[OT] Google Groups: vote for Default quoting

Discussion in 'Perl Misc' started by John Bokma, Nov 16, 2005.

  1. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    John Bokma, Nov 16, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John Bokma

    Guest

    Re: Google Groups: vote for Default quoting

    John Bokma wrote:
    > Google Groups let you vote for new features. Vote for default quoting:
    > <http://tinyurl.com/aqe6y>


    I'm replying to your post in Google Groups. I didn't need to do
    anything to use the quoting style above (except snip for brevity) -
    this quoting style is ALREADY the default behavior when replying via
    ShowOptions / Reply (which is the preferred way to reply). Is this poll
    asking about what happens if you use the "reply" link at the _bottom_
    of the post?
     
    , Nov 16, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. [OT] Re: Google Groups: vote for Default quoting

    wrote in news:1132184487.162378.318170
    @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

    > John Bokma wrote:
    >> Google Groups let you vote for new features. Vote for default quoting:
    >> <http://tinyurl.com/aqe6y>

    >
    > I'm replying to your post in Google Groups. I didn't need to do
    > anything to use the quoting style above (except snip for brevity) -
    > this quoting style is ALREADY the default behavior when replying via
    > ShowOptions / Reply (which is the preferred way to reply). Is this poll
    > asking about what happens if you use the "reply" link at the _bottom_
    > of the post?


    I am assuming they are talking about the latter. After all, most people
    posting from GG do not do what you so nicely do.

    Sinan
    --
    A. Sinan Unur <>
    (reverse each component and remove .invalid for email address)

    comp.lang.perl.misc guidelines on the WWW:
    http://mail.augustmail.com/~tadmc/clpmisc/clpmisc_guidelines.html
     
    A. Sinan Unur, Nov 16, 2005
    #3
  4. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    Abigail <> wrote:

    > John Bokma () wrote on MMMMCDLX September MCMXCIII
    > in <URL:news:Xns9710B28583EA0castleamber@130.133.1.4>:
    > .. Google Groups let you vote for new features. Vote for default
    > quoting: .. <http://tinyurl.com/aqe6y>
    > ..
    > .. "Default quoting of previous message in replies"
    > ..
    > .. one above the last option.
    >
    >
    > Why would I? I don't use google groups, and I don't read postings made
    > via google groups.


    Some people have no other option than to use Google Groups. I used to
    ploink everybody, but I use now just a negative score, and up people who
    do quote correctly (like David Filmer :) ).

    > Google is evil.


    And ignoring people who use it is not going to change that.


    > I'm not going to collect their cookies, let alone
    > bother to vote.


    Yup being overly paranoid is healty :)

    --
    John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
    Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
    I ploink googlegroups.com :)
     
    John Bokma, Nov 17, 2005
    #4
  5. John Bokma

    Guest

    Re: Google Groups: vote for Default quoting

    Abigail wrote:
    > Google is evil. I'm not going to collect their cookies...


    Wow. Evil, huh? Just out of curiosity, may I ask what non-evil (and
    cookie-less) search engine you usually use?
     
    , Nov 17, 2005
    #5
  6. John Bokma

    Matt Garrish Guest

    "Abigail" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > John Bokma () wrote on MMMMCDLX September MCMXCIII in
    > <URL:news:Xns9710B28583EA0castleamber@130.133.1.4>:
    > .. Google Groups let you vote for new features. Vote for default quoting:
    > .. <http://tinyurl.com/aqe6y>
    > ..
    > .. "Default quoting of previous message in replies"
    > ..
    > .. one above the last option.
    >
    >
    > Why would I? I don't use google groups, and I don't read postings made
    > via google groups.
    >
    > Google is evil. I'm not going to collect their cookies, let alone
    > bother to vote.
    >
    >


    Amateur. I toss their cookies! : )

    Matt
     
    Matt Garrish, Nov 17, 2005
    #6
  7. On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, John Bokma wrote:

    > Google Groups let you vote for new features. Vote for default quoting:
    > <http://tinyurl.com/aqe6y>
    >
    > "Default quoting of previous message in replies"


    Well, I'm sorry, but they've let this go on for too long to be able to
    take them seriously. Asking for votes now is just a way of seeking
    attention for their services, AFAICS. If they'd learn some basic
    netiquette and promote it to their users, then they'd be in a better
    position. It doesn't need votes to do that.

