snipping allowed?

Hi.
I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
will be allowed?  Is that true?
	Also, how about top posts?  Since I mainly follow the replies, how 
about reading the next reply at the top, instead of having to scroll to 
the bottom to get the next reply?
Thansk to the the chumps! ;)
0
Peter
1/12/2006 12:16:56 AM
mozilla.support.firefox 24318 articles. 8 followers. Post Follow

137 Replies
927 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 53

_Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
> Hi.
> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
> will be allowed?  Is that true?

http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html
For more info see http://ilias.ca/newsserverinfo.html

> Thansk to the the chumps! ;)

:-)
-- 
Chris Ilias - Mozilla Champion
(Please do not email me tech support questions)
Mozilla Help <http://mozillahelp.com>
Netscape 7 Help <http://ilias.ca/netscape/>
0
Chris
1/12/2006 12:37:21 AM
On 01/11/06 19:16, Peter In MN(Brrrr) wrote:
> Hi.
> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>     Also, how about top posts?  Since I mainly follow the replies, how 
> about reading the next reply at the top, instead of having to scroll to 
> the bottom to get the next reply?
> Thansk to the the chumps! ;)

Snipping is removing unneeded stuff when you reply. Like parts of the 
message you're replying to that you're not commenting on or old quotes
in it.

Inserting text in the middle of a message is interspersing, which I am 
going to do when I think it makes sense, even if it's against the rules.

Bottom posts are still what you're supposed to do.
-- 
Yay!
0
Matt
1/12/2006 1:05:41 PM
Chris Ilias wrote:
> _Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
> 
>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
> 
> http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html
> For more info see http://ilias.ca/newsserverinfo.html

Super!!  The etiquette/ground rules here specify that replies should 
trim quoted text.  That's much better than quoting everything from every 
prior post in the thread when you reply.  This makes bottom-posting 
somewhat viable, since if the replier trims quoted text down to only 
pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without 
scrolling forever.

To answer the OP's subject question:  'Snipping' is not only allowed, it 
is expected.

Rob
0
Rob
1/12/2006 8:40:06 PM
On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
> Chris Ilias wrote:
>> _Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
>>
>>> <snip> 
   if the replier trims quoted text down to only
> pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
> scrolling forever.
> 
 </snip>

Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?


-- 
Jim

"Cry "Havoc," and let slip the dogs of war."
                  -William Shakespeare
0
MushMorton
1/13/2006 1:11:59 AM
MushMorton wrote:
> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell wrote:
>    if the replier trims quoted text down to only
> 
>>pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
>>scrolling forever.
>>
> 
>  </snip>
> 
> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?

Not sure.  Haven't had time to look for 'end' since I'm still trying to 
find the 'any' key.

Besides, some people just use their mouse to navigate through the 
newsgroups and scroll through messages.

Rob
0
Rob
1/13/2006 4:42:46 AM
Rob Bell wrote:
> MushMorton wrote:
>> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell wrote:

/snip/

>> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?
> 
> Not sure.  Haven't had time to look for 'end' since I'm still trying to 
> find the 'any' key.
> 
> Besides, some people just use their mouse to navigate through the 
> newsgroups and scroll through messages.
> 
> Rob

Just grab the scrollbar and drag it to bottom.  Its about as good as the 
End button.

Lee

-- 
Leonidas Jones, Mozilla Champion
Learn about the Champs!  http://mozillachampions.ufaq.org
The UFAQ'S http://www.ufaq.org/
http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html
http://mozilla.com   http://mozilla.org
0
Leonidas
1/13/2006 4:47:40 AM
MushMorton wrote:
> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
>>Chris Ilias wrote:
>>
>>>_Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
>>>
>>>><snip> 
> 
>    if the replier trims quoted text down to only
> 
>>pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
>>scrolling forever.
>>
>  </snip>
> 
> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?

besides, there's this practical baspage (read it in French!) extension:
http://www.chevrel.org/fr/extensions/xpi/baspage0.8.xpi

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/13/2006 10:03:04 AM
On 13.01.2006 10:03 UK Time, Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> MushMorton wrote:
>> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>
>>>> _Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> <snip> 
>>
>>    if the replier trims quoted text down to only
>>
>>> pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
>>> scrolling forever.
>>>
>>  </snip>
>>
>> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?
> 
> besides, there's this practical baspage (read it in French!) extension:
> http://www.chevrel.org/fr/extensions/xpi/baspage0.8.xpi

And the even more practical "D�filemessage 0.3.3", which sadly is 
disabled in TB 1.5 :-(

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/13/2006 10:16:03 AM
On 13.01.2006 10:03 UK Time, Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> MushMorton wrote:
>> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>
>>>> _Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> <snip> 
>>
>>    if the replier trims quoted text down to only
>>
>>> pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
>>> scrolling forever.
>>>
>>  </snip>
>>
>> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?
> 
> besides, there's this practical baspage (read it in French!) extension:
> http://www.chevrel.org/fr/extensions/xpi/baspage0.8.xpi

Does this work in TB 1.5?

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/13/2006 10:16:45 AM

Herb wrote:

>> besides, there's this practical baspage (read it in French!) extension:
>> http://www.chevrel.org/fr/extensions/xpi/baspage0.8.xpi
> 
> Does this work in TB 1.5?

It certainly does here with the Nightly Tester Tools in place - I'm not
sure about without. Now we can snip, the necessity for it will fall -
but under the old rules it was the only way to read the group relatively
painlessly.

Regards,

Bob


-- 
Remove "x" from address to reply by email
0
Bob
1/13/2006 10:21:18 AM
Leonidas Jones wrote:

> Rob Bell wrote:
>> MushMorton wrote:
>>> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell wrote:
>>> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?
>> Not sure.  Haven't had time to look for 'end' since I'm still trying 
>> to find the 'any' key.
>> Besides, some people just use their mouse to navigate through the 
>> newsgroups and scroll through messages.
>> Rob
> Just grab the scrollbar and drag it to bottom.  Its about as good as the 
> End button.
> 
> Lee

I cannot even imagine using a mouse to view NG posts. My wife does 
that with her email, and it drives me nuts. Gotta be a keyboard for 
me. That is why, due to the feature/bug with the N key and Caps Lock, 
I find that the Toggle Keys feature is not only useful, but imperative.

Ron :)
0
Ron
1/13/2006 10:32:08 AM
On 1/13/2006 5:03 AM Gudmund Areskoug ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
> MushMorton wrote:
>> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>
>>>> _Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
>>>>
>>>>> <snip> 
>>
>>    if the replier trims quoted text down to only
>>
>>> pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
>>> scrolling forever.
>>>
>>  </snip>
>>
>> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?
> 
> besides, there's this practical baspage (read it in French!) extension:
> http://www.chevrel.org/fr/extensions/xpi/baspage0.8.xpi
> 
> BR,
> Gudmund

I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.

-- 
Jim

"Journalism largely consists of saying 'Lord Jones is Dead' to people
who never knew that Lord Jones was alive."
				-G. K. Chesterton
0
MushMorton
1/13/2006 2:57:31 PM
On 13.01.2006 14:57 UK Time, MushMorton wrote:
> On 1/13/2006 5:03 AM Gudmund Areskoug ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
>> MushMorton wrote:
>>> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
>>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> _Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip> 
>>>    if the replier trims quoted text down to only
>>>
>>>> pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
>>>> scrolling forever.
>>>>
>>>  </snip>
>>>
>>> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?
>> besides, there's this practical baspage (read it in French!) extension:
>> http://www.chevrel.org/fr/extensions/xpi/baspage0.8.xpi
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
> 
> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
> 

Does this work for you in 1.5?

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/13/2006 3:06:09 PM
On 1/13/2006 10:06 AM Herb ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
> On 13.01.2006 14:57 UK Time, MushMorton wrote:
>> On 1/13/2006 5:03 AM Gudmund Areskoug ,sat at the keyboard and poured
>> forth:
>>> MushMorton wrote:
>>>> On 1/12/2006 3:40 PM Rob Bell ,sat at the keyboard and poured forth:
>>>>> Chris Ilias wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> _Peter In MN(Brrrr)_ spoke thusly on 11/01/2006 7:16 PM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip> 
>>>>    if the replier trims quoted text down to only
>>>>
>>>>> pertinent items you'll actually be able to see the bottom without
>>>>> scrolling forever.
>>>>>
>>>>  </snip>
>>>>
>>>> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?
>>> besides, there's this practical baspage (read it in French!) extension:
>>> http://www.chevrel.org/fr/extensions/xpi/baspage0.8.xpi
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Gudmund
>>
>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>
> 
> Does this work for you in 1.5?
> 
I bumped it with NTT but, yes, it is working though, as I said, I
usually rely on the keyboard.
-- 
Jim

"War is a series of catastrophes that results in a victory."
					-Georges Clemenceau
0
MushMorton
1/13/2006 3:17:18 PM
On 01/13/06 05:21, Bob Henson wrote:
> It certainly does here with the Nightly Tester Tools in place - I'm not
> sure about without. Now we can snip, the necessity for it will fall -
> but under the old rules it was the only way to read the group relatively
> painlessly.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bob

Just because we're supposed to snip doesn't mean we all will. People are 
used to the no-snipping rule from secnews, so it'll take them a while to 
change. The extension will still be useful for a while, and it won't 
hurt to keep it around for the occasional non-snipped message from a new 
user or something.
-- 
Yay!
0
Matt
1/13/2006 4:45:08 PM
On 01/12/06 20:11, MushMorton wrote:
> Does no one else have an *end* button on the keyboard?

I have to put the focus on the message to use End (I use the preview 
pane), so then I'll have to click on the message list pane to be able to 
navigate it with the arrow keys. Ew.

(I use QuoteCollapse, so it's not an issue, but just sayin'.)
-- 
Yay!
0
Matt
1/13/2006 4:45:37 PM
MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
> 
> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.

I can't find it. Do you have a link?

-- 
Regards,

Peter Lairo

Lame attempt to get rich: http://www.lairo.com/donations.html
0
Peter
1/13/2006 5:15:17 PM
On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>
>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
> 
> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
> 

It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off the 
face of the Earth :-(

I can e-mail it to you if you like.

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/13/2006 5:22:44 PM
Ron Lopshire wrote:
> Leonidas Jones wrote:
> 
>> Rob Bell wrote:
>>
>>> MushMorton wrote:
>>>
>>>> /snip/
>>
>> Just grab the scrollbar and drag it to bottom.  Its about as good as 
>> the End button.
>>
>> Lee
> 
> 
> I cannot even imagine using a mouse to view NG posts. My wife does that 
> with her email, and it drives me nuts. Gotta be a keyboard for me. That 
> is why, due to the feature/bug with the N key and Caps Lock, I find that 
> the Toggle Keys feature is not only useful, but imperative.
> 
> Ron :)


Conversely, I cant even imagine using the keyboard <g>. I have always 
used the mouse (but then again, I'm mostly on the mac and its always 
been mouse preferred anyway). Have never used the toggle keys feature.
0
Moz
1/13/2006 7:45:13 PM
On 12-01-2006 01:16 CET, Peter In MN(Brrrr) composed this enchanting 
statement:
> Hi.
> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>     Also, how about top posts?  Since I mainly follow the replies, how 
> about reading the next reply at the top, instead of having to scroll 
> to the bottom to get the next reply?
> Thansk to the the chumps! ;)
If yes, the great quotecollapse extension may become extinct. :-(
0
Melchert
1/13/2006 8:49:38 PM
On 01/13/06 15:49, Melchert Fruitema wrote:
> If yes, the great quotecollapse extension may become extinct. :-(

Well, it's useful for me elsewhere, too. I read the Mozilla newsgroups 
more than any other newsgroups or groups of mailing lists, but I still 
do read others.
-- 
Yay!
0
Matt
1/13/2006 10:14:42 PM
Herb said on 13.1.2006 18:22:
> On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>
>>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
>>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>
>> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>
> 
> It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off the 
> face of the Earth :-(
> 
> I can e-mail it to you if you like.

No *thanks*. I'm not interested in discontinued Extensions - considering 
that Mozilla programs are evolving relatively quickly.

-- 
Regards,

Peter Lairo

The browser you can trust:   www.GetFirefox.com
Reclaim Your Inbox:          www.GetThunderbird.com
0
Peter
1/14/2006 12:35:08 AM
On 01/13/06 19:35, Peter Lairo wrote:
> No *thanks*. I'm not interested in discontinued Extensions - considering 
> that Mozilla programs are evolving relatively quickly.

I prefer not using discontinued extensions, but as long as it works...
-- 
Yay!
0
Matt
1/14/2006 12:43:30 AM
Matt Nordhoff wrote:
> On 01/13/06 19:35, Peter Lairo wrote:
>> No *thanks*. I'm not interested in discontinued Extensions - considering 
>> that Mozilla programs are evolving relatively quickly.
> 
> I prefer not using discontinued extensions, but as long as it works...

Exactly, so what if it's discontinued if a simple 'bump' makes it work.
I'd rather be benefit from the added efficiency the extension gives me 
than hold a grudge because it was abandoned, or worry needlessly whether 
bumping the 'maxversion' will "break" the application or not. I'd guess 
that 95% of the extensions I use in FF & TB were bumpable with 0 issues 
experienced.
0
RenegadeX
1/14/2006 1:22:53 PM
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

> Ron Lopshire wrote:
>>
>> I cannot even imagine using a mouse to view NG posts. My wife does 
>> that with her email, and it drives me nuts. Gotta be a keyboard for 
>> me. That is why, due to the feature/bug with the N key and Caps Lock, 
>> I find that the Toggle Keys feature is not only useful, but imperative.
> 
> Conversely, I cant even imagine using the keyboard <g>. I have always 
> used the mouse (but then again, I'm mostly on the mac and its always 
> been mouse preferred anyway). Have never used the toggle keys feature.

Dan,

When you are on XP, go to the Control Panel, and choose Accessibility 
Options and its Keyboard Tab. With Toggle Keys checked, a tone is 
sounded when the Caps (Num or Scroll) Lock key is inadvertently hit.

   (http://www.microsoft.com/enable/training/windowsxp/togglekeys.aspx)
   (http://www.worldstart.com/tips/shared/capslocktrick.htm)

I don't know about other OSs. I couldn't find this option on my wife's 
Win2K box, but it was set up by her IT department, and may not have 
been installed.

Ron :)
0
Ron
1/14/2006 4:04:35 PM
Ron Lopshire wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> 
>> Ron Lopshire wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I cannot even imagine using a mouse to view NG posts. My wife does 
>>> that with her email, and it drives me nuts. Gotta be a keyboard for 
>>> me. That is why, due to the feature/bug with the N key and Caps Lock, 
>>> I find that the Toggle Keys feature is not only useful, but imperative.
>>
>>
>> Conversely, I cant even imagine using the keyboard <g>. I have always 
>> used the mouse (but then again, I'm mostly on the mac and its always 
>> been mouse preferred anyway). Have never used the toggle keys feature.
> 
> 
> Dan,
> 
> When you are on XP, go to the Control Panel, and choose Accessibility 
> Options and its Keyboard Tab. With Toggle Keys checked, a tone is 
> sounded when the Caps (Num or Scroll) Lock key is inadvertently hit.
> 
>   (http://www.microsoft.com/enable/training/windowsxp/togglekeys.aspx)
>   (http://www.worldstart.com/tips/shared/capslocktrick.htm)
> 
> I don't know about other OSs. I couldn't find this option on my wife's 
> Win2K box, but it was set up by her IT department, and may not have been 
> installed.
> 
> Ron :)

Ron, thanks for the Windows tip, but I dont think I would find such 
useful. Most of the time I dont have any sounds on my mac, and currently 
I am running the windows without speakers! Having a !beep! to tell me 
what I can plainly see (by typing) doesnt make much sense- and since the 
only time I use the keyboard is to type... well

I am not saying the extension is not useful for those who use the 
keyboard, its just that I dont use the keyboard and thus the toggle keys 
extension just isnt my cup of tea
0
Moz
1/14/2006 6:16:00 PM
On 14.01.2006 00:35 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
> Herb said on 13.1.2006 18:22:
>> On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>>
>>>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
>>>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>>
>>> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>>
>>
>> It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off the 
>> face of the Earth :-(
>>
>> I can e-mail it to you if you like.
> 
> No *thanks*. I'm not interested in discontinued Extensions - considering 
> that Mozilla programs are evolving relatively quickly.
> 

Actually, the defilemessage extension works perfectly well im TB 1.5 - I 
only *thought* it didn't work due a problem I had with my settings not 
sticking initially.

