31:19 -0500, Ron Hunter wrote in : John Navas wrote: Please trim huge quotes to just a relevant portion, not the whole thing. Thanks. Maybe you have the time to do that, or a newsreader that makes it easy, but I have neither. Your headers say Thunderbird, which can do it easily. Would you like some help? Skipping to the end is vastly easier, and For you. unless you are one of the 5% of people who are still using dialup for newsgroup access, why bother? Because it's both wasteful and rude to others, who may be paying for metered Internet access, and who may have to manually scroll down to see your response -- I'll often not bother, especially when I'm on a small screen device. If you don't care about your audience, why bother posting at all? Come on, Ron, you're better than that. Actually, I don't care if you, or anyone else reads my posts, likes my posts, or likes the way I post. I express my opinion, or I give advice, or provide information. What you chose to do with it is your business. Then why waste your time posting anything? You might as well stand on a street corner and rail at the World. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers
In article , Ron Hunter
writes John Navas wrote: Please trim huge quotes to just a relevant portion, not the whole thing. Thanks. John, Maybe you have the time to do that, or a newsreader that makes it easy, but I have neither. If you have the time to read it then you have the time to trim it. If you have neither then you don't have the time to reply to it, so why troll? -- Kennedy Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed; A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed. Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Reason for so many focus errors we see today? | Don Stauffer | Digital Photography | 18 | June 25th 09 06:03 PM |
Reason for so many focus errors we see today? | Don Stauffer | Digital SLR Cameras | 17 | June 25th 09 06:03 PM |
Reason for so many focus errors we see today? | Doug Jewell[_3_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 2 | June 23rd 09 04:26 PM |
Reason for so many focus errors we see today? | Pete D | Digital Photography | 0 | June 23rd 09 01:02 PM |
Reason for so many focus errors we see today? | Pete D | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | June 23rd 09 01:02 PM |