On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:07 PM, <ru...@yahoo.com> wrote: > However it does not change the fact that people here have responded > in rather extreme way to GG posts including calling GG users "twits" > and claiming GG posts damage their eyesight, as well as repeatedly > denying the obvious fact that GG is much easier to use for many than > to subscribe to a usenet provider or to a mailing list. One frequently > sees words like "crap", "slimy", "rubbish" etc to describe GG posts > which is pretty intimating to people who just want some help with a > python question using a tool they already know how to use and have > had no complaints about in other places.
Please note though that there is a difference between describing the users as twits and describing the posts as slimy. Suppose you write a letter (the sort that goes on a slab of dead tree) and, instead of placing it in an envelope and putting a stamp on it, you hand it to the Arac News Insertion Device[1] to do the enveloping for you. He does a reasonable job of it, but he uses cobwebs instead of paper for the envelope. Sure, it's still readable... but your readers now have to rub off a whole lot of cobwebs before they can read what you said. That makes your post distasteful, without it being at all your fault - other than choosing to use Arac's service. That's how I see Google Groups posts. Someone's gone looking for help about Python and has found that. It's not their fault that they don't know about alternatives; so I point out the alternatives. ChrisA [1] http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/princess_ida/webop/pi_04.html On the whole we are Not intelligent... -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list