The "my rig" thread prompted an interesting observation for me. I posted a picture to that thread, and naturally, I wish to express my views here.
Basically, I came across the "aus.bicycle" through my membership of the "cyclingforums.com". The recent exchange of ideas on the above thread made me realise the situation whereas before I posted to this discussion group as any ordinary posting to "A" forum. Therefore, the technicalities remained within the boundaries of a commom practice known as "the way we post threads to a forum". The interesting point for me is that the forum is providing access to the aus.bicycle, which by nature has particular requirements. And this has not been clearly signposted.
The issue of posting a picture to me has been an ordinary matter as a forum user. Forum users post tonnes of images to their forum threads on a regular basis. It was initially confusing that why some people started yelling about the binary/non-binary stuff when there was even a set up in the new message compose page to facilitate attaching a picture. I think braso shared the same view.
Now, it's better to keep separate issues separate. Firstly, if sending a pic to the cyclinforums.com has inadvertantly caused trouble for some aus.bicycle users, then I feel sorry about that. Secondly, as a cyclingforums.com member, I have not been warned about incompatibilities with aus.bicycle, so I don't feel responsible for any incompatibility (by the way, the FAQ link leads to a brief page with no note on this matter, and extra links provided within the FAQ do not talk about the "no no" binary/non-binary matter). Thirdly, if the setup between the cyclingforums.com and the aus.bicycle is likely to cause any proplems, the matter is to be brought to the respective staff's attention so that any necessary adjustments would be made. Therefore, in my view, no one is entitled to lecture other forum users in an authorative manner.
And Oh! Someone scared me so bad about the consequences I almost c****ed my pants... We need to come down, don't we?
Cheers,
Amir.
Basically, I came across the "aus.bicycle" through my membership of the "cyclingforums.com". The recent exchange of ideas on the above thread made me realise the situation whereas before I posted to this discussion group as any ordinary posting to "A" forum. Therefore, the technicalities remained within the boundaries of a commom practice known as "the way we post threads to a forum". The interesting point for me is that the forum is providing access to the aus.bicycle, which by nature has particular requirements. And this has not been clearly signposted.
The issue of posting a picture to me has been an ordinary matter as a forum user. Forum users post tonnes of images to their forum threads on a regular basis. It was initially confusing that why some people started yelling about the binary/non-binary stuff when there was even a set up in the new message compose page to facilitate attaching a picture. I think braso shared the same view.
Now, it's better to keep separate issues separate. Firstly, if sending a pic to the cyclinforums.com has inadvertantly caused trouble for some aus.bicycle users, then I feel sorry about that. Secondly, as a cyclingforums.com member, I have not been warned about incompatibilities with aus.bicycle, so I don't feel responsible for any incompatibility (by the way, the FAQ link leads to a brief page with no note on this matter, and extra links provided within the FAQ do not talk about the "no no" binary/non-binary matter). Thirdly, if the setup between the cyclingforums.com and the aus.bicycle is likely to cause any proplems, the matter is to be brought to the respective staff's attention so that any necessary adjustments would be made. Therefore, in my view, no one is entitled to lecture other forum users in an authorative manner.
And Oh! Someone scared me so bad about the consequences I almost c****ed my pants... We need to come down, don't we?
Cheers,
Amir.