    But their presentation, even if not overtly, strongly suggests to me
    that they want to present the long-standing usenet newsgroups to their
    users as if they might be Google's own proprietary discussion forums.
    I can't be doing with that, so, with the exception of a few names
    filtered specially, I'm filtering them below the visibility horizon of
    my news client; therefore I no longer care that most of their users
    haven't a clue about Usenet. The day's too short to read every
    posting, anyway, so one has to apply *some* kind of selection, and
    this happens to be one of mine.

    best regards
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Nov 17, 2005
    #7
  8. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    Re: Google Groups: vote for Default quoting

    wrote:

    > Abigail wrote:
    >> Google is evil. I'm not going to collect their cookies...

    >
    > Wow. Evil, huh? Just out of curiosity, may I ask what non-evil (and
    > cookie-less) search engine you usually use?


    The Open Source one of course.

    Now wait....

    --
    John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
    Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
    I ploink googlegroups.com :)
     
    John Bokma, Nov 17, 2005
    #8
  9. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    "Alan J. Flavell" <> wrote:

    > On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, John Bokma wrote:
    >
    >> Google Groups let you vote for new features. Vote for default quoting:
    >> <http://tinyurl.com/aqe6y>
    >>
    >> "Default quoting of previous message in replies"

    >
    > Well, I'm sorry, but they've let this go on for too long to be able to
    > take them seriously. Asking for votes now is just a way of seeking
    > attention for their services, AFAICS.


    OMG, visiting one page, and clicking is seeking attention for their
    services? Does Google need such a thing? There are plenty of sites that
    hype Google daily, I doubt that they need some people on Usenet voting to
    promoot their services.

    > I can't be doing with that, so, with the exception of a few names
    > filtered specially, I'm filtering them below the visibility horizon of
    > my news client; therefore I no longer care that most of their users
    > haven't a clue about Usenet. The day's too short to read every
    > posting, anyway, so one has to apply *some* kind of selection, and
    > this happens to be one of mine.


    But how do you find new people that are worthy?

    --
    John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
    Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
    I ploink googlegroups.com :)
     
    John Bokma, Nov 17, 2005
    #9
  10. > But how do you find new people that are worthy?

    They're the ones that burn incense and leave money at the altar when
    they come to request Our sage advice.

    Seriously, though -- auto-plonking people because you don't like their
    newsreader doesn't seem like a good way to keep Usenet a vibrant and
    thriving community. I'm glad that 15 years ago people weren't blocking
    my newbie messages due to my choice of software!

    -- Lars

    --
    Lars Kellogg-Stedman <>
    This email address will expire on 2005-11-23.
     
    Lars Kellogg-Stedman, Nov 17, 2005
    #10
  11. Alan J. Flavell wrote:
    > they want to present the long-standing usenet newsgroups to their
    > users as if they might be Google's own proprietary discussion forums.


    Very true, unfortunately.

    --
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson
    Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
     
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson, Nov 17, 2005
    #11
  12. John Bokma wrote:
    > "Alan J. Flavell" <> wrote:
    >>with the exception of a few names filtered specially, I'm filtering
    >>[Google postings] below the visibility horizon of
    >>my news client; therefore I no longer care that most of their users
    >>haven't a clue about Usenet. The day's too short to read every
    >>posting, anyway, so one has to apply *some* kind of selection, and
    >>this happens to be one of mine.

    >
    > But how do you find new people that are worthy?


    Do you also question the use of spam filters since worthy messages that
    'look like' crap might be filtered out?

    --
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson
    Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
     
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson, Nov 17, 2005
    #12
  13. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    Lars Kellogg-Stedman <> wrote:

    >> But how do you find new people that are worthy?

