On 27/01/2016 16:16, gareth wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...
I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied.
I'm starting to think this group is only interested in the drama of
who should post and who should be ignored.

I'll give you a big hint - don't post from google, I and I am sure many
others kill file everything that has "gmail" in the from field. never
saw you post about loop antennas.


--
Extend ****s law - make 'em wear a cheat sheet 24/7

On 1/27/2016 12:21 PM, Je Suis Class A wrote:
On 27/01/2016 16:16, gareth wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...
I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied.
I'm starting to think this group is only interested in the drama of
who should post and who should be ignored.

I'll give you a big hint - don't post from google, I and I am sure many
others kill file everything that has "gmail" in the from field. never
saw you post about loop antennas.

I didn't post from Google, I use eternal-september. Subject line was
"Capacitor Dielectrics for Transmitting Loop Antennas" and the date was
1/19/2016

--

Rick

On 1/27/2016 12:02 PM, Spike wrote:
On 27/01/2016 15:33, rickman wrote:

I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied. I'm
starting to think this group is only interested in the drama of who
should post and who should be ignored.

I saw your post, but didn't reply as I'm not into transmitting loops.
Perhaps no-one really understood your question, it's not the first time
this sort of thing has happened.

My point was not so much about the lack of response to my post in
particular, but the lack of any meaningful posting in the group. When
no one posts anything of interest it only takes a few messages arguing
over who is the biggest troll to make this group irrelevant.

--

Rick

On 1/27/2016 12:21 PM, Je Suis Class A wrote:
On 27/01/2016 16:16, gareth wrote:
"rickman" wrote in message
...
I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied.
I'm starting to think this group is only interested in the drama of
who should post and who should be ignored.

I'll give you a big hint - don't post from google, I and I am sure many
others kill file everything that has "gmail" in the from field. never
saw you post about loop antennas.

I just realized you didn't see my other thread because it was in r.r.a.a
and this thread is crossposted to four groups.

--

Rick

On Wed, 27 Jan 2016, rickman wrote:

On 1/27/2016 12:02 PM, Spike wrote:
On 27/01/2016 15:33, rickman wrote:

I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied. I'm
starting to think this group is only interested in the drama of who
should post and who should be ignored.

I saw your post, but didn't reply as I'm not into transmitting loops.
Perhaps no-one really understood your question, it's not the first time
this sort of thing has happened.

My point was not so much about the lack of response to my post in particular,
but the lack of any meaningful posting in the group. When no one posts
anything of interest it only takes a few messages arguing over who is the
biggest troll to make this group irrelevant.

I've replied to a bunch of messages recently, it is harder to start a
thread than to reply. And all of those replies went into the history of
various things, an overview so to speak. It doesn't matter who started
the thread, it's what you do with it.

And yes, spam and other annoyances are not as significant if a newsgroup
is healthy.

Michael

En el artículo , rickman
escribió:

I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied.

try uk.radio.amateur.moderated. It doesn't suffer from the problem you
cite in the next para.

I'm
starting to think this group is only interested in the drama of who
should post and who should be ignored.

"This group"? You're posting to 4.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) Bunny says: Windows 10? Nein danke!
(")_(")

On Thu, 28 Jan 2016, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

En el artículo , rickman
escribió:

I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied.

try uk.radio.amateur.moderated. It doesn't suffer from the problem you
cite in the next para.

He could post to the rec.radio.amateur.moderated, and he isn't likely to
get an answer. Except for the filler crossposted between there and other
newsgroups, it's a pretty dead newsgroup, has been since the beginning.

Michael



I'm starting to think this group is only interested in the drama of who
should post and who should be ignored.

"This group"? You're posting to 4.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) Bunny says: Windows 10? Nein danke!
(")_(")

On 1/28/2016 3:22 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2016, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

En el artículo , rickman
escribió:

I made a post about loop antennas a week ago and no one replied.

try uk.radio.amateur.moderated. It doesn't suffer from the problem you
cite in the next para.

He could post to the rec.radio.amateur.moderated, and he isn't likely to
get an answer. Except for the filler crossposted between there and
other newsgroups, it's a pretty dead newsgroup, has been since the
beginning.

Michael



Actually, rram used to be a usable group, with some traffic even as
recently as 2-3 years ago. But the current moderators have driven
everyone away.

I haven't heard anyone say anything good about the way the mods spam
multiple newsgroups by posting copyrighted material without the owners'
permissions.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

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

On 28/01/2016 15:39, Jerry Stuckle wrote:


Actually, rram used to be a usable group, with some traffic even as
recently as 2-3 years ago. But the current moderators have driven
everyone away.

I haven't heard anyone say anything good about the way the mods spam
multiple newsgroups by posting copyrighted material without the owners'
permissions.


I'm all against the spamming, but it raises an interesting question - If
you are referring to syndicating the content and the blog author has
published at atom or rss feed then surely it is implied that they are
giving permission to re-distribute it?

Or did you mean some other copyrighted material?

--
Mouse.
Where Morse meets House.

On 1/28/2016 4:22 PM, A. non Eyemouse wrote:
On 28/01/2016 15:39, Jerry Stuckle wrote:


Actually, rram used to be a usable group, with some traffic even as
recently as 2-3 years ago. But the current moderators have driven
everyone away.

I haven't heard anyone say anything good about the way the mods spam
multiple newsgroups by posting copyrighted material without the owners'
permissions.


I'm all against the spamming, but it raises an interesting question - If
you are referring to syndicating the content and the blog author has
published at atom or rss feed then surely it is implied that they are
giving permission to re-distribute it?

Or did you mean some other copyrighted material?


By international law, any published material, whether on the internet or
otherwise, is copyrighted and cannot be copied without the explicit
permission of the owner. This includes atom and rss feeds. These may
be distributed to their subscribers, but the subscribers may not
republish without the owners consent.

It's like a newspaper. I get a copy of the Washington Post every day.
I can read it. I can mention articles in passing. But I cannot
republish the article without the Post's permission.

Copyright law makes no distinction. It's the same in both cases.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

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