Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 25th 14, 07:57 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2014
Posts: 1
Default DX-375 power button trouble

On Tuesday, October 10, 2000 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, isojoern wrote:
Hi there,

I have a DX-375 from the SHACK and the power button doesn't always work
(sometimes I have to press it 20 times to fire it up...).

Is there a resonable fix?

Thanks, Joern


The problem is that the power and sleep buttons are both attached to a bracket as thin as a piece of paper. The part that connects the power button to the bracket has probably broken. I contacted Radio Shack to get a replacement part, but they say that they can't help me. Yes, it's really irritating.
  #5   Report Post  
Old June 26th 14, 11:49 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Mar 2008
Posts: 618
Default DX-375 power button trouble

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:

Michael Black wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, wrote:

On Tuesday, October 10, 2000 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, isojoern wrote:
Hi there,

I have a DX-375 from the SHACK and the power button doesn't always work
(sometimes I have to press it 20 times to fire it up...).

Is there a resonable fix?

Thanks, Joern

The problem is that the power and sleep buttons are both attached to a
bracket as thin as a piece of paper. The part that connects the power
button to the bracket has probably broken. I contacted Radio Shack to
get a replacement part, but they say that they can't help me. Yes, it's
really irritating.

The problem is that it's fourteen years later, so your reply has no
relevance to the original poster. Chances are pretty good he's not even here any more.

If you've got something to say, don't use an old thread to say it.

Michael


Part of the beauty of Usenet is its timeless nature. Let's revel in the
fact that there is a place where ancient thread necrology is even possible.

I have noticed that you must have your feelers out pretty intensively, as
you respond to many resurrected threads admonishing the necromancers not to
practice their dark arts. May I ask, what's the harm to you?

Because it's a bug at google. When google took over the archive from
dejanews, you couldn't reply to old messages. Then one time when they
changed the interface, to be more useful for their own "groups", they
allowed replies to old posts. People like me complained, and that bug was
fixed. Then another iteration of the interface, and the bug was back.

The google idiots think usenet is what they see at google, I doubt they
even know that they are not posting to a "web board". So they think
everyone will see it like they do, all the messages on one page. I doubt
most of the time they even notice that they are replying to an old post,
though I can't figure out why they are looking for old posts to reply to.

The "excuse" that replying to an ancient thread will keep the information
together is crazy. Nobody will find the threads without a search, and
that will turn up the other threads. When google was useful as an archive
of Usenet, I'd have to check multiple threads to find the actual
information, the same is true now.

ANd it gets worse. It's not just google-idiots replying to old posts.
They often don't quote what they are replying to, leaving no context, they
are too often replying with something that no longer has value ("it's time
to update your computer", when the computer was nice and new back in
1998), they may not even do a proper reply, so it looks like a new
thread.

And once they post, there are others who aren't paying attention either,
so they add to the resurrected thread. There was one in
sci.electronics.repair a week or so ago where back in the original thread
(only five or so years old) the original poster had even posted a followup
saying he'd fixed the problem and giving details. Yet someone felt the
need to reply to that old thread, and then others jumped in, not noticing
it was a zombie post they were replying to. That instance was a joke,
since some of the original posters actually replied in the resurrected
thread, not even remembering they'd done so in the past.

A sad example is the infamous post where Linus Torvald announced Linux.
The first time the google bug appeared, vandals decided they needed to
tack their stupidity onto that thread. I assume because google put up a
timeline of usenet, and so made it easy for the vandals to find the
thread. The bug came back, and that thread was further vanadalized, it's
just idiots thinking it's amusing to reply as if Linus was still reading
the minix newsgroup, as if he'd just posted last week. So a historical
thread is now cluttered with endless posts that have nothing to do with
it. And the minix newsgroup just ends up with replies to old posts,
rather than relevant on topic new posts.

For "dead" newsgroups, many of the new posts are from these google idiots,
wanting to know if that thing from 1995 is still forsale, or whatever.

There is no reason to reply to old posts. I have posts going back to 1996
saved on various hard drives, but I don't reply to them. This is a google
problem inflicted on the rest of usenet.

Michael



  #6   Report Post  
Old June 26th 14, 11:57 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Aug 2013
Posts: 35
Default DX-375 power button trouble

On 2014-06-26 22:49:01 +0000, Michael Black said:

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014, Oregonian Haruspex wrote:

Michael Black wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, wrote:

On Tuesday, October 10, 2000 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, isojoern wrote:
Hi there,

I have a DX-375 from the SHACK and the power button doesn't always work
(sometimes I have to press it 20 times to fire it up...).

Is there a resonable fix?

Thanks, Joern

The problem is that the power and sleep buttons are both attached to a
bracket as thin as a piece of paper. The part that connects the power
button to the bracket has probably broken. I contacted Radio Shack to
get a replacement part, but they say that they can't help me. Yes, it's
really irritating.

The problem is that it's fourteen years later, so your reply has no
relevance to the original poster. Chances are pretty good he's not
even here any more.

If you've got something to say, don't use an old thread to say it.

Michael


Part of the beauty of Usenet is its timeless nature. Let's revel in the
fact that there is a place where ancient thread necrology is even possible.

I have noticed that you must have your feelers out pretty intensively, as
you respond to many resurrected threads admonishing the necromancers not to
practice their dark arts. May I ask, what's the harm to you?

Because it's a bug at google. When google took over the archive from
dejanews, you couldn't reply to old messages. Then one time when they
changed the interface, to be more useful for their own "groups", they
allowed replies to old posts. People like me complained, and that bug
was fixed. Then another iteration of the interface, and the bug was
back.

The google idiots think usenet is what they see at google, I doubt they
even know that they are not posting to a "web board". So they think
everyone will see it like they do, all the messages on one page. I
doubt most of the time they even notice that they are replying to an
old post, though I can't figure out why they are looking for old posts
to reply to.

The "excuse" that replying to an ancient thread will keep the
information together is crazy. Nobody will find the threads without a
search, and that will turn up the other threads. When google was
useful as an archive of Usenet, I'd have to check multiple threads to
find the actual information, the same is true now.

ANd it gets worse. It's not just google-idiots replying to old posts.
They often don't quote what they are replying to, leaving no context,
they are too often replying with something that no longer has value
("it's time to update your computer", when the computer was nice and
new back in 1998), they may not even do a proper reply, so it looks
like a new thread.

And once they post, there are others who aren't paying attention
either, so they add to the resurrected thread. There was one in
sci.electronics.repair a week or so ago where back in the original
thread (only five or so years old) the original poster had even posted
a followup saying he'd fixed the problem and giving details. Yet
someone felt the need to reply to that old thread, and then others
jumped in, not noticing it was a zombie post they were replying to.
That instance was a joke, since some of the original posters actually
replied in the resurrected thread, not even remembering they'd done so
in the past.

A sad example is the infamous post where Linus Torvald announced Linux.
The first time the google bug appeared, vandals decided they needed to
tack their stupidity onto that thread. I assume because google put up
a timeline of usenet, and so made it easy for the vandals to find the
thread. The bug came back, and that thread was further vanadalized,
it's just idiots thinking it's amusing to reply as if Linus was still
reading the minix newsgroup, as if he'd just posted last week. So a
historical thread is now cluttered with endless posts that have nothing
to do with it. And the minix newsgroup just ends up with replies to
old posts, rather than relevant on topic new posts.

For "dead" newsgroups, many of the new posts are from these google
idiots, wanting to know if that thing from 1995 is still forsale, or
whatever.

There is no reason to reply to old posts. I have posts going back to
1996 saved on various hard drives, but I don't reply to them. This is
a google problem inflicted on the rest of usenet.

Michael


Old posts have been replied to before Google took over Deja. HP for
example still runs its own Usenet server, and I believe their retention
goes back to the day it was set up (HP employees feel free to correct
me, just heard it from an ex-HPer). I would agree that sometimes, a
reply to an old post is worthless, but this is true with many replies
in new threads too.

I think that I understand your viewpoint, though. Is it that older
posts should not be replied to, in order to keep the threads more of a
time capsule of the day and age they were active? I think that the
historical value of a thread is maintained, as one can just ignore the
newer posts.

While I do understand that you have your reasons for seeking out and
chiding people who resurrect dead threads, I think that ultimately
you're tilting at windmills because nobody "owns" Usenet and I'm not
sure that there is any universal or even popular feeling that replying
to old threads is wrong. You're certainly not going to stop anybody,
at least, so why make trouble for yourself? That's my feeling.

  #7   Report Post  
Old July 2nd 14, 02:03 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2012
Posts: 1
Default DX-375 power button trouble

Michael Black wrote:
Because it's a bug at google. When google took over the archive from
dejanews, you couldn't reply to old messages. Then one time when they
changed the interface, to be more useful for their own "groups", they
allowed replies to old posts. People like me complained, and that bug
was fixed. Then another iteration of the interface, and the bug was back.


You can reply to any Usenet post ever, if you can find it. You can
reply to a nonexistent one you invented. If your newsreader will not
let you do this, there are plenty of ways to create the headers,
including typing them in manually, and of sending the completed message
to your server.

George Cornelius
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
midland handheld cd owner wants to increase transmission and reception power. (min investment and trouble) [email protected] CB 2 July 31st 07 02:58 AM
TS-700SP button? Bob Spooner Boatanchors 2 October 18th 05 08:29 PM
BC760Xlt - what does that button do? Zombie Scanner 9 June 5th 05 04:38 PM
repair of pwr button on ft-50 r?? keith Equipment 0 December 21st 03 03:00 PM
repair of pwr button on ft-50 r?? keith Equipment 0 December 21st 03 03:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017