René Berber wrote:
> Yes but... the problem is caused by the terminfo data you showed:
> columns is not defined.
> Try "echo $COLUMNS"... now "export COLUMNS=80; top"; does it work?
COLUMNS is getting set someplace:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ echo $COLUMNS
80
Any other ideas?
David
> I suspect it has something to do with the lines/columns settings.
> Try resizing the window before running top to make it recalculate
> size. Or run something like "eval `resize`".
Again, my preference is that the sshd host work correctly with the Cygwin ssh
client.
Davi
debian-user:
I've been chasing a problem with Cygwin ssh and Debian 3.1 top. Here's my
original posting to debian-user:
-Original Message-
From: David Christensen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 9:13 PM
To: 'debian-user@lists.debian.org'
Subje
On Tue September 20 2005 06:11 pm, Dan Jacobson wrote:
> It's the time seen in the beginning of /var/log/boot that bugs me, why
> is it GMT+16 hours?
Is that the time the kernel was built?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL P
(Was Re: why early boot timezone so east?)
What is the time of the beginning part of your /var/log/boot, as
compared to the latter part of your /var/log/boot, as compared with
your local time, as compared to the time in your BIOS setup menu. Mine
is GMT+16, GMT+8, GMT+8, GMT+8.
On my two unconnect
> When I ssh into one of my Debian 3.0 boxes from WinXP Pro/ Cygwin, top
> works as expected.
>
>
> When I ssh into my Debian 3.1 box from WinXP Pro/Cygwin, top seems to be
> inserting multiple line feeds at the end of each line:
>
>
>4 root 5 -10
debian-user:
I'm still having trouble with top via ssh from Cygwin to Debian 3.1, but not to
Debian 3.0. I updated both Cygwin and Debian 3.1 today.
Any suggestions?
TIA,
David
-Original Message-
From: David Christensen
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 9:13 PM
To:
Subject: C
A couple of years ago, I found a reference on the web
(which I can no longer locate) that explained how to
keep gnome-panel always on top.
I had this applied under woody, and it worked
beautifully in conjuction with auto-hide.
However, following an upgrade to sarge, always on top
is no longer in
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:24:07 -0500 (CDT)
"Michael Martinell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, July 8, 2005 8:45 pm, Cybe R. Wizard said:
> >>
> > Yes, that makes perfect sense and reiterates what I have said; that
> > if a thing has dropped in price 2000-fold /someone/ should now be
> > pa
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 08:43:32 -0400
Stephen R Laniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How many people do you think have 1.4-gig email
> archives? Gmail's original 1-gig archive was supposed to be
> enough for a lifetime.
Mine's about 500 megs, for what that's worth. Much of that is from
various mailin
On 2005-07-08, michael wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 12:59 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 08:43:32 -0400
>> Stephen R Laniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Earlier in our lives, it was a big deal when hard-disk
>> > prices fell below $1 per megabyte. I recently bought a
>>
On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 10:33:12PM -0400, Michael Z Daryabeygi wrote:
> However, the poster above could be correct that someone should be paying
> him if a price drops by 2000-fold. We are not dealing with Zeno's
> paradox because of the order of operations and that "fold" can mean
> multiply
Chris Bannister wrote:
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:
On Fri, July 8, 2005 8:45 pm, Cybe R. Wizard said:
Yes, that makes perfect sense and reiterates what I have said; that if a
thing has dropped in price 2000-fold /someone/ should now be paying me
to use
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:
>
> On Fri, July 8, 2005 8:45 pm, Cybe R. Wizard said:
> >>
> > Yes, that makes perfect sense and reiterates what I have said; that if a
> > thing has dropped in price 2000-fold /someone/ should now be paying me
> > to use their ha
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 10:45:56PM -0400, Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 08:47:48PM -0500, Jacob S wrote:
> > Ugh... and I thought HTML e-mail took a ton of disk space compared to
> > plain text. An inline reply would make the e-mail more than double in
> > size!
