Cecil ... GUIDELINES are not cast in concrete!!


Cecil Moore wrote:

Ham op wrote:

I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.


Have you read the usenet posting guidelines?

John Smith wrote:
What? The hams are now attempting to set rules for usenet posting?

There are indeed guidelines for usenet postings to the
rec.radio.amateur.* newsgroups. I had that URL on my
computer that crashed. A web search will probably
reveal them.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Ham op wrote:
Cecil ... GUIDELINES are not cast in concrete!!

Is that a yes or a no answer?

Cecil Moore wrote:
Have you read the usenet posting guidelines?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:50:34 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:

I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.

I prefer TOP POSTING. I've read the original message previously


It isn't about what you have read, or what you have stored. Get a
clue.

, it is
stored sequentially on my computer sorted by thread and date if I need a
refresher, and I don't have to scroll through a lot of attached garbage
to get to your meaningful or meaningless comments.

What you fail to realize is that what you have stored, and the
manner which you read Usenet is not how everyone does it. The
protocols (which do exist) are in place to increase understanding of
the post from that very post, without the need to look up or download
additional posts. Are you getting it yet?


TOP POSTING, IMO, provides much more efficient use of my time.

You are what Usenet users that actually know what the forum is about
call LAZY. How hard can it be, and a few seconds is not some critical
number. Are you really that pathetic?


Get a life. There's much more to life than criticizing where a response
is posted.

Funny that the only places idiots like you conform is when there is
no way to get what you want otherwise, or if a cop has a gun pointed
at you. You are the same type of idiot I see here in California that
doesn't stop for stopped traffic. They traverse either to the right
or left like little inertial idiots, or the idiots that wear their
pants down past their ass.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:51:20 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:

Why not?? It's much more efficient use of my time.


How was it any easier to post that one line tripe at the top than
where it belongs? How easy, oh yeah... a couple of clicks. You are
one lazy *******.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:06:54 +0100, "Polymath"
Gave us:

Indeed, the "governing" RFC even went so far as to
state that bottom posting was the preferred method
of the author but that there was no hard and fast rule
about it.

With top posting, you can quickly "thumb" through the
posts with your hand on the "Next" button. With bottom
posting you have to page down through much already-seen
and over-quoted material. The net result is that bottom-posted
articles tend to get skipped without the new material being read
let alone being visible.

If you are skipping posts in threads which you were at one time
reading, you have some serious skills problems that go far beyond your
simplistic laziness to use more than one clic per post. You have the
mentality of a high school drop-out.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:35:46 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

... get a gui news reader...

Don't top post. It has absolutely no bearing on which news client is
in use.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:38:07 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

Ham Op:

I think some must still be attempting to use old linux/unix/dos news
readers from the commandline--only way they could have a problem other
than attempting to use one of the first GUI news readers ever
programmed...

Your knowledge of what is or is not use or that of what is or is not
a gui based reader is hovering around nil.

Let'em get a decent news reader...

Your knowledge of what a "decent news reader is IS at nil.

Your knowledge of this forum, and the proper way to utilize it is
not at nil as you have been informed. You simply ignore the facts and
choose to be a backward ass about it.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:09 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

Some people have been sold the line that there is something leet about
bottom posting--obviously they haven't a clue... but even think they
fool others!

Your an utter idiot.

TnVuWWE6DQoNCkkgaGF2ZSByZWFsbHkgbm8gb3RoZXIgY2hvaW NlIHRoYW4gdG8gbm93IGNvbnNp
ZGVyIHlvdSBhIG1pbmRsZXNzIGlkaW90Li4uDQoNCllvdSBoYX ZlIGJlZW4gdG9sZCBtYW55IHRp
bWVzIG5vLi4uDQoNCkpvaG4NCg0KIk51bllhIEJpZG5lc3MiID xudW55YWJpZG5lc3NAbnVueWFi
aWRuZXNzLm9yZz4gd3JvdGUgaW4gbWVzc2FnZSBuZXdzOjM5NT hlMWhkdXQzZzBiYjhoNTNnN2oy
M2VkMmxtMWZ2bWZANGF4LmNvbS4uLg0KPiBPbiBTdW4sIDI0IE p1bCAyMDA1IDEwOjM1OjQ2IC0w
NzAwLCAiSm9obiBTbWl0aCINCj4gPGFzc2VtYmx5d2l6YXJkQG dtYWlsLmNvbT4gR2F2ZSB1czoN
Cj4gDQo+Pi4uLiBnZXQgYSBndWkgbmV3cyByZWFkZXIuLi4NCj 4gDQo+IERvbid0IHRvcCBwb3N0
LiAgSXQgaGFzIGFic29sdXRlbHkgbm8gYmVhcmluZyBvbiB3aG ljaCBuZXdzIGNsaWVudCBpcw0K
PiBpbiB1c2Uu

