Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[Michael Pavling]

On many occasions, C E Macfarlane  wrote:
> Please see below ...
>
> www.macfh.co.uk/CEMH.html



A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?


Please don't feed the trolls.

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[Simon Ward]

If you don't read below the top part of the message you might not see what I 
have written below, but that's where my replies are nonetheless. If you can't 
see them because your MUA does not let you see them I sugest you get it fixed 
or find one that is less broken. 

On 18 May 2016 20:20:05 BST, Dennis Smith  wrote:
>How about, we don't bring the list down to the level of a Fox/Sky
>broadcast?

By posting without proper quotation and with disregard to the list guidelines 
that have already been referenced I feel this is precisely what you are doing. 

>As the thread has been mangled (it was one thread but people changed
>the subject line fudging threaded view), I cannot find the original
>comment without taxing my sore brain right now.

If your MUA is breaking threads because of changed Subject headers this is a 
problem with your MUA. Threads are created using the References and In-Reply-To 
headers, not Subject. Broken threads may also be caused by broken MUAs not 
correctly setting the References and In-Reply-To headers.

Please get your broken MUA fixed or find one that isn't broken, and stop trying 
to cripple everyone else's email experience to suit your crippled MUA.

>However I wanted to
>elaborate on my comment about not reading the messages below the top
>part. To clarify, in received messages the old parts of the message
>are filtered out and only the new part of the message is visible, if
>you put your comment in the middle of the message, it's not shown to
>me.

This is a problem with your MUA. If it filters the old parts of the message 
without even giving you the option of showing them it is removing the ability 
to quote relevant parts. Google Mail hides (collapses) quoted text blocks but 
at least gives the option of expanding them.

I currently use five different MUAs: Kaiten Mail (based on K-9 Mail), Mozilla 
Thunderbird, Gmail (web interface), Evolution, and Mutt. I have also used, that 
I can remember, K-9 Mail, Gmail (Android), Pine, Sylpheed Claws/Claws Mail, 
Eudora, Yahoo! (old interface), Outlook (2000?), and Netscape/Mozilla before 
Thunderbird and Firefox became things. I don't recall having any trouble with 
properly quoted messages with any of these. It really sounds like your MUA is 
in the minority.

>I have about 30 messages that are largely a pile of nonsense mush
>without context or meaning, that in order to read the full message
>including original content I have to open each one separately. 

This is backwards. The context is provided by quoting text then adding your 
reply below the quoted text. The whole message followed by whole reply (or 
whole reply followed by whole message in the case of top-posting) only really 
works for small messages. Email is not SMS or instant messaging. There are 
often many points made in one email, each soliciting a response, which 
naturally leads to an interposed quote-reply format.

>Also I am subscribed to about 80 different groups with daily emails (I
>receive well over a 1000 emails a day as a result) and I have no
>trouble with any of them except the 2 lists that insist on interposed
>or bottom posting.

Is this a competition? You win on the number of mailing lists (I currently 
subscribe to about 65), but your experience is totally opposite to mine: I am 
on one list where top-posting is the norm (two if we're counting private lists, 
in which case I'm on ~70-75 lists overall), but don't think I've seen anyone 
complain about interposed quotes and replies before you. Some lists are 
announce only, so the quoting method doesn't apply. The remainder all favour 
what you call interposed posting. 

Regards,
Simon Ward
-- 
Sent from Kaiten Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[Christopher Woods]

To wit, at this point I think I speak for most recipients in declaring that 
this thread's run its course. It's now serving no use except to sustain a 
circular conversation and add to my inbox.


Please, let's all move on to more useful discussions. Have a good evening all.

Chris



___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[Dennis Smith]

How about, we don't bring the list down to the level of a Fox/Sky broadcast?

As the thread has been mangled (it was one thread but people changed
the subject line fudging threaded view), I cannot find the original
comment without taxing my sore brain right now. However I wanted to
elaborate on my comment about not reading the messages below the top
part. To clarify, in received messages the old parts of the message
are filtered out and only the new part of the message is visible, if
you put your comment in the middle of the message, it's not shown to
me. I have about 30 messages that are largely a pile of nonsense mush
without context or meaning, that in order to read the full message
including original content I have to open each one separately.

Also I am subscribed to about 80 different groups with daily emails (I
receive well over a 1000 emails a day as a result) and I have no
trouble with any of them except the 2 lists that insist on interposed
or bottom posting.