    >
    > They're the ones that burn incense and leave money at the altar when
    > they come to request Our sage advice.
    >
    > Seriously, though -- auto-plonking people because you don't like their
    > newsreader doesn't seem like a good way to keep Usenet a vibrant and
    > thriving community. I'm glad that 15 years ago people weren't blocking
    > my newbie messages due to my choice of software!


    Yup, I agree (although my sig shows a different message). OTOH, 9 out of
    10 people using Google Groups are ignorant, and stay like that. So let's
    hope that if Google makes the change back, that we are not bothered by 9
    out of 10 people quoting 100%.


    --
    John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
    Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
    I ploink googlegroups.com :)
     
    John Bokma, Nov 17, 2005
    #13
  14. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    Gunnar Hjalmarsson <> wrote:

    > John Bokma wrote:
    >> "Alan J. Flavell" <> wrote:
    >>>with the exception of a few names filtered specially, I'm filtering
    >>>[Google postings] below the visibility horizon of
    >>>my news client; therefore I no longer care that most of their users
    >>>haven't a clue about Usenet. The day's too short to read every
    >>>posting, anyway, so one has to apply *some* kind of selection, and
    >>>this happens to be one of mine.

    >>
    >> But how do you find new people that are worthy?

    >
    > Do you also question the use of spam filters since worthy messages that
    > 'look like' crap might be filtered out?


    I certainly do question spam filters that filter on one specific item in a
    mail header, yes. Maybe that's why most spamfilters are very sophisticated
    software that use a weighted score from many rules.


    --
    John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
    Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
    I ploink googlegroups.com :)
     
    John Bokma, Nov 17, 2005
    #14
  15. John Bokma wrote:
    > Gunnar Hjalmarsson <> wrote:
    >>Do you also question the use of spam filters since worthy messages that
    >>'look like' crap might be filtered out?

    >
    > I certainly do question spam filters that filter on one specific item in a
    > mail header, yes. Maybe that's why most spamfilters are very sophisticated
    > software that use a weighted score from many rules.


    If I want my (Usenet or email) messages to be read, I'd better make
    _some_ own effort to make them not be mixed up with spam. It would be
    unreasonable IMNSHO to demand from the recipients that they _alone_ have
    the responsibility to figure out that my messages are worth reading.

    --
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson
    Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
     
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson, Nov 17, 2005
    #15
  16. Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
    > If I want my (Usenet or email) messages to be read, I'd better make
    > _some_ own effort to make them not be mixed up with spam. It would be
    > unreasonable IMNSHO to demand from the recipients that they _alone_ have
    > the responsibility to figure out that my messages are worth reading.


    Or more generally: You need to earn your right to be paid attention to. :)

    --
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson
    Email: http://www.gunnar.cc/cgi-bin/contact.pl
     
    Gunnar Hjalmarsson, Nov 17, 2005
    #16
  17. >>>>> "LKS" == Lars Kellogg-Stedman <> writes:

    LKS> Seriously, though -- auto-plonking people because you don't
    LKS> like their newsreader doesn't seem like a good way to keep
    LKS> Usenet a vibrant and thriving community. I'm glad that 15
    LKS> years ago people weren't blocking my newbie messages due to
    LKS> my choice of software!

    Years ago I added Delphi to my killfile, because for every interesting
    person on Delphi, there were seven or eight twits, and the interesting
    people soon figured out that there were services other than Delphi.

    Then Prodigy showed up, and they made Delphi look tame. Fortunately,
    my killfile still had space in it, and the intelligent people found
    other services.

    Then AOL showed up, and we realized just how lucky we had been with
    Delphi and Prodigy. My killfile got a workout, and somewhere in there
    I switched to a scorefile, and Delphi and Prodigy and later AOL
    started looking after themselves.

    Now it's Google Groups. As near as I can tell, for every interesting
    and clueful person on Google Groups, there are twenty to thirty twits;
    though perhaps there are only ten or so twits, and the horrifically
    bad posting software they have provided is making the others look bad.
    So I added a rule to not even download and score any post coming from
    Google Groups.