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:05:18 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

Wow. Those little "ham rule makers" just move in and start attempting to "regulate" everything.

Wow, you are likely to be one of those "assembly wizards" that only
makes such a claim personally in tooting your own horn, when in
reality you cut so many corners on the standards that you are a wizard
of nothing more than your own bull****. It's funny to see someone
that touts being able to program in assembly claiming that those of us
that do follow the standards are all on telenet or a command line news
client. You are stupid beyond compare.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 15:33:14 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:


Either get a news reader which will format posts to please you or shut-up!

**** off, you Usenet retard! Don't top post. It's that simple.
You do not get to tell your detractors to shut up. You are wrong, and
it is that simple.

I spit on your liberal left coast ideas. People who bitch about how people
post are the same people that would take away all of our property rights
with zoning laws, and determine what is healthy for us to eat.

You want everyone else to make your anal retentive life neat and orderly,
and feel it is our duty to do so or you call us idiots.

I too have been here since the DARPA days, and had the third BBS in the US
behind Ward C. and Bob Blue.

I chuckle at the little pukes that wasn't even born at the time making rules
and guidelines...

Individuels of your ilk are invited to note the mistletoe pinned to my
coattail.

"NunYa Bidness" wrote in message
...
Funny that the only places idiots like you conform is when there is
no way to get what you want otherwise, or if a cop has a gun pointed
..

TnVuWWE6DQoNClRoZW4gdGhlcmUgaXMgYnV0IG9uZSB0aGluZy BsZWZ0LCBhbmQgeW91IG11c3Qg
ZG8gaXQuLi4NCg0KU1RPUCBNRS4NCg0Kb3IgYmV0dGVyIHlldC 0tYml0IGJ1Y2tldCBtZSENCg0K
Sm9obg0KDQoiTnVuWWEgQmlkbmVzcyIgPG51bnlhYmlkbmVzc0 BudW55YWJpZG5lc3Mub3JnPiB3
cm90ZSBpbiBtZXNzYWdlIG5ld3M6MDA2OGUxZG1kb3UxbG9qYm 41NTZqNXZiOGFrYWx1ZmY4OUA0
YXguY29tLi4uDQo+IE9uIFN1biwgMjQgSnVsIDIwMDUgMTU6Mz M6MTQgLTA3MDAsICJKb2huIFNt
aXRoIg0KPiA8YXNzZW1ibHl3aXphcmRAZ21haWwuY29tPiBHYX ZlIHVzOg0KPiANCj4+DQo+PkVp
dGhlciBnZXQgYSBuZXdzIHJlYWRlciB3aGljaCB3aWxsIGZvcm 1hdCBwb3N0cyB0byBwbGVhc2Ug
eW91IG9yIHNodXQtdXAhDQo+IA0KPiAgRnVjayBvZmYsIHlvdS BVc2VuZXQgcmV0YXJkISAgRG9u
J3QgdG9wIHBvc3QuICBJdCdzIHRoYXQgc2ltcGxlLg0KPiBZb3 UgZG8gbm90IGdldCB0byB0ZWxs
IHlvdXIgZGV0cmFjdG9ycyB0byBzaHV0IHVwLiAgWW91IGFyZS B3cm9uZywgYW5kDQo+IGl0IGlz
IHRoYXQgc2ltcGxlLg==

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:40:31 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
Gave us:

I spit on your liberal left coast ideas.

You are a sadly mistaken idiot.

People who bitch about how people
post are the same people that would take away all of our property rights
with zoning laws, and determine what is healthy for us to eat.

I spit on your absolute refusal to conform to decades old standards
on your lazy assed whim.

You want everyone else to make your anal retentive life neat and orderly,
and feel it is our duty to do so or you call us idiots.

