Interesting..

https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1454513626006573060

Bob.

On 01/11/2021 12:05, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> Interesting..
>
> https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1454513626006573060

One of your few better links. Makes some very good points along the
way, but they don't actually support his final overall conclusion, which
verges needlessly on the paranoid.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 01/11/2021 12:05, Bob Latham wrote:
> Interesting..
>
> https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1454513626006573060
>
> Bob.
>
Very good.

Bill

Too long.

What am I supposed to know?

Tony

On 01/11/2021 18:02, williamwright wrote:
> On 01/11/2021 12:05, Bob Latham wrote:
>> Interesting..
>>
>> https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1454513626006573060
>>
>> Bob.
>>
> Very good.
>
> Bill

You might as well have posted the comment, the link is almost as long.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"williamwright" <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote in message
news:iuaoe6Fib9bU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 01/11/2021 12:05, Bob Latham wrote:
>> Interesting..
>>
>> https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1454513626006573060
>>
>> Bob.
>>
> Very good.
>
> Bill

Well done Brian,

Maybe if it is interesting or important the OP can show us the easy way.
I gave up on the link.

Good so see you are a top poster as well. So I will revert to being one
as you are one of the elite on this forum.

Tony

On 02/11/2021 09:30, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> You might as well have posted the comment, the link is almost as long.
> Brian
>

On 02/11/2021 09:53, Tony Gamble wrote:
>
> Good so see you are a top poster as well. So I will revert to being one
> as you are one of the elite on this forum.

As you are new here, it might be advisable to tell you that Brian is
blind - didn't used to be, macular degeneration IIRC - and he top
posts because that's the way his screen reader software works.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Brian Gaff wrote:

> You might as well have posted the comment, the link is almost as long.

I've seen much worse URLs, I suspect they don't want you to read the tweet, but
watch the video ...

<https://youtu.be/5U2UoR-oB1M>

On 02/11/2021 10:35, Java Jive wrote:
> On 02/11/2021 09:53, Tony Gamble wrote:
>>
>> Good so see you are a top poster as well. So I will revert to being
>> one as you are one of the elite on this forum.
>
> As you are new here, it might be advisable to tell you that Brian is
> blind  -  didn't used to be, macular degeneration IIRC  -  and he top
> posts because that's the way his screen reader software works.
>
Thanks JJ. I did realise that.

I'll go back to posting after all the other text if that make the forum
happy.

As someone said it has been like that since the system was invented so
who am I to suggest moving with the times!!

FWIW I find Brian's posts most informative and hence my rating of 'elite'.

T

On 01/11/2021 21:38, Tony Gamble wrote:
> Too long.
>
> What am I supposed to know?
>
> Tony
>
>
> On 01/11/2021 18:02, williamwright wrote:
>> On 01/11/2021 12:05, Bob Latham wrote:
>>> Interesting..
>>>
>>> https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1454513626006573060
>>>
>>> Bob.
>>>
>> Very good.
>>
>> Bill
>

You're supposed to know that Neil Oliver can remember the same old
arguments that are brought up at the time of every big climate
conference and present them with an intensity intended to anger the
public, make them believe the government only wants to control them in
any way possible and increase his audience.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

On 02/11/2021 in message <iucsq9F8oaU1@mid.individual.net> Tony Gamble
wrote:

>On 02/11/2021 10:35, Java Jive wrote:
>>On 02/11/2021 09:53, Tony Gamble wrote:
>>>
>>>Good so see you are a top poster as well. So I will revert to being one
>>>as you are one of the elite on this forum.
>>
>>As you are new here, it might be advisable to tell you that Brian is
>>blind  -  didn't used to be, macular degeneration IIRC  -  and he top
>>posts because that's the way his screen reader software works.
>>
>Thanks JJ. I did realise that.
>
>I'll go back to posting after all the other text if that make the forum
>happy.
>
>As someone said it has been like that since the system was invented so who
>am I to suggest moving with the times!!
>
>FWIW I find Brian's posts most informative and hence my rating of 'elite'.
>
>T

It's not moving with the times, some languages are read left to right and
some right to left but they are all read top to bottom. Sadly top posting
has become prevalent in email which means signatures and all the tosh
following them end up being left in the posts thus adding to the load on
the Internet.

