Confused about todays updates

[DanS]

Zaphod Beeblebrox <[email protected]>
wrote in

Nah, I'll be fine - as long as you are a good boy of course
;-)

Fair enough, but his philosophy was fairly clear (to me, at
least) from his other posts in the thread. My assumption
was that you had seen them - perhaps a bad assumption on my
part.

Hmmmmm....in looking back at the thread, I believe his post
and my reply asking for clarification was the first post of
his in this thread......I may be mistaken.

OT: You said you had been trying XNews out....it looks like
the version you are using is the one from the full install
package and not the one called out as the "test version".
You'll want to use the "test version", which is essentially
just the latst build of the exe file that Liu Tran has
released. It's not *really* a test version.

Also, since you are replying to my post, you've seen probably
the biggest issue with XNews....when you get so deep into a
thread, the posts aren't shown properly in the "tree", but
instead show as just lined up below each other, so this post
isn't indented from the one I'm replying to.

I usually bail from a thread before it gets this deep anyway,
so usually it isn't a problem.

 

[Nil]

Also, since you are replying to my post, you've seen probably
the biggest issue with XNews....when you get so deep into a
thread, the posts aren't shown properly in the "tree", but
instead show as just lined up below each other, so this post
isn't indented from the one I'm replying to.

I usually bail from a thread before it gets this deep anyway,
so usually it isn't a problem.

There's a setting in xnews.ini that controls that, MaxThreadDepth.
Default is 20 - I have mine bumped out to 30, but beyond that is too
much to display, anyway.

I find that once a thread gets to that point it's usually devolved into
a flame war or has gone on an irrelevant tangent, so I'm usually out of
it by then.

 

[Ray]

"Gene E. Bloch" wrote in message

You must mean me. My evidence? I am still reading this whole thread, so
obviously I need to resume my meds - and somehow, you knew.

It might work better if you put your reply *before* the signature
delimiter

 

[DanS]

There's a setting in xnews.ini that controls that,
MaxThreadDepth. Default is 20 - I have mine bumped out to
30, but beyond that is too much to display, anyway.

Nice!!!!! Thank you for this.

I find that once a thread gets to that point it's usually
devolved into a flame war or has gone on an irrelevant
tangent, so I'm usually out of it by then.

This is true, and usually why I bail........

.....thanks for the tip.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Aw, now you gave it away.

Yeah, I was never good a keeping secrets, especially the secret
handshake...

So they kicked me out of the club, and now I have to spend my days on
Usenet.

 

[Alex Clayton]

Yeah, I was never good a keeping secrets, especially the secret
handshake...

So they kicked me out of the club, and now I have to spend my days on
Usenet.

I could never remember the damn secret knock and they frowned on writing
it down to keep in my wallet.

--
I met a Genie today that said she would grant me one wish.

"I want to live forever," I said.

"Sorry," said the Genie, "I'm not allowed to grant wishes like that!"

"Fine," I said, "then I want to die after Congress gets their heads out
of their a$$e$!"

"You crafty bastard," said the Genie.

 

[Paul]

"Gene E. Bloch" wrote in message

It might work better if you put your reply *before* the signature
delimiter

Just in case anyone hasn't mentioned it,

Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513

is a non standards compliant way of posting to USENET. WLM 15
doesn't do USENET posts properly, leading to issues with the
ability of other persons to read your posts properly.

There are plenty of other news reader softwares, which work OK.
Even WLM 14 works better than WLM 15, for example.

The signature delimiter in a posting, is

dash dash space carriage-return

If you post below that item, your posting appears in gray text
which is hard to read. And then, people can't figure out where
your reply went. And a proper news reader, deletes the signature
from a reply, so your comment would then be discarded. Which is
a pain for other users to deal with.

(Ref)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signature_block

"The formatting of the sig block is prescribed somewhat more firmly:

(i.e., "-- \n")

allows software to automatically mark or remove the sig block"

(End Ref)

There are lots more news readers here. I use one from the Free/Open Source group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Usenet_newsreaders

HTH,
Paul

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

I could never remember the damn secret knock and they frowned on writing it
down to keep in my wallet.

That's why encryption was invented

I've forgotten who it was in some newsgroup whose signature assured us
that his posts' security is guaranteed by double ROT-13 encryption.

 

[Ken Blake]

Just in case anyone hasn't mentioned it,

Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513

is a non standards compliant way of posting to USENET. WLM 15
doesn't do USENET posts properly, leading to issues with the
ability of other persons to read your posts properly.

It doesn't even do e-mail properly. It doesn't put the > sign in
quotes there either.

 

[Char Jackson]

That's why encryption was invented

I've forgotten who it was in some newsgroup whose signature assured us
that his posts' security is guaranteed by double ROT-13 encryption.

I seem to remember reading that double ROT-13 had been hacked.
Quadruple ROT-13 might be the way to go.

 

[Alex Clayton]

That's why encryption was invented

Now days they probably have an app for it. One more reason I should get
a "smart phone" I guess. I tease my Wife now and then about how we seem
to be the only members of the family who have not yet traded our dumb
phones for smart ones.

 

[BillW50]

This is true, and usually why I bail........

....thanks for the tip.

Careful! It is also true that truth comes in three stages.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second,
it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer -- German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

 

[Char Jackson]

Careful! It is also true that truth comes in three stages.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second,
it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer -- German philosopher (1788 - 1860)

You seem to be stuck at the first stage.

 

[BillW50]

In

You seem to be stuck at the first stage.

I am at the final stage and waiting for the rest to catch up (nothing
new for me). Why what is your problem?

 

[Bob I]

Yeah, I was never good a keeping secrets, especially the secret
handshake...

So they kicked me out of the club, and now I have to spend my days on
Usenet.

At least not wandering aimlessly! ;-)

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

At least not wandering aimlessly! ;-)

I can't - you didn't leave me a leg to stand on (or wander on)...

 

[Nil]

I am at the final stage and waiting for the rest to catch up
(nothing new for me). Why what is your problem?

You are all-seeing eye of God. You obviously know it - all you have to
do is wait for the rest of us to worship you.

It will happen any minute now.

Really.

Wait for it...

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

alt.windows7.general:

You are all-seeing eye of God. You obviously know it - all you have to
do is wait for the rest of us to worship you.

It will happen any minute now.

Wait for it...

December 21, 2012, by any chance?

 

[Paul]

December 21, 2012, by any chance?

You can't.

The Mayans have booked the bar for a private celebration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_phenomenon

Maybe you could hold your event on the 22nd ?

Paul

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

You can't.

The Mayans have booked the bar for a private celebration.

Maybe you could hold your event on the 22nd ?

Paul

From your post, I can't tell whether you realize that I was alluding to
that...

By coincidence, I happened to go to that Wikipedia page yesterday - I
was programming the times of the solstices and equinoxes into my
calendar yesterday and Google pointed there, but that page was not
useful for the purpose.

I've been telling people for the last few months that every year I
always thought the world was going to end on December 31, since most
printed calendars for *any* year end on that date. Most people reject
my idea, though