No. I call you an idiot because you step into a perfectly normal
forum, and **** it all up, then claim that you are the norm. You may
be correct in one thing... the population of utterly stupid people in
Usenet is rising, and I'll bet that you do not know which side of the
fence you reside on.

I too have been here since the DARPA days, and had the third BBS in the US
behind Ward C. and Bob Blue.

Oh boy. I'd bet that claim to be utter bull**** as well. BBS's
sprouted up all over and there were hundreds of dolts just like you
claiming to be the first or second or third. You are very likely full
of **** due to the fact that your resource for your statistic is
flawed. There were plenty of private BBS's in place that never even
got on your special list. Bull**** proven.

Do you also claim to be one of the first HAMs? I'd bet you don't,
as you know that it would be a foolish claim.

I chuckle at the little pukes that wasn't even born at the time making rules
and guidelines...

You know nothing about it. Most folks that put forth the protocols
into the faces of dolts like you are older, and were in fact around.
I was around when it was conceived, even before it was put in place.
I'd be willing to bet you do not even know when that was, regardless
of whether you were alive or not, BBS boy.


Individuels of your ilk are invited to note the mistletoe pinned to my
coattail.

You probably can't afford a coat with tails. And the only thing
that needs to be there is a broomstick handle to plug the **** spewing
from it into Usenet.

Made my day, you have nothing to offer except personal attacks and profane
language.

Kings X

"NunYa Bidness" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 18:40:31 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
Gave us:

I spit on your liberal left coast ideas.

You are a sadly mistaken idiot.

People who bitch about how people
post are the same people that would take away all of our property rights
with zoning laws, and determine what is healthy for us to eat.

I spit on your absolute refusal to conform to decades old standards
on your lazy assed whim.

You want everyone else to make your anal retentive life neat and orderly,
and feel it is our duty to do so or you call us idiots.

No. I call you an idiot because you step into a perfectly normal
forum, and **** it all up, then claim that you are the norm. You may
be correct in one thing... the population of utterly stupid people in
Usenet is rising, and I'll bet that you do not know which side of the
fence you reside on.

I too have been here since the DARPA days, and had the third BBS in the
US
behind Ward C. and Bob Blue.

Oh boy. I'd bet that claim to be utter bull**** as well. BBS's
sprouted up all over and there were hundreds of dolts just like you
claiming to be the first or second or third. You are very likely full
of **** due to the fact that your resource for your statistic is
flawed. There were plenty of private BBS's in place that never even
got on your special list. Bull**** proven.

Do you also claim to be one of the first HAMs? I'd bet you don't,
as you know that it would be a foolish claim.

I chuckle at the little pukes that wasn't even born at the time making
rules
and guidelines...

You know nothing about it. Most folks that put forth the protocols
into the faces of dolts like you are older, and were in fact around.
I was around when it was conceived, even before it was put in place.
I'd be willing to bet you do not even know when that was, regardless
of whether you were alive or not, BBS boy.


Individuels of your ilk are invited to note the mistletoe pinned to my
coattail.

You probably can't afford a coat with tails. And the only thing
that needs to be there is a broomstick handle to plug the **** spewing
from it into Usenet.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 19:31:08 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
Gave us:

Made my day, you have nothing to offer except personal attacks and profane
language.


As if your "I spit on..." CRAP was anything but that. You are an
idiot extraordinaire, and you did NOT have the third US BBS.

Nope!! Just efficient

NunYa Bidness wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:51:20 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:


Why not?? It's much more efficient use of my time.



How was it any easier to post that one line tripe at the top than
where it belongs? How easy, oh yeah... a couple of clicks. You are
one lazy *******.

You haven't given one logical reason to bottom post.

You revert to name calling, insults, IQ assassination, challenging my
IQ, while clearly demonstrating your IQ. Give a positive benefit of
bottom posting, other than that's the way it's done, specially when a
post may be very long, several pages or more, that requires scrolling
through to locate your asinine answer. I could read your answer
immediately and simply ignore it, if it were TOP POSTED.

NunYa Bidness wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:41:09 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:


Some people have been sold the line that there is something leet about
bottom posting--obviously they haven't a clue... but even think they
fool others!