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/15/2006 5:20:22 PM
Herb wrote on 13.01.2006 18:22:
> On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>
>>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
>>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>
>> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>
> 
> It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off the 
> face of the Earth :-(
> 
> I can e-mail it to you if you like.

OK. OK. You guys convinced me. Could you please post the link. I'll try 
it out. :-)

-- 
Regards,

Peter Lairo

Lame attempt to get rich: http://www.lairo.com/donations.html
0
Peter
1/16/2006 8:43:00 AM
On 16.01.2006 08:43 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
> Herb wrote on 13.01.2006 18:22:
>> On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>>
>>>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
>>>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>>
>>> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>>
>>
>> It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off the 
>> face of the Earth :-(
>>
>> I can e-mail it to you if you like.
> 
> OK. OK. You guys convinced me. Could you please post the link. I'll try 
> it out. :-)
> 

Well, that's the problem - the link seems to have disappeared, despite 
the fact that the extension is useful and works perfectly well :-(

As I said, I can e-mail you the xpi file (note that, after installation, 
the toolbar buttons will not immediately become apparent - you have to 
drag them via "Customise").

Would it be acceptable to post the xpi file here?

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/16/2006 8:52:03 AM
Herb wrote:

> On 16.01.2006 08:43 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
> 
>>Herb wrote on 13.01.2006 18:22:
>>
>>>On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>
>>>>MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>>
>>>>>I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, but,
>>>>>by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>>>
>>>>I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>>>
>>>
>>>It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off the 
>>>face of the Earth :-(
>>>
>>>I can e-mail it to you if you like.
>>
>>OK. OK. You guys convinced me. Could you please post the link. I'll try 
>>it out. :-)
>>
> 
> 
> Well, that's the problem - the link seems to have disappeared, despite 
> the fact that the extension is useful and works perfectly well :-(
> 
> As I said, I can e-mail you the xpi file (note that, after installation, 
> the toolbar buttons will not immediately become apparent - you have to 
> drag them via "Customise").
> 
> Would it be acceptable to post the xpi file here?
> 
you can't post anything in these newsgroups -- not even images.  Try 
using one of the test sites on the old secnews groups.
0
gwtc
1/16/2006 9:40:29 AM
On 16.01.2006 09:40 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> Herb wrote:
> 
>> On 16.01.2006 08:43 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>
>>> Herb wrote on 13.01.2006 18:22:
>>>
>>>> On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, 
>>>>>> but,
>>>>>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off 
>>>> the face of the Earth :-(
>>>>
>>>> I can e-mail it to you if you like.
>>>
>>> OK. OK. You guys convinced me. Could you please post the link. I'll 
>>> try it out. :-)
>>>
>>
>>
>> Well, that's the problem - the link seems to have disappeared, despite 
>> the fact that the extension is useful and works perfectly well :-(
>>
>> As I said, I can e-mail you the xpi file (note that, after 
>> installation, the toolbar buttons will not immediately become apparent 
>> - you have to drag them via "Customise").
>>
>> Would it be acceptable to post the xpi file here?
>>
> you can't post anything in these newsgroups -- not even images.  Try 
> using one of the test sites on the old secnews groups.

Small attachments were allowed under exceptional circumstances (and I 
dare say this is such an occasion) in the old secnews groups :-)

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/16/2006 9:48:48 AM
----688D8ED31F091A24_message_boundary--
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:48:48 +0000, Herb wrote:

> On 16.01.2006 09:40 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>> Herb wrote:
>> 
>>> On 16.01.2006 08:43 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Herb wrote on 13.01.2006 18:22:
>>>>
>>>>> On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, 
>>>>>>> but,
>>>>>>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off 
>>>>> the face of the Earth :-(
>>>>>
>>>>> I can e-mail it to you if you like.
>>>>
>>>> OK. OK. You guys convinced me. Could you please post the link. I'll 
>>>> try it out. :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, that's the problem - the link seems to have disappeared, despite 
>>> the fact that the extension is useful and works perfectly well :-(
>>>
>>> As I said, I can e-mail you the xpi file (note that, after 
>>> installation, the toolbar buttons will not immediately become apparent 
>>> - you have to drag them via "Customise").
>>>
>>> Would it be acceptable to post the xpi file here?
>>>
>> you can't post anything in these newsgroups -- not even images.  Try 
>> using one of the test sites on the old secnews groups.

I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
-- 
Jim 
         Tyneside UK
----688D8ED31F091A24_message_boundary--
Content-type: image/GIF; name=classic12.gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=classic12.gif
Content-Description: Attached file: classic12.gif

R0lGODlhMQAmALMAAAAAnABjMTExADFjYzGcAJxjMZycnM4AAP8xAP/OAP//AP//zv//////
/////////yH5BAEAAAwALAAAAAAxACYAQATtkMlJq70468eBV2AojmToAdyjTV/pvqW3Sk8r
njCIj546p6ldjtcD+lbGjjB3QiVnjBqA1JzGmlQU1KazDm/eLjQYNlXP19Q4yT4X2cY1XOqu
zjlyZfnbdap/Ull7YHtFY1xmg4lpW4p8MDIziAqTkIUAa5NVgppOeUuPiUB5RptXJ3Okc3V3
o4BtWKdvT69kji+ocbWgoZSzcpW9XX9IgYTBpmZ4P528fZ1HGsHCWY3UX5EriNO4ZdnS3tyC
RIfht4RE0RnGx5bQmYN1aFnLxXQudfhvpM7Ys+oYYIlL5MeVPTjy7NyBwrAhwwgAADs=

----688D8ED31F091A24_message_boundary----

0
Jim
1/16/2006 10:29:03 AM
Jim Scott wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:48:48 +0000, Herb wrote:
> 
> 
>>On 16.01.2006 09:40 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>
>>>Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 16.01.2006 08:43 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Herb wrote on 13.01.2006 18:22:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, 
>>>>>>>>but,
>>>>>>>>by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off 
>>>>>>the face of the Earth :-(
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I can e-mail it to you if you like.
>>>>>
>>>>>OK. OK. You guys convinced me. Could you please post the link. I'll 
>>>>>try it out. :-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Well, that's the problem - the link seems to have disappeared, despite 
>>>>the fact that the extension is useful and works perfectly well :-(
>>>>
>>>>As I said, I can e-mail you the xpi file (note that, after 
>>>>installation, the toolbar buttons will not immediately become apparent 
>>>>- you have to drag them via "Customise").
>>>>
>>>>Would it be acceptable to post the xpi file here?
>>>>
>>>
>>>you can't post anything in these newsgroups -- not even images.  Try 
>>>using one of the test sites on the old secnews groups.
> 
> 
> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
now how did you do it?  I tried a few days ago, and it still hasn't 
shown up.  I wonder if the rules have changed.
0
gwtc
1/16/2006 10:39:32 AM
Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
<news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:

> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg

Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
attachments.

-- 
�Q�
0
ISO
1/16/2006 10:46:47 AM
On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
generate the following:? :

>Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
><news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>
>  
>
>>I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>    
>>
>
>Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>attachments.
>
>  
>
what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly legimate 
here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime 
enemy Chris!

reg

reg
0
squaredancer
1/16/2006 11:04:51 AM
On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
> generate the following:? :
> 
>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>
>>  
>>
>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>   
>>
>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>> attachments.
>>
>>  
>>
> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly legimate 
> here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime 
> enemy Chris!

Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/16/2006 11:18:39 AM
On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  squaredancer 
to generate the following:? :

> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
> generate the following:? :
>
>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>
>>  
>>
>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>> attachments.
>>
>>  
>>
> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly legimate 
> here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime 
> enemy Chris!
>
> reg
>
> reg

sorry @ Q - I was thinking of gw when I referenced the "prime 
enemy".....  my mistake!

reg
0
squaredancer
1/16/2006 12:22:54 PM
Herb wrote:
> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>> generate the following:? :
>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>
>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>> attachments.
>>>
>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly legimate 
>> here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime 
>> enemy Chris!
> 
> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(

Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
obviously too binanary.

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/16/2006 2:00:48 PM
On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
Areskoug to generate the following:? :

> Herb wrote:
>
>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>
>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>> generate the following:? :
>>>
>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>> attachments.
>>>>
>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly legimate 
>>> here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime 
>>> enemy Chris!
>>
>>
>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>
>
> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
> obviously too binanary.
>
> BR,
> Gudmund

..... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*

reg
0
squaredancer
1/16/2006 2:39:40 PM
squaredancer wrote:
> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
> 
>> Herb wrote:
>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>
>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>> obviously too binanary.
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
>>
> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*

'zactly! And two of them at once makes it one bit too binary.

Seriously though, it's hard to test sending things to this list by 
sending them to another list. I wonder why the one got through but not 
the other. Animation, size, filetype, sloppy filtering...?

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/16/2006 3:05:06 PM
squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
<news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:

> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>
>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>> generate the following:? :
>>
>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>> attachments.
>>
>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>> legimate here, *and* in context!

It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
say "do not send binary attachments".

>> DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime enemy Chris!

> sorry @ Q - I was thinking of gw when I referenced the "prime
> enemy".....  my mistake!

You can tell us apart by remembering that "gwtc" stands for "BJ
Honeycutt", whereas Q doesn't.  ;)

-- 
�Q�
0
ISO
1/16/2006 6:09:31 PM
squaredancer wrote:
> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  squaredancer 
> to generate the following:? :
> 
> 
>>On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>generate the following:? :
>>
>>
>>>Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>><news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>  
>>>
>>>
>>>Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>attachments.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>
>>what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly legimate 
>>here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime 
>>enemy Chris!
>>
>>reg
>>
>>reg
> 
> 
> sorry @ Q - I was thinking of gw when I referenced the "prime 
> enemy".....  my mistake!
> 
> reg
thanks a lot!! ;-)
0
gwtc
1/16/2006 6:22:05 PM
�Q� wrote:

> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
> 
> 
>>On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>
>>
>>>On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>generate the following:? :
>>>
>>>
>>>>Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>attachments.
>>>
>>>what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>legimate here, *and* in context!
> 
> 
> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
> say "do not send binary attachments".
> 
> 
[SNIP]

But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
0
gwtc
1/16/2006 6:37:29 PM
On 16.01.2006 16:05, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
Areskoug to generate the following:? :

> squaredancer wrote:
>
>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>
>>>
>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Gudmund
>>>
>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>
>
> 'zactly! And two of them at once makes it one bit too binary.
>
> Seriously though, it's hard to test sending things to this list by 
> sending them to another list. I wonder why the one got through but not 
> the other. Animation, size, filetype, sloppy filtering...?
>
> BR,
> Gudmund

ahhhh! in that case, Gudmund, Herbert needs to take "a byte" from one of 
his banananas - it will then have been "bit-ten" down to size...

reg
0
squaredancer
1/16/2006 11:45:16 PM
On 16.01.2006 19:09, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
generate the following:? :

>squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
><news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>
>  
>
>>On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>
>>    
>>
>>>On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>generate the following:? :
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>attachments.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>      
>>>
>
>It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>say "do not send binary attachments".
>
>  
>
>>>DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime enemy Chris!
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>sorry @ Q - I was thinking of gw when I referenced the "prime
>>enemy".....  my mistake!
>>    
>>
>
>You can tell us apart by remembering that "gwtc" stands for "BJ
>Honeycutt", whereas Q doesn't.  ;)
>
>  
>
well - to (try and....) be honest... that *was* floating around in my 
head, and causing an ache...

reg
0
squaredancer
1/16/2006 11:47:09 PM
squaredancer wrote:
> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund=20
> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>=20
>> Herb wrote:
>>
>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB to=
=20
>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>
>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>
>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly legimate=
=20
>>>> here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that your prime =

>>>> enemy Chris!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>
>>
>>
>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are=20
>> obviously too binanary.
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
>=20
>=20
> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>=20
> reg

Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!

Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that=20
specific text is rendered as a smiley!

For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley into=20
it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse

Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing but=20
plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will render=20
as a image.

;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a elispse =
)

the same as
http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it=20
blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go=20
anywhere of course)
news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
or
mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
0
Moz
1/17/2006 8:08:23 AM
gwtc wrote:
> =BBQ=AB wrote:
>=20
>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>
>>
>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB to=

>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>> attachments.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>
>>
>>
>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>
>>
> [SNIP]
>=20
> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while=20
> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.

A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an=20
emoticon in so enabled readers
0
Moz
1/17/2006 8:09:51 AM
On 17.01.2006 08:08 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> squaredancer wrote:
>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>
>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly 
>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that 
>>>>> your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Gudmund
>>
>>
>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>
>> reg
> 
> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
> 
> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that 
> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
> 
> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley into 
> it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
> 
> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing but 
> plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will render 
> as a image.
> 
> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a elispse )
> 
> the same as
> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it 
> blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go 
> anywhere of course)
> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
> or
> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com

Dan,

the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage to 
send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed 
to send attachments.

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/17/2006 8:14:37 AM
On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> gwtc wrote:
>> �Q� wrote:
>>
>>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>
>>>
>> [SNIP]
>>
>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
> 
> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
> emoticon in so enabled readers

Dan,

the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage to 
send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed 
to send attachments.

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/17/2006 8:15:18 AM
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> squaredancer wrote:
> 
>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>
>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly 
>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that 
>>>>> your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Gudmund
>>
>>
>>
>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>
>> reg
> 
> 
> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
> 
> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that 
> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
> 
> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley into 
> it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
> 
> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing but 
> plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will render 
> as a image.
> 
> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a elispse )
> 
> the same as
> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it 
> blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go 
> anywhere of course)
> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
> or
> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com

I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at 
news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file 
attached, that got through to the newsgroup.

That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through 
(smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/17/2006 8:20:05 AM
On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> gwtc wrote:
>>> �Q� wrote:
>>>
>>>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>
>>>>
>>> [SNIP]
>>>
>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>> 
>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>> emoticon in so enabled readers
> 
> Dan,
> 
> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage to 
> send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed 
> to send attachments.
> 

I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed and
others are ... dunno.


-- 
Jay Garcia Netscape Champion
UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org
0
Jay
1/17/2006 3:50:49 PM
On 17.01.2006 15:50 UK Time, Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:
> 
>  --- Original Message ---
> 
>> On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>> gwtc wrote:
>>>> �Q� wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>
>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>>>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>> Dan,
>>
>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage to 
>> send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed 
>> to send attachments.
>>
> 
> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed and
> others are ... dunno.
> 

No, it was gif alright - see 
news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/17/2006 3:51:45 PM
On 17.01.2006 15:51 UK Time, Herb wrote:
> On 17.01.2006 15:50 UK Time, Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>> gwtc wrote:
>>>>> �Q� wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>>>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>>>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>>>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>
>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>>>>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>> Dan,
>>>
>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage 
>>> to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others 
>>> failed to send attachments.
>>>
>>
>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed and
>> others are ... dunno.
>>
> 
> No, it was gif alright - see 
> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net
> 

Notwithstanding the fact that he had announced a jpg file :-)

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/17/2006 3:55:51 PM
<snip>
> 
> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at 
> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file 
> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
> 
> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through 
> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
> 
> BR,
> Gudmund

I'm sure you are right.
I tried to send an .avi with no success so far.
-- 
Jim 
         Tyneside UK
0
Jim
1/17/2006 4:19:58 PM
Jay Garcia wrote:

> On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:
> 
>  --- Original Message ---
> 
> 
>>On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>>gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>>�Q� wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>>><news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>>>squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>>>>>generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>>attachments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>>>legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>>>filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>>>say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>[SNIP]
>>>>
>>>>But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>>>>others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>
>>>A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>emoticon in so enabled readers
>>
>>Dan,
>>
>>the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage to 
>>send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed 
>>to send attachments.
>>
> 
> 
> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed and
> others are ... dunno.
> 
> 
If you look at the message source it says this:

Content-type: image/GIF; name=classic12.gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=classic12.gif
Content-Description: Attached file: classic12.gif

Therefore, its a gif attachment.  And I'm presuming that the Base64 
means its binary.
0
gwtc
1/17/2006 4:52:32 PM
On 17.01.2006 10:52, gwtc wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> If you look at the message source it says this:
> 
> Content-type: image/GIF; name=classic12.gif
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=classic12.gif
> Content-Description: Attached file: classic12.gif
> 
> Therefore, its a gif attachment.  And I'm presuming that the Base64 
> means its binary.

