Re: Service Manuals PDFs for Test Equipment available

From: Thomas P. Gootee (tomg_at_fullnet.com)
Date: 09/28/04 

Date: 27 Sep 2004 23:24:43 -0700

jeffm_@email.com (JeffM) wrote in message news:<f8b945bc.0409220950.940028e@posting.google.com>...
> >Many full service manuals available in PDF format:
> > Thomas P. Gootee
> >
> |Please preface posts of this type with [FS].
> | Chris Foley
>
> Yes. Note brackets. Include them in the prefix.
> Most folks are configured for bracketed text
> so that stuff like "PDFs" or "PDFs:" in the subject line won't get filtered.
>
> Same goes for [OT].
> Filters can then differentiate stuff like "Hot" or "Hot:".

OK, Jeff! Thanks for pointing out those brackets. I don't think I've
ever seen that syntax used, yet, even when "FS" WAS included in the
title, although adaptation of syntaxes' usage to filters'
characteristics seems very reasonable, and probably beneficial.

It will probably "catch on" by itself, though, if it's
beneficial-enough, don't you think? (Of course, for the simpletons
like me, who don't HAVE any "filters", your information is right on
target. [I use the web-accessed http://groups.google.com, so that I
can also do searches of the newsgroups' archive, which contains all
message-traffic from all groups, basically from the beginning of the
net. It's quite a goldmine, by the way.])

The following isn't *directly* related to your post, Jeff, or to you.
So please, don't be offended. But it's something that IS related, that
I've been wanting to air, here, for some time.

(Removing gauntlet. Preparing to throw down. Hoping dust from
gauntlet, settling on their shiny boots, riles potential adversaries.)

Comments are welcome, from everyone. (But don't necessarily expect
them to be freebies: If I'M wrong, I'd like to know WHY, and be
*PROPERLY* convinced. But if YOU'RE wrong, or even not completely or
provably right, you'll be "taking your chances". i.e. "Gloves are now
*OFF*.")

Here are some "off-the-cuff" remarks, just to get us started:

I still wonder why so many people seem to want to single out all "for
profit" posts for such "special treatment", and go to so much trouble
to try to "correct" the poster. (And I'm mostly talking about posts
that are at least somehow related to the interests of the newsgroup
that they're posted in.)

Note that I, too, often find it *extremely* inconvenient, when
searching for, say, information about repairing a particular make and
model of oscilloscope, to have to wade through mostly "for sale" posts
that happen to include that model. (That's why the "FS", or, excuse
me, "[FS]", in the title, can be so valuable.)

But that's not a very comparable type of situation, since my post was
just a URL, pointing to a list of PDF manuals that are for sale (which
did NOT, by the way, include any of the website's text, which was
"somehow" inserted by someone ELSE, into the post that Jeff replied to
(with a perfectly-acceptable manner and message, on his part), which
was a REPLY to my original URL-only post.).

And note that I even put "PDF" in the title, since it was suggested to
me, after a similar, previous post of mine that didn't include "PDF"
in the title, JUST so people who are searching for ONLY paper manuals
wouldn't have to be inconvenienced by my eeevil "PDF manuals for sale"
post. So I would say that I AM demonstrably sensitive to "the needs of
the many", and even considerate-enough to do something about it, when
it's been pointed out to me and I can understand why it would be "a
good thing", and not terribly damaging to my OWN cause (especially
when the ratio of "all of them", and their related time and effort, to
the one "me", and my related time and effort, is considered.)

Or is it, possibly, instead, because a certain type of people expect
manuals, and other intellectual property, to always be GIVEN away, FOR
FREE? Is that the REAL "objection", here?! What other "unexpected"
or bothersome-in-a-search-result material would you be wanting to have
flagged with a "[FS]", in my URL-only post?

The TITLE?? OK. Look: The vast majority of professionals,
quite-rightly, fully-expect to have to PAY for any and all manuals and
schematics that they need. And it is most likely, in MY hardly-humble
opinion, that the vast majority of people who are searching for
manuals will NEVER want to filter out 'all of the ones that are "for
sale"', since that is the MOST-likely-to-find type of search-result
that might actually lead them to what they are looking for (AND by far
the most-likely to have people behind it who have the means and the
motivation to provide the desired service or goods reliably and
quickly, whenever needed).

So, THEN, I guess, you might object to me not putting the "FS" or
"[FS]" in the title because omitting it might enable me to ruthlessly
"snare" a few cheap, gullible amateurs, "forcing" them to start to
look at my list of manuals that are (gasp!) NOT EVEN FREE! Horrors!!
Well, hey! If even ONE of THEM *buys* something, then I guess that
that's "a good thing", for ME (not to mention for all of the other
people who are positively *thrilled* to find the manual they were
wanting to buy, who really appreciate even just the fact that I'm IN
this business at ALL, and would like see it STAY that way). And I just
can't see much harm in it, at all, otherwise, either.

I can also note that in ALL of the cases that I'VE seen, where someone
ELSE, other than ME, posts the exact-same URL, or one of my several
other FOR-profit URLs (and note that I have many that are NON-profit,
too [not that THAT should matter, though!), *NO* ONE, ever, EVER,
chastises THEM, and says, "Oh! Hey! You posted a commercial or
for-profit URL and didn't mention that fact, in the title, or even in
your text!". Nope. Doesn't happen. Ever wonder WHY NOT??????!
(HINT!!!)