Your an utter idiot.

yes

Cecil Moore wrote:

Ham op wrote:

Cecil ... GUIDELINES are not cast in concrete!!


Is that a yes or a no answer?

Cecil Moore wrote:

Have you read the usenet posting guidelines?

Usenet?
on
it
do
why
so
not
thought
I
backwards?
everything
write
normally
you
Do
NunYa Bidness wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 09:50:34 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:


I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.

I prefer TOP POSTING. I've read the original message previously



It isn't about what you have read, or what you have stored. Get a
clue.


, it is
stored sequentially on my computer sorted by thread and date if I need a
refresher, and I don't have to scroll through a lot of attached garbage
to get to your meaningful or meaningless comments.


What you fail to realize is that what you have stored, and the
manner which you read Usenet is not how everyone does it. The
protocols (which do exist) are in place to increase understanding of
the post from that very post, without the need to look up or download
additional posts. Are you getting it yet?


TOP POSTING, IMO, provides much more efficient use of my time.


You are what Usenet users that actually know what the forum is about
call LAZY. How hard can it be, and a few seconds is not some critical
number. Are you really that pathetic?


Get a life. There's much more to life than criticizing where a response
is posted.


Funny that the only places idiots like you conform is when there is
no way to get what you want otherwise, or if a cop has a gun pointed
at you. You are the same type of idiot I see here in California that
doesn't stop for stopped traffic. They traverse either to the right
or left like little inertial idiots, or the idiots that wear their
pants down past their ass.
YAWN! Another 12 year old who thinks he pioneered the universe.
--
;-)
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.
http://turner-smith.co.uk

"Ham op" wrote in message
...
I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the 11th
commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.

I prefer TOP POSTING.



And I prefer editing and bottom posting. Obviously, if you don't take the
time to distill the OP's comments, then you bury your reply under his
verbiage. Perhaps one of the best arguments for editing is that you have to
think about what's important in the previous post. That allows you to focus
your reply.

Another criteria for deciding to top or bottom post is your estimation of
the audience. Critical thinkers will want to review the salient points of
the discussion, and an edited bottom post gives them the facts in a linear
fashion. However, if you think your audience is a bunch of
attention-deficient rude boobs, then top posting is indicated. Top posting
is ideally suited to replies that consist of "Yeah, me too!"

--
Ed
WB6WSN
El Cajon, CA USA

TXkgZ2F3ZCBtYW4sIGFsbCB0aG9zZSBsaW5lcyBmb3IgYSBzaW 1wbGUgInllcy4iDQoNCk5vdyB5
b3UgaGF2ZSB3ZW50IGFuZCBkb25lIGl0LCBOdW55YSBOdW1OdX RzIGlzIGdvaW5nIHRvIGJlIGNh
bGxpbmcgdG8gaGF2ZSB5b3UgZmxvZ2dlZCENCg0KSm9obg0KDQ oiSGFtIG9wIiA8aGFtb3BAY29t
Y2FzdC5uZXQ+IHdyb3RlIGluIG1lc3NhZ2UgbmV3czpvTW1kbl ZkWEM4MlhzSG5mUlZuLTFnQGNv
bWNhc3QuY29tLi4uDQo+IHllcw0KPiANCj4gQ2VjaWwgTW9vcm Ugd3JvdGU6DQo+IA0KPj4gSGFt
IG9wIHdyb3RlOg0KPj4gDQo+Pj4gQ2VjaWwgLi4uIEdVSURFTE lORVMgYXJlIG5vdCBjYXN0IGlu
IGNvbmNyZXRlISENCj4+IA0KPj4gDQo+PiBJcyB0aGF0IGEgeW VzIG9yIGEgbm8gYW5zd2VyPw0K
Pj4gDQo+Pj4gQ2VjaWwgTW9vcmUgd3JvdGU6DQo+Pj4NCj4+Pj 4gSGF2ZSB5b3UgcmVhZCB0aGUg
dXNlbmV0IHBvc3RpbmcgZ3VpZGVsaW5lcz8NCj4=

Glad you enjoy it John, As California is about to fall in the ocean from the
"big one", we should probably enjoy the left wing babble before it becomes a
mere memory...


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Fred:

My gawd man, your posts have improved tremendously since I have come here!