Yup, I managed to find the OP ..

-- 
Jay Garcia Netscape Champion
UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org
0
Jay
1/17/2006 6:53:14 PM
Herb said on 16.1.2006 09:52:
> On 16.01.2006 08:43 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>> Herb wrote on 13.01.2006 18:22:
>>> On 13.01.2006 17:15 UK Time, Peter Lairo wrote:
>>>> MushMorton wrote on 13.01.2006 15:57:
>>>>>
>>>>> I prefer Pascal's defilemessage extension for it's scroll buttons, 
>>>>> but,
>>>>> by and large, I find the keyboard easier and faster.
>>>>
>>>> I can't find it. Do you have a link?
>>>>
>>>
>>> It's a mystery why defilemessage.xpi seems to have disappeared off 
>>> the face of the Earth :-(
>>>
>>> I can e-mail it to you if you like.
>>
>> OK. OK. You guys convinced me. Could you please post the link. I'll 
>> try it out. :-)
>>
> 
> Well, that's the problem - the link seems to have disappeared, despite 
> the fact that the extension is useful and works perfectly well :-(
> 
> As I said, I can e-mail you the xpi file (note that, after installation, 
> the toolbar buttons will not immediately become apparent - you have to 
> drag them via "Customise").

Yes, please do: Peter AT Lairo DOT com

> Would it be acceptable to post the xpi file here?

Unfortunately, the new server only allows TEXT attachments IIRC. :-(

PS. Moz Champion still cracks me up. :-D
-- 
Regards,

Peter Lairo

The browser you can trust:   www.GetFirefox.com
Reclaim Your Inbox:          www.GetThunderbird.com
0
Peter
1/17/2006 10:45:29 PM
Herb wrote:
> On 17.01.2006 08:08 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>=20
>> squaredancer wrote:
>>
>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund=20
>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>
>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB =
to=20
>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly=20
>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that =

>>>>>> your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are=20
>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>> Gudmund
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>
>>> reg
>>
>>
>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>
>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that=20
>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>
>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley into=
=20
>> it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
>>
>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing=20
>> but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will=20
>> render as a image.
>>
>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a=20
>> elispse )
>>
>> the same as
>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it =

>> blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go =

>> anywhere of course)
>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>> or
>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>=20
>=20
> Dan,
>=20
> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage t=
o=20
> send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed =

> to send attachments.
>=20

Please give me the message number if you will so I can take a look.
I dont see ANY posts in this group from "Geordie Jim" for example.
0
Moz
1/17/2006 11:44:30 PM
Herb wrote:
> On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>=20
>> gwtc wrote:
>>
>>> =BBQ=AB wrote:
>>>
>>>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB =
to
>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>
>>>>
>>> [SNIP]
>>>
>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while=20
>>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>
>>
>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an=20
>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>=20
>=20
> Dan,
>=20
> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage t=
o=20
> send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed =

> to send attachments.
>=20

Who? I dont see any posts from "Geordie Jim" in this group. Which post=20
are you referring to?
0
Moz
1/17/2006 11:45:32 PM
Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:
>=20
>  --- Original Message ---
>=20
>=20
>>On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>>gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>>=BBQ=AB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>>><news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>>>squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB =
to
>>>>>>>generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>>attachments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>>>legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>>>filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>>>say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>[SNIP]
>>>>
>>>>But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while=20
>>>>others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>
>>>A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an=20
>>>emoticon in so enabled readers
>>
>>Dan,
>>
>>the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage t=
o=20
>>send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others failed =

>>to send attachments.
>>
>=20
>=20
> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed an=
d
> others are ... dunno.
>=20
>=20

Likewsies, I cant see any such post, can someone give pointers to it?
0
Moz
1/17/2006 11:46:22 PM
Herb wrote:
> On 17.01.2006 15:50 UK Time, Jay Garcia wrote:
>=20
>> On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>> gwtc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> =BBQ=AB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>>>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB=
 to
>>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have=

>>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>>>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>>>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>
>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while =

>>>>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>>
>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an=20
>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>
>>> Dan,
>>>
>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage=
=20
>>> to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others=20
>>> failed to send attachments.
>>>
>>
>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but=

>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed a=
nd
>> others are ... dunno.
>>
>=20
> No, it was gif alright - see=20
> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual=
=2Enet
>=20

Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the=20
message, and which group it was in?
0
Moz
1/17/2006 11:52:01 PM
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

> Herb wrote:
> 
>>On 17.01.2006 15:50 UK Time, Jay Garcia wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:
>>>
>>> --- Original Message ---
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>gwtc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>�Q� wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>>>>><news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>>>>>squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to
>>>>>>>>>generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>>>>attachments.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>>>>>legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>>>>>filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>>>>>say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[SNIP]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>>>>>>others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>>A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>>>emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>>
>>>>Dan,
>>>>
>>>>the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage 
>>>>to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others 
>>>>failed to send attachments.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
>>>rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed and
>>>others are ... dunno.
>>>
>>
>>No, it was gif alright - see 
>>news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net
>>
> 
> 
> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
> message, and which group it was in?
This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 12:06:11 AM
Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>=20
>> squaredancer wrote:
>>
>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund=20
>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>
>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB =
to=20
>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly=20
>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that =

>>>>>> your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are=20
>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>> Gudmund
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>
>>> reg
>>
>>
>>
>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>
>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that=20
>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>
>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley into=
=20
>> it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
>>
>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing=20
>> but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will=20
>> render as a image.
>>
>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a=20
>> elispse )
>>
>> the same as
>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it =

>> blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go =

>> anywhere of course)
>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>> or
>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>=20
>=20
> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at=20
> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual=
=2Enet=20
> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file=20
> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>=20
> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through=20
> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>=20
> BR,
> Gudmund

I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, Thunderbird=20
doesnt know what to do with the file.
If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the=20
group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on the=20
specific message

I dont see a gif in this newsgroup
0
Moz
1/18/2006 12:19:07 AM
gwtc wrote:
> Jay Garcia wrote:
>=20
>> On 17.01.2006 02:15, Herb wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>
>>> On 17.01.2006 08:09 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>> gwtc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> =BBQ=AB wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> squaredancer <cubedancer@pinneberg.com> wrote in
>>>>>> <news:E5adnYg9lqOODVbeRVn-uA@mozilla.org>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 12:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused
>>>>>>> squaredancer to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB=
 to
>>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have=

>>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly
>>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a test to see if a binary can be gotten past the Giganews
>>>>>> filters.  Dunno what you mean by "legitimate", but the guidelines
>>>>>> say "do not send binary attachments".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>
>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while =

>>>>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an=20
>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan,
>>>
>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact manage=
=20
>>> to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas others=20
>>> failed to send attachments.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but=

>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed a=
nd
>> others are ... dunno.
>>
>>
> If you look at the message source it says this:
>=20
> Content-type: image/GIF; name=3Dclassic12.gif
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=3Dclassic12.gif
> Content-Description: Attached file: classic12.gif
>=20
> Therefore, its a gif attachment.  And I'm presuming that the Base64=20
> means its binary.

How can I look at the message source for a message when you cant direct=20
me to the message? PLEASE give the group the message is in, and the name =

of the sender, maybe I can find it that way.
0
Moz
1/18/2006 12:21:32 AM
----1954E6483FAE236D_message_boundary--
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:19:07 -0500, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> 
>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly 
>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that 
>>>>>>> your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>>
>>>>> BR,
>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>>
>>>> reg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>>
>>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that 
>>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>>
>>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley into 
>>> it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
>>>
>>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing 
>>> but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will 
>>> render as a image.
>>>
>>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a 
>>> elispse )
>>>
>>> the same as
>>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it 
>>> blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go 
>>> anywhere of course)
>>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>>> or
>>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>> 
>> 
>> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at 
>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file 
>> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>> 
>> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through 
>> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>> 
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
> 
> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, Thunderbird 
> doesnt know what to do with the file.
> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the 
> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on the 
> specific message
> 
> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup

Do you want me to send the gif again?
(A Geordie is a person from Tyneside!)
Aw I'll send it anyhow - here goes!
-- 
Jim 
         Tyneside UK
----1954E6483FAE236D_message_boundary--
Content-type: image/GIF; name=classic12.gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=classic12.gif
Content-Description: Attached file: classic12.gif

R0lGODlhMQAmALMAAAAAnABjMTExADFjYzGcAJxjMZycnM4AAP8xAP/OAP//AP//zv//////
/////////yH5BAEAAAwALAAAAAAxACYAQATtkMlJq70468eBV2AojmToAdyjTV/pvqW3Sk8r
njCIj546p6ldjtcD+lbGjjB3QiVnjBqA1JzGmlQU1KazDm/eLjQYNlXP19Q4yT4X2cY1XOqu
zjlyZfnbdap/Ull7YHtFY1xmg4lpW4p8MDIziAqTkIUAa5NVgppOeUuPiUB5RptXJ3Okc3V3
o4BtWKdvT69kji+ocbWgoZSzcpW9XX9IgYTBpmZ4P528fZ1HGsHCWY3UX5EriNO4ZdnS3tyC
RIfht4RE0RnGx5bQmYN1aFnLxXQudfhvpM7Ys+oYYIlL5MeVPTjy7NyBwrAhwwgAADs=

----1954E6483FAE236D_message_boundary----

0
Jim
1/18/2006 12:29:50 AM
On 17.01.2006 18:19, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> 
>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly 
>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that 
>>>>>>> your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>>
>>>>> BR,
>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>>
>>>> reg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>>
>>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that 
>>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>>
>>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley into 
>>> it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
>>>
>>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing 
>>> but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will 
>>> render as a image.
>>>
>>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a 
>>> elispse )
>>>
>>> the same as
>>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it 
>>> blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go 
>>> anywhere of course)
>>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>>> or
>>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>> 
>> 
>> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at 
>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file 
>> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>> 
>> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through 
>> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>> 
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
> 
> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, Thunderbird 
> doesnt know what to do with the file.
> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the 
> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on the 
> specific message
> 
> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup

I get both a "Save to" and "Open with" and I used "Open with" to view in
Firefox.

-- 
Jay Garcia Netscape Champion
UFAQ - http://www.UFAQ.org
0
Jay
1/18/2006 2:03:11 AM
gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp> wrote in
<news:dYCdnZdhDKzCGFDenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>:

> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>
>> Herb wrote:
>>
>>> No, it was gif alright - see
>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net
>>>
>>
>>
>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of
>> the message, and which group it was in?
>
> This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06

Yup.  If that link didn't work, this one should:

<news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>

-- 
�Q�
0
ISO
1/18/2006 2:39:25 AM
On 17.01.2006 23:52 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

>>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>>>>>> others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>>
>>>> Dan,
>>>>
>>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact 
>>>> manage to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas 
>>>> others failed to send attachments.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
>>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed and
>>> others are ... dunno.
>>>
>>
>> No, it was gif alright - see 
>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>
>>
> 
> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
> message, and which group it was in?

Hi Dan,

sorry about confusing the issue by introducing "Geordie Jim" (I hope Jim 
didn't mind :-) ).

I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
fixes it?

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 5:57:27 AM
Herb wrote:

> On 17.01.2006 23:52 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> 
> 
>>>>>>>[SNIP]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through while 
>>>>>>>others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>>>>emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>>>
>>>>>Dan,
>>>>>
>>>>>the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact 
>>>>>manage to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas 
>>>>>others failed to send attachments.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
>>>>rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed and
>>>>others are ... dunno.
>>>>
>>>
>>>No, it was gif alright - see 
>>>news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>>message, and which group it was in?
> 
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> sorry about confusing the issue by introducing "Geordie Jim" (I hope Jim 
> didn't mind :-) ).
> 
> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
> message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
> doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
> had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
> fixes it?
> 
message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 7:07:04 AM
On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> Herb wrote:

>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
>> message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
>> doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
>> had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
>> fixes it?
>>
> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/

Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too fuzzy 
and therefore not very enlightening :-( )

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 7:35:57 AM
Herb wrote:

> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> 
>>Herb wrote:
> 
> 
>>>I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
>>>message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
>>>doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
>>>had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
>>>fixes it?
>>>
>>
>>message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
> 
> 
> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
> should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too fuzzy 
> and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
> 
Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find Message 
by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and the message 
you're on should change to the message of the link:

news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 7:43:50 AM
On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> Herb wrote:
> 
>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
>>>> message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
>>>> doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that 
>>>> this had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or 
>>>> something that fixes it?
>>>>
>>>
>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>
>>
>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
>> should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too fuzzy 
>> and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>
> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find Message 
> by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and the message 
> you're on should change to the message of the link:
> 
> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org

Splendid, thank you :-)

Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the link 
(i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer clickable)?

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 7:45:18 AM
On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> Herb wrote:
>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens 
>>>>>> the message in Firefox here, although I never really understood 
>>>>>> why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere 
>>>>>> that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or 
>>>>>> something that fixes it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
>>>> should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too 
>>>> fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>
>>>
>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>> Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and the 
>>> message you're on should change to the message of the link:
>>>
>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>
>>
>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>
>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the link 
>> (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer clickable)?
>>
> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking about.

If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, when I 
get there the header looks slightly different from what it looks like 
normally - does it look the same for you?

Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.

Perhaps I better take a screenshot?

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 8:00:20 AM
Herb wrote:
> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> 
>>Herb wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
>>>>>message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
>>>>>doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that 
>>>>>this had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or 
>>>>>something that fixes it?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
>>>should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too fuzzy 
>>>and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>
>>
>>Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find Message 
>>by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and the message 
>>you're on should change to the message of the link:
>>
>>news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
> 
> 
> Splendid, thank you :-)
> 
> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the link 
> (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer clickable)?
> 
Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking about.
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 8:02:07 AM
Herb wrote:

> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> 
>>Herb wrote:
>>
>>>On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens 
>>>>>>>the message in Firefox here, although I never really understood 
>>>>>>>why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere 
>>>>>>>that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or 
>>>>>>>something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
>>>>>should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too 
>>>>>fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>>>Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and the 
>>>>message you're on should change to the message of the link:
>>>>
>>>>news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>
>>>
>>>Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>
>>>Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the link 
>>>(i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer clickable)?
>>>
>>
>>Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> 
> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, when I 
> get there the header looks slightly different from what it looks like 
> normally - does it look the same for you?
> 
> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
> 
> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
> 
You mean this:

Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 8:11:54 AM
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly 
>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper that 
>>>>>>> your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>>>>
>>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>>
>>>>> BR,
>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>>
>>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>>
>>>> reg
>>>>
>>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>>
>>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that 
>>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>>
>>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley 
>>> into it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
>>>
>>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing 
>>> but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will 
>>> render as a image.
>>>
>>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a 
>>> elispse )
>>>
>>> the same as
>>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making it 
>>> blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one wont go 
>>> anywhere of course)
>>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>>> or
>>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>>>
>> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at 
>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file 
>> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>>
>> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through 
>> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
> 
> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, Thunderbird 
> doesnt know what to do with the file.
> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the 
> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on the 
> specific message
> 
> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup

If the link doesn't work, the fault seems to be in Thunderbird.

I went back to the post, right-clicked it in the messages list and 
selected copy message location, then pasted it into my message. AFAIR, 
I've done that many times before, and nobody had problems with it.

Hey, funny! I just tried clicking that link. Telling TB to open it in TB 
results in nothing. Opening it with FF gives the interesting result that 
the text body is visible in FF, and a new TB window opens showing the 
..gif image in the message preview window...

Why isn't this working? And since it doesn't now, how on earth did I do 
it before, in secnews??? Do the server differences result in the links 
being different? Will try in a few minutes!

