[OT] Google Groups: vote for Default quoting

[T Beck]

Well, let me point out that you are again making an incorrect statement.

The issue was not that the quoted material was not preceded by >'s.

The issue was that you explicitly attributed words to me that I had not
uttered. (To add insult to injury, you then proceded to lecture me on C++
in a Perl group).

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.perl.misc/msg/97d1c4736dc18aed

let's add this one for completeness:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.perl.misc/msg/dec9164d86434399

As you can see, your quoting style is fine, but you are claiming that I
made statements which I did not make.

I was a more than little miffed by your misattribution, combined with the
"For those of you not getting this," speech.

I made a mistake. I admit it. But it would be one thing to say
"that's a bad idea to do the quoting that way" and another to say
"you're a liar". Calling someone a liar (and then immediately plonking
them) is not a good way to encourage better netiquette. In fact, I
reacted rather harshly to this action (which I also regret now), but I
would've been much more open to a "I see what you're trying to say, but
the way you've quoted misrepresents me... try this:". The point is, I
made a mistake. But instead of trying to help me learn from my
mistake, I was berated and then ignored. Definitely not a very
comforting way to join the group.

While it is interesting to note that you still haven't given up the habit
of making ``incorrect statements'', please, I am but one person. I also
don't know much about Perl, so it is time for you to get over it being
plonked.

Trust me, I'm not missing posts by Sinan. I just wanted to make it a
point that some (at least one) of the regulars seem like they could use
the rule in the posting guidelines about counting to ten before posting
an angry reply.

It's been months already. I had to dig through Google archives to try to
find the relevant post and remember what happened after I saw Bernard
mention my name.

And the incident certainly would not have stuck out so much if I hadn't
watched Sinan Plonk person after person for fairly trivial reasons.

Either way, it doesn't really matter. I'm not crying myself to sleep
every night because Sinan isn't reading my posts. I just hope that
some of the regulars can take a deep breath once in a while and not
flame everyone who's inexperienced. I'm not saying it's your
responsibility, and I'm certainly not telling you that you have to. I
just think that as people who typically seem to hang around to share
your knowledge, it definitely makes the medicine go down easier if you
try to think about what it used to feel like when you were a newbie.

At any rate, I'll leave this alone now. I don't think I have any more
to add that I haven't said already.

--T Beck

 

[John Bokma]

What is the user agent for google groups.
I want to add a filter to leafnode to filter all google groups out

User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-Complaints-To: (e-mail address removed)
Organization: http://groups.google.com

Thank you

;-)

I would go for the Message-ID [1] (if it ends in .googlegroups.com).

And as the OP, I am thinking more and more about ploinking google groups
:-( (It's a sad, sad world)

 

[Tad McClellan]

I want to add a filter to leafnode to filter all google groups out

Organization: http://groups.google.com

 

[Gunnar Hjalmarsson]

I am thinking more and more about ploinking google groups

I'll respect your decision, and won't try to make you do otherwise if
that's what you finally decide.

:-( (It's a sad, sad world)

Yes, it is.

And don't forget that Google is the culprit that's causing this mess.

No private company should be allowed to become too dominant on any
market, whether it's named Microsoft, Google or anything else.

 

[John Bokma]

I'll respect your decision, and won't try to make you do otherwise if
that's what you finally decide.

Thanks. However, before I do so I will follow this group a bit more, and
assign some positive score to people who do use Google Groups in a
responsible way :-D.

Yes, it is.

And don't forget that Google is the culprit that's causing this mess.

I have been thinking for quite some time: what's going to happen when they
make quoting default? Probably we get all lines quoted. It's not that hard
to make a little program however, that checks if there are no more then n
lines quoted per section, and warn if this is the case. Wishfull
thinking...

No private company should be allowed to become too dominant on any
market, whether it's named Microsoft, Google or anything else.

Sony, Disney to name a few. I have no idea if it's bad or good, in
general.

 

[Gunnar Hjalmarsson]

I have been thinking for quite some time: what's going to happen when they
make quoting default? Probably we get all lines quoted. It's not that hard
to make a little program however, that checks if there are no more then n
lines quoted per section, and warn if this is the case. Wishfull
thinking...

Yeah.. Maybe it's really about the posting guidelines rather than just
the lack of context.

Talking about wishfull thinking:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.perl.misc/msg/1cb00782385278cb

 

[John Bokma]

Talking about wishfull thinking:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.perl.misc/msg/1cb00782385278cb

Yup, my client complains when I quote more then 60%. How hard is it to add
something like that to Google Groups? Probably never going to happen.