OT: When is a Usenet post too stale to reply to?

[still just me]

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 17:16:18 -0600, "Jay" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Yes, in theory, that might appear to be possible. But only to those who do
>not understand the distributed nature of the NNTP protocol
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_News_Transfer_Protocol .
>
>There is no one server, to be reconfigured. There are thousands of NNTP
>servers, distributed worldwide.

It was a rhetorical point. I do know how the usenet works

 

[still just me]

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:05:20 -0600, Tom Sherman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> There's no excuse for not trimming.
>
>Unless one is engaging in a drawn out flame war - then it is best to
>quote everything.

Naw, I disagree. You've deluded yourself into believing the someone is
actually reading the thread and that you're proving your point to
someone other than the party you are arguing with. In most cases,
everyone else has already lost interest.

 

[still just me]

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:29:45 -0600, Tom Sherman
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Nonsense. Interleaved replies makes it obvious what particular portion
>of the preceding post the new text is a response to. Top posting is so
>annoying, since it makes this interleaving impossible without
>reformatting the quoted post first.

Agreed. Top posting sucks. So does "not trimming"!

 

[Tom Sherman]

still just me wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:05:20 -0600, Tom Sherman
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> There's no excuse for not trimming.
>> Unless one is engaging in a drawn out flame war - then it is best to
>> quote everything.
>
> Naw, I disagree. You've deluded yourself into believing the someone is
> actually reading the thread and that you're proving your point to
> someone other than the party you are arguing with. In most cases,
> everyone else has already lost interest.

butbutbut, I enjoy it!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
POST FREE OR DIE!