Obviously people are courteous enough to accommodate people who have
special reasons for doing things differently which is right and proper
and, hopefully, allows everybody to participate.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
That's an amazing invention but who would ever want to use one of them?
(President Hayes speaking to Alexander Graham Bell on the invention of the
telephone)

In article <iud0o1F10k9U1@mid.individual.net>,
Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote:
> On 01/11/2021 21:38, Tony Gamble wrote:
> > Too long.
> >
> > What am I supposed to know?
> >
> > Tony
> >
> >
> > On 01/11/2021 18:02, williamwright wrote:
> >> On 01/11/2021 12:05, Bob Latham wrote:
> >>> Interesting..
> >>>
> >>> https://twitter.com/GBNEWS/status/1454513626006573060
> >>>
> >>> Bob.
> >>>
> >> Very good.
> >>
> >> Bill
> >

> You're supposed to know that Neil Oliver can remember the same old
> arguments that are brought up at the time of every big climate
> conference and present them with an intensity intended to anger the
> public, make them believe the government only wants to control
> them in any way possible and increase his audience.

It's a scam.

Bob.

"Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0n4wm51szcgxc01l@news.individual.net...
> It's not moving with the times, some languages are read left to right and
> some right to left but they are all read top to bottom. Sadly top posting
> has become prevalent in email which means signatures and all the tosh
> following them end up being left in the posts thus adding to the load on
> the Internet.
>
> Obviously people are courteous enough to accommodate people who have
> special reasons for doing things differently which is right and proper
> and, hopefully, allows everybody to participate.

Yes, I "always" post my reply below the text that it is a comment on. But I
make the exception for people like Brian who have a very good reason for
wanting the reply at the very beginning so they don't have to wade through
loads of context to get to the "what's new" in my post. I don't always
remember to do it but I try...

In message <iucsq9F8oaU1@mid.individual.net>, Tony Gamble
<tonygamble@compuserve.com> writes
>I'll go back to posting after all the other text if that make the forum
>happy.
>
<snip>
>As someone said it has been like that since the system was invented so
>who am I to suggest moving with the times!!

I've always felt that talk of "top" and "bottom" posting rather misses
the point. Quoting a huge mass of text without any snipping, only to
follow it with a one line reply - as some do - wastes the reader's time
in scanning through the quoted text and IMO is even worse than top
posting. The ideal is what one might call "interspersed" posting, where
the responder quotes only those parts of the original that he is
replying to (clearly indicating where he has snipped), and follows each
quoted section with his response to that section.

I.e.:

Quoted bit A
Response to quoted bit A
Quoted bit B
Response to quoted bit B
etc

That makes it much easier to follow the discussion.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

Jeff Gaines <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

[judicious snippetry to conserve bandwidth]

> It's not moving with the times, some languages are read left to right and
> some right to left but they are all read top to bottom. Sadly top posting
> has become prevalent in email which means signatures and all the tosh
> following them end up being left in the posts thus adding to the load on
> the Internet.
>
> Obviously people are courteous enough to accommodate people who have
> special reasons for doing things differently which is right and proper
> and, hopefully, allows everybody to participate.

The difference between Usenet News and email is that email is not
threaded, therefore a new participant in an email conversation cannot
go back to see what has gone before unless it is quoted in its entirety.
It is just a matter of convention and convenience that top-posting in
email is the norm. Regrettably, web logs ('blogs) and web forums have
adopted the email way of doing things.

OTOH, a Usenet article contains References, thus enabling the thread
to be back-tracked. In the old days when bandwidth was still a precious
commodity it was considered the height of bad manners to include stale
quotes. The old aphorism was "Don't quote more than you wrote."

Bottom posting was ~always~ the convention on Usenet. I recall the
furore that ensued when Microsoft made their Outlook Express emailer
capable of posting News and regrettably left the cursor positioned at
the top of the editing window, so that newbies had a brand new trap to
fall into. The rest is ancient history; alas it's still a modern bone
of contention.

----------

e.g.

Top posting.

> What is the most irritating thing on Usenet?

----------

--
^Ï^ <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

My pet rock Gordon just is.

On 02/11/2021 17:08, John Hall wrote:
> Quoting a huge mass of text without any snipping, only to
> follow it with a one line reply

I will normally give up long before I reach the one line answer.

On 02/11/2021 15:00, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> It's not moving with the times, some languages are read left to right
> and some right to left but they are all read top to bottom. Sadly top
> posting has become prevalent in email which means signatures and all the
> tosh following them end up being left in the posts thus adding to the
> load on the Internet.
>
Some languages go top to bottom, and one or two old ones used to
alternate left and right on subsequent lines...

> Obviously people are courteous enough to accommodate people who have
> special reasons for doing things differently which is right and proper
> and, hopefully, allows everybody to participate.

Brian is a special case.

One of my rules with threads is that if I can't see the new bit for the
quotes I skip to the next post.