That's just a (very, very) *little* personally-bothersome, to me. But
it tells *volumes* about the person attempting to do the "correcting".
Hehe.

I could JUST-as-easily make a possibly-BETTER case for having things
turned around, so that only all posts involving NON-profit info should
always be flagged in their titles. After all, it could be that MANY,
or even MOST, people PREFER to deal with only for-profits i.e.
professionals, for MANY or MOST of their needs. And perhaps they can't
STAND wading through all of the amateur glop that turns up in search
results (or even all of the posts from hopeless amateurs wanting help
with their repairs, or, worse yet, offering repair ADVICE!), burning
up many searchers' valuable time.

Imagine if all (or even just a few) of "US" started "badgering" and
nagging THOSE people, with similar "net-cop" types of posts, saying
"You should *always* put "[NPA]" in your posts' titles, since you're
only a "non-profit amateur". {Or do you think that businesses and
professionals also have no business "clogging up", or at least
certainly not dominating, the (or any?) newsgroups? THIS one happens
to be about "electronics repair". Without "professionals", there
wouldn't even BE much of anything electronic, in this world (And
probably nothing electronic at ALL, actually. [Don't anyone even TRY
to argue that LAST point.]).}

Sounds "stupid", to you? Well, no more stupid than the other way
around, except maybe to the socialist types. But even THEY should
realize that they don't own the net ("Own?! What's "own" mean,
Vladimir?!" [Hehe. "Sorry" (not really). Couldn't resist! It never
ceases to amaze me how they (socialists, communists, etc) don't want
to have to earn and/or OWN, but still want to CONTROL, yet also don't
want "YOU AND ME" to own, *NOR* control. You and I are far too stupid
and untrustworthy, you see! (either that, or *they're* just criminals)
- By the way (BRIEF slightly-OT point): That *exact* same type of
thinking is behind gun-control efforts: "THEY" don't *TRUST* "you and
me"! (Either THAT, OR, they DO truly understand that the USA's 2nd
Amendment was WRITTEN by "guys who *JUST* got finished overthrowing
the government, using GUNS, and wisely wanted that same scenario to
always stay possible, in the future", and they're planning to do
something that they think will probably make us want to...(aha!):
overthrow the government, like, um, maybe too much more @%^%#
*socialism*, perhaps?! Or else they're just "useful idiots" for the
same cause...)].

It's a great BIG, beautiful, very-interesting world, out there!!
"Other people" do things you can't imagine, for (possibly good)
reasons that you also can't imagine. LEAVE THEM ALONE!!! They should
be allowed to do almost whatever they want, *JUST* as *YOU* are (i.e.
without YOUR understanding OR (ugh!) "permission"). THAT'S almost
perfection, in it's own way. Besides, you're probably totally WASTING
*your* own time, ESPECIALLY if you're reaching THIS deep, for things
to "complain about" (i.e. to try to *CONTROL*...). *MAYBE* you could
try using your astonishingly-and-beautifully-complex human mind to try
to produce something wonderful, instead of for trying to inhibit
others' pursuits.

(But that's NOT to say that you might not have a RIGHT to try to
inhibit other's pursuits; just that you might be a JERK, if you do.
For you non-English-speaking people, the translation of "JERK" would
probably be: "***", or maybe even "FUCKHEAD". [Please pardon my
almost-illiterate level of French.])

But, keep in mind, if you can, that I did, above, and *DO*, AGREE with
the CONCEPT, and, mostly, with the PRACTICE, of adding appropriate
[FS] or FS (or FA, etc) notes, to the titles of MANY posts. Just not
in *THIS* type of case (at least).

See the above paragraphs, again, if you STILL think I'm wrong. Repeat
previous statement, ad infinitum.

That's it, for now. I just HAVE to go try to be productive ("for
profit!", I hope).

Bring it on, people, and have at it (and me?). All comments and
arguments, both pro and con, are almost insisted on.

I'll try to check back, in a day or so.

Hehe: If there's a firefight going, when I get back, I'll lob in at
least a few hopefully-well-placed grenades, if I can be absolutely
sure of avoiding friendly-fire casualties. Otherwise, I'll probably
either resort to close-in or even hand-to-hand combat, or, find a good
sniper position. I won't hold my breath waiting for the $@$#%
air-support, either. On the other hand, if I'm ambushed, alone, or
overwhelmed by superior numbers of opposing forces, I'll probably have
to either use any available tactical nuclear weapons or die
fighting... or, both.

[It's late. What can you expect? Hehe.]

Cheers!

Tom

--------

"NO advertising, anywhere, EVER!!":

"Everything for FREE!!! ALL the time!!!", at:

******************************

******************************

******************************

http://www.fullnet.com/u/tomg !!!

******************************

******************************

******************************

Includes the new smash hit: "Come get your FREE LUNCH, as often as you
want!"

by TANSTAAFL!!! ALWAYS FREE!!! AND ALWAYS WAS!!!

----------------------------------------

"It's only 295... ... HUNDRED dollars!"

...

CLI-MATE con-trol...??

...

"Antelope Freeway - 1/4 Mile"

"Antelope Freeway - 1/8 Mile"

"Antelope Freeway - 1/16 Mile"

"Antelope Freeway - 1/32 Mile"

"Antelope Freeway - 1/64 Mile"

"Antelope Freeway - 1/128 Mile"

...

"HEY!!! What are you guys doing in my CAR??!!"

(OK. THAT part was from an old "Firesign Theatre" comedy LP. - Tom)

------------------