The .gif poster is Jim Scott, in this very thread in this very forum. 
Since I've kept this message unmutilated from the smiley point on, it's 
in there, close to the top:

">>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
 >>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
 >>>>>>>>>
 >>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg"

....and now I'll have to go find out how on earth to easily give 
cross-references to other messages in here with TB...

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 8:18:36 AM
On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> Herb wrote:
> 
>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens 
>>>>>>>> the message in Firefox here, although I never really understood 
>>>>>>>> why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read 
>>>>>>>> somewhere that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an 
>>>>>>>> extension or something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
>>>>>> should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too 
>>>>>> fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>>>> Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and 
>>>>> the message you're on should change to the message of the link:
>>>>>
>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>
>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the 
>>>> link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer 
>>>> clickable)?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking about.
>>
>>
>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, when I 
>> get there the header looks slightly different from what it looks like 
>> normally - does it look the same for you?
>>
>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>
>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>
> You mean this:
> 
> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox

Difficult to say in txt mode :-)

I mean this: 
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, which is 
different (in fact significantly different in several ways!) from 
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 8:25:51 AM
�Q� wrote:
> gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp> wrote in
> <news:dYCdnZdhDKzCGFDenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>:
> 
>>Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>>Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>>No, it was gif alright - see
>>>>news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net
>>>>
>>>Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of
>>>the message, and which group it was in?
>>
>>This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
> 
> Yup.  If that link didn't work, this one should:
> 
> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>

Odd. Only thing that happens here when clicking it, is it changes colour 
to red during the click.

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 8:29:25 AM
Herb wrote:

> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> 
>>Herb wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Herb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens 
>>>>>>>>>the message in Firefox here, although I never really understood 
>>>>>>>>>why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read 
>>>>>>>>>somewhere that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an 
>>>>>>>>>extension or something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
>>>>>>>should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too 
>>>>>>>fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>>>>>Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and 
>>>>>>the message you're on should change to the message of the link:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the 
>>>>>link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer 
>>>>>clickable)?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking about.
>>>
>>>
>>>If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, when I 
>>>get there the header looks slightly different from what it looks like 
>>>normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>
>>>Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>
>>>Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>
>>
>>You mean this:
>>
>>Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
> 
> 
> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
> 
> I mean this: 
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, which is 
> different (in fact significantly different in several ways!) from 
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
> 
I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to do 
with your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and how did 
you see the other?
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 8:33:40 AM
On 18.01.2006 08:33 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
> Herb wrote:
> 
>> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it 
>>>>>>>>>> opens the message in Firefox here, although I never really 
>>>>>>>>>> understood why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had 
>>>>>>>>>> read somewhere that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that there 
>>>>>>>>>> is an extension or something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly I 
>>>>>>>> should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit too 
>>>>>>>> fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>>>>>> Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org and 
>>>>>>> the message you're on should change to the message of the link:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the 
>>>>>> link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer 
>>>>>> clickable)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking 
>>>>> about.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, when 
>>>> I get there the header looks slightly different from what it looks 
>>>> like normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>>
>>>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You mean this:
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
>>
>>
>> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
>>
>> I mean this: 
>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, which is 
>> different (in fact significantly different in several ways!) from 
>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
>>
> I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to do with 
> your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and how did you see 
> the other?

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png is how I 
normally see the headers in this group.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png is how I see 
it after following a link with MessageID-Finder.

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 8:34:50 AM
Gudmund Areskoug wrote:

> �Q� wrote:
> 
>>gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp> wrote in
>><news:dYCdnZdhDKzCGFDenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>:
>>
>>
>>>Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>No, it was gif alright - see
>>>>>news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of
>>>>the message, and which group it was in?
>>>
>>>This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
>>
>>Yup.  If that link didn't work, this one should:
>>
>><news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>
> 
> 
> Odd. Only thing that happens here when clicking it, is it changes colour 
> to red during the click.
> 
> BR,
> Gudmund
maybe you need the message id finder: http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 8:36:19 AM
Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund=20
>>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB=
 to=20
>>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>=20
>>
>> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, Thunderbird=
=20
>> doesnt know what to do with the file.
>> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the=20
>> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on=20
>> the specific message
>>
>> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup
>=20
> If the link doesn't work, the fault seems to be in Thunderbird.
>=20
> I went back to the post, right-clicked it in the messages list and=20
> selected copy message location, then pasted it into my message. AFAIR, =

> I've done that many times before, and nobody had problems with it.
>=20
> Hey, funny! I just tried clicking that link. Telling TB to open it in T=
B=20
> results in nothing. Opening it with FF gives the interesting result tha=
t=20
> the text body is visible in FF, and a new TB window opens showing the=20
> .gif image in the message preview window...
>=20
> Why isn't this working? And since it doesn't now, how on earth did I do=
=20
> it before, in secnews??? Do the server differences result in the links =

> being different? Will try in a few minutes!
>=20
> The .gif poster is Jim Scott, in this very thread in this very forum.=20
> Since I've kept this message unmutilated from the smiley point on, it's=
=20
> in there, close to the top:
>=20
> ">>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>  >>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>  >>>>>>>>>
>  >>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg"
>=20
> ...and now I'll have to go find out how on earth to easily give=20
> cross-references to other messages in here with TB...
>=20
> BR,
> Gudmund

Jim reposted the smiley gif so I dont need to find it anylonger

Okay, so it wasnt a smiley (emoticon) and my comments were rather=20
superfleous
Now to figure out why it gets through while others dont, and I think Jay =

might have something there when he noted its base 64 coded.

Base 64 isnt a binary file, Base 64 literally means a positional=20
numbering system using a base of 64. It is the largest power of two base =

that can be represented using only printable ASCII characters

So, it seems that Base 64 coding is exempt from the 'no binaries' rule=20
solely because it can be done on a ASCII text only basis.

When is a binary not a binary? When its coded in Base 64!
0
Moz
1/18/2006 8:38:11 AM
gwtc wrote:
> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> 
>> �Q� wrote:
>>
>>> gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp> wrote in
>>> <news:dYCdnZdhDKzCGFDenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> No, it was gif alright - see
>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of
>>>>> the message, and which group it was in?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
>>>
>>>
>>> Yup.  If that link didn't work, this one should:
>>>
>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> Odd. Only thing that happens here when clicking it, is it changes 
>> colour to red during the click.
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
> 
> maybe you need the message id finder: http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/

Perhaps I do, but I sure hope there already is a decent way of doing 
these things inside the standard Thunderbird. Seems like a pretty 
fundamental thing for newsgroup handling, IMHO.

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 8:42:25 AM
gwtc wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> 
>> Herb wrote:
>>
>>> 
>>
>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>> message, and which group it was in?
> This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06

Doesnt matter now, Jim was kind enough to repost it for me.

Right it wasnt a 'smiley' (emoticon) but it was coded in Base 64
Base 64 literally means a positional numbering system using a base of 
64. It is the largest power of two base that can be represented using 
only printable ASCII characters

since all the data in such a file can be represented using only 
printable ASCII characters, then its not a binary, its a base 64 file.
Interesting that it can contain a gif or image tho
0
Moz
1/18/2006 8:43:15 AM
Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> 
>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� to 
>>>>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly 
>>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper 
>>>>>>>> that your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BR,
>>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>>>
>>>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>>>
>>>>> reg
>>>>>
>>>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>>>
>>>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>>>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that 
>>>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>>>
>>>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley 
>>>> into it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end elipse
>>>>
>>>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing 
>>>> but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will 
>>>> render as a image.
>>>>
>>>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a 
>>>> elispse )
>>>>
>>>> the same as
>>>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>>>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making 
>>>> it blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one 
>>>> wont go anywhere of course)
>>>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>>>> or
>>>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>>>>
>>> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at 
>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file 
>>> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>>>
>>> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through 
>>> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Gudmund
>>
>>
>> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, Thunderbird 
>> doesnt know what to do with the file.
>> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the 
>> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on 
>> the specific message
>>
>> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup
> 
> 
> If the link doesn't work, the fault seems to be in Thunderbird.
> 
> I went back to the post, right-clicked it in the messages list and 
> selected copy message location, then pasted it into my message. AFAIR, 
> I've done that many times before, and nobody had problems with it.
> 
> Hey, funny! I just tried clicking that link. Telling TB to open it in TB 
> results in nothing. Opening it with FF gives the interesting result that 
> the text body is visible in FF, and a new TB window opens showing the 
> .gif image in the message preview window...
> 
> Why isn't this working? And since it doesn't now, how on earth did I do 
> it before, in secnews??? Do the server differences result in the links 
> being different? Will try in a few minutes!
> 
> The .gif poster is Jim Scott, in this very thread in this very forum. 
> Since I've kept this message unmutilated from the smiley point on, it's 
> in there, close to the top:
> 
> ">>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>  >>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>  >>>>>>>>>
>  >>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg"
> 
> ...and now I'll have to go find out how on earth to easily give 
> cross-references to other messages in here with TB...
> 
> BR,
> Gudmund

Nope, doesn't work in secnews either. Opening with TB results in a short 
blink, opening in FF shows the intended message body, but from some 
local TEMP directory...

So how should this be done properly from within TB? Surely, one should 
be able to point to other messages in a newsgroup within a standard TB?

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 8:43:56 AM
=BBQ=AB wrote:
> gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp> wrote in
> <news:dYCdnZdhDKzCGFDenZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d@mozilla.org>:
>=20
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> No, it was gif alright - see
>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individ=
ual.net
>>>>
>>>
>>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of
>>> the message, and which group it was in?
>> This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
>=20
> Yup.  If that link didn't work, this one should:
>=20
> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>
>=20

Nope, that link does absolutely nothing. Previous links which included=20
the news: prefix caused TB to put up a dialog asking me what to do with=20
the file. I dont have message id installed on TB btw, that might make a=20
difference
0
Moz
1/18/2006 8:45:18 AM
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>>>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� 
>>>>>>>>> to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, 
>>> Thunderbird doesnt know what to do with the file.
>>> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the 
>>> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on 
>>> the specific message
>>>
>>> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup
>>>
>> If the link doesn't work, the fault seems to be in Thunderbird.
>>
>> I went back to the post, right-clicked it in the messages list and 
>> selected copy message location, then pasted it into my message. AFAIR, 
>> I've done that many times before, and nobody had problems with it.
>>
>> Hey, funny! I just tried clicking that link. Telling TB to open it in 
>> TB results in nothing. Opening it with FF gives the interesting result 
>> that the text body is visible in FF, and a new TB window opens showing 
>> the .gif image in the message preview window...
>>
>> Why isn't this working? And since it doesn't now, how on earth did I 
>> do it before, in secnews??? Do the server differences result in the 
>> links being different? Will try in a few minutes!
>>
>> The .gif poster is Jim Scott, in this very thread in this very forum. 
>> Since I've kept this message unmutilated from the smiley point on, 
>> it's in there, close to the top:
>>
>> ">>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>  >>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg"
>>
>> ...and now I'll have to go find out how on earth to easily give 
>> cross-references to other messages in here with TB...
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
> 
> Jim reposted the smiley gif so I dont need to find it anylonger
> 
> Okay, so it wasnt a smiley (emoticon) and my comments were rather 
> superfleous
> Now to figure out why it gets through while others dont, and I think Jay 
> might have something there when he noted its base 64 coded.
> 
> Base 64 isnt a binary file, Base 64 literally means a positional 
> numbering system using a base of 64. It is the largest power of two base 
> that can be represented using only printable ASCII characters
> 
> So, it seems that Base 64 coding is exempt from the 'no binaries' rule 
> solely because it can be done on a ASCII text only basis.
> 
> When is a binary not a binary? When its coded in Base 64!

So now everyone'll be off to check how anything can be coded in Base 64! 
(Heard a song "Addicted to Base", now I know what it was about! ;) )

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 8:47:11 AM
Herb wrote:
> On 17.01.2006 23:52 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> 
>>>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through 
>>>>>>> while others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and 
>>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>>>
>>>>> Dan,
>>>>>
>>>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact 
>>>>> manage to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, whereas 
>>>>> others failed to send attachments.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF but
>>>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being passed 
>>>> and
>>>> others are ... dunno.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, it was gif alright - see 
>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>> message, and which group it was in?
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> sorry about confusing the issue by introducing "Geordie Jim" (I hope Jim 
> didn't mind :-) ).
> 
> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
> message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
> doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
> had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
> fixes it?
> 

TB puts up a dialog asking me what to do with the file here. Both on 
1.0.7 and 1.5. I dont have the messageid extension installed. Never 
thought of telling it to open in Firefox.

Well, hey, it does open in Firefox, tho the GIF cant be seen there 
(broken image icon)

So the reason I couldnt open it was that I never thought of using 
Firefox to see a news message <g>
0
Moz
1/18/2006 8:50:14 AM
Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>>
>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund =

>>>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BBQ=AB=
=20
>>>>>>>>> to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they hav=
e
>>>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly=20
>>>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper=20
>>>>>>>>> that your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :=
-(
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are =

>>>>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BR,
>>>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> reg
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>>>>
>>>>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>>>>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that =

>>>>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley=20
>>>>> into it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end=20
>>>>> elipse
>>>>>
>>>>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is nothing=
=20
>>>>> but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) readers will=
=20
>>>>> render as a image.
>>>>>
>>>>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a=20
>>>>> elispse )
>>>>>
>>>>> the same as
>>>>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>>>>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making =

>>>>> it blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one=20
>>>>> wont go anywhere of course)
>>>>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>>>>> or
>>>>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>>>>>
>>>> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at=20
>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individ=
ual.net=20
>>>> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file =

>>>> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>>>>
>>>> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through=20
>>>> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>> Gudmund
>>>
>>>
>>> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk,=20
>>> Thunderbird doesnt know what to do with the file.
>>> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the =

>>> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on=20
>>> the specific message
>>>
>>> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup
>>
>>
>> If the link doesn't work, the fault seems to be in Thunderbird.
>>
>> I went back to the post, right-clicked it in the messages list and=20
>> selected copy message location, then pasted it into my message. AFAIR,=
=20
>> I've done that many times before, and nobody had problems with it.
>>
>> Hey, funny! I just tried clicking that link. Telling TB to open it in =

>> TB results in nothing. Opening it with FF gives the interesting result=
=20
>> that the text body is visible in FF, and a new TB window opens showing=
=20
>> the .gif image in the message preview window...
>>
>> Why isn't this working? And since it doesn't now, how on earth did I=20
>> do it before, in secnews??? Do the server differences result in the=20
>> links being different? Will try in a few minutes!
>>
>> The .gif poster is Jim Scott, in this very thread in this very forum. =

>> Since I've kept this message unmutilated from the smiley point on,=20
>> it's in there, close to the top:
>>
>> ">>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>  >>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg"
>>
>> ...and now I'll have to go find out how on earth to easily give=20
>> cross-references to other messages in here with TB...
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
>=20
> Nope, doesn't work in secnews either. Opening with TB results in a shor=
t=20
> blink, opening in FF shows the intended message body, but from some=20
> local TEMP directory...
>=20
> So how should this be done properly from within TB? Surely, one should =

> be able to point to other messages in a newsgroup within a standard TB?=

>=20
> BR,
> Gudmund

I think the extension Messageid will do that

0
Moz
1/18/2006 9:05:07 AM
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:

> gwtc wrote:
> 
>>Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>>>message, and which group it was in?
>>
>>This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
> 
> 
> Doesnt matter now, Jim was kind enough to repost it for me.
> 
> Right it wasnt a 'smiley' (emoticon) but it was coded in Base 64
> Base 64 literally means a positional numbering system using a base of 
> 64. It is the largest power of two base that can be represented using 
> only printable ASCII characters
> 
> since all the data in such a file can be represented using only 
> printable ASCII characters, then its not a binary, its a base 64 file.
> Interesting that it can contain a gif or image tho
So, how does one send a gif in base64 and make it appear as an image 
when its posted?
0
gwtc
1/18/2006 9:09:34 AM
gwtc wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> 
>> gwtc wrote:
>>
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>>>> message, and which group it was in?
>>>
>>> This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
>>
>>
>> Doesnt matter now, Jim was kind enough to repost it for me.
>>
>> Right it wasnt a 'smiley' (emoticon) but it was coded in Base 64
>> Base 64 literally means a positional numbering system using a base of 
>> 64. It is the largest power of two base that can be represented using 
>> only printable ASCII characters
>>
>> since all the data in such a file can be represented using only 
>> printable ASCII characters, then its not a binary, its a base 64 file.
>> Interesting that it can contain a gif or image tho
> So, how does one send a gif in base64 and make it appear as an image 
> when its posted?

