|
|
Posted by NRen2k5 on 10/13/01 11:36
Jon B wrote:
> when you post in html is usenet, a vast majority of readers
> see a mess, or nothing at all. A lot of people also just filter out any
> html messages to usenet
And they are elitists, morons and dorks. Choosing to be ignorant doesn't
help anything.
> whatever the message is because it is html requires 10x the amount of
> data to download and one of the beauties of usenet is that it is all
> plain text which takes up bugger all bits, therefore it is quick [1]
10x? No, try 3x. Oh, right, you would never try, because HTML posting is
like some kind of venereal disease to you.
> Well it isn't. There are a set of long term laid down rules about
> usenet, the fact that many groups don't all now follow them is the fact
> they are full of people like yourself, those that don't listen when they
> are told they are doing things wrong, and continue going about their
> ways.
They work perfectly well for us. They don't work for you only because
you're anal retentive bastards who care more about how something is
being said than what is actually being said.
> Two things tend to happen to these groups, either the regular
> crowd keep shouting at the newcomers until they do follow the rules, or
> give up and they all put you in the kill file so we don't see anything
> you post, normality is restored and everyone is happy, and the group
> continues to be a useful and informative place to gain information.
In your fantasy world.
> all you are left with is the top posting html no
> nothings and a group not worth belonging too.
No. On the other hand, let anal retentiveness, idiocy and forced
adherence to ridiculously outdated standards rule, and you end up with a
usenet as a whole that nobody even knows exists, because it's such a
fucking backwater that only the biggest geeks use it. And that's the
condition it's in right now.
> [1] Yes a lot of us have a broadband connection, but a lot of us have
> laptops, phone data cards, etc etc and suddenly a low bit rate becomes
> important again.
And even in those conditions, downloading 9kB as opposed to 3kB is still
not even noticeable. That is, unless you're some fat 30-year-old in his
boxer shorts in a basement appartment, holding a stopwatch beside his
monitor.
- NRen2k5
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|