Background: In the past two weeks I have been advised to lurk. In
fact I have been lurking for some years. For every post I make there is
hundreds of hours of lurking time involved. Here is an estimated
scenario: I first came to 24hrshd and asked about certain problems I
was having with a computer that was given to me. I did not know what
tweak meant, I did not know what sys 32 was. I basically knew nothing
about any computer related subject. So I happened upon this newsgroup
and started asking questions. Please understand that I did not know
what a troll was. (the archives can back this up but I'm not going to
present them as I already know that what I'm saying is true). I don't
really want to name names here but it seems essential to my case. Mike,
Trout, Blinky and Mara were the ones that got me strait on allot of
stuff that I had already done. I was actually deleting things from i386
and system 32. It is not a big deal cause when the computer crashed I
was hooked and a bit wiser and purchased the HP 606n. It is upstairs
and running very good on xp for a couple a years. This is coming to you
from my IBM Thinkpad (old but real reliable). Now, Mike was helpful
but very smartassed. Trout was helpful and normal. Blinky was helpful
yet posted like I was a complete moron. Mara didn't like me from the
beginning and still gave me valuable info. The trolls would interject
their fashionable "fucktard, cuntfungus", etc. verbiage and be no help.
(remember I still didn't know what a troll was). Humans a acclimated
creatures. Just because Mara knew what a troll was four years ago
(second nature) she forgot that not everybody does. My lurking
continued and I learned allot about Windows and Microsoft. I still
would not consider myself an expert but I do clean friends' computers
when they are sluggish and nearly crashing. It was Usenet that was
foreign to me still. So, this time I decided to read up on Usenet and
post more. The past two weeks have taught me some valuable lessons;
lessons I could have only gained by posting. Who are trolls? In the
past weeks I was informed that old gringo is a troll. I believe that.
BUT (my emphasis) I also looked back, in my mind, at his posts for
years. Old gringo is polite. He is funny. He is informative and
answers tech questions only when he knows the solution. I have always
enjoyed his posts and feel like I am accepted here when I read them.
How about Mara? She is indeed not a troll. Mara has an hair pin
trigger finger for Killfile, (for her to know this someone else will
have to tell her). Mara is stoic and will not bend the rules. She
lives by the letter of the law vice the spirit of the law. That's ok
because between the times she KF'd me I learned much computer knowledge
from her. Blinky wants people to do their homework (that is a
compliment). Trout has long patience and will spell shit out as many
times as you need him to. There are normal posters like Toolman. He
will help but will seem to run out of patience if you don't get it right
now. Brian H is smart but can come off like an....oh....what's the
word...uh..oh yeah an asshole. I enjoy his posts. Mike I can never
figure out (not that that's my job). He probly is the most
knowledgeable. He lurks and replies when it is necessary. Proverb:
"The wise man says only what he knows".
Johnny o. has decided to be a not-troll. A not-enabler. I see
questions that I can solve (not too tech) and I reply. I can reply
cause I probly had their problem happen to me in the not too distant
past. I first try to wait for another reply. I am an older man an
expect respect from those younger than I. I respect my elders, purely
chronological, in every case. My dad taught me that. He was the
quintessential gentleman. Now for trolls. I will not reply to any
reply in this post to any KNOWN troll. You may call me the chosen
words like Cuntfinger, Cuntfungus, Fucktard (my favorite) and so on and
so forth. That is my statement (not requested) but given nonetheless.
Appreciate your time to read.
johnny

johnny o, <altruisticbenevolent@bullshit.uk>, whose name means "hopeless;
invites friends over to gang-bang his old granny; likes to call his penis
his 'muscle of love'", groaned:

johnny o, <altruisticbenevolent@bullshit.uk>, the toothy, bantering lost
soul, and ankle beater, drawled:

Oh, what a sweet rant. I shall take the kudos for inducing it.

--
Doug Grant <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote:
"If you want to respond to my posts... then email me and
I will either allow you to do so or not."

johnny o wrote:
don't get you the Bigots will.

--
Old Gringo George
Magic Weaver Of Life
Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
Freedom For The World <http://www.nuboy-Industries.com>

"johnny o" wrote
Well, johnny, I'm still not sure I really understand what you are
all about, but this post suggests that you are still TRYING to
do what is reasonable with regard to netiquette. I'm not going
to reply specifically to most of what you have said above, as
I don't think a lot of what I have already said to you has been
completely understood. (I have invested a great deal of time
trying to point you in the right direction, yet you never even
mentioned my existence above.) I will say that your inability
to understand °Mike° is baffling to me, since he is clearly
one of the most consistently useful, *ethical*, and good-natured
person who has ever posted to this NG. This may be why
you can't comprehend that anything Old Gringo might say
that is "normal" is completely dwarfed by his chronic
sucking-up-to and making-excuses-for blatant trolls -- so
much so, that he must, therefore, also be considered a troll.

