Javascript was invented by an evil AI ! ! !

K

Karl-Hugo Weesberg

The evil AI creates virus and worm programs to conquer the internet
and turn humans into slaves.

Throw away javascript, fast, or your brain will be damaged beyond
repair!
 
L

Lasse Reichstein Nielsen

McKirahan said:
I gather that it is alright to cross-post but not multi-post:
http://www.aspfaq.com/5003/

Yes, but when cross-posting, you should select groups carefully so
your message is on-topic for all of them, and you *must* set the
Followup-To header to point to one of the groups.

/L
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, dated Sat, 23 Oct 2004
12:46:31, seen in Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
Yes, but when cross-posting, you should select groups carefully so
your message is on-topic for all of them, and you *must* set the
Followup-To header to point to one of the groups.

The latter is emphatically NOT an accepted requirement. While a branch
of a thread remains on-topic to all the groups that it is going to, the
articles should continue to go to all those groups. When a branch is no
longer on-topic for one or more of those groups, then the newsgroups
line should be reduced accordingly, generally with a brief note in the
body. To move discussion from group A to group B, add B to the
newsgroups list in a reply, with follow-ups set to exclude A; note
likewise in the body.


Don't be influenced by your southern neighbours.


McKirahan would do better to cite a known accepted Usenet authority - an
RFC, a Usefor draft, etc.

For example, current USEFOR thinking is visible in work-in-progress
<URL:http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
draft-ietf-usefor-useage-00.txt>
and <URL:http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
draft-ietf-usefor-article-13.txt>; it makes no such suggestion.
 
G

George Hester

Lasse Reichstein Nielsen said:
Yes, but when cross-posting, you should select groups carefully so
your message is on-topic for all of them, and you *must* set the
Followup-To header to point to one of the groups.
<snip>

How do I do that in Microsoft Outlook Express? And wouldn't that mean if the post was replied to in one
newsgroup it wouldn't be seen in the others? Is that really a good idea?
 
M

Michael Winter

[Setting follow-ups]
How do I do that in Microsoft Outlook Express?

When you're composing a message, look for the "All headers" item in the
View menu (or one of its sub-menus). This will add a couple of header
lines, including Follow-up.
And wouldn't that mean if the post was replied to in one newsgroup it
wouldn't be seen in the others?

Assuming the next person to reply respects the follow-up, then yes, their
post will only go to the specified group(s).
Is that really a good idea?

If a subject isn't on-topic, it shouldn't appear in that particular
newsgroup. As you should indicate when the follow-up header is set,
there's no harm as responders will have been told about the change in
destination.

[snip]

Mike
 
G

George Hester

Michael Winter said:
[Setting follow-ups]
How do I do that in Microsoft Outlook Express?

When you're composing a message, look for the "All headers" item in the
View menu (or one of its sub-menus). This will add a couple of header
lines, including Follow-up.
<snip>

OK I tried that. I get Followup-To. Thanks for making that one clear.
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, dated Sun,
24 Oct 2004 00:40:09, seen in Andrew Thompson
Now, that's an interesting point, let's examine it for a moment..

The x-post was across major hierarchies, to two groups.

Nothing wrong with that.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript,can.uucp

The original article is on-topic here, though to me both the Subject and
the body looked trollish.

It has no obvious relevance to CANada, nor to the UUCP copying protocol
(was that not used for News, OUAT?). A number of articles of a similar
nature have appeared in other interesting groups, cross-posted to
can.uucp, from the same author.
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, dated Sun,
24 Oct 2004 00:40:09, seen in Andrew Thompson
Aaaah.. (smiles) Back on slightly more familiar
territory. Try.. RFC 1855 - "Netiquette Guidelines"*
Section 3.1.3, point 1.
<http://www.physci.org/rfc/rfc1855.jsp#3_1_3>

( ..and yes, Dr. J.S., I *do* specifically want you throwing
your IE 4 at that page, are there any problems? )

JRS, if you please.

On following that link, I did see the text to which you refer, briefly.
IE4 then died, leaving an unresponsive system. After a couple of
minutes or so, Win98 re-awoke, but with no IE windows showing (I usually
have several). In the meanwhile, I had dropped the dial-up by
unplugging.

I had waited until news/mail/FTP had ceased, and the line was idle; past
experience suggests that they would probably have continued - Turnpike
seems robust.

I did see that you had reduced accessibility by imposing your own choice
of font face and probably of size. I've set my browser up with what
suits me best.

I found a copy in my cache, edited out the Google references, and the
page then succeeded.

It is not a faithful copy of RFC 1855, since it contains added material.
That added material could have been placed logically-outside the rest,
before the genuine material and in some form of box. Standards should
only be copied unaltered. I grant that yours might be a copy of an
"official" HTML version of the original ASCII text.

The page contains HTML errors, according to my copy of W3's TIDY.

ISTM that it would be better to link to a recognised RFC site or a major
mirror such as Simtel, Demon or Garbo. My www-use1.htm includes :-

<p>A couple (untested) of RoW sites said to have most RFCs :
<a href="ftp://ftp.internic.net/rfc/">internic</a>,
<a href="ftp://ftp.uoknor.edu/rfc/">uoknor</a>; and a tested one :
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/">ietf</a>,
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc.html">rfc.html</a>,
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt">fyi28/rfc1855</a>.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,904
Latest member
HealthyVisionsCBDPrice

Latest Threads

Top