External CSS and HTML 2.0

[Travis Newbury]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

On Jul 27, 2:00 am, Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.co m/wrote:

It was a one-time attempt at humor.  Sorry that you didn't find it funny.

ok kiss make up whatever. Hey what ever happened to that kook with the
really really really long signature. He use to argue with everyone.
He did a care-bear's site.

--
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap

[Travis Newbury]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

On Jul 27, 4:05 am, Gus Richter <gusrich...@net scape.netwrote:

If it worked as you suggest, there would be no point in including a sig
since nobody would see it and there would be no need to strip it when
replying since it had already been stripped on receiving.

That's a mighty big assumption that everyone would stip them out.

--
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap

[Gus Richter]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

Travis Newbury wrote:

On Jul 27, 4:05 am, Gus Richter <gusrich...@net scape.netwrote:

>If it worked as you suggest, there would be no point in including a sig
>since nobody would see it and there would be no need to strip it when
>replying since it had already been stripped on receiving.

>
That's a mighty big assumption that everyone would stip them out.

I take it that English is not your first language, or you are lacking in
reading skills. Guy said that a "good newsreader will strip the sig
before displaying". I don't say it, nor assume it to be so. In fact, my
post disputes this. Guy did not say "everyone", he said "a good one".

--
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap

Do you stutter or are you otherwise challenged? Do you really think that
by irritating people by repeating your "crap" four times will attract
people? I may have otherwise gone to have a look.

I conclude that you are challenged since you do not properly use the (--
) but choose to irritate readers in this way as well.

--
Gus

[Travis Newbury]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

On Jul 27, 9:43 am, Gus Richter <gusrich...@net scape.netwrote:

Do you stutter or are you otherwise challenged? Do you really think that
by irritating people by repeating your "crap" four times will attract
people? I may have otherwise gone to have a look.

Visit, don't visit. What ever you do is pretty much irrelevant to
me.

--
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

On 2008-07-27, Gus Richter wrote:

Guy Macon wrote:

>>
>A good newsreader will give you the option of stripping out .sigs
>before displaying posts to the reader. This is an especially
>valuable option for those who are easily annoyed by .sigs.

>
You've got it wrong there. The sig is only stripped out when replying.

A good newsreader has the option to show or not show sigs when
displaying posts.

If it worked as you suggest, there would be no point in including a sig
since nobody would see it and there would be no need to strip it when
replying since it had already been stripped on receiving.

--
Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
=============== =============== =============== =============== =======
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

[Stanimir Stamenkov]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

Sun, 27 Jul 2008 18:44:34 +0000, /Chris F.A. Johnson/:

On 2008-07-27, Gus Richter wrote:
>

>You've got it wrong there. The sig is only stripped out when replying.

>
A good newsreader has the option to show or not show sigs when
displaying posts.

I wouldn't say that is top-of-pops feature which makes a newsreader
good. Especially if most people follow the etiquette of having sig
of no more than 4 lines.

--
Stanimir

[Guy Macon]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0




Gus Richter wrote:

>
>Travis Newbury wrote:
>

>On Jul 27, 4:05 am, Gus Richter <gusrich...@net scape.netwrote:

>>If it worked as you suggest, there would be no point in including a sig
>>since nobody would see it and there would be no need to strip it when
>>replying since it had already been stripped on receiving.

>>
>That's a mighty big assumption that everyone would stip them out.

>
>I take it that English is not your first language, or you are lacking in
>reading skills. Guy said that a "good newsreader will strip the sig
>before displaying". I don't say it, nor assume it to be so. In fact, my
>post disputes this. Guy did not say "everyone", he said "a good one".
>

>--
>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap

>
>Do you stutter or are you otherwise challenged? Do you really think that
>by irritating people by repeating your "crap" four times will attract
>people? I may have otherwise gone to have a look.
>
>I conclude that you are challenged since you do not properly use the (--
>) but choose to irritate readers in this way as well.

And who are you, the .sig police?

Usenet has standards. The standard for .sigs is no more than 4 lines,
no more than 79 characters per line. Within that standard, the user
is allowed to put anything he wishes in his sig. Deal with it.






--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.co m/>

[Guy Macon]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0




Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

>
>Gus Richter wrote:
>

>Guy Macon wrote:

>>>
>>A good newsreader will give you the option of stripping out .sigs
>>before displaying posts to the reader. This is an especially
>>valuable option for those who are easily annoyed by .sigs.

>>
>You've got it wrong there. The sig is only stripped out when replying.

>
A good newsreader has the option to show or not show sigs when
displaying posts.

Gus was a little excited and wasn't thinking straight.
This is an exciting day for Gus; he just got accepted
into the .sig police academy!


--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.co m/>

[Gus Richter]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

Guy Macon wrote:

Gus Richter wrote:

>Travis Newbury wrote:
>>

>>On Jul 27, 4:05 am, Gus Richter <gusrich...@net scape.netwrote:
>>>If it worked as you suggest, there would be no point in including a sig
>>>since nobody would see it and there would be no need to strip it when
>>>replying since it had already been stripped on receiving.
>>That's a mighty big assumption that everyone would stip them out.

>I take it that English is not your first language, or you are lacking in
>reading skills. Guy said that a "good newsreader will strip the sig
>before displaying". I don't say it, nor assume it to be so. In fact, my
>post disputes this. Guy did not say "everyone", he said "a good one".
>>

>>--
>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap

>Do you stutter or are you otherwise challenged? Do you really think that
>by irritating people by repeating your "crap" four times will attract
>people? I may have otherwise gone to have a look.
>>
>I conclude that you are challenged since you do not properly use the (--
>) but choose to irritate readers in this way as well.

