Snit <SNIT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> "Mark Kent" <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> stated in post
> kalor3-oq2.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 8/21/06 5:25 AM:
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Donn Miller <hackr_d@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Roy Culley wrote:
>>>> Roy Schestowitz's [News] posts have really rattled the COLA wintrolls.
>>>> The personal attacks against him have proved that.
>>>>
>>>> One argument used by some of the trolls is that so few of his posts
>>>> generate followups and hence nobody appreciates his articles to COLA.
>>>
>>> I think the fact that so few of his posts generate followups is a good
>>> argument for grouping a number of his posts into one post. I don't mean
>>> create one giant post containing 200 posts, but rather, do something
>>> like is done with FAQs: break the posts down into 3-4 or so posts.
>>>
>>
>> I totally disagree. I prefer to have separate titles which are relevant
>> to each posting. As his postings are on topic, are well within the
>> charter, and are relevant, and are easy to mark down if you don't
>> like
For FS, create subthread replies from the digest post. yttrx is more on
topic than most of those snivelling press cuttings which anyone of us
could find anyway. You are about the only one who replies. Noone is
saying "dont post" only saying "dont choke the NG".
But your typically self centred, selfish attitude is expected. Because
you two like it that way, continue to bombard the NG.
If it were a SINGLE digest post, then none of us would kill file the
posts and so still have a chance to browse the digest and find things of
interest. That is advocating a lot better.
>> them, there's no reason to impose restrictions - think about this a
>> minute - why would you want to restrict /on topic posting/, yet leave
>> the xtian fundies, snits, yttrxes and so on alone? It maketh no sense
>> to me.
>>
>> Roy S - please do /not/ combine news postings.
|
|