Reg Edwards wrote:

The English are not very spiritual people, so they
invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity.
- George Bernard Shaw

Did George top post or bottom post?

Hey Reg, I just got this quote off The Drudgereport web page.

" ... (London) senior police officers defended a policy of
shooting dead individuals ..."

Do the London police really shoot dead people? (Ain't English
a hoot?)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 20:04:00 -0400, Ham op Gave
us:

You haven't given one logical reason to bottom post.

You revert to name calling, insults, IQ assassination, challenging my
IQ, while clearly demonstrating your IQ. Give a positive benefit of
bottom posting, other than that's the way it's done, specially when a
post may be very long, several pages or more, that requires scrolling
through to locate your asinine answer. I could read your answer
immediately and simply ignore it, if it were TOP POSTED.

You do not understand what Usenet is then. It isn't a message board
between two folks having a conversation, it IS a place where such
conversations can benefit any and all that read them. The entire
point of proper posting is so that ANY person popping into the group
for a read, can garner the entire idea of a post *without* having to
go find, download, and plow through a number of others to do it. It
has nothing to do with YOUR convenience and everything to do with the
stray "just walked in" reader. Your attitude about the whole thing is
what is asinine, and that alone is what prompted your much deserved
put downs. In other words, you DO have a reduced IQ if you don't even
have the time to read, learn and follow the protocols and expectations
of a forum you happen to think is some "do as you please" thing, when
it is not, by any stretch. Your convenience is not the issue in any
way.

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 00:35:22 GMT, Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI
Gave us:

Usenet?
on
it
do
why
so
not
thought
I
backwards?
everything
write
normally
you
Do

Placing your answer in front of the text you are replying to IS
backwards, ass.

snip

YAWN! Another 12 year old who thinks he pioneered the universe.

You act as if you haven't been in Usenet more than two months, and
then act as if you are a twelve year old adolescent twit when you
decide that long accepted standards no longer apply, or do not apply
to you. Get a clue, dumbass.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 22:16:41 -0400, "Fred W4JLE"
Gave us:

Glad you enjoy it John, As California is about to fall in the ocean from the
"big one", we should probably enjoy the left wing babble before it becomes a
mere memory...

More utter, meaningless stupidity.

If it does by some thin chance, however, I'll be one that is diving
into banks, and retrieving safety deposit boxes.

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:59:40 -0500, Cecil Moore
Gave us:

Reg Edwards wrote:

The English are not very spiritual people, so they
invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity.
- George Bernard Shaw

Did George top post or bottom post?

Hey Reg, I just got this quote off The Drudgereport web page.

" ... (London) senior police officers defended a policy of
shooting dead individuals ..."

Do the London police really shoot dead people? (Ain't English
a hoot?)


I'd say the guy was dead around the time of the second round fired,
so the other three qualify.

"NunYa Bidness" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:59:40 -0500, Cecil Moore
Gave us:

Reg Edwards wrote:

The English are not very spiritual people, so they
invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity.
- George Bernard Shaw

Did George top post or bottom post?

Hey Reg, I just got this quote off The Drudgereport web page.

" ... (London) senior police officers defended a policy of
shooting dead individuals ..."

Do the London police really shoot dead people? (Ain't English
a hoot?)


I'd say the guy was dead around the time of the second round fired,
so the other three qualify.

=====================================

What a shocking waste of ammunition! The police officer involved
should be fined with a corresponding deduction from salary.

There will have to be a judicial enquiry. The dead person's family
will sue the London Police for compensation. A report will be issued
in about 18 months time when everybody has forgotten all about it.
The names of the people really responsible for the murder will not be
mentioned of course.

In the meantime, English cricket fixtures and other relics of the
British Empire will continue as usual. But use by Brazilian police of
London policemen as exemplary role models will cease forthwith.
---
Reg.

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 06:42:12 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
Gave us:


"NunYa Bidness" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:59:40 -0500, Cecil Moore
Gave us:

Reg Edwards wrote:

The English are not very spiritual people, so they
invented cricket to give them some idea of eternity.
- George Bernard Shaw

Did George top post or bottom post?

Hey Reg, I just got this quote off The Drudgereport web page.

" ... (London) senior police officers defended a policy of
shooting dead individuals ..."

Do the London police really shoot dead people? (Ain't English
a hoot?)


