I typically change the subject header when I reply to a post that I consider OT with the hopes that the original poster gets my point that way...
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:46 PM Sellam Abraham via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > This is really funny. Do you all realize how many times we've gone over > this over the past 25 years? > > As Bill poignantly explained, maybe instead of trying to establish a > cut-off date, we instead think outside of the box: > > If enough people object to a topic, it stops. Let's call it three > objections. If three different people reply to a post objecting to it then > whoosh, off it goes into the bit bucket, never to be spoken of again. > > Example: > > Someone A: Hey, is it OK if I talk about Windows 11? > Someone B: Objection. > Someone C: Objection. > Someone D: Objection. > Someone A: Ok, sorry [bashfully skulks away] > > Food for thought. > > Sellam > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 8:33 PM Tony Jones via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > > Traffic on the list is so low I'm not seeing the issue. I'm also not > > seeing complaints about threads being off topic. Seems like solution > > seeking a problem. > > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 8:28 PM Chris via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > > wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday, December 20, 2022, 11:11:27 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk > < > > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I was not disagreeing with you. > > > > > > > > > Ok. Wonderful. I guess we've sufficiently established that from > > henceforth > > > anything dang-old is totally on topic. Any detractors? :) > > > > > > Transcoding as in vcr to mpegs? I wasn't suggesting XP was utterly > > > entirely useless. Video editing in a modern sense requires loads of > > > processing h.p. to be efficient. And no transcodimg is necessary. > > Certainly > > > not an expert. But I should think older hardware would be very very > slow. > > >
