patronising digital advert

"Tiddy Ogg" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 21:51:24 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

On Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:16:09 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

It is the normal convention on usenet to quote some of the posting to
which one is replying, so that anyone joining the thread can get some
idea of what you're on about.

Yes no contention there, but the point was -- which is the lesser of the
two evils if snipping is not practical

I'm sure the impractibility of snipping is rare. I agree with JPG. I
know blind users have special needs, but I far prefer bottom posting.
If it is a long post then use your keys to go to the end and then up a
bit to get the newest bit.

and miss the bit in the middle


Interleaving, which is probably the best idea for sighted users in
some cases, does make things difficult, but otherwise standard usenet
standards are fine.


then misunderstand the last bit.

I think it much depends on whether you use Outlook Express etc. One of the
most annoying thing is when people quote whole streams from thread, then at
the very bottom say something like..
I agree.

Snipping is the word of the day.
However from the posting side, because OE top posts by default, and often
you have in your mind what you want to say, by the time you have done all
the pasting about and snipping you have forgotten what you wanted to bloody
say in the first place!!

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message
...
In message , "[email protected]"
writes:
Brian is blind and uses a screen reader of some sort.

Bottom posting is a problem when used with a screen reader as it is
difficult to find the content.

. I'm puzzled as to how, and I'm sitting in a household belonging to two
screenreader users as I type this. ..

It may seem logical to bottom post but that doesn't make it correct once
you understand all the implications.

. (Although I strongly prefer bottom-posting - or, actually, snip and
interposting, see later posts - I never say either is "incorrect".) ..
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf
** http://www.soft255.demon.co.uk/G6JPG-PC/JPGminPC.htm for ludicrously
outdated thoughts on PCs. **

Sarcasm: Barbed ire

In message , Brian Gaff
writes
I think it much depends on whether you use Outlook Express etc. One of the
most annoying thing is when people quote whole streams from thread, then at
the very bottom say something like..
I agree.

Snipping is the word of the day.


Actually the issue of correct posting to the Usenet was the subject of a
paper published by the Tavistock Institute about seven or eight years
ago. If they've got a website, it can probably be found.

The authors' findings were that the reason why many people have
difficulty understanding the incredibly simple guidelines on posting is
because many schools don't teach that most important subject of all:
philosophy. Many people are not being taught how to think. Arranging
thoughts logically does require training of the mind. At its simplest
this is writing a letter. A letter of complaint, for example, does
require a marshalling of thoughts, arranging of facts, and then pinning
them down on paper in a coherent manner.

Many are so ill-equipped for this task that large organizations now
encourage their customers to use telephones so that their operators can
do their customers' thinking for them: asking them questions in a
logical sequence, and so on. And it saves return letter-writing costs or
ferreting on their part because their customers are now incapable of
supplying all the information necessary to resolve a problem.

Even writing CVs is getting beyond the limited cognitive abilities of
many causing them to resort to professional CV writers. The authors
cited a boiler-plate software package for writing CVs! A discipline that
requires little more than the expression of a few facts and figures
written on one side of a sheet of paper on a subject that the author
ought to be an expert on, and they're sunk.

Good thinking requires good training. I was fortunate to have teachers
who trained my mind to work clearly and to arrange facts/ideas and to
present them logically. My job depends on it. I don't profess to be a
brilliant thinker; the reason my mediocre cognitive ability has made me
a millionaire is because so many are worse thinkers than I am. The way
society is being structured today ensures that many can muddle their way
through life without having to think too much. But when they're
presented with the simple communication conventions of the Usenet, which
has evolved over quarter of a century as a global forum and therefore
requires fairly dynamic thinking to work properly, they're buggered. Not
only are the conventions not understood, but the reasoning behind the
evolution of those conventions is not understood either.

