Panasonic Vs Kodak Vs Minolta Vs Canon

Ryadia wrote:

Incidentally... Alan's sig is 5 lines in total (4 plus separator). Like I
said in my first post: Some people choose to use the "rules" when it suits
them and deny all knowledge of them when it doesn't. That is just human
nature. If Alan is to be the (unofficial) policeman of this group, then I
will point out his short comings (and there are more than just his sig) when
he gets up someone for doing something he doesn't like. Live and let live,
Alan. And hey... When did you get the DSLR? I thought you were a film kinda
guy.

1) The seperator is inserted by Netscape. 2) 4 lines are hardly abusive. 3) The
Charter for this NG says 4 lines in a sig. 4) The whole point of this NG is
digital SLR equipment and someone stumbled in here with the right question in
the wrong place... all I did was tell his where the right place was. 5) I don't
answer to you. 6) Yeah I shoot film and no doubt I'll be shooting more digital
in the future.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.

In article , Ryadia
wrote:

A lot of use of Usenet and the quasi standards adopted were from teletext.
Using a personal sig longer than 3 lines with a separator above, added
significant load to messages. If you really are interested in this totally
off topic subject, do a search on Yahoo or Goggle for personal sig RFC. That
should make your day!

I suggest you do the search, bub. You are wrong ( you probably know you
are wrong). The proper etiquette is no more than 4 lines not including
the seperator. The seperator is not part of the signature. It is an
indicator so that properly written newsreaders will know that it is the
signature below the seperator and the message above, so that when
posting a followup that includes quoted text, the signature is not
quoted, it is omitted in the quoted text in the followup.

--
Charles

Amen, top posting is my preference also and I will continue to do it. I do
not wish to scroll to the bottom of the page to wade through everything I
have already read.

"David H. Lipman" wrote in message
news:VvNrd.9587$_E3.342@trndny06...
I always post On Topic. Replies in a thread may go Off Topic.
I almost always Top Post. It is my preference and *I will continue* to do
so.

The rest of my replies are inline...

"Ryadia" wrote in message
...
| So David...
| Does not the charter of this group seek to avoid/prevent/discourage top
| posting?

No. It discourages 80 chars/line and more than 4 lines/sig.
When I stated they were stringent rules. A very wise a smart man
replied...
"That part of the charter is more of a suggested practice as opposed to
'hard rules' that are set out higher up in the charter.

There is rarely an excuse for more than a few lines in a sig. The bit
about 80 chars is for those who have funky readers that don't wrap
intelligently."


| Did you not break the charter yourself just now?

No



| Perhaps I see the stupidity of having a set of guidelines (rules?) in
the
| form of a Charter which are only ever used or evoked by people when
*they*
| feel like it. Those same people - which you can now class yourself as
one -
| turn a blind eye to their own activities which are outside the charter
| whenever it suits them. What does that make you, David?


A UseNet proponent who has been posting for ~15 years.

Dave

top posting is the way to go IMO ...

"MrB" a écrit dans le message de
...
Amen, top posting is my preference also and I will continue to do it. I do
not wish to scroll to the bottom of the page to wade through everything I
have already read.

"David H. Lipman" wrote in message
news:VvNrd.9587$_E3.342@trndny06...
I always post On Topic. Replies in a thread may go Off Topic.
I almost always Top Post. It is my preference and *I will continue* to
do
so.

The rest of my replies are inline...

"Ryadia" wrote in message
...
| So David...
| Does not the charter of this group seek to avoid/prevent/discourage
top
| posting?

No. It discourages 80 chars/line and more than 4 lines/sig.
When I stated they were stringent rules. A very wise a smart man
replied...
"That part of the charter is more of a suggested practice as opposed to
'hard rules' that are set out higher up in the charter.

There is rarely an excuse for more than a few lines in a sig. The bit
about 80 chars is for those who have funky readers that don't wrap
intelligently."


| Did you not break the charter yourself just now?

No



| Perhaps I see the stupidity of having a set of guidelines (rules?) in
the
| form of a Charter which are only ever used or evoked by people when
*they*
| feel like it. Those same people - which you can now class yourself as
one -
| turn a blind eye to their own activities which are outside the charter
| whenever it suits them. What does that make you, David?


A UseNet proponent who has been posting for ~15 years.

Dave