>
> XML is chat
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 10:46:35PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:
>
> On Fri, July 8, 2005 10:25 pm, Carl Fink said:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:
> >
> >> Following these statements and math, one is always dividing, not
> >> subtracting. No matter how ma
On Fri, July 8, 2005 10:25 pm, Carl Fink said:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:
>
>> Following these statements and math, one is always dividing, not
>> subtracting. No matter how many times you divide you are still left
>> with
>> parts. If you then call each
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:24:07PM -0500, Michael Martinell wrote:
> Following these statements and math, one is always dividing, not
> subtracting. No matter how many times you divide you are still left with
> parts. If you then call each of the new parts a whole and divide it you
> never end
On Fri, July 8, 2005 8:45 pm, Cybe R. Wizard said:
>>
> Yes, that makes perfect sense and reiterates what I have said; that if a
> thing has dropped in price 2000-fold /someone/ should now be paying me
> to use their hardware. Isn't it similar to the problem in saying that
> something costs, say,
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 19:40:11 +0100
michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 12:59 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 08:43:32 -0400
> > Stephen R Laniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Earlier in our lives, it was a big deal when hard-disk
> > > prices fe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm not sure how the = signs got into my message. I don't use MS products, and
in fact, refuse to use Windows, and I am using a plain-text editor to compose my
mail. The = signs almost look like some kind of margin bell or something turned
on either
On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 12:59 -0500, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 08:43:32 -0400
> Stephen R Laniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Earlier in our lives, it was a big deal when hard-disk
> > prices fell below $1 per megabyte. I recently bought a
> > 200-gig drive for $100. Assume the
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 08:43:32 -0400
Stephen R Laniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Earlier in our lives, it was a big deal when hard-disk
> prices fell below $1 per megabyte. I recently bought a
> 200-gig drive for $100. Assume the $1-per-meg limit
> was hit 15 years ago (I think it was less than tha
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 09:56:29 -0400
Stephen R Laniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 06:31:35AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Which is marketing talking, not technical realities. How many
> > people do I
> > think have 1.4Gb archives? It's easier to ask me how many I th
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 08:43:32 -0400
Stephen R Laniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 07:31:01AM -0500, Jacob S wrote:
> > the extras such as font size and color. This means my mail archive
> > would be at least 4.2GB and easily more, instead of 1.4GB. Sorry,
> > but that's not j
Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> I get a few hundred messages a day, and I never delete any
> mail other than spam. My archives over the last *four years*
> total about 900 megs.
Happy for ya. My dad hasn't upgraded his email client in 5 years and has
mail going back 5 years beyond that. Just becau
Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> Speaking of netiquette (since the topic is top-posting,
> which is supposedly a violation of some norm or other),
> being a screamy dick in email is a violation. I'll only
> respond to the un-angry folks.
Nope, not screaming. As I prefaced, since y
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 06:31:35AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Which is marketing talking, not technical realities. How many people do I
> think have 1.4Gb archives? It's easier to ask me how many I think don't have
> such large archives. Webmail users. People who use local clients often hav
N CONTEXT WITH
> THE QUOTE WHICH PRECEEDS IT!
Speaking of netiquette (since the topic is top-posting,
which is supposedly a violation of some norm or other),
being a screamy dick in email is a violation. I'll only
respond to the un-angry folks.
--
Stephen R. Laniel
[EMAIL PROTECTED
Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> How many people do you think have 1.4-gig email
> archives? Gmail's original 1-gig archive was supposed to be
> enough for a lifetime.
Which is marketing talking, not technical realities. How many people do I
think have 1.4Gb archives? It's easier to ask me how many
Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> This XML format would be no more of a burden on sysadmins
> than HTML email or large attachments. Less, in fact.
Point being that any increase of message size cannot be blithely dismissed
at one level without looking at the impact on other levels.
> The word 'impossi
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 07:31:01AM -0500, Jacob S wrote:
> the extras such as font size and color. This means my mail archive would
> be at least 4.2GB and easily more, instead of 1.4GB. Sorry, but that's
> not just a difference of a "few hundred extra megabytes".