Firstly: trimming follow-ups to salient points does require the exercise
of editorial skill i.e. judgement, and judgement is either instinctive
or is acquired through training. Philosophy is the only practical tool
to apply that training. Secondly: actually answering a specific point
within a post and focussing on that point also requires a trained mind.
Confronted with these seemingly insuperable obstacles, the untrained
mind simply gives up the unequal struggle and says: "bugger it -- I'll
just top-post. Someone else can figure out what I mean.�

Conventions in communication are essential, particularly so with the
Usenet that consists of millions of people world-wide subscribing to
around 100,000 newsgroups on an equal number of subjects. For it to work
depends on the observation of protocols. The essential protocols that
control distribution are imbedded in the headers of a post and not
usually within users' control, but control of the content of posts and
therefore understanding rests with the users.

To ensure that the majority derive the greatest enjoyment and benefit
from the Usenet a few simple conventions exist. They are not difficult
to understand or follow if one takes a little trouble and is prepared to
show some respect for others. The recommended max of four newsgroups for
cross-posting is sensible which is why I've reset the headers for this
post.

It's important to remember that a post has one author but many readers
therefore the majority should be always be considered.

Another advantage is that mastery of those conventions enables one to
move with confidence from newsgroup to newsgroup and converse with the
world.

The Usenet is a remarkable tool that is worthy of respect rather than
the consequences of such muddle-headed thinking.

--
James Follett.
http://www.jamesfollett.dswilliams.co.uk

In article ,
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
If you have to scroll on an 800x600 page before the new stuff starts
there's too much quoting. ;-)

. I saw the smiley, but actually sounds a good rule of thumb! ..

It's actually how my newsreader does it - you'll get a warning of
excessive quoting if this isn't the case. But of course it's not a PC one.
;-)

--
*Never put off until tomorrow what you can avoid altogether *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Aug 31, 9:45*pm, Andy Champ wrote:
Mark Carver wrote:
tony sayer wrote:
*It seems that in modern Britain, *whilst racism is almost a capital
offence, ageism is officially condoned.

Totally agree!. Don't they -ever- think that one day they'll be old to?..

You don't when you're in your twenties, and that's the root problem.

One of two roots. *The other is - why are people that age in charge of
the ad. campaign anyway?

'Cos they've already retired off all of the old duffers at the Beeb ?

HTH

Paul.

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

If you have to scroll on an 800x600 page before the new stuff starts
there's too much quoting. ;-)

Exactly my opinion. I just skip anything upside down, or where the response
doesn't at least START on the screen.

--
AJL Electronics (G6FGO) Ltd : Satellite and TV aerial systems
http://www.illifauthouse.co.uk : http://www.ajlelectronics.co.uk

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
I think it much depends on whether you use Outlook Express etc. One of
the most annoying thing is when people quote whole streams from
thread, then at the very bottom say something like.. I agree.


Snipping is the word of the day. However from the posting side, because
OE top posts by default, and often you have in your mind what you want
to say, by the time you have done all the pasting about and snipping
you have forgotten what you wanted to bloody say in the first place!!

So what you're really saying is top posting would help your circumstances
(which I can understand) whereas you top post because of using crappy
software - but give your blindness as the excuse?

It's easy enough to change OE to work in the conventional manner - and
that shouldn't effect your use of it.

--
*If they arrest the Energizer Bunny, would they charge it with battery? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

It may well fix it for you, but all it does for me is screw up outlook
express and crash it more often than not.

Its still no answer to the snipping problem. far better to top post as if
you follow the thread there is no real need for quotes unless you are one of
those who suddenly looks at a thread weeks later when half the posts are
gone or your news server has the retention span of a goldfish.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"brightside S9" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:35:01 GMT, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

I think it much depends on whether you use Outlook Express etc.

Quotefix fixes OE

http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software.../downloads.php

--
brightside S9

"Brian Gaff" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

It may well fix it for you, but all it does for me is screw up outlook
express

See? It IS doing you a big favour.

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
It may well fix it for you, but all it does for me is screw up outlook
express and crash it more often than not.

Well why stick with OE when there are better and free newsreaders?

Its still no answer to the snipping problem. far better to top post as
if you follow the thread there is no real need for quotes unless you
are one of those who suddenly looks at a thread weeks later when half
the posts are gone or your news server has the retention span of a
goldfish.

So you're basically a top poster who uses his blindness as an excuse?

--
*A journey of a thousand sites begins with a single click *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.