Path: news.nzbot.com!spool1.sonic-news.com!news-out.sonic-news.com!not.news-service.com!not.alt.net!not.highwinds-media.com!news.astraweb.com!border1.newsrouter.astraweb.com!not-for-mail
From: hopper <Troll5layer@acting.invalid>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.93/32.576 English (American)
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.crafts.pictures
Subject: Re: Thx NNJ ATTN: Noone2 pls read below
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 11:09:35 +1000
Organization: set Path -9999 Trolls
References: <o0tmd517253ml6oi5cdl6dfddfbit91sut@4ax.com> <md0od5t8recd4823sd72apvhrq13gir5qh@4ax.com> <0054d410$0$1572$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com> <qe9pd5p1e2qp520middqeli8n977qklm03@4ax.com>
X-No-Archive: yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 163
Message-ID: <0058e029$0$26912$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 8807c389.news.astraweb.com
X-Trace: DXC=6]2ohC7@MofNIa8EGN3lWcL?0kYOcDh@jEE63Zc8>UeglR_DkgKLhVjZEh^_h:cI`mhEZMGje0n?l[];HdWiSbEd
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.crafts.pictures:10320
noone2 <noone2@hushmail.com>, wrote
> <noone2@hushmail.com>
[..]
The "intelligence leech" is exactly that.
Two words very easily constructed as a whole meaning from
any dictionary on the planet!
Sorry I am not doing the yards.. you have had more than
enough of the effort I was prepared to extend.
Acronyms are of common usage in todays communication.
More so in the written electronic medium of Usenet.
This is fact, easily verified.. pick up a cellphone and read
the SMS messages, as just one contemporary example.
To solve those then that puzzle you it is a simple step to
use a search engine.
IIRC this was only just underlined in a recent post.
I fergit right now who it was wrote the advice.
IOW I am having great difficulty swallowing the message from you
which says, effectively "I am so challenged I cannot use a search engine".
http://www.dogpile.com/dogpile/ws/results/Web/Acronym%20IOW/1/417/TopNavigation/Relevance/iq=true/zoom=off/_iceUrlFlag=7?_IceUrl=true
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/IOW
>I have a fetish....hmmmm and what is a froup? serious question.
>
IMO?.. definitely.
I will allow things to develop before I stick my foot in that mantrap.
"what is a froup? serious question."
Usenet slang for "group", as in NG.
>I find many tutorials are written by folks who don't really write for
>the layperson. I could be wrong, it's just something I've experienced.
You are familiar with, but likely -- as are most people -- not to have ever
read (in depth) the manuals you get with any purchase of a new piece of
machinery. Professionally -- in a former life -- I wrote many of these.
As an aside?
At one point in time I constructed a "mini thesis" on the topic of the MS Help
file construct which comes with Windows (any version available at that
dateline).
The focus being "MS Help, how to provide no help at all".
As that module was being delivered by a CISCO employee, with that Company
being well "in bed" with MS at that time, I was handed the equivalent of
a grade school "F". The work was never published and it was only because
of the academic achievements from other modules that pulled me through to
certificate level.
My point being.
The people who wrote the "help" for the very machine you
purchased have _no interest_ in actually helping a user. These people are
North Americans, as you are, with much closer ties (than anyone "offshore") to
what you (the user) would need in order to "get going"... on any question
of the "how does that work" puzzle.
Simply put, cultural differences are *not* a consideration when writing
manuals/FAQs for computer focused tasks. The work is always published with
the assumption a user will investigate (and be empowered to) any facet of
operation found to be confusing.. AND use the support services available
to do so, if necessary.
You are not a user of MS Help services... in Delhi?
Many of the available FAQs, for software used for Usenet, share _exactly_ that
attitude. There is the reason why it is more than most newbs, following what
the software writer recommends, get themselves in so much bother. The Newsbin
author being the most recent example here (ABCP)
The tutorials were actually written and constructed by myself. However the
content/focus and approach was a joint effort from British, USA, Canadian
and of course, Australian intelligencia. I did ask, and was refused, input from
both Netherlands and French sources. There was also a period of introduction
where active feedback was sought. No changes were required.