How many people do you think hav
;
> > The trouble is that everybody has different standards: some
> > like inline quotes, some like top-posting, and some like
> > bottom-posting. Rather than get exercised about others'
> > aesthetic choices, we should let our programs format our
> > mail the way
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 01:44:08AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Now apply that to the providers that have to transport and store several
> hundred thousand in a day.
Oh, the overworked sysadmin with limited disk space. I read
about him and his overloaded servers just the other day in
the pages o
On 7/8/05, Haines Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Until then, markups are a pain. The passages I've quoted above are
> an example. I had the impression the "=" to mark a carriage return was
> a peculiar effect of Windows editors, and my emacs re-fill command
> treats them as an ordinary characte
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 07:22:23PM -0400, Lorenzo Taylor wrote:
> > Wow! I really like the XML approach. But how are you going to get all t=
> he
> > email programs in the world to use it? It seems too late to make such a =
> smart
> > new approach to email a standard now as old as email is.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 01:30:52 -0400
Lorenzo Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is why it's called "extensible markup language". We could all be
> doing things with email that until today no one even thought possible.
> But since
> there is currently no XML standard, a few like-minded people
has different standards: some
> like inline quotes, some like top-posting, and some like
> bottom-posting. Rather than get exercised about others'
> aesthetic choices, we should let our programs format our
> mail the way we want.
Not possible because, as I pointed out, when one
Jacob S wrote:
> What happened to humans being smart enough to make things look neat and
> clean?
It went away around the time when humans stopped taking responsibility for
their own actions.
> When I first came to this list, I observed how others posted, received a
> few tips when I messed u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephen R Laniel's comments on Re: OT (and Flamebait): Top-Posting were as
follows:
# I've had similar ideas recently about using XML for conf
# files in /etc, but that would take a bit of elaboration.
# I'll save that for another time
On Thursday 07 July 2005 07:45 pm, Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> The trouble is that everybody has different standards: some
> like inline quotes, some like top-posting, and some like
> bottom-posting. Rather than get exercised about others'
> aesthetic choices, we should let our pr
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 07:22:23PM -0400, Lorenzo Taylor wrote:
> Wow! I really like the XML approach. But how are you going to get all the
> email programs in the world to use it? It seems too late to make such a smart
> new approach to email a standard now as old as email is. Then again, if H
u. Not on hard disks that *start* at 40 gigs.
> What happened to humans being smart enough to make things look neat and
> clean?
The trouble is that everybody has different standards: some
like inline quotes, some like top-posting, and some like
bottom-posting. Rather than get exercised abo
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 19:22:23 -0400
Lorenzo Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Stephen R Laniel's comments on Re: OT (and Flamebait): Top-Posting
> were as follows: # On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 02:52:41P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Stephen R Laniel's comments on Re: OT (and Flamebait): Top-Posting were as
follows:
# On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 02:52:41PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
#
#
# This is some stuff that a guy wrote
#
#
#
#
Stephen R Laniel wrote:
> I wonder if I may be so bold as to suggest the final word
> about top- or bottom-posting. Here it is:
Nope. Here's the final word.
> Your email program should be smart enough to customize to
> your preference.
Pipe dream.
> Email messages
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 02:52:41PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> At the risk of starting yet another war about top-posting, I just came
> across this (year-old) blog by what appears to be the guy who wrote
> (with a couple of others) the IMAP support in Microsoft's Entourage
> (&qu
At the risk of starting yet another war about top-posting, I just came
across this (year-old) blog by what appears to be the guy who wrote
(with a couple of others) the IMAP support in Microsoft's Entourage
("Outlook for the Mac") product.
Two things he said that caught my attenti
On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 09:41:02AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Kent West wrote:
> > I'm in America (USA to be specific), and I avoid math whenever I can.
> > It's calculators for me, whenever possible. :-)
>
> Is it bad of me that I avoid calculators whenever possible and instead go
> for a P
Kent West wrote:
> I'm in America (USA to be specific), and I avoid math whenever I can.
> It's calculators for me, whenever possible. :-)
Is it bad of me that I avoid calculators whenever possible and instead go
for a Python prompt? :D
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest,
Chris Bannister wrote:
>
>mmm, maths, short for mathematics whereas math is short for maths?