I dont know <g> Ask Jim, he did it <g>
0
Moz
1/18/2006 9:32:09 AM
On 18.01.2006 09:32 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> gwtc wrote:
>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>> gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of 
>>>>> the message, and which group it was in?
>>>>
>>>> This newsgroup, Jim Scott, 16/01/06
>>>
>>>
>>> Doesnt matter now, Jim was kind enough to repost it for me.
>>>
>>> Right it wasnt a 'smiley' (emoticon) but it was coded in Base 64
>>> Base 64 literally means a positional numbering system using a base of 
>>> 64. It is the largest power of two base that can be represented using 
>>> only printable ASCII characters
>>>
>>> since all the data in such a file can be represented using only 
>>> printable ASCII characters, then its not a binary, its a base 64 file.
>>> Interesting that it can contain a gif or image tho
>> So, how does one send a gif in base64 and make it appear as an image 
>> when its posted?
> 
> I dont know <g> Ask Jim, he did it <g>

See http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/classic/titles/jimllfixit.shtml :-)

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 9:38:59 AM
Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> 
>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>
>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Gudmund 
>>>>>>> Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  �Q� 
>>>>>>>>>> to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they have
>>>>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly 
>>>>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper 
>>>>>>>>>> that your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet :-(
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas are 
>>>>>>>> obviously too binanary.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> BR,
>>>>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> reg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>>>>>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is that 
>>>>>> specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley 
>>>>>> into it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end 
>>>>>> elipse
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is 
>>>>>> nothing but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled) 
>>>>>> readers will render as a image.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a 
>>>>>> elispse )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the same as
>>>>>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>>>>>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link, making 
>>>>>> it blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but this one 
>>>>>> wont go anywhere of course)
>>>>>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>>>>>>
>>>>> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at 
>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>>>> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF file 
>>>>> attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through 
>>>>> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>>>>>
>>>>> BR,
>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk, 
>>>> Thunderbird doesnt know what to do with the file.
>>>> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide the 
>>>> group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the sender on 
>>>> the specific message
>>>>
>>>> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If the link doesn't work, the fault seems to be in Thunderbird.
>>>
>>> I went back to the post, right-clicked it in the messages list and 
>>> selected copy message location, then pasted it into my message. 
>>> AFAIR, I've done that many times before, and nobody had problems with 
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Hey, funny! I just tried clicking that link. Telling TB to open it in 
>>> TB results in nothing. Opening it with FF gives the interesting 
>>> result that the text body is visible in FF, and a new TB window opens 
>>> showing the .gif image in the message preview window...
>>>
>>> Why isn't this working? And since it doesn't now, how on earth did I 
>>> do it before, in secnews??? Do the server differences result in the 
>>> links being different? Will try in a few minutes!
>>>
>>> The .gif poster is Jim Scott, in this very thread in this very forum. 
>>> Since I've kept this message unmutilated from the smiley point on, 
>>> it's in there, close to the top:
>>>
>>> ">>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>  >>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>  >>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg"
>>>
>>> ...and now I'll have to go find out how on earth to easily give 
>>> cross-references to other messages in here with TB...
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Gudmund
>>
>>
>> Nope, doesn't work in secnews either. Opening with TB results in a 
>> short blink, opening in FF shows the intended message body, but from 
>> some local TEMP directory...
>>
>> So how should this be done properly from within TB? Surely, one should 
>> be able to point to other messages in a newsgroup within a standard TB?
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
> 
> 
> I think the extension Messageid will do that

But how is it done with Plain Vanilla TB? I have seen (and made) posts 
where clicking the link opens the corresponding message in TB, no 
extensions at all.

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 9:39:34 AM
Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>
>>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>>
>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 15:00, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused =20
>>>>>>>> Gudmund Areskoug to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:04 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 16.01.2006 11:46, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  =BB=
Q=AB=20
>>>>>>>>>>> to generate the following:? :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Please make test posts in mozilla.test, especially if they h=
ave
>>>>>>>>>>>> attachments.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> what "Test Posts" do you mean??  Jim's Smiley was perfectly=20
>>>>>>>>>>> legimate here, *and* in context!  DO NOT try to be one-upper =

>>>>>>>>>>> that your prime enemy Chris!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sadly, my reply with banana attachment hasn't come through yet=
=20
>>>>>>>>>> :-(
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Some binaries are more or less binary than others? Banananas=20
>>>>>>>>> are obviously too binanary.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BR,
>>>>>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> .... too (many)  "Banananas"  *lol*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> reg
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sheesh, Smileys ARE NOT binaries!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Smileys are SLIGHT OF HAND, period, no images are sent.
>>>>>>> IF the recipient has Smileys enabled then ALL that occurrs is=20
>>>>>>> that specific text is rendered as a smiley!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, this is a plain text message, but I can get a smiley=
=20
>>>>>>> into it simply by typing :)     a full colon followed by and end =

>>>>>>> elipse
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Reg's bananas are a GIF, and therefor a binary. A SMILEY is=20
>>>>>>> nothing but plain text, that smiley enabled (emoticon enabled)=20
>>>>>>> readers will render as a image.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ;)  is a smiley but its really just a full colon : followed by a =

>>>>>>> elispse )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the same as
>>>>>>> http://this.is.not.a.link/but.looks.like.one
>>>>>>> sleight of hand is all, the reader interprets it as a link,=20
>>>>>>> making it blue (depending on settings) and even clickable (but=20
>>>>>>> this one wont go anywhere of course)
>>>>>>> news://not.a.news.server/but.looks.like.one
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>> mailto:this.is.not.a.real.email@so.dont.mail.me.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you're missing the point, Dan. Take a look at=20
>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.indiv=
idual.net=20
>>>>>> a bit further up in this thread, and you will indeed see a GIF=20
>>>>>> file attached, that got through to the newsgroup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's what the fuss is about (by now), one GIF making it through =

>>>>>> (smiley), but not the other one (animated bananas).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BR,
>>>>>> Gudmund
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I click on that and all I get is an offer to save to disk,=20
>>>>> Thunderbird doesnt know what to do with the file.
>>>>> If you want to direct me to a specific post, then PLEASE provide=20
>>>>> the group it is in (this one I presume?) and the name for the=20
>>>>> sender on the specific message
>>>>>
>>>>> I dont see a gif in this newsgroup
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If the link doesn't work, the fault seems to be in Thunderbird.
>>>>
>>>> I went back to the post, right-clicked it in the messages list and=20
>>>> selected copy message location, then pasted it into my message.=20
>>>> AFAIR, I've done that many times before, and nobody had problems=20
>>>> with it.
>>>>
>>>> Hey, funny! I just tried clicking that link. Telling TB to open it=20
>>>> in TB results in nothing. Opening it with FF gives the interesting=20
>>>> result that the text body is visible in FF, and a new TB window=20
>>>> opens showing the .gif image in the message preview window...
>>>>
>>>> Why isn't this working? And since it doesn't now, how on earth did I=
=20
>>>> do it before, in secnews??? Do the server differences result in the =

>>>> links being different? Will try in a few minutes!
>>>>
>>>> The .gif poster is Jim Scott, in this very thread in this very=20
>>>> forum. Since I've kept this message unmutilated from the smiley=20
>>>> point on, it's in there, close to the top:
>>>>
>>>> ">>>>>>>> Jim Scott <mr.jimscott@Xvirgin.net> wrote in
>>>>  >>>>>>>> <news:16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net>:
>>>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>>>  >>>>>>>>> I'm trying now to send a smiley.jpg"
>>>>
>>>> ...and now I'll have to go find out how on earth to easily give=20
>>>> cross-references to other messages in here with TB...
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>> Gudmund
>>>
>>>
>>> Nope, doesn't work in secnews either. Opening with TB results in a=20
>>> short blink, opening in FF shows the intended message body, but from =

>>> some local TEMP directory...
>>>
>>> So how should this be done properly from within TB? Surely, one=20
>>> should be able to point to other messages in a newsgroup within a=20
>>> standard TB?
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Gudmund
>>
>>
>> I think the extension Messageid will do that
>=20
> But how is it done with Plain Vanilla TB? I have seen (and made) posts =

> where clicking the link opens the corresponding message in TB, no=20
> extensions at all.
>=20
> BR,
> Gudmund

I never have, so I dont have any idea
0
Moz
1/18/2006 9:55:57 AM
"Moz Champion (Dan)" <moz.champion@sympatico.ca> wrote in
<news:domdnbIOOOY6Y1DeRVn-vQ@mozilla.org>:

> So, it seems that Base 64 coding is exempt from the 'no binaries'
> rule solely because it can be done on a ASCII text only basis.

That's not the key.  The only way to attach any binary to a newsgroup
post (to any server) is to encode it as ASCII.  "To post a binary" is
just a shorthand way of saying "to post an ASCII encoding of a binary".
E.g., all those bananas that were posted to the Netscape server were
encoded as ASCII.

FWIW, this is true of e-mail attachments as well.  The transport
mechanisms for e-mail and news just don't allow for transmission of raw
binaries, so various ASCII encodings have been devised over the years.

-- 
�Q�
0
ISO
1/18/2006 5:46:43 PM
�Q� <boxcars@gmx.net> wrote in
�<news:MrQ974F77D224FB2itsmeitsQ@QsFQDN.dyndns.org>:

> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <moz.champion@sympatico.ca> wrote in
> <news:domdnbIOOOY6Y1DeRVn-vQ@mozilla.org>:
>
>> So, it seems that Base 64 coding is exempt from the 'no binaries'
>> rule solely because it can be done on a ASCII text only basis.
>
> That's not the key.  The only way to attach any binary to a
> newsgroup post (to any server) is to encode it as ASCII.  "To post
> a binary" is just a shorthand way of saying "to post an ASCII
> encoding of a binary". E.g., all those bananas that were posted to
> the Netscape server were encoded as ASCII.

A little more on this.  I can't find any of the bananas on the old
server, but he recently posted several jpegs of hell freezing
over/under and a jpeg of a plane and runway.  All were
base64-encoded.

-- 
�Q�
0
ISO
1/18/2006 6:04:53 PM
On 18.01.2006 09:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Herb to 
generate the following:? :

> On 18.01.2006 08:33 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>
>> Herb wrote:
>>
>>> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it 
>>>>>>>>>>> opens the message in Firefox here, although I never really 
>>>>>>>>>>> understood why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I 
>>>>>>>>>>> had read somewhere that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that 
>>>>>>>>>>> there is an extension or something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly 
>>>>>>>>> I should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit 
>>>>>>>>> too fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>>>>>>> Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org 
>>>>>>>> and the message you're on should change to the message of the 
>>>>>>>> link:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the 
>>>>>>> link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer 
>>>>>>> clickable)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking 
>>>>>> about.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, 
>>>>> when I get there the header looks slightly different from what it 
>>>>> looks like normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You mean this:
>>>>
>>>> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>>> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>>> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>>> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
>>>
>>> I mean this: 
>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, which 
>>> is different (in fact significantly different in several ways!) from 
>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
>>>
>> I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to do 
>> with your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and how did 
>> you see the other?
>
>
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png is how I 
> normally see the headers in this group.
>
> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png is how I 
> see it after following a link with MessageID-Finder.
>
Herbert

what I think is that Message ID-Finder  links you to a *COPY* of the 
message - neither editable nor replyable.  You possibly have the 
opportunity to note the location (date, thread or whatever) and then - 
in original TB mode - look for that location!

Dunno for sure, but that's how it seems to me!

reg
0
squaredancer
1/18/2006 8:58:56 PM
On 18.01.2006 20:58 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
> On 18.01.2006 09:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Herb to 
> generate the following:? :
> 
>> On 18.01.2006 08:33 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it 
>>>>>>>>>>>> opens the message in Firefox here, although I never really 
>>>>>>>>>>>> understood why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I 
>>>>>>>>>>>> had read somewhere that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that 
>>>>>>>>>>>> there is an extension or something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly 
>>>>>>>>>> I should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit 
>>>>>>>>>> too fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>>>>>>>> Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org 
>>>>>>>>> and the message you're on should change to the message of the 
>>>>>>>>> link:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow the 
>>>>>>>> link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no longer 
>>>>>>>> clickable)?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking 
>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, 
>>>>>> when I get there the header looks slightly different from what it 
>>>>>> looks like normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean this:
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>>>> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>>>> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>>>> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
>>>>
>>>> I mean this: 
>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, which 
>>>> is different (in fact significantly different in several ways!) from 
>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
>>>>
>>> I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to do 
>>> with your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and how did 
>>> you see the other?
>>
>>
>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png is how I 
>> normally see the headers in this group.
>>
>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png is how I 
>> see it after following a link with MessageID-Finder.
>>
> Herbert
> 
> what I think is that Message ID-Finder  links you to a *COPY* of the 
> message - neither editable nor replyable.  You possibly have the 
> opportunity to note the location (date, thread or whatever) and then - 
> in original TB mode - look for that location!
> 
> Dunno for sure, but that's how it seems to me!
> 
> reg

Hi Reg,

seems a reasonable interpretation, but where is this copy located???

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/18/2006 9:00:56 PM
On 18.01.2006 09:50, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion 
(Dan) to generate the following:? :

> Herb wrote:
>
>> On 17.01.2006 23:52 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through 
>>>>>>>> while others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and 
>>>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact 
>>>>>> manage to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, 
>>>>>> whereas others failed to send attachments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF 
>>>>> but
>>>>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being 
>>>>> passed and
>>>>> others are ... dunno.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, it was gif alright - see 
>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>>> message, and which group it was in?
>>
>>
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> sorry about confusing the issue by introducing "Geordie Jim" (I hope 
>> Jim didn't mind :-) ).
>>
>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
>> message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
>> doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
>> had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
>> fixes it?
>>
>
> TB puts up a dialog asking me what to do with the file here. Both on 
> 1.0.7 and 1.5. I dont have the messageid extension installed. Never 
> thought of telling it to open in Firefox.
>
> Well, hey, it does open in Firefox, tho the GIF cant be seen there 
> (broken image icon)
>
> So the reason I couldnt open it was that I never thought of using 
> Firefox to see a news message <g>

opens *two* FF windows here - one with the message and the second with 
the attachment-gif
How do you have FF set to handle GIFs ??

reg
0
squaredancer
1/18/2006 9:01:52 PM
�Q� wrote:
> "Moz Champion (Dan)" <moz.champion@sympatico.ca> wrote in
> <news:domdnbIOOOY6Y1DeRVn-vQ@mozilla.org>:
> 
>>So, it seems that Base 64 coding is exempt from the 'no binaries'
>>rule solely because it can be done on a ASCII text only basis.
> 
> That's not the key.  The only way to attach any binary to a newsgroup
> post (to any server) is to encode it as ASCII.  "To post a binary" is
> just a shorthand way of saying "to post an ASCII encoding of a binary".
> E.g., all those bananas that were posted to the Netscape server were
> encoded as ASCII.
> 
> FWIW, this is true of e-mail attachments as well.  The transport
> mechanisms for e-mail and news just don't allow for transmission of raw
> binaries, so various ASCII encodings have been devised over the years.

....so how come one (smiley) got through, but not the other (bananas)?