Dennis Smith
M1DLG

On 18 May 2016 at 19:55, C E Macfarlane  wrote:
> Please see below ...
>
> www.macfh.co.uk/CEMH.html
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org]On
>> Behalf Of Veni Vidi Video
>> Sent: 18 May 2016 19:20
>> To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
>> Subject: Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...
>>
>> Okay, everyone is thinking it, so I'll say it.  If C E
>> Macfarlane were banned from the list the vast majority of the
>> truly offensive OT noise would be eliminated.
>
> Well, for the most part I think I am responding to people flaming me, as you
> have just done!  This suggests to me that the cure is not as simple as you
> make out.
>
>>   It's easy to
>> filter him out
>
> Yes, and that would certainly be preferable to continuing the flame war.
>
>>   but unfortunately various people rise to the
>> bait
>
> Again, as you have done.
>
>>   and respond to his nastiness
>
> Mmmm!  Pots and kettles!
>
>>   and those people may in
>> other threads provide useful observations.
>
> As indeed I have done in the past, and may do so in future.
>
>> At a minimum, I suggest to everyone that you just not respond
>> to Macfarlane.  Yes, he'll flame you.  I know beyond a doubt
>> he'll flame me for this.
>
> Well, you may consider the above a flame, but, given the provocation, it
> seems a fairly reasonable response to me!
>
>
> ___
> get_iplayer mailing list
> get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[David Woodhouse]

On Wed, 2016-05-18 at 19:55 +0100, C E Macfarlane wrote:
> Please see below ...
> 
> www.macfh.co.uk/CEMH.html

Please stop putting this at the top of every message you send.

It really does look like you are explicitly referring people to see the
URL "below" (on the very next line). Signatures belong at the end of
the message, after a line which contains only '-- ' (dash dash space).

-- 
dwmw2




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[C E Macfarlane]

Please see below ...

www.macfh.co.uk/CEMH.html

> -Original Message-
> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org]On
> Behalf Of Veni Vidi Video
> Sent: 18 May 2016 19:20
> To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...
>
> Okay, everyone is thinking it, so I'll say it.  If C E
> Macfarlane were banned from the list the vast majority of the
> truly offensive OT noise would be eliminated.

Well, for the most part I think I am responding to people flaming me, as you
have just done!  This suggests to me that the cure is not as simple as you
make out.

>   It's easy to
> filter him out

Yes, and that would certainly be preferable to continuing the flame war.

>   but unfortunately various people rise to the
> bait

Again, as you have done.

>   and respond to his nastiness

Mmmm!  Pots and kettles!

>   and those people may in
> other threads provide useful observations.

As indeed I have done in the past, and may do so in future.

> At a minimum, I suggest to everyone that you just not respond
> to Macfarlane.  Yes, he'll flame you.  I know beyond a doubt
> he'll flame me for this.

Well, you may consider the above a flame, but, given the provocation, it
seems a fairly reasonable response to me!


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[Veni Vidi Video]

On May 18, 2016, at 6:01 AM, C E Macfarlane  wrote:
> ... have you no sense of your own hypocrisy in that by making such a 
> pointless,
> not to mention insulting, complaint you actually add uselessly to the very
> noise that you complain about ???!!! ...

Okay, everyone is thinking it, so I'll say it.  If C E Macfarlane were banned 
from the list the vast majority of the truly offensive OT noise would be 
eliminated.  It's easy to filter him out, but unfortunately various people rise 
to the bait and respond to his nastiness, and those people may in other threads 
provide useful observations.

At a minimum, I suggest to everyone that you just not respond to Macfarlane.  
Yes, he'll flame you.  I know beyond a doubt he'll flame me for this.  But 
consider the source.  I promise I will not respond.

-vvv
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[Owen Smith]

The web itself didn't exist until the early 1990s, and it took a bit longer 
than that for web forums to appear. Internet email is nearly 20 years older 
than that and was in quite wide use when I started using it in the mid 1980s. 
I'm less sure about dates for newsgroups but I believe they are also 
substantially older than the web, by at least a decade.

So not from remotely similar eras, unless by that you mean "the couple of 
decades when only techie people used the internet".

-- 
Owen Smith 
Cambridge, UK

> On 18 May 2016, at 12:36, C E Macfarlane  wrote:
> 
> Email, newsgroups, and web forums all date from a similar era!


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[C E Macfarlane]

Please see below ...

www.macfh.co.uk/CEMH.html

> -Original Message-
> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org]On
> Behalf Of James Scholes
> Sent: 18 May 2016 13:49
> To: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...
>
> Please, for the love of God, see below.

[Please let's not, so snip more noise about more noise about ...]

As there is no smiley in your reply, I assume you must mean it for real  -
have you no sense of your own hypocrisy in that by making such a pointless,
not to mention insulting, complaint you actually add uselessly to the very
noise that you complain about ???!!!  If you wish us all to take your
advice, start by following it yourself!



___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[James Scholes]

Please, for the love of God, see below.

C E Macfarlane wrote:
> Better to do it IF there is the demand.  So far we've only heard NAYs in
> response here, so it doesn't seem likely, but if as many or more YEAHs
> appear, then I would be willing to pursue the matter further.