>Mathematics is plural like arithmetic is singular?
>
>
>Is 'math' used for maths only in America?
>
>
>
I'm in America (USA to be specific), and I avoid math whenever I can.
It's calculators for me, wh
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 12:29:06AM -0700, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> In math (or maths, ifs yous plurals yours words), it's *greatest* common
> denominator.
mmm, maths, short for mathematics whereas math is short for maths?
Mathematics is plural like arithmetic is singular?
Is 'math' used for ma
on Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 09:09:25PM -0400, Patrick Wiseman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On 6/10/05, Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 12:46:20PM -0700, Caleb Walker wrote:
> > > Carl Fink wrote:
> > >
> > > >Just out of curiosity: you do realize that "LCD" is an insu
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 11:36:42PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
> >Kent West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>What is the difference between a duck?
> >>
> >>(Which I _still_ don't get.)
> >>
> >>
> >And that, I believe, is the point. Kinda like one hand clapping
On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 01:29:23PM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Monday 13 June 2005 04:48 am, Basajaun wrote:
>
> > > Such
> > > people had the opinion rock was morally wrong and inferior to all other
> > > music. They may or may not have been right, but the point is it was only
> > > their opi
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 06:41 pm, Alex Malinovich wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 13:01 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> --snip--
>
> > No. We are close minded people, like those in the 1950s or before who
> > never
>
> ^^
>
> If I see one more post talking about "near-minded" people I'
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 13:01 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
--snip--
> No. We are close minded people, like those in the 1950s or before who never
^^
If I see one more post talking about "near-minded" people I'm going to
go even more insane. :) That one ranks up there with 'loosing my
truggle to disrupt a consensed
> way of communication, or ignorants who do so without being aware.
Vandals is a pretty strong and judgemental word. Are you sure they are
"struggling to disrupt" anything? Educating those who are not aware is good,
but does it have to go so far
Hal Vaughan wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 June 2005 01:41 am, Steve Lamb wrote:
> > Hal Vaughan wrote:
[snip]
> > > Putting a few sentences together in reverse order is not a comparison to
> > > top posting.
> >
> > Yes, it is because that is exactly what
erences between objective and subjective points of views. If
you didn't see it, go back, find them, *then* decide whether there's no
backup. I'm not going to repeat what I've already said in several posts.
> > Putting a few sentences together in reverse order is not a compa
Hal Vaughan wrote:
> Actually, they are not as objective as one would think.
Statement with no backup, gotta love it.
> Putting a few sentences together in reverse order is not a comparison to
> top posting.
Yes, it is because that is exactly what top posting does.
> Th
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 12:05 am, Alex Malinovich wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 22:33 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
> --snip--
>
> > you've noticed, I inline post, and rarely top post. I know that is how
> > it is done, but the will of the group is not always righ
Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>Kent West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>What is the difference between a duck?
>>
>>(Which I _still_ don't get.)
>>
>>
>And that, I believe, is the point. Kinda like one hand clapping or the
>trees/forest thing.
>
>
Ah-hah! Now I don't get it . . . . Thanks!
(A
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 15:58:15 -0500
Kent West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:04:41 -0700
> >Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>(*ducks*)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>*tosses peanuts back at the gallery!*
> >>
> >>
> >Ducks eat pean
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 22:33 -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
--snip--
> you've noticed, I inline post, and rarely top post. I know that is how it is
> done, but the will of the group is not always right. Where there is one,
You're absolutely right. The will of the group most d
Hal Vaughan wrote:
>... And policy can be enforced anal retentively
>
Is that why they're called analysts? ;-)
--
Kent
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > argument.
>
> Any pre-existing group dictates policy to newcomers. When I go into a
> new job, if they tell me to top post, I top post. When I go to a new
> mailing list, if they tell me to bottom post, I bottom post. If a new
> group doesn't specify how to post, I&#
On Monday June 13 2005 12:22 pm, Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:04:41 -0700
>
> Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > (*ducks*)
> >
> > *tosses peanuts back at the gallery!*
>
> Ducks eat peanuts?