>
And who are you, the .sig police?

Just someone that tries to follow conventions, point out false
allegations and irritating "crap".

Usenet has standards. The standard for .sigs is no more than 4 lines,
no more than 79 characters per line. Within that standard, the user
is allowed to put anything he wishes in his sig. Deal with it.

Please provide a link to these "Usenet Standards".

--
Gus

[Gus Richter]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

Guy Macon wrote:

Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

>Gus Richter wrote:
>>

>>Guy Macon wrote:
>>>A good newsreader will give you the option of stripping out .sigs
>>>before displaying posts to the reader. This is an especially
>>>valuable option for those who are easily annoyed by .sigs.
>>You've got it wrong there. The sig is only stripped out when replying.

> A good newsreader has the option to show or not show sigs when
> displaying posts.

>
Gus was a little excited and wasn't thinking straight.
This is an exciting day for Gus; he just got accepted
into the .sig police academy!

Thinking straight, thank you. More than I can say about you. Trolling is
what you're into. What would a Googlegrouper like you and Chris know
about a good newsreader? How about using one?

--
Gus

[Tim Streater]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

Here's another thread replete with devastating brilliance and insight. I
wouldn't have missed it for worlds. But being the bozo newbie that I am
(with my code replete with frames and javascript, and not a style sheet
in sight), the sharp and witty post which showed how to count angels on
pinheads has completely passed me by.

Pity really.

[Travis Newbury]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

On Jul 28, 5:29 am, Tim Streater <tim.strea...@d ante.org.ukwrot e:

Here's another thread replete with devastating brilliance and insight.

Yea, what a shame..

[Guy Macon]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0




Gus Richter wrote:

>
>Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.co m/wrote:
>

>Gus Richter wrote:
>>

>>Travis Newbury wrote:
>>>
>>>Gus Richter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>If it worked as you suggest, there would be no point in including a sig
>>>>since nobody would see it and there would be no need to strip it when
>>>>replying since it had already been stripped on receiving.
>>>>
>>>That's a mighty big assumption that everyone would stip them out.
>>>
>>I take it that English is not your first language, or you are lacking in
>>reading skills. Guy said that a "good newsreader will strip the sig
>>before displaying". I don't say it, nor assume it to be so. In fact, my
>>post disputes this. Guy did not say "everyone", he said "a good one".
>>>
>>>--
>>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>>>Travis Newbury <http://travisnewbury.b logspot.com/Flash Crap
>>Do you stutter or are you otherwise challenged? Do you really think that
>>by irritating people by repeating your "crap" four times will attract
>>people? I may have otherwise gone to have a look.
>>>
>>I conclude that you are challenged since you do not properly use the (--
>>) but choose to irritate readers in this way as well.

>>
>And who are you, the .sig police?

>
>Just someone that tries to follow conventions, point out false
>allegations and irritating "crap".
>

>Usenet has standards. The standard for .sigs is no more than 4 lines,
>no more than 79 characters per line. Within that standard, the user
>is allowed to put anything he wishes in his sig. Deal with it.

>
>Please provide a link to these "Usenet Standards".

I take it that English is not your first language, or that you are
lacking in reading skills. The phrase "Usenet Standards" implies
an RFC or other official document. The phrase "Usenet has standards"
implies a long tradition of clueful Usenet users doing something the
same way and thus creating a de-facto standard.

That being said, Section 4.3 of RFC 3676 documents the
"-- " separator and Page 4 of RFC 1855 documents the
4-line McQuary limit.

And, of course, the The alt.fan.warlord FAQ is the authority
on all things .SIGish... (search on "4 LINES, THE NET STANDARD.")

http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/afw/#afwfaq

Also see:

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/M/McQuary-limit.html

http://lipas.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/signatur.html

http://mailformat.dan.info/trailers/sigblocks.html

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3676#section-4.3

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt

And before anyone starts the usual bleating about the above
documents not saying that the 4-line McQuary limit is a
requirement, please note that nothing concerning the content
Usenet posyts is required or forbidden. There is no central
governing agency over Usenet, and as such, one can only offer
friendly suggestions or strongly worded suggestions towards
an ideal of compliance. There are no .sig police to run
to if someone wants to go against the rules.



--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.co m/>

[Guy Macon]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0




Gus Richter wrote:

>
>Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.co m/wrote:
>

>Gus was a little excited and wasn't thinking straight.
>This is an exciting day for Gus; he just got accepted
>into the .sig police academy!

>
>Thinking straight, thank you. More than I can say about you. Trolling is
>what you're into. What would a Googlegrouper like you and Chris know
>about a good newsreader? How about using one?

You think that I am a Googlegrouper?

I post through Giganews, using a newsreader that I compiled
myself, based on a highly modified version of the source
code for WinVN (the newsreader NASA brought to us). I run
it on a copy of Windows 2000 Advanced server running inside
a VMWare virtual machine that in turn runs on my main
Slackware Linux box.


--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.co m/>

[Andrew Heenan]

Re: External CSS and HTML 2.0

"Tim Streater" <tim.streater@d ante.org.ukwrot e...

Here's another thread replete with devastating brilliance and insight.

Your eyes must be MUCH better than mine ...
.... Unless you are hallucinating?

I was just about to nominate it for "Boring Thread of the Day"
--

Andrew
seo2seo.com
sick-site-syndrome.com

UK Residents:
STOP THE "10p Tax Ripoff"
Sign the petition to stop the government stealing from the
very poorest tell your friends about this petition:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/10penceband/