Re: The ultimate luxury ?

From: Jesse F. Hughes (jesse_at_phiwumbda.org)
Date: 08/04/04 

Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:57:20 +0200

jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:

> In article <sWNPc.7854$Jp6.2035@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> Bo Grimes <vcg3rd@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>On Tue, 03 Aug 04 12:11:13 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com <jmfbahciv@aol.com>
> wrote:
>>> In article <oPLPc.7757$Jp6.937@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
>>> Bo Grimes <vcg3rd@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> You keep removing sci.physics. In order to answer your question,
>>> I have to keep adding it back in case you post again. I'm
>>> not going to wipe your snot again. If you want me to answer
>>> a question, you have to include the newsgroup I'm reading.
>>
>>Nice move to avoid the fact that you used 'sort' to
>>mean 'thread' exactly as
>>you said I shouldn't and that this whole thing has been a semantic play to
>>save face on your part.
>
> Your reading comprehension needs work.
>>
>>I *did* include sci.physics,
>
> No, you didn't. The only newsgroup in the line for that post was
> the linux advocacy group.

BULL***.

This is just utter bull***.

See <oPLPc.7757$Jp6.937@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>. It's on
Google Groups now. The Newsgroup line is this:

Discussies:comp.os.linux.advocacy, sci.physics

(Sorry for the Dutch there. Google keeps deciding I prefer it, and
evidently their foreign language versions translate the header.)

Now, it is unlikely in the extreme that the header was somehow mangled
on the way to your server and sci.physics was mysteriously dropped.
So what is your explanation for the discrepancy between your claim and
the truth?

Is it that you don't understand Followup-To headers? This was set to
COLA, so that probably, when you tried to followup, your client obeyed
the header and dropped sci.physics *in your followup*. But it is not
at all the case that Bo posted only to COLA.

>> ...or can't you read headers? When did you begin
>>subscribing to cola? I just set a follow-up to where I'm posting from. No
>>one was forcing you to follow it;
>
> So you are trying to undo the software. I was beginning to suspect
> so.

"Undo the software"? What the *** does that mean?

He used the header in an appropriate way. From son-of-RFC1036:

 6.1. Followup-To

          The Followup-To header contents specify which newsgroup(s)
          followups should be posted to:

               Followup-To-content = Newsgroups-content / "poster"

          The syntax is the same as that of the Newsgroups content,
          with the exception that the magic word "poster" means that
          followups should be mailed to the article's reply address
          rather than posted. In the absence of Followup-To, the
          default newsgroup(s) for a followup are those in the News-
          groups header.

               NOTE: The way to request that followups be mailed
               to a specific address other than that in the From
               line is to supply "Followup-To: poster" and a
               Reply-To header. Putting a mailing address in the
               Followup-To line is incorrect; posting agents
               should reject or rewrite such headers.

               NOTE: There is no syntax for "no followups
               allowed" because "Followup-To: poster" accom-
               plishes this effect without extra machinery.

          Although it is generally desirable to limit followups to the
          smallest reasonable set of newsgroups, especially when the
          precursor was cross-posted widely, posting agents SHOULD not
          supply a Followup-To header except at the poster's explicit
          request.

               NOTE: In particular, it is incorrect for the post-
               ing agent to assume that followups to a cross-
               posted article should be directed to the first
               newsgroup only. Trimming the list of newsgroups
               should be the poster's decision, not the posting
               agent's. However, when an article is to be cross-
               posted to a considerable number of newsgroups, a
               posting agent might wish to SUGGEST to the poster
               that followups go to a shorter list.

Some clients also ask respondents if they wish to obey a followup-to
header. At least Gnus does.

>
>> ... in fact, you managed to somehow figure out
>>how to respond just fine and still manage to avoid the questions.
>
> I had to edit the newsgroups line to include s.p.

In *your* followup. Not Bo's post.

>>Since you seem to be the only one in sci.physics
>
> You need to reexamine your assumptions. Just because nobody
> is commenting does not mean that they're not interested. The
> fact that they're letting me be the only fighter in this
> biz is almost proof that they're enjoying it and not bored :-).

Uh-huh. The lurkers support you in silence.

>>....well, just maybe you shouldn't be so quick to respond with a
> patronizing
>>tone.
>
> Snotty is as snotty does. Whenever management needed the snot
> removed, I got the job so that our bit gods didn't have to waste
> their time on puerile behaviour. Since I was real efficient,
> I would do a snotectomy rather than momentary Kleenix wipes.
>
> There was only one person who needed to be de-snotted by the
> bit gods. It wasn't a pretty sight. Do not piss off bit gods
> if you ever want to login again in your life time :-).

Really, the end result of this exchange has been more evidence that
jmfbah does not understand Usenet headers. 

-- 
"'Every man who has ever lived holds tight to the belief that for him
alone the laws of probability are canceled out by love[...] Therefore,
you will marry Guinevere.  You do not want advice --- only agreement.'
Merlin sighed..."  -- John Steinbeck
Quantcast