Yes, I've seen it. At least the ducks I see around here will eat
almost a
go into a
new job, if they tell me to top post, I top post. When I go to a new
mailing list, if they tell me to bottom post, I bottom post. If a new
group doesn't specify how to post, I'll always bottom post since, in my
opinion, it makes the thread easier to read. The point is that in any
Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:04:41 -0700
>Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>>(*ducks*)
>>>
>>>
>>*tosses peanuts back at the gallery!*
>>
>>
>Ducks eat peanuts?
>
>
What is the difference between a duck?
(Which I _still_ don't get.)
--
Kent West
Tech
On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 12:04:41 -0700
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (*ducks*)
>
> *tosses peanuts back at the gallery!*
Ducks eat peanuts?
(sorry, sorry)
Cybe R. Wizard
--
Press 'START' to stop
Winduhs
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "u
On Monday 13 June 2005 02:36 pm, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Because we're not playing Jeopardy.
>
> Why is top-posting wrong?
>
> Put up top for the top posters who are too lazy to do it right.
Cute. Just so cute and original. I don't think I've seen that befo
e as all points in favor of interspersing and against top/bottom
> > posting are *objective within the context of the forum under discussion*
> > anyone who does adhere to them after being properly educated is sloppy or
> > lazy.
>
> Point is that since it is a matter of
Kent West wrote:
> Steve Lamb wrote:
>> Proofreading is a good thing. Why I never do it until the message is
>>delivered back to me is beyond me.
> ...
>>"and against top/bottomg posting ..."
> D'oh!
Meh, typos I'm less concerned about tha
Kent West wrote:
> "I say,", said Fred, "that's a giant tuber!". - - Incorrect, but
> technically more informative (or so I would think)
> (*ducks*)
*tosses peanuts back at the gallery!*
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5
Steve Lamb wrote:
>Proofreading is a good thing. Why I never do it until the message is
>delivered back to me is beyond me.
>
...
>"and against top/bottomg posting ..."
>
D'oh!
--
Kent West
Technology Support
/A/bilene /C/hristian /U/niversity
--
T
Steve Lamb wrote:
>For example there are rules on where punctuation
>is placed when using quotation marks.
>
>"I say," said Fred, "that's a giant tuber!" -- Correct
>
>"I say", said Fred, "that's a giant tuber"! -- Incorrect
>
>
"I say,", said Fred, "that's a giant tuber!". - - In
Proofreading is a good thing. Why I never do it until the message is
delivered back to me is beyond me.
Steve Lamb wrote:
> Point is that since it is a matter of technical detail, not moral nor
> subjective as all points in favor of interspersing and against top/bottom
> po
Because we're not playing Jeopardy.
Why is top-posting wrong?
Put up top for the top posters who are too lazy to do it right.
Hal Vaughan wrote:
> It is not a strawman argument.
It is.
> My point is that you have put yourself in a position to say, "This is
&
s nothing to
> do with efficiency or correctness.
It is not a strawman argument. My point is that you have put yourself in a
position to say, "This is right," you are making an absolute moral judgement
for all people and all time. Throughout your posts, until here, you say
non-top posting
Chris Bannister wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 09:55:57AM -0500, Kent West wrote:
>
>
>>Apparently I best not give up my day job, and should stay
>>away from the comedy-related fields.
>>
>>
>No please, I do and have appreciated your sense of humour.
>
>I've read your other post in this thr
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 09:55:57AM -0500, Kent West wrote:
> Apparently I best not give up my day job, and should stay
> away from the comedy-related fields.
No please, I do and have appreciated your sense of humour.
I think it was your reference(s) in the past to Monty Python
which brought a ch
s people follow your rules, they are open minded. People who don't
> > > are closed minded. So does it not occur to you that many people think
> > > differently than you, so top posting may work better for you?
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > Yes, and many peo
David P James wrote:
> On Thu 9 June 2005 22:12, Paul Johnson wrote:
> The only time when top-posting is equal (not superior - equal) to
> interspersed is under the following strict set of circumstances:
Even under those circumstances it isn't because most people don't
On Thu 9 June 2005 22:12, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> You've been around too many Outlook Express and Outlook users, then.
