M
Michael Press
Guest
In article
<[email protected]>,
Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > What does this have to do with tires? If you must yank threads off
> > > topic like this, please at least fork it off into its own thread.
> >
> > It has to do with tires in that displayed data can be more easilly
> > understood when displayed in aligned columns.
>
> In the case of the original table, I didn't have any trouble
> understanding it. There were few columns and few rows so it was easy to
> see the relationships. If there had been six columns and twenty rows,
> it might have been a different matter. The reader has to be a bit
> flexible and sometimes exert a little mental effort, as Usenet is not a
> typeset medium where the writer has complete control over how the
> material ends up formatted. Some newsreaders use fixed width fonts,
> some do not. Some newsreaders enforce an 80 column line length and some
> do not. Some use MIME, some do not. And so on.
People study how well and efficiently information gets
across to a reader; they even publish papers about it
in journals devoted to those matters. Unregistered
columns are measurably more difficult to extract
information from by readers. Registered columns make it
much simpler to find trends, patterns, and outliers.
You say you have `no trouble', but in fact you have
_some_ trouble.
You speak as if newsreaders are imposed upon the user
and offer no choices to the user. The user chooses the
newsreader. Newsreaders have preferences, and among
them is font selection. The user of the newsreader is
the active agent, not the `newsreader'. The newsreader
does not `have fonts.' Fonts are part of the system,
and the newsreader offers to the user the fonts that
the system offers the newsreader
> > I do not see that the thread has been yanked off. Perhaps you could
> > elaborate.
>
> Because we suddenly had a discussion that was about about newsreaders,
> fixed width fonts, yadda yadda yadda, and which was not about tires.
> Which is continuing, and hence this will be my last post participating
> in this topic drift.
I asked the publiser of the table to use fixed with
fonts to enhance the technical discussion. I offered
ways an means. The matter was settled, except for this.
The tire discussion rolled on unabated and undiverted.
> > I do not need to start a thread for this as the matter is at rest for
> > the nonce. Such a thread would be off topic by your estimation, so
> > you ought not propose it.
>
> The generally accepted Usenet practice in situations like these is to
> start a parallel thread, usually titled something like:
>
> Subject: New Thread (was: Old Thread)
This subject header is often found when the old thread
has a sub_thread renamed. The reference headers show
that the sub-thread remains in the parent thread. Yes,
I should have changed the subject header.
> That way those who wish to participate in the diversionary conversation
> may do so, while those who do not may carry on with the original
> conversation undistracted. It's a simple enough practice with good
> reasons behind it.
Yes, except I object to characterizing it as diversionary.
--
Michael Press
<[email protected]>,
Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > What does this have to do with tires? If you must yank threads off
> > > topic like this, please at least fork it off into its own thread.
> >
> > It has to do with tires in that displayed data can be more easilly
> > understood when displayed in aligned columns.
>
> In the case of the original table, I didn't have any trouble
> understanding it. There were few columns and few rows so it was easy to
> see the relationships. If there had been six columns and twenty rows,
> it might have been a different matter. The reader has to be a bit
> flexible and sometimes exert a little mental effort, as Usenet is not a
> typeset medium where the writer has complete control over how the
> material ends up formatted. Some newsreaders use fixed width fonts,
> some do not. Some newsreaders enforce an 80 column line length and some
> do not. Some use MIME, some do not. And so on.
People study how well and efficiently information gets
across to a reader; they even publish papers about it
in journals devoted to those matters. Unregistered
columns are measurably more difficult to extract
information from by readers. Registered columns make it
much simpler to find trends, patterns, and outliers.
You say you have `no trouble', but in fact you have
_some_ trouble.
You speak as if newsreaders are imposed upon the user
and offer no choices to the user. The user chooses the
newsreader. Newsreaders have preferences, and among
them is font selection. The user of the newsreader is
the active agent, not the `newsreader'. The newsreader
does not `have fonts.' Fonts are part of the system,
and the newsreader offers to the user the fonts that
the system offers the newsreader
> > I do not see that the thread has been yanked off. Perhaps you could
> > elaborate.
>
> Because we suddenly had a discussion that was about about newsreaders,
> fixed width fonts, yadda yadda yadda, and which was not about tires.
> Which is continuing, and hence this will be my last post participating
> in this topic drift.
I asked the publiser of the table to use fixed with
fonts to enhance the technical discussion. I offered
ways an means. The matter was settled, except for this.
The tire discussion rolled on unabated and undiverted.
> > I do not need to start a thread for this as the matter is at rest for
> > the nonce. Such a thread would be off topic by your estimation, so
> > you ought not propose it.
>
> The generally accepted Usenet practice in situations like these is to
> start a parallel thread, usually titled something like:
>
> Subject: New Thread (was: Old Thread)
This subject header is often found when the old thread
has a sub_thread renamed. The reference headers show
that the sub-thread remains in the parent thread. Yes,
I should have changed the subject header.
> That way those who wish to participate in the diversionary conversation
> may do so, while those who do not may carry on with the original
> conversation undistracted. It's a simple enough practice with good
> reasons behind it.
Yes, except I object to characterizing it as diversionary.
--
Michael Press