Andy

On 02/11/2021 15:11, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> In article <iud0o1F10k9U1@mid.individual.net>,
> Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 01/11/2021 21:38, Tony Gamble wrote:
>>>
>>> Too long.
>>>
>>> What am I supposed to know?
>>
>> You're supposed to know that Neil Oliver can remember the same old
>> arguments that are brought up at the time of every big climate
>> conference and present them with an intensity intended to anger the
>> public, make them believe the government only wants to control
>> them in any way possible and increase his audience.

And not forgetting most probably his income too.

> It's a scam.

That depends on what you mean by 'it'.

He does make some valid points, but he could have made them in half the
time or less, and his so-called conclusion is a near-paranoid non-sequitur.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 02/11/2021 17:08, John Hall wrote:
>
> I've always felt that talk of "top" and "bottom" posting rather misses
> the point. Quoting a huge mass of text without any snipping, only to
> follow it with a one line reply - as some do - wastes the reader's time
> in scanning through the quoted text and IMO is even worse than top
> posting. The ideal is what one might call "interspersed" posting, where
> the responder quotes only those parts of the original that he is
> replying to (clearly indicating where he has snipped), and follows each
> quoted section with his response to that section.
>
> I.e.:
>
> Quoted bit A
> Response to quoted bit A
> Quoted bit B
> Response to quoted bit B
> etc
>
> That makes it much easier to follow the discussion.

+100 to all that.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 02/11/2021 21:47, Vir Campestris wrote:
> One of my rules with threads is that if I can't see the new bit for the
> quotes I skip to the next post.

Too many overlook the whole point of posting something is to have it
read by someone.

Things like cryptic titles, long blocks of quotes etc often mean the
pearls of wisdom in the post are never read.

"Vir Campestris" <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:slsbl0$llb$3@dont-email.me...
> On 02/11/2021 15:00, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>> It's not moving with the times, some languages are read left to right and
>> some right to left but they are all read top to bottom. Sadly top posting
>> has become prevalent in email which means signatures and all the tosh
>> following them end up being left in the posts thus adding to the load on
>> the Internet.
>>
> Some languages go top to bottom, and one or two old ones used to alternate
> left and right on subsequent lines...

Ah, "boustrophedon" writing (Greek: freely translates to "as the ox
ploughs").

When I was at school I had a very stern, strict, firm-but-fair maths
teacher. He didn't suffer fools gladly but he was very supportive of those
who wanted to learn (some might say that this made him a bad teacher; a good
one would also have encouraged those who *didn't* want to learn).

It was near the end of summer term on the all-the-sevens day (7/7/1977) and
he let his hair down and showed us his party trick: he was ambidextrous. He
wrote the same thing on two blackboards with a piece of chalk in each hand.
He then wrote forwards with one hand and mirror-image with the other hand at
the same time. Finally (though only with one hand) he wrote "boustrophedon"
("that's a new word, lads - remember it") - left to right on one line then
right to left (but with the letters still the correct way round) on the next
line - as a daisy-wheel or dot-matrix impact/inkjet printer prints.

He was a great guy. He died a few weeks ago - at the age of 101. He had also
(we never knew this when he taught us) been a fighter or bomber pilot during
WWII.

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 22:08:35 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
wrote:

>On 02/11/2021 15:11, Bob Latham wrote:
>>
>> In article <iud0o1F10k9U1@mid.individual.net>,
>> Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 01/11/2021 21:38, Tony Gamble wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Too long.
>>>>
>>>> What am I supposed to know?
>>>
>>> You're supposed to know that Neil Oliver can remember the same old
>>> arguments that are brought up at the time of every big climate
>>> conference and present them with an intensity intended to anger the
>>> public, make them believe the government only wants to control
>>> them in any way possible and increase his audience.
>
>And not forgetting most probably his income too.
>
>> It's a scam.
>
>That depends on what you mean by 'it'.
>
>He does make some valid points, but he could have made them in half the
>time or less, and his so-called conclusion is a near-paranoid non-sequitur.

He's an actor. In his world, judgement is made not on the validity of
the argument but the quality of the performance.

Rod.

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 18:01:08 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 02/11/2021 17:08, John Hall wrote:
>> Quoting a huge mass of text without any snipping, only to
>> follow it with a one line reply
>
>I will normally give up long before I reach the one line answer.

Allow be to introduce you to the PgDn key...

Rod.

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 21:47:12 +0000, Vir Campestris
<vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>One of my rules with threads is that if I can't see the new bit for the
>quotes I skip to the next post.

One of my rules is that if I know I'm replying to a blind reader, if
all of the text seems relevant I'll top-post and quote it all, but
it's possible to keep the quoted text or a summary of it to three
lines or less I'll bottom-post as usual. I do this with the aim of
pleasing most of the people most of the time, so I hope it does.

Rod.

On 03/11/2021 11:05, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> Allow be to introduce you to the PgDn key...

Why?

The key for next post is much easier.