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 9:45:10 PM
squaredancer wrote:
> On 18.01.2006 09:50, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion 
> (Dan) to generate the following:? :
> 
>> Herb wrote:
>>
>>> On 17.01.2006 23:52 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through 
>>>>>>>>> while others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and 
>>>>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>>>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dan,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact 
>>>>>>> manage to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, 
>>>>>>> whereas others failed to send attachments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF 
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being 
>>>>>> passed and
>>>>>> others are ... dunno.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it was gif alright - see 
>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>>>> message, and which group it was in?
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> sorry about confusing the issue by introducing "Geordie Jim" (I hope 
>>> Jim didn't mind :-) ).
>>>
>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
>>> message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
>>> doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
>>> had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
>>> fixes it?
>>>
>>
>> TB puts up a dialog asking me what to do with the file here. Both on 
>> 1.0.7 and 1.5. I dont have the messageid extension installed. Never 
>> thought of telling it to open in Firefox.
>>
>> Well, hey, it does open in Firefox, tho the GIF cant be seen there 
>> (broken image icon)
>>
>> So the reason I couldnt open it was that I never thought of using 
>> Firefox to see a news message <g>
> 
> opens *two* FF windows here - one with the message and the second with 
> the attachment-gif
> How do you have FF set to handle GIFs ??
> 
> reg

Since Firefox handles gifs internally, how would I change such?
0
Moz
1/18/2006 9:45:16 PM
squaredancer wrote:
> On 18.01.2006 09:50, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Moz Champion 
> (Dan) to generate the following:? :
>> Herb wrote:
>>
>>> On 17.01.2006 23:52 UK Time, Moz Champion (Dan) wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>>>> But the question remain, how did Jim Scott's pic get through 
>>>>>>>>> while others can't?  I've tried both gif and jpg formats and 
>>>>>>>>> nothing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A smiley isnt a binary, its plain text that is interpreted as an 
>>>>>>>> emoticon in so enabled readers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dan,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the point of this discussion is that "Geordie Jim" did in fact 
>>>>>>> manage to send a smiley in the form of the gif attachment, 
>>>>>>> whereas others failed to send attachments.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I missed his post, could it be that the file extension wasn't .GIF 
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> rather .ICO or whatever? Maybe certain filetypes aren't being 
>>>>>> passed and
>>>>>> others are ... dunno.
>>>>>>
>>>>> No, it was gif alright - see 
>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/16rh4cmvn9vmd.dlg@ID-104726.news.individual.net 
>>>>>
>>>> Doesnt do a thing for me... Can you provide the Sender 'name' of the 
>>>> message, and which group it was in?
>>>>
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> sorry about confusing the issue by introducing "Geordie Jim" (I hope 
>>> Jim didn't mind :-) ).
>>>
>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it opens the 
>>> message in Firefox here, although I never really understood why it 
>>> doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I had read somewhere that this 
>>> had been fixed in 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
>>> fixes it?
>>>
>> TB puts up a dialog asking me what to do with the file here. Both on 
>> 1.0.7 and 1.5. I dont have the messageid extension installed. Never 
>> thought of telling it to open in Firefox.
>>
>> Well, hey, it does open in Firefox, tho the GIF cant be seen there 
>> (broken image icon)
>>
>> So the reason I couldnt open it was that I never thought of using 
>> Firefox to see a news message <g>
>>
> opens *two* FF windows here - one with the message and the second with 
> the attachment-gif
> How do you have FF set to handle GIFs ??
> 
> reg

Soon, someone'll come along with yet another way that message and gif 
were handled! I had FF open the text part, while TB showed me only the 
gif, and I sure don't have TB set as standard app for handling gif!

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/18/2006 9:48:48 PM
Gudmund Areskoug <"fta at algonet dot se"> wrote in
<news:FumdnWXgIIDDK1PenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@mozilla.org>:

> �Q� wrote:

>> That's not the key.  The only way to attach any binary to a
>> newsgroup post (to any server) is to encode it as ASCII.
>
> ...so how come one (smiley) got through, but not the other
> (bananas)?

I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill(file) you.  ;)

Seriously, I think I have a decent theory about how Giganews' binaries
filters work, but I don't think it's a good idea to post it.

-- 
�Q�
0
ISO
1/18/2006 11:45:53 PM
�Q� wrote:
> Gudmund Areskoug <"fta at algonet dot se"> wrote in
> <news:FumdnWXgIIDDK1PenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@mozilla.org>:
> 
>> �Q� wrote:
> 
>>> That's not the key.  The only way to attach any binary to a
>>> newsgroup post (to any server) is to encode it as ASCII.
>>
>> ...so how come one (smiley) got through, but not the other
>> (bananas)?
> 
> I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill(file) you.  ;)
> 
> Seriously, I think I have a decent theory about how Giganews' binaries
> filters work, but I don't think it's a good idea to post it.

Yes or no.  Anything to do with size?

Rinaldi
-- 
Gravity is a myth, the Earth sucks.
0
Rinaldi
1/19/2006 12:21:46 AM
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:45:53 -0600, �Q� wrote:

> Gudmund Areskoug <"fta at algonet dot se"> wrote in
> <news:FumdnWXgIIDDK1PenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@mozilla.org>:
> 
>> �Q� wrote:
> 
>>> That's not the key.  The only way to attach any binary to a
>>> newsgroup post (to any server) is to encode it as ASCII.
>>
>> ...so how come one (smiley) got through, but not the other
>> (bananas)?
> 
> I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill(file) you.  ;)
> 
> Seriously, I think I have a decent theory about how Giganews' binaries
> filters work, but I don't think it's a good idea to post it.

I have tried several types on mozilla.test if it helps your theory or should
that be hypothesis :o)
-- 
Jim 
         Tyneside UK
0
Jim
1/19/2006 12:33:23 AM
�Q� wrote:
> Gudmund Areskoug <"fta at algonet dot se"> wrote in
> <news:FumdnWXgIIDDK1PenZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@mozilla.org>:
>>�Q� wrote:
> 
>>>That's not the key.  The only way to attach any binary to a
>>>newsgroup post (to any server) is to encode it as ASCII.
>>
>>...so how come one (smiley) got through, but not the other
>>(bananas)?
> 
> I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill(file) you.  ;)

:-D

> Seriously, I think I have a decent theory about how Giganews' binaries
> filters work, but I don't think it's a good idea to post it.

you're probably right.

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/19/2006 9:47:12 AM
On 18.01.2006 21:00 UK Time, Herb wrote:
> On 18.01.2006 20:58 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>> On 18.01.2006 09:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Herb to 
>> generate the following:? :
>>
>>> On 18.01.2006 08:33 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>
>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> opens the message in Firefox here, although I never really 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> understood why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> had read somewhere that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is an extension or something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what exactly 
>>>>>>>>>>> I should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit 
>>>>>>>>>>> too fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see Find 
>>>>>>>>>> Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on news.mozilla.org 
>>>>>>>>>> and the message you're on should change to the message of the 
>>>>>>>>>> link:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow 
>>>>>>>>> the link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no 
>>>>>>>>> longer clickable)?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're talking 
>>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, 
>>>>>>> when I get there the header looks slightly different from what it 
>>>>>>> looks like normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>>>>> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>>>>> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>>>>> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean this: 
>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, which 
>>>>> is different (in fact significantly different in several ways!) 
>>>>> from http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
>>>>>
>>>> I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to do 
>>>> with your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and how 
>>>> did you see the other?
>>>
>>>
>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png is how I 
>>> normally see the headers in this group.
>>>
>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png is how I 
>>> see it after following a link with MessageID-Finder.
>>>
>> Herbert
>>
>> what I think is that Message ID-Finder  links you to a *COPY* of the 
>> message - neither editable nor replyable.  You possibly have the 
>> opportunity to note the location (date, thread or whatever) and then - 
>> in original TB mode - look for that location!
>>
>> Dunno for sure, but that's how it seems to me!
>>
>> reg
> 
> Hi Reg,
> 
> seems a reasonable interpretation, but where is this copy located???
> 

Opening a message link without Message ID-Finder, i.e. via FF, gives a 
clue - the following is an example of what appears in the address bar: 
file:///C:/DOCUME~1/HERBER~1/LOCALS~1/Temp/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org.htm

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/19/2006 3:18:46 PM
Herb wrote:
> On 18.01.2006 21:00 UK Time, Herb wrote:
> 
>> On 18.01.2006 20:58 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>
>>> On 18.01.2006 09:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Herb to 
>>> generate the following:? :
>>>
>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:33 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opens the message in Firefox here, although I never really 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understood why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I thought I 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had read somewhere that this had been fixed in 1.5 or that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is an extension or something that fixes it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what 
>>>>>>>>>>>> exactly I should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit 
>>>>>>>>>>>> too fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see 
>>>>>>>>>>> Find Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on 
>>>>>>>>>>> news.mozilla.org and the message you're on should change to 
>>>>>>>>>>> the message of the link:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow 
>>>>>>>>>> the link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no 
>>>>>>>>>> longer clickable)?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're 
>>>>>>>>> talking about.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, 
>>>>>>>> when I get there the header looks slightly different from what 
>>>>>>>> it looks like normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You mean this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>>>>>> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>>>>>> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I mean this: 
>>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, which 
>>>>>> is different (in fact significantly different in several ways!) 
>>>>>> from http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
>>>>>>
>>>>> I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to do 
>>>>> with your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and how 
>>>>> did you see the other?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png is how 
>>>> I normally see the headers in this group.
>>>>
>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png is how I 
>>>> see it after following a link with MessageID-Finder.
>>>>
>>> Herbert
>>>
>>> what I think is that Message ID-Finder  links you to a *COPY* of the 
>>> message - neither editable nor replyable.  You possibly have the 
>>> opportunity to note the location (date, thread or whatever) and then 
>>> - in original TB mode - look for that location!
>>>
>>> Dunno for sure, but that's how it seems to me!
>>>
>>> reg
>>
>>
>> Hi Reg,
>>
>> seems a reasonable interpretation, but where is this copy located???
>>
> 
> Opening a message link without Message ID-Finder, i.e. via FF, gives a 
> clue - the following is an example of what appears in the address bar: 
> file:///C:/DOCUME~1/HERBER~1/LOCALS~1/Temp/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org.htm 

Herbert, take a look at the link: file:///...

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/19/2006 4:53:18 PM
On 19.01.2006 16:53 UK Time, Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
> Herb wrote:
>> On 18.01.2006 21:00 UK Time, Herb wrote:
>>
>>> On 18.01.2006 20:58 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18.01.2006 09:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Herb to 
>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>
>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:33 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it opens the message in Firefox here, although I never 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really understood why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought I had read somewhere that this had been fixed in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that fixes 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> exactly I should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a bit 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> too fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Find Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on 
>>>>>>>>>>>> news.mozilla.org and the message you're on should change to 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the message of the link:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow 
>>>>>>>>>>> the link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no 
>>>>>>>>>>> longer clickable)?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're 
>>>>>>>>>> talking about.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, 
>>>>>>>>> when I get there the header looks slightly different from what 
>>>>>>>>> it looks like normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You mean this:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>>>>>>> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>>>>>>> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I mean this: 
>>>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, 
>>>>>>> which is different (in fact significantly different in several 
>>>>>>> ways!) from 
>>>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to do 
>>>>>> with your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and how 
>>>>>> did you see the other?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png is how 
>>>>> I normally see the headers in this group.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png is how 
>>>>> I see it after following a link with MessageID-Finder.
>>>>>
>>>> Herbert
>>>>
>>>> what I think is that Message ID-Finder  links you to a *COPY* of the 
>>>> message - neither editable nor replyable.  You possibly have the 
>>>> opportunity to note the location (date, thread or whatever) and then 
>>>> - in original TB mode - look for that location!
>>>>
>>>> Dunno for sure, but that's how it seems to me!
>>>>
>>>> reg
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Reg,
>>>
>>> seems a reasonable interpretation, but where is this copy located???
>>>
>>
>> Opening a message link without Message ID-Finder, i.e. via FF, gives a 
>> clue - the following is an example of what appears in the address bar: 
>> file:///C:/DOCUME~1/HERBER~1/LOCALS~1/Temp/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org.htm 
> 
> 
> Herbert, take a look at the link: file:///...
> 
> BR,
> Gudmund

Indeed, but that's what it says - what can we conclude from this?

-- 
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
0
Herb
1/19/2006 4:57:28 PM
Herb wrote:
> On 19.01.2006 16:53 UK Time, Gudmund Areskoug wrote:
>> Herb wrote:
>>> On 18.01.2006 21:00 UK Time, Herb wrote:
>>>> On 18.01.2006 20:58 UK Time, squaredancer wrote:
>>>>> On 18.01.2006 09:34, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Herb to 
>>>>> generate the following:? :
>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:33 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:11 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 08:02 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:43 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18.01.2006 07:07 UK Time, gwtc wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Herb wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure why the link doesn't do anything for you - 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it opens the message in Firefox here, although I never 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really understood why it doesn't open in Thunderbird. I 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought I had read somewhere that this had been fixed in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.5 or that there is an extension or something that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message id finder does wonderful things like this: 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks - I installed it, but I'm not really sure what 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exactly I should/can do with it (the screenshot at 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://messageidfinder.mozdev.org/screenshots.html is a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bit too fuzzy and therefore not very enlightening :-( )
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mouse over the link below, right click and you should see 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Find Message by ID.  Click on that, then click on 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news.mozilla.org and the message you're on should change to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the message of the link:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news://news.mozilla.org:119/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Splendid, thank you :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a reason why the header 'goes funny' after I follow 
>>>>>>>>>>>> the link (i.e. the font changes, and the From address is no 
>>>>>>>>>>>> longer clickable)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I can't help you cause I have no idea what you're 
>>>>>>>>>>> talking about.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If I follow a link to a news message in the way you described, 
>>>>>>>>>> when I get there the header looks slightly different from what 
>>>>>>>>>> it looks like normally - does it look the same for you?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not a big deal really, I'm just curious.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps I better take a screenshot?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You mean this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [OT] PS PS PSsnipping allowed?
>>>>>>>>> From: gwtc <TheNewGWTC@pppmppfmpfmmmmfmmmpfmmpp.pppmppfmp>
>>>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 23:07:04 -0800
>>>>>>>>> Newsgroups: mozilla.support.firefox
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Difficult to say in txt mode :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I mean this: 
>>>>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png, 
>>>>>>>> which is different (in fact significantly different in several 
>>>>>>>> ways!) from 
>>>>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I get the first one, but then again, it might have something to 
>>>>>>> do with your font settings.  I guess.  Which one do you see, and 
>>>>>>> how did you see the other?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header2.png is 
>>>>>> how I normally see the headers in this group.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/herb.eppel_new/temp/Header.png is how 
>>>>>> I see it after following a link with MessageID-Finder.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Herbert
>>>>>
>>>>> what I think is that Message ID-Finder  links you to a *COPY* of 
>>>>> the message - neither editable nor replyable.  You possibly have 
>>>>> the opportunity to note the location (date, thread or whatever) and 
>>>>> then - in original TB mode - look for that location!
>>>>>
>>>>> Dunno for sure, but that's how it seems to me!
>>>>>
>>>>> reg
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Reg,
>>>>
>>>> seems a reasonable interpretation, but where is this copy located???
>>>>
>>> Opening a message link without Message ID-Finder, i.e. via FF, gives 
>>> a clue - the following is an example of what appears in the address 
>>> bar: 
>>> file:///C:/DOCUME~1/HERBER~1/LOCALS~1/Temp/m-qdnfYF5vCZdVDeRVn-hw@mozilla.org.htm 
>>>
>> Herbert, take a look at the link: file:///...
>>
>> BR,
>> Gudmund
>>
> Indeed, but that's what it says - what can we conclude from this?

Umm... that I need to read the thread more carefully, it seems.

BR,
Gudmund
0
Gudmund
1/24/2006 11:25:45 AM
god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
> 

So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?

I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).

Next you'll be telling me if I ever use the word "be" I can't use 
"you'll" in front of it.
0
Yeebok
8/5/2008 6:54:13 AM
god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi.
>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
> 
> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.

That's not snipping.  That's interposting.  A combination of both is the 
  best policy.

<snip>

> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting

Or http://blinkynet.net/comp/toppost.html   :)


-- 
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed?  http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
0
Blinky
8/5/2008 7:40:39 AM
Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>>
> 
> So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
> whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
> posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
> complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?
> 
> I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
> rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
> examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).

It's a great world, isn't it?  I mean, you can also read books from the 
end back to the beginning if you like.


-- 
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed?  http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
0
Blinky
8/5/2008 7:42:42 AM
god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi.
>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
> 
> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.
> 
>> 	Also, how about top posts?  Since I mainly follow the replies, how 
>> about reading the next reply at the top, instead of having to scroll to 
>> the bottom to get the next reply?
> 
> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
> 
Bottom posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult for 
many others. It is a personal preference like many other things in life. 
The preferred method for this group is to intersperse your replies after 
the question that you are answering. Also to judiciously "snip" 
extraneous text. The only authoritative for any group is first and 
foremost the published preferences for the group or lacking that 
accepted practice. If you are the only one top posting then it is 
courtesy to conform to the accepted practice of the group.