I'd say the guy was dead around the time of the second round fired,
so the other three qualify.

=====================================

What a shocking waste of ammunition! The police officer involved
should be fined with a corresponding deduction from salary.

There will have to be a judicial enquiry. The dead person's family
will sue the London Police for compensation. A report will be issued
in about 18 months time when everybody has forgotten all about it.
The names of the people really responsible for the murder will not be
mentioned of course.

In the meantime, English cricket fixtures and other relics of the
British Empire will continue as usual. But use by Brazilian police of
London policemen as exemplary role models will cease forthwith.
---
Reg.


How refreshing it is to see a fine post every now and again...

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:01:54 +0100, Walt Davidson
Gave us:

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 06:42:12 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

But use by Brazilian police of
London policemen as exemplary role models will cease forthwith.

But how are they going to solve the Rio "street-kids" problem then?


Give them massive overdoses of Jimmy's special kool-aid?

Ed Price wrote:

Obviously, if you don't take the
time to distill the OP's comments, then you bury your reply under his
verbiage. Perhaps one of the best arguments for editing is that you have to
think about what's important in the previous post. That allows you to focus
your reply.

What an excellent philosophy.

Perhaps the top-posters and non-editors are merely guilty of lack of
focus and an ability to think.

from
Aero Spike

But how are they going to solve the Rio "street-kids" problem then?

Bring them over here and employ them as arithmetic teachers.

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 08:15:28 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
Gave us:


But how are they going to solve the Rio "street-kids" problem then?

Bring them over here and employ them as arithmetic teachers.

The national average would go up at that point, no?

In uk.radio.amateur Ham op wrote:
I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.


Perhaps, but, as I am sure you do know as a veteran user, USENET
preceded the DARPAnet by several years, and, bottom posting has
ALWAYS been the documented, preferred posting method for most
USENET groups, uk.r.a specifically.
--
Chris Cox, N0UK/G4JEC NIC Handle: CC345
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

Hey! we invented the internet, why should we listen to some user across the
pond. We took care of you guys once before for your oppressive laws. Need we
repeat the lesson?

"see sea oh ecks at you aitch see dot comm"
wrote in message ...
In uk.radio.amateur Ham op wrote:
I've used the internet since 1985 [DARPA net] and have yet to see the
11th commandment prohibiting top posting or forcing bottom posting.


Perhaps, but, as I am sure you do know as a veteran user, USENET
preceded the DARPAnet by several years, and, bottom posting has
ALWAYS been the documented, preferred posting method for most
USENET groups, uk.r.a specifically.
--
Chris Cox, N0UK/G4JEC NIC Handle: CC345
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

In uk.radio.amateur Fred W4JLE wrote:
Hey! we invented the internet, why should we listen to some user across the
pond. We took care of you guys once before for your oppressive laws. Need we
repeat the lesson?

Did you not understand my previous message; USENET PREDATES the Internet.
Besides, I am on the western side of the Atlantic, and have been for
nigh on 20 years.
--
Chris Cox, N0UK/G4JEC NIC Handle: CC345
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

NunYa Bidness wrote:

Placing your answer in front of the text you are replying to IS
backwards, ass.

and how does that differ from top posting?

snip


YAWN! Another 12 year old who thinks he pioneered the universe.


You act as if you haven't been in Usenet more than two months, and
then act as if you are a twelve year old adolescent twit when you
decide that long accepted standards no longer apply, or do not apply
to you. Get a clue, dumbass.
So you don't dispute my estimate of your age; did I over-estimate?
--
;-)
73 de Frank Turner-Smith G3VKI - mine's a pint.
http://turner-smith.co.uk

On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:43:23 -0700, "John Smith"
Gave us:

Well, the computer is not limiting you from rearranging the text so it appears bottom posted for you...

The software is not a limitation from formatting the text so it will appear bottom posted for you...

I guess it is your knowledge and skills which prevent you from having the text appear as you would like...

Obviously, YOU are the best one to remedy that situation...

John

Hey, dumbass. There is also ANOTHER standard in Usenet. It is line
length.

How can you claim to have been in these forums for so long, and yet
be so utterly stupid regarding its use?

72 character line length dip****. Yet another tragic fallacy of
Outhouse Express, and the idiots that use it, and tout it to be a
viable news client.