On 2006-10-11, tjb <tjb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
> Jamie Hart <usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Just to add that he does post some really good ones. This is why I'm so
>>> hesitant on killfiling here. The problem is the sheer quantity of the
>> Buy a clue. If he cuts down the volume, he may well cut out something
>> you'd want to see.
> The point is that the line has to be drawn somewhere.
> Currently, Roy *isn't* posting a million articles every day, and thus he's
> very probably (in effect) cutting out something I'd want to see. Would
> you, on this logic, conclude that I would like to see Roy post a million
> articles a day? No. There must be a cut-off point. I am arguing that he
> is already exceeding it.
Make up your mind. Is he posting too little of what you want to see? Or
is it that he's posting too much of anything?
Let's take the first part. If he's posting too little of what you want
to see, you can find the ones you think are missing and post them
yourself. Or you can read subject lines, kill the ones you don't want
to read and read the rest. You can use filtering of the "reader" (I've
used that one, and it doesn't have much going for it to earn the class
"newsreader") to get rid of certain posts based upon keywords.
As for part 2, killfile it all and be done with it. Then no complaints.
And you can go out on the web, find the ones you're interested in and
read them until you've had your fill.
In short, there are lots of ways to get what you want, all of it or
nothing without putting the burden of total effort on someone else to
make you happy while leaving everyone around you dissatisfied.
Personally I find that I read less than half. Until I see some of the
responses. Then the numbers rise. Sometimes I don't see the responses
until the thread goes on for awhile. Then I back up to the beginning
and read it all or most of it (a nice feature of using a slrn/leafnode
combination is not seeing what you don't want to until you decide you
do want to see it).
Shouldn't I have the opportunity to dictate how I like things, too? If
everybody who doesn't like it gets a turn, it's only fair that those
who like it should have a say.
Since the overwhelming majority of people against this are known,
verifiable trolls, that means the overwhelming majority of people
against it can/should be ignored (yes, that includes you, Larry;
/especially/ you, in fact). That leaves a few who dislike it that
should also be considered.
(Go ahead and give us another reason. I'm all geared up and ready for
your anticipated next "point" of contention.)
Sality: Innovative Microsoft peer-to-peer software.