    And you know what? It really doesn't matter to me; there's more
    *good* Usenet than I have time to read, and if I filter out some
    intelligent people while filtering out the vast majority of junk,
    well, them's the breaks. If you care about me reading your posts so
    badly that you're upset that I don't, well, that's an incentive to get
    another news host.

    Beyond that, I trust that this time, just like every other time
    there's been an infusion of idiots onto Usenet via an easily
    accessible service, the people with a bit of smarts will realize that
    they're being ignored because of their news host and pay the $10 a
    year for news.cfn.de or some other news service.

    Charlton


    --
    cwilbur at chromatico dot net
    cwilbur at mac dot com
     
    Charlton Wilbur, Nov 17, 2005
    #17
  18. Re: [OT] Hiding from Google

    [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
    Matt Garrish
    <>], who wrote in article <zwQef.2008$>:

    > > Google is evil. I'm not going to collect their cookies, let alone
    > > bother to vote.


    > Amateur. I toss their cookies! : )


    Hmm, this looks like this (silly) advice of swapping the grocery
    stores cards with your friends to hide you from the watch - in the
    case you also use a credit card. Having two pieces of info (customer
    card number and credit card number) it is very easy to work around
    such games. (There was a discussion in comp.risks; see the archives.)

    Likewise with google: the only reliable way to untrace yourselves is
    to change your IP address *similtaneously* with a cooky flush. And I
    do not know a reliable way to do this... (Also discussed in comp.risks...)

    Hope this helps,
    Ilya
     
    Ilya Zakharevich, Nov 17, 2005
    #18
  19. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    Gunnar Hjalmarsson <> wrote:

    > John Bokma wrote:
    >> Gunnar Hjalmarsson <> wrote:
    >>>Do you also question the use of spam filters since worthy messages
    >>>that 'look like' crap might be filtered out?

    >>
    >> I certainly do question spam filters that filter on one specific item
    >> in a mail header, yes. Maybe that's why most spamfilters are very
    >> sophisticated software that use a weighted score from many rules.

    >
    > If I want my (Usenet or email) messages to be read, I'd better make
    > _some_ own effort to make them not be mixed up with spam.


    Imagine your Usenet server is down, and you have an urgent question do you

    [a] nothing
    use Google Groups?

    I have done the latter in the past. Also note that some people using GG do
    post useful replies, etc.


    > It would be
    > unreasonable IMNSHO to demand from the recipients that they _alone_
    > have the responsibility to figure out that my messages are worth
    > reading.


    Who else has that responsibility? The reader decides, or don't I
    understand you?

    --
    John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
    Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
    I ploink googlegroups.com :)
     
    John Bokma, Nov 17, 2005
    #19
  20. John Bokma

    John Bokma Guest

    Gunnar Hjalmarsson <> wrote:

    > Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
    >> If I want my (Usenet or email) messages to be read, I'd better make
    >> _some_ own effort to make them not be mixed up with spam. It would be
    >> unreasonable IMNSHO to demand from the recipients that they _alone_
    >> have the responsibility to figure out that my messages are worth
    >> reading.

    >
    > Or more generally: You need to earn your right to be paid attention
    > to. :)


    Yes, true. And hence ploinking everybody using Google Groups, like I did
    some time ago (have to fix that sig), means everybody using GG is unable
    to earn that right.


    --
    John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
    Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/
    I ploink googlegroups.com :)
     
    John Bokma, Nov 17, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

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

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Petra Hübner
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    459
    Petra Hübner
    Feb 16, 2004
  2. anonymous
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    4,625
    Francisco Padron
    May 8, 2005
  3. Andrew Thompson

    FAQ - references to Google/Google Groups

    Andrew Thompson, Jun 20, 2005, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    651
    Andrew Thompson
    Jun 20, 2005
  4. JD
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,779
    Dan Abrey
    Aug 12, 2004
  5. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    369
    Peter Hansen
    Jun 10, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page