It's now reached the stage where the noise about the off-topic noise has
become louder than the original off-topic noise it was aiming to stop,
with people replying just to score points against the opposition.
Honestly I've worked with children who are less likely to answer back
than some of the adults on this list.

Personally, rather than some theoretical vote about some silly idea to
move to a newsgroup which isn't going to happen, I vote we all just shut
up.  The list is clearly here to stay, get_iplayer is working, everyone
is happy.  If you want to discuss newsgroup clients, go elsewhere.  No
wonder a forum was created for GiP - I wouldn't wish wading through this
mess on anybody, least of all the developer(s) of the fine software we
all use every day.

In many other communities, the continued proliferation of this sort of
traffic would see you removed and/or moderated at the very least.
Please try to bear that in mind before replying to me just to tell me
how much you disagree with my tone.  Or if you do, have the decency and
common sense to do it off-list.

Thank you, and a good afternoon to you all.
-- 
James Scholes
http://twitter.com/JamesScholes

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[C E Macfarlane]

Please see below ...

www.macfh.co.uk/CEMH.html

> -Original Message-
> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org]On
> Behalf Of SquarePenguin
> Sent: 18 May 2016 13:16
> To: c.e.macfarl...@macfh.co.uk
> Cc: get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...
>
> On 18/05/2016 12:36, C E Macfarlane wrote:
> > I am merely pointing out that the requirements of this list
> might be better
> > served by a newsgroup rather than a web-forum.
>
> Why don't you set one up and publicise it?
>
> Better to just do it rather than pontificate about it.

Better to do it IF there is the demand.  So far we've only heard NAYs in
response here, so it doesn't seem likely, but if as many or more YEAHs
appear, then I would be willing to pursue the matter further.


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[SquarePenguin]

On 18/05/2016 12:36, C E Macfarlane wrote:

I am merely pointing out that the requirements of this list might be better
served by a newsgroup rather than a web-forum.


Why don't you set one up and publicise it?

Better to just do it rather than pontificate about it.


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

RE: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

[C E Macfarlane]

Please see below ...

www.macfh.co.uk/CEMH.html

Note: When you reply to an email message, the header of the message being
replied to is normally here, so your placing of some, but not all, of your
reply here makes it look as though the rest of the message beyond the header
below is just untrimmed quoting, and, habitually, therefore not worth
scrolling down any further for.  If you want people to be certain of seeing
and reading ALL of your message, it would be better to not to write anything
here, but instead ...

> -Original Message-
> From: get_iplayer [mailto:get_iplayer-boun...@lists.infradead.org]On
> Behalf Of Shevek
> Sent: 17 May 2016 13:33
> To: c.e.macfarl...@macfh.co.uk
> Cc: get_iplayer; David Woodhouse
> Subject: Re: Offtopic noise: Re: BBC iPlayer viewers now need a...

... start here!  So (quoted out of order in the interests of clarity) ...

> Er, did you actually bother reading to the end of my reply where I did
> reply to your points?

... I'm sorry, but, for the above reason, I didn't see the rest of your
message, for which I accept responsibility of habit, not laziness, as I
think you must also accept some responsibility for confusing quoting.

> Outlook does not put in the " Please see below ..."

Nobody's complaining about "Please see below ..."

To return to the missed section of your earlier post ...

> How many people on this list do you think know about NNTP, let alone
> use it still?

I don't know, and I suspect neither do you, but the fact that they are using
something involved as GiP instead of just a normal PVR implies a level of
technical willingness to learn.

> You are asking probably 90-95% of this list to:

You have no real basis for such figures, the truth is that neither of us
knows what the percentage would be.

> a) download and install a client (I am aware that some use email
> clients with built in news reading capabilities [snip])

Yes, and, depending on your OS, there are various other possibilities.

> b) gain access to an NNTP service (not all ISPs provide it any more)

For text only, there are many free options, it's usually only binary
downloads that require payment.

> c) configure the client

Usually easier than trying to configure an email client.

> d) learn to use the client

Again, pretty easy.

> e) learn new rules

Not much different from a list such as this.

> People know web forums and people know email. Asking them to use a 90s
> technology is, frankly, ridiculous.

Email, newsgroups, and web forums all date from a similar era!

So your so-called 'obvious' arguments are all straw men, you haven't really
got a single, cogent argument at all!

I am merely pointing out that the requirements of this list might be better
served by a newsgroup rather than a web-forum.  That the majority of people
here may not WISH to migrate to a newsgroup I can entirely accept, but there
is no technical or similar reason to prevent it.


___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer

BBC subsciption streaming service

[mccarthy kevin]

 Small article here

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2016/05/17/bbc-gets-green-light-to-start-new-subscription-streaming-service?utm_source=newsletterENG;

___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer