 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/14/09 10:34, David H. Burns wrote:
> Perhaps povray.off-topic should have an additional subgroup:
> povray.offtopic.politics.
> But that might leave the main off-topic group rather bare. :)
Your newsreader likely has a way to kill a thread if you're not
interested in the topic. I use it all the time here.
--
I don't suffer from insanity, i enjoy every waking moment of it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> Your newsreader likely has a way to kill a thread if you're not
> interested in the topic. I use it all the time here.
Oh no! Have I ever been killfiled?
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 08/14/09 10:34, David H. Burns wrote:
>> Perhaps povray.off-topic should have an additional subgroup:
>> povray.offtopic.politics.
>> But that might leave the main off-topic group rather bare. :)
>
> Your newsreader likely has a way to kill a thread if you're not
> interested in the topic. I use it all the time here.
>
Thanks :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <4a859a99$1@news.povray.org>,
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> Your newsreader likely has a way to kill a thread if you're not
> interested in the topic. I use it all the time here.
That's always the way to go. I could have a peaceful discussion with
someone in a crawded-with-spam USENET group. I ignore everyone but the
person.
I used to do this on IRC. Crawded channel, peaceful conversation with
very few. This was in the days where I could still bear IRC.
And that's why I despise a mail list. I don't mind them as long as I
can talk in them through gmane.org or something like that. But many
mail lists require you to be a member to talk there. Aff. One must
control everything.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/14/09 12:11, Mike Raiford wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>
>> Your newsreader likely has a way to kill a thread if you're not
>> interested in the topic. I use it all the time here.
>
> Oh no! Have I ever been killfiled?
I kill threads, not people (at least not on this newsgroup).
--
When a toast with butter falls from your hand, it always falls on the
butter side.
When a cat falls from a height, it always lands on her feet.
If you tie a buttertoast over a cat with the butterside to the top, and
let both fall, what will face the floor, the butter or the feet?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/14/09 15:30, Daniel Bastos wrote:
> In article<4a859a99$1@news.povray.org>,
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>
>> Your newsreader likely has a way to kill a thread if you're not
>> interested in the topic. I use it all the time here.
>
> That's always the way to go. I could have a peaceful discussion with
> someone in a crawded-with-spam USENET group. I ignore everyone but the
> person.
>
> I used to do this on IRC. Crawded channel, peaceful conversation with
> very few. This was in the days where I could still bear IRC.
>
> And that's why I despise a mail list. I don't mind them as long as I
> can talk in them through gmane.org or something like that. But many
> mail lists require you to be a member to talk there. Aff. One must
> control everything.
You know, stuff like Thunderbird doesn't let you kill subthreads, which
really sucks. I don't know if the more well known news readers (tin?)
allow it.
I know gnus does. One day, within the next ten years or so, I'll switch
both email and newsgroup reading to gnus.
Then *finally*, I'll be able to handle mailing lists (treat them just
as I treat any newsgroup).
--
When a toast with butter falls from your hand, it always falls on the
butter side.
When a cat falls from a height, it always lands on her feet.
If you tie a buttertoast over a cat with the butterside to the top, and
let both fall, what will face the floor, the butter or the feet?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <4a85d6dc$1@news.povray.org>,
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 08/14/09 15:30, Daniel Bastos wrote:
>> In article<4a859a99$1@news.povray.org>,
>> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>>
>>> Your newsreader likely has a way to kill a thread if you're not
>>> interested in the topic. I use it all the time here.
>>
>> That's always the way to go. I could have a peaceful discussion with
>> someone in a crawded-with-spam USENET group. I ignore everyone but the
>> person.
>>
>> I used to do this on IRC. Crawded channel, peaceful conversation with
>> very few. This was in the days where I could still bear IRC.
>>
>> And that's why I despise a mail list. I don't mind them as long as I
>> can talk in them through gmane.org or something like that. But many
>> mail lists require you to be a member to talk there. Aff. One must
>> control everything.
>
>
> You know, stuff like Thunderbird doesn't let you kill subthreads, which
> really sucks. I don't know if the more well known news readers (tin?)
> allow it.
That really sucks. I don't know either about tin or another.
I use slrn, and in reality slrn doesn't even ignore threads
either. But with the scoring mecanism, you can easily separate the
threads you participate. That's a must in any reader. Outlook express
does that by default by pressing C-H. That's nice. Simple things.
These things are usually very easy to implement. But figuring out how
the code works is usually a major curve. People write notes about the
code, but they never write a tutorial on how to keep all the code in
your mind.
> I know gnus does. One day, within the next ten years or so, I'll switch
> both email and newsgroup reading to gnus.
I was never able to do that. I do compose mail in emacs; so it always
made sense to me to use gnus. But I never made it. I don't know why;
slrn however seemed quite natural.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <4a85ed33$1@news.povray.org>,
Daniel Bastos wrote:
>> You know, stuff like Thunderbird doesn't let you kill subthreads, which
>> really sucks. I don't know if the more well known news readers (tin?)
>> allow it.
>
> That really sucks. I don't know either about tin or another.
>
> I use slrn, and in reality slrn doesn't even ignore threads
> either. But with the scoring mecanism, you can easily separate the
> threads you participate. That's a must in any reader. Outlook express
> does that by default by pressing C-H. That's nice. Simple things.
Turns out slrn can kill any subthread; with the scoring mechanism. You
score low by a reference; all further messages contain that reference,
and all scored low. Do the same thing to watch subthreads; score high.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/14/09 18:03, Daniel Bastos wrote:
> I use slrn, and in reality slrn doesn't even ignore threads
> either. But with the scoring mecanism, you can easily separate the
> threads you participate. That's a must in any reader. Outlook express
> does that by default by pressing C-H. That's nice. Simple things.
I believe that's the same as gnus. You can give a rank/score to a
subthread, and if you do it properly, it's pretty much the same as
killing it. I'm guessing tin probably can do it - I never used it long
enough to figure it out.
Now that I think about it - I don't see why I'm *not* using tin...
>> I know gnus does. One day, within the next ten years or so, I'll switch
>> both email and newsgroup reading to gnus.
>
> I was never able to do that. I do compose mail in emacs; so it always
> made sense to me to use gnus. But I never made it. I don't know why;
> slrn however seemed quite natural.
gnus seems like a huge headache to learn.
It's just that I'm sick of mutt. Sick, sick and sick! I've heard that
gnus is the most versatile you can get, so I thought I might as well
dive into that.
--
When a toast with butter falls from your hand, it always falls on the
butter side.
When a cat falls from a height, it always lands on her feet.
If you tie a buttertoast over a cat with the butterside to the top, and
let both fall, what will face the floor, the butter or the feet?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <4a863b7f$1@news.povray.org>,
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 08/14/09 18:03, Daniel Bastos wrote:
>> I use slrn, and in reality slrn doesn't even ignore threads
>> either. But with the scoring mecanism, you can easily separate the
>> threads you participate. That's a must in any reader. Outlook express
>> does that by default by pressing C-H. That's nice. Simple things.
>
> I believe that's the same as gnus. You can give a rank/score to a
> subthread, and if you do it properly, it's pretty much the same as
> killing it.
Yeah, and scoring must be the most flexible scheme.
>>> I know gnus does. One day, within the next ten years or so, I'll switch
>>> both email and newsgroup reading to gnus.
>>
>> I was never able to do that. I do compose mail in emacs; so it always
>> made sense to me to use gnus. But I never made it. I don't know why;
>> slrn however seemed quite natural.
>
> gnus seems like a huge headache to learn.
And, also, you need to accept the framework, and learn to live with it
which I believe I did not. I think that when I was using gnus, I
sometimes would kill the connection to the nntpd, and later try to do
something on the article buffer, and obviously it wouldn't work. Stuff
like that.
Also, eventually, I'd have lots of buffers open, and it would be
difficult to find my own text ones, so using emacs was becoming
surfing through buffers. So I realized I needed to train myself in
that, and then I thought the whole thing was defeating the purpose of
using gnus.
There's also the conclusion I reached some time. The most important
thing in a news client is the text editor; if you can't compose
properly, forget it.
But also, you want some simplicity in running it, subscribing, surfing
through threads, searching, et cetera. And, you know, if you look at a
program like ``mail'', that's a fine mail client if all the mail in
the world is us-ascii and you compose replies with your favorite
editor.
Oh, what about filters, and mail lists? Filtering can be done before
you read mail. Mail lists should be managed by your local gmane guy,
or in qmail style which is just another kind of filtering. So I don't
consider these points. (Once firefox allowed me to call an external
editor, I began using webmails, and I have not been unhappy. I don't
like reading mail on the web, but I'm living with that for now.)
So, well, slrn seems to be that for NNTP. (Apparently the s-lang
language makes slrn quite flexible.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