Regards
Keith
0
Keith
8/5/2008 7:56:22 AM
Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>>
> 
> So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
> whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
> posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
> complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?
> 
> I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
> rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
> examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).
> 
> Next you'll be telling me if I ever use the word "be" I can't use 
> "you'll" in front of it.
No it means that you are being an inconsiderate boar that has no respect 
for the people who donate there time to help other users or for the 
published policies of this group.

Regards
Keith
0
Keith
8/5/2008 8:03:57 AM
I'm not answering you because you bottom posted. :)

That said, often the previous message is also 75% stuff you read the day 
before. I mean we're not goldfish are we ? If you can't remember you can 
always read the old part (again and again).

squaredancer wrote:
> On 05.08.2008 09:42, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Blinky the 
> Shark to generate the following:? :
>> Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
>>> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:

>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>>>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>>>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting

>>> So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
>>> whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
>>> posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
>>> complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?

>>> I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
>>> rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
>>> examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).

>> It's a great world, isn't it?  I mean, you can also read books from 
>> the end back to the beginning if you like.

> But Blinky - isn't that like knowing "Who Dunnit" before you know 
> "What-they-did" ??
> I mean, knowing the answer to a question before the question has been 
> asked... that would get *really* boring, wouldn't it ;-)
> 
> reg
> ps
> thought you might like this one... gruesome
> http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/sharkweek/video-player/video-player.html 
> 
0
Yeebok
8/5/2008 11:34:19 AM
So I can't have an overall comment at the start .. like how stupid this 
whole argument is .. don't take this personally, it's intended to 
illustrate the point.

Blinky the Shark wrote:
> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi.
>>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>>
>> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.
> 
> That's not snipping.  That's interposting.  A combination of both is the 
>  best policy.

Then add an opinion here by interposting however to be pedantic I would 
prefer "interspersing" - as my comments are then interspersed throughout 
your text. I also think you may have meant "intraposting" but that's 
true pedantry so you can ignore it. :)

> 
> <snip>

trim some text but add 3 lines to make up for it ? :)

> 
>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
> 
> Or http://blinkynet.net/comp/toppost.html   :)
> 
> 

Then add a summary

Now how screwed up is the precious thread once a few people do that ?

I mean *really*.
0
Yeebok
8/5/2008 11:38:05 AM
god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi.
>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>>     
>
> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.
>
>   
>> 	Also, how about top posts?  Since I mainly follow the replies, how 
>> about reading the next reply at the top, instead of having to scroll to 
>> the bottom to get the next reply?
>>     
>
> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>   

I used to be a devout top poster, however, after seeing several of these 
discussions about the evils/benefits of top/bottom posting, I've come to 
this simple decision:

       1.  When reading anything, we read from top to bottom.  We begin 
at the top of a page and read down.
       2.  Paragraphs are not arranged from bottom to the top as follows:

                   I sure did sleep well though.
                   Yes.  All over the state.
                   Hail?  I didn't realize it had stormed.
                   Good, because it stormed last night with hail.
                   They're in the garage.
                   Did you put the cars in the driveway or in the garage?
                   They are on the hall desk.
                   Where are the car keys?

Considering how this top post conversation sounds, here's the questions 
that come to mind:
        That is one OVERweight or sleasy individual to be able to sleep 
all over the state.
        I'd like to see the garage full of hail.
        I'll betcha they can't drive the cars off the hall desk.
        I'd like to know how they got them up there in the first place.

See how difficult it is to read this;  not to mention understand it?  No 
wonder we sometimes misunderstand what someone needs and what they've done.
It must be from top to bottom to make sense.

Again the nature of writing is top to bottom, left to right.  A writer 
doesn't finish the first part last....   he writes the last part last.

Joseph



0
Joseph
8/5/2008 11:41:55 AM
Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>>
> 
> So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
> whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
> posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
> complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?
> 
> I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
> rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
> examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).
> 
> Next you'll be telling me if I ever use the word "be" I can't use 
> "you'll" in front of it.


Use the QuoteCollapse add-on and your problem is solved.
Regards,    Maurice
0
Maurice
8/5/2008 12:17:28 PM
Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi.
>>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>>
>> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.
>>
>>>     Also, how about top posts?  Since I mainly follow the replies, 
>>> how about reading the next reply at the top, instead of having to 
>>> scroll to the bottom to get the next reply?
>>
>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>>
> Bottom posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult for 
> many others. It is a personal preference like many other things in life. 
> The preferred method for this group is to intersperse your replies after 
> the question that you are answering. Also to judiciously "snip" 
> extraneous text. The only authoritative for any group is first and 
> foremost the published preferences for the group or lacking that 
> accepted practice. If you are the only one top posting then it is 
> courtesy to conform to the accepted practice of the group.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Keith

Bottom posting is the preferred method in this group.  Interspersed 
posts are harder to read, but if a post has multiple questions, then 
interspersed answers are easier to relate to the question, and are 
acceptable.  Top posting is discouraged as a mix of bottom and top 
posting is very hard for anyone to follow.
0
Ron
8/5/2008 12:34:00 PM
On 05.08.2008 06:34, Yeebok Shu'in wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> squaredancer wrote:
>> On 05.08.2008 09:42, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Blinky the 
>> Shark to generate the following:? :
>>> Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
>>>> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
> 
>>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>>>>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>>>>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
> 
>>>> So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
>>>> whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
>>>> posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
>>>> complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?
> 
>>>> I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
>>>> rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
>>>> examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).
> 
>>> It's a great world, isn't it?  I mean, you can also read books from 
>>> the end back to the beginning if you like.
> 
>> But Blinky - isn't that like knowing "Who Dunnit" before you know 
>> "What-they-did" ??
>> I mean, knowing the answer to a question before the question has been 
>> asked... that would get *really* boring, wouldn't it ;-)
>> 
>> reg
>> ps
>> thought you might like this one... gruesome
>> http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/sharkweek/video-player/video-player.html 
>> 
> I'm not answering you because you bottom posted. :)
>
> That said, often the previous message is also 75% stuff you read the
> day before. I mean we're not goldfish are we ? If you can't remember
> you can always read the old part (again and again).

The published guidelines have been determined by years of experience in
support groups and are written by people accordingly as to the best
posting/reply methods. They are not "rules", just "guidelines" that make
it easier for those of us that provide free support reading and
answering thousands of posts monthly. We don't get paid for this service.

To not answer a question/reply because it's top or bottom posted is not
the way but posting against the guidelines makes it harder and more time
consuming to do so which can result in another poster with a question to
not get that answer because it takes too long for the responder to
figure out the confusion of a mis-aligned reply/post, etc. Following the
established guidelines is not only demonstrating courtesy to the
responder but also to the rest of the reading community as well.

You mention that you would rather read/post a top-posted answer. Well,
that's fine IF the thread is short and the answer is posted directly
above the related reply/post, etc. What if the answer at the top relates
to a reply that is buried several sections down the page and out of
sight? So you're going to scroll down the page to find the section you
want to reply to and then scroll back up to the top to post your answer?
What then happens to a reader coming in to the thread for the first time
sees that top-posted answer which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever
to the post directly below it and now has to scroll endlessly down the
thread to find the realted reply/question, etc. However, if the thread
follows convention then that reader can follow the issue from the first
post down the thread in chronological order.

All in all, it's not a question of "I'm going to do it MY way" but
rather having the courtesy of following guidelines that have been
predetermined to be the best way to provide much needed support.





-- 
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
0
Jay
8/5/2008 12:44:33 PM
On 05.08.2008 02:56, Keith N. McKenna wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi.
>>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>> 
>> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.
>> 
>>> 	Also, how about top posts?  Since I mainly follow the replies, how 
>>> about reading the next reply at the top, instead of having to scroll to 
>>> the bottom to get the next reply?
>> 
>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>> 
> Bottom posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult for 
> many others. It is a personal preference like many other things in life. 
> The preferred method for this group is to intersperse your replies after 
> the question that you are answering. Also to judiciously "snip" 
> extraneous text. The only authoritative for any group is first and 
> foremost the published preferences for the group or lacking that 
> accepted practice. If you are the only one top posting then it is 
> courtesy to conform to the accepted practice of the group.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Keith

"Annoying" ??? A top-posted reply in a mega-thread is most times quite
confusing when attempting to find the particular section related. Bottom
posting is keeping the thread in chronological order which is MOST
important in a support venue. On a 20 question essay type exam, where do
you post your answers? :-)

-- 
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
0
Jay
8/5/2008 12:53:11 PM
On 05.08.2008 06:38, Yeebok Shu'in wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

>> That's not snipping.  That's interposting.  A combination of both is the 
>>  best policy.
> 
> Then add an opinion here by interposting however to be pedantic I would 
> prefer "interspersing" - as my comments are then interspersed throughout 
> your text. I also think you may have meant "intraposting" but that's 
> true pedantry so you can ignore it. :)

Interspersing is a most accepted method of providing support in a
multi-reply thread as it lends continuity and chronology to the thread
keeping it in the proper flow.

> Then add a summary

Not really the best way. Keeping the thread intact in the order posted
is best.

> Now how screwed up is the precious thread once a few people do that ?

That's the point. Following the guidelines will not screw up the thread.

> I mean *really*.

Right, "really"!!

-- 
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
0
Jay
8/5/2008 1:03:46 PM
Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
> So I can't have an overall comment at the start .. like how stupid this 
> whole argument is .. don't take this personally, it's intended to 
> illustrate the point.
>
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>   
>> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>>     
>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Hi.
>>>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>>>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>>>>         
>>> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.
>>>       
>> That's not snipping.  That's interposting.  A combination of both is the 
>>  best policy.
>>     
>
> Then add an opinion here by interposting however to be pedantic I would 
> prefer "interspersing" - as my comments are then interspersed throughout 
> your text. I also think you may have meant "intraposting" but that's 
> true pedantry so you can ignore it. :)
>
>   
>> <snip>
>>     
>
> trim some text but add 3 lines to make up for it ? :)
>
>   
>>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>>>       
>> Or http://blinkynet.net/comp/toppost.html   :)
>>
>>
>>     
>
> Then add a summary
>
> Now how screwed up is the precious thread once a few people do that ?
>
> I mean *really*

It wouldn't be worth as much as the remains of the trash I'd burned last 
evening.   <GRIN>



0
Joseph
8/5/2008 1:11:10 PM
Maurice wrote:
> Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
>   
>> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>>     
>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>>>
>>>       
>> So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
>> whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
>> posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
>> complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?
>>
>> I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
>> rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
>> examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).
>>
>> Next you'll be telling me if I ever use the word "be" I can't use 
>> "you'll" in front of it.
>>     
>
> Use the QuoteCollapse add-on and your problem is solved.
> Regards,    Mauric

I wonder how that would work with the interspersed, intermingled, 
interjected texts?  <GRIMACE>



0
Joseph
8/5/2008 1:13:47 PM
Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 05.08.2008 06:38, Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
>
>  --- Original Message ---
>
>   
>>> That's not snipping.  That's interposting.  A combination of both is the 
>>>  best policy.
>>>       
>> Then add an opinion here by interposting however to be pedantic I would 
>> prefer "interspersing" - as my comments are then interspersed throughout 
>> your text. I also think you may have meant "intraposting" but that's 
>> true pedantry so you can ignore it. :)
>>     
>
> Interspersing is a most accepted method of providing support in a
> multi-reply thread as it lends continuity and chronology to the thread
> keeping it in the proper flow.
>
>   
>> Then add a summary
>>     
>
> Not really the best way. Keeping the thread intact in the order posted
> is best.
>
>   
>> Now how screwed up is the precious thread once a few people do that ?
>>     
>
> That's the point. Following the guidelines will not screw up the thread.
>
>   
>> I mean *really*.
>>     
>
> Right, "really"!!
>   

Rather than interspersing and inter-whatever-else all through the post 
when there's multiple questions or issues, I tend to refer back and 
reply as follows:

Jay, you'd written that "Interspersing is a most accepted method of 
providing support in a multi-reply thread as it lends continuity and 
chronology to the thread keeping it in the proper flow."

That's ok for a single response, but when there's to be more responses 
and replies, then it can make it a jungle through which no one can 
pass.  Like Kudzu vines....   Grows fast, and makes passage through 
(understanding) impossible.

I think this is far better than intermingling replies....   and one can 
reply to two three or more individuals in the same reply.

Joseph


0
Joseph
8/5/2008 1:20:43 PM
On 05.08.2008 08:20, Joseph wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 05.08.2008 06:38, Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
>>
>>  --- Original Message ---
>>
>>   
>>>> That's not snipping.  That's interposting.  A combination of both is the 
>>>>  best policy.
>>>>       
>>> Then add an opinion here by interposting however to be pedantic I would 
>>> prefer "interspersing" - as my comments are then interspersed throughout 
>>> your text. I also think you may have meant "intraposting" but that's 
>>> true pedantry so you can ignore it. :)
>>>     
>>
>> Interspersing is a most accepted method of providing support in a
>> multi-reply thread as it lends continuity and chronology to the thread
>> keeping it in the proper flow.
>>
>>   
>>> Then add a summary
>>>     
>>
>> Not really the best way. Keeping the thread intact in the order posted
>> is best.
>>
>>   
>>> Now how screwed up is the precious thread once a few people do that ?
>>>     
>>
>> That's the point. Following the guidelines will not screw up the thread.
>>
>>   
>>> I mean *really*.
>>>     
>>
>> Right, "really"!!
>>   
> 
> Rather than interspersing and inter-whatever-else all through the post 
> when there's multiple questions or issues, I tend to refer back and 
> reply as follows:
> 
> Jay, you'd written that "Interspersing is a most accepted method of 
> providing support in a multi-reply thread as it lends continuity and 
> chronology to the thread keeping it in the proper flow."
> 
> That's ok for a single response, but when there's to be more responses 
> and replies, then it can make it a jungle through which no one can 
> pass.  Like Kudzu vines....   Grows fast, and makes passage through 
> (understanding) impossible.
> 
> I think this is far better than intermingling replies....   and one can 
> reply to two three or more individuals in the same reply.
> 
> Joseph
> 
> 

That's what arrow keys and the spacebar are for. <spacebar> scrolls one
page at a time and scrolling from top to bottom is more productve than
hunting as long as the thread is in chronoligical order and follows
convention(s). I've been doing this since 1995 when the Netscape Secure
Server came online and the first guidelines were written stressing the
point of non-snipping (in support threads) and keeping threads in
chronological order. Courtesy dictates and providing useful, easy to
follow threads.

-- 
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
0
Jay
8/5/2008 2:25:53 PM
squaredancer wrote:
> On 05.08.2008 09:42, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused  Blinky the 
> Shark to generate the following:? :
>> Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
>>   
>>> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>     
>>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>>>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Top posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult.
>>>> Don't do it. See http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting
>>>>
>>>>       
>>> So are people who force their viewpoints on others. Regardless of 
>>> whether this forum prefers, supports, donates to or whatever top 
>>> posters, does not mean you cannot top post. It just means jerks will 
>>> complain because they have a reason they can. That sum it up ?
>>>
>>> I personally would much prefer reading the newest stuff at the top, 
>>> rather than re-reading the entire thread every post (or having to 
>>> examine it to see what's been snipped in etc).
>>>     
>> It's a great world, isn't it?  I mean, you can also read books from the 
>> end back to the beginning if you like.
>>
> 
> But Blinky - isn't that like knowing "Who Dunnit" before you know 
> "What-they-did" ??

I believe you missed my point, again.