There is the short version of the provenance of those tutorials.
I am currently in the throes of "updating" those tutorials as much has changed
in the relatively short time since they were built. Mostly to do with web
sites no longer available, and the advent of "web interfaces" being introduced
by profiteers _selling_ Usenet access! A concept "old hands" of Usenet find
ludicrous in that _anyone_ would actually pay hard cash for access to a medium
that is totally free. However, as the electronic medium expands it is a fact
there are indeed people who are that dumb. The majority of those being AOL'ers
and @Home'ers, as history has recorded.
Which leads me directly to your statement of "I am so new to this, I've tried
to read all the tutorials, but I'm tutorial challenged"
In response to an answer to that you then made the excuse "As far as all
the tutorial, they give me a headache because of eyestrain."
Assuming you _are_ driving a Windows box, it is known to myself that Windows
carries a number of tools designed to make reading text a "safe" experience,
in occupational safety terms.
These are "built-in" only because Mr. Gates does not want a "class action"
(plaint) against MS for causing Global blindness! No other reason despite what
you will be told by a salesperson.
Also PDF readers are equipped with "zoom" functions and there are pan and
scroll features on many desktops.
Add to that the mix which displays the tutorials are "pictorial based".
IOW.. you the reader are _shown_ the screens which require adjustment!
Sorry.. your excuse does not "wash":-/
As to the parsing of the text?
IF it is at all possible to "dumb down" the directions any further, this will
be done. However _nothing_ can change without "feedback".
And as strange a concept (to you, personally) it may appear, saying "I've tried
to read all the tutorials, but I'm tutorial challenged" is *not* "feedback".
At this point in time, I repeat.. that comment reads as a troll.
Nobody of substance in Usenet will be trolled.
True, I am more tolerant than some.. but I too have my limits.
You, in your latest response have reached those limits.
>That aside, how could you possibly know whether or not I'm genuine.
>Is it because I don't meet your standards or perhaps you are the
>genuine police and you can determine who is or who is not genuine.
>There is no way you can really know, I think it's really just your opinion.-0
>
This too is suspiciously passive aggressive.
Think what you like, I doubt anything I write will change that.
As always I write for the audience. Whether you "get it" or not is of
little consequence. The information will help someone.
As to your question?
There is no way I am going to sit here and write you up >15 years of Usenet
experience, psyche training in "Human Behavioral Sciences, >30 years of PR roles
in "customer relations", both in Australia and "overseas", >35 years of parental
supervision, *and* detail my professional quals.. fergit it!
There is no need to do so.
Your own words are more than enough to bring a sound judgment.
What is _done_ speaks louder than any ream of patronising
text.
Where you could have spent time actually doing your own research
you chose to instead write up excuses.
Where you could have spent time developing your own personal
desktop operations for Usenet you chose to encourage the only
malcontent, wannabee, loser -- call IT what you want --
excusing yourself as you are so driven and hopelessly obsessed
you just cannot help yourself.
You do not know Jean
(or do you..?.. he often has boasted of his "American friends),
whereas many past and present here do know him, and what he
gets up to. In fact he is so transparent, today he can be easily
maneuvered into whatever scenario one wishes to place him into.
You say "I have a great deal of respect for your knowledge".
Frankly I find _all_ of your response insulting.
That said, I do admire people who speak up, whatever they offer.
With every word you show us, the reader, someone who believes they
have an audience they can project a mind message to.
A message we are supposed to read as being they are so
dumb and so driven as to be excused for _anything_ they may say
or do "engroupe".
Some here (ABCP) would rightly label you as a "pollyanna".
I am thinking "junior troll".. yet, I hold judgment on any of that
as it is just not possible for someone to obtain, config and then
construct posts as you do using;
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 5.00/32.1171
Organization: Forte Inc. http://www.forteinc.com/apn/
.. without having a comprehensive understanding of at least
the basics of Usenet.
IOW.. you did not get here (ABCP) on a giggle and a whim.
I have hit up <noone2 @ hushmail.com>.
Lets see what that brings.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
|