> Those are the only two clients that encourage top posting by default
> and make you strain to post properly, instead of the other way
> around.
Sad
On 10/6/2005, at 1:55, David Jardine wrote:
be getting out of hand :)
us a lecture on top posting sometime soon? It seems to
Isn't some authoritative voice on the list going to give
I gave up lecturing people about top quoting. Non Technical People,
and those are the most in
On Sunday June 12 2005 10:10 am, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > Unlike vi v. emacs or KDE v. Gnome, there's actually an RFC about
> > this one. It's a dead issue. If you don't conform, people will be
> > less liekly to reply to you.
>
> Really? an RFC? Which one, and where might I find it?
http://ursin
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:26:47AM -0500, Alex Malinovich wrote:
>
> /me envisions an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of
> typewriters sitting in a building in Redmond with an M$ logo on the
> front... :)
Well, "infinite" is probably a little on the high side, but...
--
David
age VersionStatus
openssh 4.1p1-1OK
top still works fine on Debian 3.0 (my other boxes) and Slackware 9.0-beta
(he.net), but still fails on Debian 3.1:
43 root 15 0 000 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.34 pdflush
44 root 15 0 000 S
On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 06:14:50PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Friday June 10 2005 8:40 am, you wrote:
> > Paul Johnson wrote:
> > >It's
> > >preserved for posterity and not everybody wants to read a whole
> > >thread to figure out what solved some random printing problem.
> >
> > But, in fact,
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 08:36:38PM +0100, Peter J Ross wrote:
> Tom Waits.
>
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 06:22:27PM -0500, John Carline wrote:
>
> > What a crock of snobbish BS!
> >
> > snobbish
> > adj : befitting or characteristic of those who inclined to social
> >exclusivenes
On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 23:25 -0400, Hubert Chan wrote:
--snip--
> I program randomly. Err. That's random as opposed to sequentially; not
> as in I bang random keys on my keyboard and hope for the best. ;-)
/me envisions an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of
typewriters sitting in
Paul Johnson wrote:
> Modern mail readers include
> reply-to-list as a basic part of standard functionality these days
> (No, OE and Lotus Notes are not modern).
Neither is Thunderbird.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5
Hubert Chan wrote:
(Yes, I'm top-posting here, because it seems to be the most appropriate
for this type of message. I usually bottom-post/interpolate.)
Jim, your message is a perfect example of why people need to trim quoted
text if you bottom-post. You have included 74 lines of quoted
Paul Johnson wrote:
http://ursine.ca/Top_Posting#Why_bottom-posting_also_isn.27t_the_answer
On Saturday June 11 2005 5:02 pm, Jim Hall wrote:
BTW, we solved the problem of accidently sending replies to
individuals by using a "Reply-To:" in the header with the lists
address. Not exactly a "pur
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 18:51:18 -0400
John Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think I do actually write my programs backwards .. from how it
> > will look to the enduser.
>
> That's top down development vs. bottom up development.
>
> Using top down developme
On 6/11/05, Jim Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW, we solved the problem of accidently sending replies to individuals
> by using a "Reply-To:" in the header with the lists address. Not exactly
> a "pure" solution, but it works.
Did you open this can o' worms on purpose, or do you just not kno
(Yes, I'm top-posting here, because it seems to be the most appropriate
for this type of message. I usually bottom-post/interpolate.)
Jim, your message is a perfect example of why people need to trim quoted
text if you bottom-post. You have included 74 lines of quoted text, and
almost *non
http://ursine.ca/Top_Posting#Why_bottom-posting_also_isn.27t_the_answer
On Saturday June 11 2005 5:02 pm, Jim Hall wrote:
> BTW, we solved the problem of accidently sending replies to
> individuals by using a "Reply-To:" in the header with the lists
> address. Not exactly a "pure" solution, but i
(maybe not such a valid point) I do agree with
you that the body of the message should allways reiterate what is set
in the subject. That is simply good writing form.
Those really are two different use cases, but on a mailinglist it
is handy if everybody has the same style of posting (top or
bottom)
701 - 800 of 1221 matches
Mail list logo