-- 
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed?  http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
0
Blinky
8/5/2008 7:17:17 PM
Yeebok Shu'in wrote:
> So I can't have an overall comment at the start .. like how stupid this 
> whole argument is .. don't take this personally, it's intended to 
> illustrate the point.
> 
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>> god_free_jones@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:16:56 -0600, "Peter In MN(Brrrr)"
>>> <aptdoc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi.
>>>> I read somewhere that "snipping", inserting text in a middle of post, 
>>>> will be allowed?  Is that true?
>>> That is the proper way to do it. The reply should follow the quote.
>> That's not snipping.  That's interposting.  A combination of both is the 
>>  best policy.
> 
> Then add an opinion here by interposting however to be pedantic I would 
> prefer "interspersing" - as my comments are then interspersed throughout 
> your text. I also think you may have meant "intraposting" but that's 
> true pedantry so you can ignore it. :)

The common term is "interposting".  I see no need to invent other terms 
for the practice.

>> <snip>
> 
> trim some text but add 3 lines to make up for it ? :)

Absolutely, since it was meant as an example of "snipping", which had 
been confused with interposting.


-- 
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed?  http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
0
Blinky
8/5/2008 7:20:55 PM
Joseph wrote:
> Jay Garcia wrote:

> Rather than interspersing and inter-whatever-else all through the post 
> when there's multiple questions or issues, I tend to refer back and 
> reply as follows:
> 
> Jay, you'd written that "Interspersing is a most accepted method of 
> providing support in a multi-reply thread as it lends continuity and 
> chronology to the thread keeping it in the proper flow."

Extra work; no added benefit.

> That's ok for a single response, but when there's to be more responses 
> and replies, then it can make it a jungle through which no one can 
> pass.  Like Kudzu vines....   Grows fast, and makes passage through 
> (understanding) impossible.

Properly done, interposting makes nothing impassible.  What it does do 
is keep each new point adjacent to the one that prompted it, making the 
shape of the conversation clear.  This is a good thing.

> I think this is far better than intermingling replies....   and one can 
> reply to two three or more individuals in the same reply.

As can one when intelligently interposting.


-- 
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed?  http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html
0
Blinky
8/5/2008 7:23:47 PM
Jay Garcia wrote:
n
>> Bottom posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult for 
>> many others. It is a personal preference like many other things in life. 
>> The preferred method for this group is to intersperse your replies after 
>> the question that you are answering. Also to judiciously "snip" 
>> extraneous text. The only authoritative for any group is first and 
>> foremost the published preferences for the group or lacking that 
>> accepted practice. If you are the only one top posting then it is 
>> courtesy to conform to the accepted practice of the group.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
> 
> "Annoying" ??? A top-posted reply in a mega-thread is most times quite
> confusing when attempting to find the particular section related. Bottom
> posting is keeping the thread in chronological order which is MOST
> important in a support venue. On a 20 question essay type exam, where do
> you post your answers? :-)
> 

Usually in a separate "blue book" provided by the professor. :)
  I understand the concept  and for the person coming into the middle of 
a thread I agree it can be confusing. I tend to follow threads from 
beginning to end and since many people have no concept of judicious 
snipping I find it a major pita to scroll through material I have 
already waded through to get to the piece I am interested in at the moment.
I follow a number of Usenet groups and the first thing I do when I 
subscribe to a group is to read any posted policies as to accepted 
etiquette for that group. I find it enhances my experience of the group 
greatly.

Regards
Keith
0
Keith
8/5/2008 11:18:23 PM
On 05.08.2008 18:18, Keith N. McKenna wrote:

 --- Original Message ---

> Usually in a separate "blue book" provided by the professor. :)

I KNEW someone was gonna bring that up!! I've done that myself. 8-)

-- 
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
0
Jay
8/5/2008 11:33:06 PM
Ron Hunter wrote:
> Keith N. McKenna wrote:

>>>
>> Bottom posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult 
>> for many others. It is a personal preference like many other things in 
>> life. The preferred method for this group is to intersperse your 
>> replies after the question that you are answering. Also to judiciously 
>> "snip" extraneous text. The only authoritative for any group is first 
>> and foremost the published preferences for the group or lacking that 
>> accepted practice. If you are the only one top posting then it is 
>> courtesy to conform to the accepted practice of the group.
>>
>>
>> Regards
>> Keith
> 
> Bottom posting is the preferred method in this group.  Interspersed 
> posts are harder to read, but if a post has multiple questions, then 
> interspersed answers are easier to relate to the question, and are 
> acceptable.  Top posting is discouraged as a mix of bottom and top 
> posting is very hard for anyone to follow.

Ron I will defer to your greater knowledge of the group though I believe 
I remember reading the guidelines when I first subscribed and they said 
interspersed was preferred. However I could be wrong and since I cannot 
remember where i read them I will defer to your expertise.

Regards
Keith
0
Keith
8/6/2008 12:07:32 AM
Jay Garcia wrote:
> On 05.08.2008 18:18, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> 
>  --- Original Message ---
> 
>> Usually in a separate "blue book" provided by the professor. :)
> 
> I KNEW someone was gonna bring that up!! I've done that myself. 8-)
> 
Jay it was just to good an opportunity to let pass. I couldn't 
disappoint my daughter by passing up an opportunity to uphold her faith 
in me  as the Worlds Biggest Smart Ass. :D

Regards
Keith
0
Keith
8/6/2008 12:10:59 AM
So we will top-post to you, Keith, to keep you from getting confused, 
and you can bottom-post to us for the same reason.

:-)

Keith N. McKenna has written on 8/5/2008 7:18 PM:
> Jay Garcia wrote:
> n
>   
>>> Bottom posting is annoying and makes following the thread difficult for 
>>> many others. It is a personal preference like many other things in life. 
>>> The preferred method for this group is to intersperse your replies after 
>>> the question that you are answering. Also to judiciously "snip" 
>>> extraneous text. The only authoritative for any group is first and 
>>> foremost the published preferences for the group or lacking that 
>>> accepted practice. If you are the only one top posting then it is 
>>> courtesy to conform to the accepted practice of the group.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Keith
>>>       
>> "Annoying" ??? A top-posted reply in a mega-thread is most times quite
>> confusing when attempting to find the particular section related. Bottom
>> posting is keeping the thread in chronological order which is MOST
>> important in a support venue. On a 20 question essay type exam, where do
>> you post your answers? :-)
>>
>>     
>
> Usually in a separate "blue book" provided by the professor. :)
>   I understand the concept  and for the person coming into the middle of 
> a thread I agree it can be confusing. I tend to follow threads from 
> beginning to end and since many people have no concept of judicious 
> snipping I find it a major pita to scroll through material I have 
> already waded through to get to the piece I am interested in at the moment.
> I follow a number of Usenet groups and the first thing I do when I 
> subscribe to a group is to read any posted policies as to accepted 
> etiquette for that group. I find it enhances my experience of the group 
> greatly.
>
> Regards
> Keith
> _______________________________________________
> support-firefox mailing list
> support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-firefox
> To unsubscribe, send an email to support-firefox-request@lists.mozilla.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
>   

0
Pete
8/6/2008 12:24:52 AM
On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 20:07:32 -0400
"Keith N. McKenna" <keith.mckenna@comcast.net> wrote:

> Ron I will defer to your greater knowledge of the group though I
> believe I remember reading the guidelines when I first subscribed and
> they said interspersed was preferred. However I could be wrong and
> since I cannot remember where i read them I will defer to your
> expertise.

You're right.  "To keep forum discussion friendly, please do
interspersion with trimming (see above for trimming rules). For a
simple reply, this is equivalent [to] bottom-posting."

<http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html>
0
ISO
8/6/2008 5:22:29 AM
�Q� wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Aug 2008 20:07:32 -0400
> "Keith N. McKenna" <keith.mckenna@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> Ron I will defer to your greater knowledge of the group though I
>> believe I remember reading the guidelines when I first subscribed and
>> they said interspersed was preferred. However I could be wrong and
>> since I cannot remember where i read them I will defer to your
>> expertise.
> 
> You're right.  "To keep forum discussion friendly, please do
> interspersion with trimming (see above for trimming rules). For a
> simple reply, this is equivalent [to] bottom-posting."
> 
> <http://www.mozilla.org/community/etiquette.html>

 >>Q<<;
   thank you for the link. I was fairly sure I remembered reading it, 
but as I get older the crs gets worse and worse.

Regards
Keith
0
Keith
8/6/2008 6:52:47 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

ALLOW ALLOW ALLOW
Name: Sara F Product: Firefox Summary: ALLOW ALLOW ALLOW Comments: It's getting extremely tiresome to have to "allow" a site to reload/redirect all the time. at least three of my favourite sites require that I do this, including my webmail, which often does it TWICE. Also, should I not select the 'allow' option and switch tabs, the option disappears entirely, which means I have to reload the page and repeat the whole process. My suggestion is this: Invest some time into "allowing" Firefox to REMEMBER which sites I always allow. Browser ...

Allow the option to update firefox when you exit firefox
Name: CM Product: Firefox Summary: Allow the option to update firefox when you exit firefox Comments: Currently you can update firefox when you start firefox or the next time you launch firefox. It would be nice to have the option to update firefox on exit. This would allow updates to take place when you are done with the internet and not take up time when you start firefox. Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.13) Gecko/20080311 Firefox/2.0.0.13 From URL: http://hendrix.mozilla.org/ ...

FIrefox support
I have had a message posted now for about two weeks in here and no replies - I'm used to the old Netscape support group that seemed to be very involved in anyone's issues - a lot of discussion and support. Does anyone have suggestions for links for technical support for Firefox browser? I like the browser and would like to switch over from Netscape but I need some help. Appreciate any ideas and links. On 23.09.2007 01:29, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused technical80@yahoo.com to generate the following:? : > I have had a message posted now for about two weeks in here ...

Firefox support
There is a new IPrint client (4.05) on Novell's site. Does this version support Firefox? Thanks. MC No issues for iPrint 4.0.5 under Firefox 1.0.1 and 1.0.2. I also had no issues under earlier iPrint clients either. >>> Mike<curt@fordhamprep.org> 4/14/2005 10:55 AM >>> There is a new IPrint client (4.05) on Novell's site. Does this version support Firefox? Thanks. MC Michael Fraser wrote: > No issues for iPrint 4.0.5 under Firefox 1.0.1 and 1.0.2. > > I also had no issues under earlier iPrint clients either. > >...

support/what support
Name: William Johnson Email: william0992atsbcglobaldotnet Product: Firefox Summary: support/what support Comments: your support? department for Firefox issues is nothing but a circular maze of unbelievably confusing information that is of no use for the layman and I would dump this piece of trash if I didn't need it for certain websites. I don't know how to reprogram the many bugs or fix the many websites broken by this thing and its "error console" with no directions as to what to do with it. What is it's purpose if there is no help function for it? ...

Firefox support
I have been experimenting around with Mozilla's Firefox browser, here are my questions: 1. has anyone else been looking into this, if so what have you found for compatibility 2. I have found that only 1 of the page layouts render correctly in Firefox, does anyone know why, or if this is being worked on? Thanks again for your time and knowledge 1. has anyone else been looking into this, if so what have you found for compatibility Some of the html editors don't work that well or at all in FF. 2. I have found that only 1 of the page layouts render correctly in Firefox, does an...

Firefox support should be ...
-- i think -- Firefox support should last 5 years to 7 years for Firefox 2.x.x.x and 3.x.x ...

why not support firefox
Name: Email: michelwongatyahoodotcom Product: Firefox Summary: why not support firefox Comments: Dear Sirs I notice that many China website e.g. http://v.163.com/tvlist/borpage_81.html not support firefox but only IE. The box said : "您现在使用浏览器(如FireFox)无法正常观看,请使用 IE(Internet Explorer)浏览器打开此页面!". This is only 1 example, but there are many more cases like this from China sites. Another 1 is CCTV(http://vod.cctv.com/podcast/index), but after I ungrade to 3.5.3 recently, CCTV China pop-up a small box asking me to plugin, after that I can view it. Please improv...

Firefox Not supported
Name: Chris Product: Firefox Summary: Firefox Not supported Comments: Firefox not supported on NatWest online banking. Running Firefox version 3.1b3 Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.4; en-GB; rv:1.9.1b3) Gecko/20090305 Firefox/3.1b3 From URL: http://hendrix.mozilla.org/ Note to readers: Hendrix gives no expectation of a response to this feedback but if you wish to provide one you must BCC (not CC) the sender for them to see it. ...

allow or not to allow
sygate personal pro asks if I want netbeui.vxd and Win 32 Kernel core component to access the internet-since I do not know what these programs are, can someone advise why these programs want to access the net and what they do------------thanxxxxxxx--- t <me@anon.com> wrote: > sygate personal pro asks if I want netbeui.vxd and Win 32 Kernel core > component to access the internet-since I do not know what these programs > are, can someone advise why these programs want to access the net and what > they do------------thanxxxxxxx--- I don't use Sygate (its support...

Firefox or not Firefox
Name: M B Fletcher Email: mf38794atntlworlddotcom Product: Firefox Summary: Firefox or not Firefox Comments: You asked why I took it off but did not ask more than the basics. I put security but in fact I put on Fire fox today and found a GOOGLE front page for searching when I had nothing there before. I wondered if I had been hijacked or you had done a very stupid update. I still do not know for sure. I do not ever use Google that I know of. The biggest spy on computers in the world and you should know better. If I find it is correct on Firefox I will go back to IE. At...

firefox support
Name: hen Product: Firefox Summary: firefox support Comments: firefox should support Firefox 2.x.x.x and 3.x.x - 5 years to 7 years should be good support Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.3) Gecko/2008092417 Firefox/3.0.3 From URL: http://hendrix.mozilla.org/ Note to readers: Hendrix gives no expectation of a response to this feedback but if you wish to provide one you must BCC (not CC) the sender for them to see it. ...

Firefox Support?
Hopefully someone will answer this. I have seen several posts asking about Firefox support in NW65SP3 with no responses. I see that support should be there in SP3, but it isn't working on any of the servers in our school district. I am running FF 1.0.4, and the 4.0.5 iPrint client. We are still receiving the message that iPrint is not installed. Is there something that I need to do on the server to enable iPrint support for other browsers? -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Timothy M. Musa Community Consolidated School District 93 ...

Support Firefox
Name: Product: Firefox Summary: Support Firefox Comments: In US, online banks can be accessed by using firefox, which is not the case in China since in China banks usually issue a plug-in which is a pre-requsite and is only compatible with IE. I believe this problem hinders the more poluparization of FIREFOX in China. But in US, this is hardly a problem, I prefer Firefox. Browser Details: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; zh-CN; rv:1.9.1.6) Gecko/20091201 Firefox/3.5.6 From URL: http://hendrix.mozilla.org/ Note to readers: Hendrix gives no expectation of a response...

Web resources about - snipping allowed? - mozilla.support.firefox

More Americans snipping landlines in favor of cell phones
Mobile phones are steadily becoming the only phone in American households, …

Snipping Costs
... traffic to the medical center than fight the in-bound commute and then the out-bound counter commute to the community hospital. The snipping ...

Police: Man Arrested For Snipping Dollar Tree Shopper’s Hair
( frankieleon ) Hide your ponytails and send those braids home, folks: There just might be someone out there looking to snip off your locks while ...

Verizon Tech Charged With Snipping Cablevision Lines -
According to a report in the New York Post (via Multichannel News ), a Long Island, NY Verizon employee has been charged with sabotaging Cablevision's ...

Business and bureaucracy: Snipping off the shackles - The Economist
THE streets outside are searingly hot, noisy and pot-holed. But Tunde Oyekunle’s air-conditioned office is an oasis of calm. Mr Oyekunle runs ...

Vista Snipping Tool Recursion
... fix it in the next service pack – I’ve got to believe it’ll take a competent person 30 minutes from start to finish. I find the Vista Snipping ...

Snipping Tool++ · GitHub
Build software better, together.

I got to 8192 in 2048! ETA: HA HA! Snipping Tool to the Rescue!
But I can't get the damn screen capture function to work on my computer! But I really did it!

Snipping Tool++ Easily Sends Windows Screenshot Snippets to the Cloud
Windows: Windows 7 shipped with a much-needed Snipping Tool for taking partial screenshots, but it's not exactly feature-rich. Snipping Tool++ ...

Gosnell in Solitary Confinement: Prisoners “Frown On Snipping Babies”
Kermit Gosnell has been in jail since his January 2011 arrest after authorities raided his abortion clinic. The jury in the Gosnell murder trial ...

Resources last updated: 1/20/2016 4:00:38 AM