Perhaps you are confusing newsgroup personalities
with ideas and *ethics*. I've highlighted ETHICS twice now,
because it's becoming harder and harder to find evidence
of it in Usenet, and ethics are essential to make netiquette
work. In any case, this reply allows those who have filtered
you to see what you said -- perhaps he/she/they will want
to comment more extensively about your remarks.

Old Gringo wrote:

Weeeeeell, doggies. It's another Lesson in Usenet from ol' Gringo
George.

Relaaaax, take it easy. So, he hasn't figured out yet that an
address munge comes *after* the "@". So, a little more spam has to be
handled by Yahoo...
Relax, dude. Don't be a bigot.

So, what? Someone is using your valid email address to post in a
cancer survivors' newsgroup? Using your name to say the most hateful
things to the most vulnerable people? Relax! According to ol' George,
"Just a harmless prank, not to worry." (Message-ID:
<Gc3Le.983$SR5.613@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net>)

So someone just screams insults, and attacks people? Hey, don't get
all bigoted, man, he's a "truth teller". Cross-posts a 150-line attack
thread to five newsgroups to make sure he annoys as wide an 'audience'
as possible? Hey, re-cross-post the whole thing, and stick a "lol" on
the end. Don't let those bigots tell you what to do. Just sit up here on
ol' Gringo's knee. Go ahead and pee, he ain't no bigot.

Live life to the fullest. Use the place as a dumping ground for
tests. Get a pat on the head, and a sheltering hanky to protect you from
those bigoted bastards.

And if someone constantly morphs, because they know they can rely on
you to repost a troll, no matter how obvious or implausible? Uh, what?
M-m-m- orph? Uhhhhhh, don't be a bigot.
--
Now let's all go back to the front porch and do some whittlin'

"johnny o" <altruisticbenevolent@bullshit.uk> wrote in news:b9aPe.27168
$ja7.13485@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com:

<snip>

Usenet denizens typically have a low tolerance for newbies. They expect a
person to have done some research and tried to learn something for
themselves before asking for help. That's not unreasonable.

Much of the trouble began when AOL added Usenet. A forum that was
populated by professionals and knowledgeable people suddenly was invaded
by people of the most clueless sort. Top posting know nothings who caused
many oldtime Usenetters to become quite prejudiced against newbies. It
was not uncommon for many users to have AOLer's killfiled across the
board.

AOL has dropped Usenet, and most of them access it via Google Groups. Now
you have the clueless newbies accessing Usenet via a web based format,
and many of them don't even know what the real form of Usenet is. Newbie
intolerance goes up another notch.

Add the usual assortment of kooks and netkopps, and you have the
experience you just posted.

It's to your credit that you have put what you learned to use, but you
have to admit that in your description, what you did was comparable to
showing up at a convention of atomic scientists with a first grade
education, and expecting to be accepted. Try doing that in some of the
Linux groups (just as an example) and you'll get a new one ripped before
you know what even happened.

gangle wrote:

My comment, is that I'd like to poke you in the eye with an icepick.
--
But that's just being "helpful and normal". I'm known for that.

trout, <trout_24hrs@yahoo.ca>, the damaged, jittering fossil, and alchemist,
bickered:

Real Meaning: "If you do not conform to my ideas of how you should conduct
yourself on usenet then you are a troll."

--
Doug Grant <DGVREIMAN@COMCAST.NET> wrote:
"If you want to respond to my posts... then email me and
I will either allow you to do so or not."

"trout" wrote
Yeah. They don't come any more normal than you, a
dumbass, hideous fish.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 22:39:40 -0700, "trout" <trout_24hrs@yahoo.ca> wrote:

Warning - Ringo isn't smart enough to understand sarcasm or irony.

"Especially if it gets between him and the leash."

--
"No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
--glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r

"gangle" <gangle@mustard.yum> wrote in message

gangle: I'm gonna post within your post, indexing I guess.

<snip>

with "TRYING to do what is reasonable..."

have posted to me.

I will say that your inability


This may be why
Good reply. And the trolls answer is always something like this: "If
you cuntfingers can't get newbies to post exactly the way you want them
to you KF them" That is not the way I see it. I believe the "normal"
posters seem to want a continuity to a newsgroup. Nobody *tells* me how
to post. I get suggestions from normal posters letting me know the
proper netiquitte if I want to part of a viable, informative newsgroup.
I'm guessing that a troll just can't stand that. They're probly that
way at the store, gas station, etc. too but do not have the nerve to
actually say anything outloud. Here they are hidden, so to speak, and
let their disease emerge in words.
Thanks gangle for all the help so far.
johnny oooooooooooo

johnny o, <altruisticbenevolent@bullshit.uk>, whose name means "like an
Italian breakfast bread roll, hollow on the inside; gay, would rather jump
from a plane without a parachute than be seen with a female", ululated:

"elaich" <a@b.c> wrote in message news:3n54auF19quaeU1@individual.net...
I get it. But newbies have to post questions. I'm aloud to show up at
the atomic scientists convention and not know anything. It is what I
do from that point on that could get me in trouble. Let's say I was
just interested in the convention and during a break asked one of the
members to explain what a certain thing meant? He/she might have
patience and actually give me a clue to my question. I would leave
there a bit smarter than when I went in but would not have disturbed the
flow of their convention plus I might have got some decent food at the
buffet.
Thank you elaich
johnny

johnny o, <altruisticbenevolent@bullshit.uk>, whose name means "total loser;
sperm hungry male slut", issued forth:

[piggybacked, thanks glurd]

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 22:10:20 -0700, "gangle" <gangle@mustard.yum> wrote:

You have just described many, if not most, poster in 24. Because of this groups
position on most newsgroup lists, newbies tend to stumble on it first, and this
is where they should be taught the things they need to know.

When you learn to drive a car, do you just get in it and go? Of course not -
there are many things you need to know before you leave the curb for the first
time. It's that way with anything you choose to do - you need to learn about it
*before* you actually start doing it, and in most cases, it's what people do.

But not in usenet. And that's a great pity, because there's a wealth of
information about how to use usenet online. Links to informative sites on usenet
are literally everywhere. They've been posted in this very group thousands of
times.

My condolences.

You're making assumptions. I don't have anything personal against you. I *do*
hate trolls. I really, *really* HATE trolls. Perhaps now, you're beginning to
see why.

You're making assumptions again. I've known about trolls for a lot longer than 4
years.

He has also willingly joined the ranks of the trolls. Even Powaqqatsi Man makes
the occasional almost-decent post. Do you think that makes him any less the
troll that he is? Do you think that it excuses his abuses?

Clue - it doesn't. And here's another tip - trolls do not change. Trolls who
only troll part of the time are still trolls, and sooner or later will go back
to trolling. It's not just what they do, but *who they are.* They do not change
because they cannot.

That's your opinion. In my opinion, I'm cleaning out the sewage in my client so
I can spend my time reading things that are worthwhile for me. That doesn't
include troll posts, of course - and it doesn't include seeing their spews in
replies. That's what killfiles are for.

Most times, when people speak like this, it's because they wish to twist the
"spirit of the law" to their own means, as an excuse to continue doing what they
know to be wrong. It's the same reasoning spammers use to declare that spamming
"is that which they do not do." No, thanks. Netiquette exists for a reason. The
RFCs exist for a reason.

The way to deal with trolls is not to speak to them, in any post, including this
one. Such a statement as you made above will only incite them to new heights of
stupidity, foaming their witlessness all over the group again. Only when a troll
is completely *shunned,* in all ways, will they leave in search of greener
pastures.

"The one thing they won't do is stop trolling."

<snip>
I have tried. That is all I can do. Thanks.

--
"No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
--glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r

"elaich" <a@b.c> wrote in message news:3n54auF19quaeU1@individual.net...

What is the best way to refresh/catch up/mark as read, etc? I have my
settings at 99 new posts at a time instead of the 300 default. When I'm
here posting or reading and want to get caught up I go in this order:
Edit/mark as read. Then Edit/catch up. Finally View/refresh. When I
hit refresh it takes forever and I get error box sort of like I timed
out. Then I click on ok and refresh again and everything is caught up.
johnny

johnny o, <altruisticbenevolent@bullshit.uk>, whose name means
"train-spotter, likes plaid; only has one eyebrow that goes right across his
forehead", gabbed:

johnny o wrote:
<snip>

You seem to have learned some things.

Now, can you learn what "white space" is? And what happens when you
push the <Enter> key a couple of times after a paragraph?

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

johnny o wrote:

Hey, isn't this question a re-run?
It depends on what you mean by 'get caught up', and how many messages
you've already downloaded in your newsgroup folder, and how many you'll
typically read in a day.
I'd try to avoid using the 'catch up'. Marking all unread mesages
(downloaded or not) as 'read' is a waste of time and resources, and an
unnecessary step in most cases.
It's best to approach the question by defining what you want to
accomplish. Say it's a scenerio where you want to have everything
already downloaded marked as read, so you can see 'new' messages that
are downloaded. And you don't want to download old messages that look
like new messages.
In this case, you'd mark all read, refresh to download new headers,
and handle the rest in the background with a message rule. Maybe one
that says that if a post was sent more than one day ago, mark it as read
(or delete). That's *one* scenerio.
Again, it depends on what you're really trying to get done.
--
Start from the result, and then fill in the steps that lead to it.