mamaT <mamaT@dunno.com> wrote:
><<snip>>
>>
>>>I know how
>>>frustrating it can be to some people to see the misuse of words
>>>though! My pet peeve is to, too and two!
>>>
>>"lose and loose" are two that make me chuckle in Usenet posts.
>>Misspelt simple words and even borked parsing I can handle.. that is the
>>world today.. and it is Global.
>>But using the wrong word in the poor context fairly gets me
>>hoppin'../LAFF
>Ha! I love this one too! Good old English, nose, rose, hose....and
>then lose? Makes no sense to me! I so dislike to "exceptions to the
>rules"!
>
heh.. you bet!
that teaching by rote, in time with rhythmic beats behind the knees with
a piece of bamboo.. ya know..
"two by two is four"
/insert WHACK
"three by three is nine"
/insert WHACK
.. and so on.. and so on..
.. no bloody wonder I (and most of my Gen) are such
bloody minded revolutionaries!!
/Laff
><<Snip>>
>
>>
>>>Okay so back to a few questions a little more on topic if you don't
>>>mind.... I've always had an inquisitive mind and want to know the
>>>when, where, how. I've seen it mentioned that you "may" have changed
>>>the ini file in Agent. I understand in some instances they do need to
>>>be changed. If in fact you did change it, I am curious as to why?
>>>What the benefit might be. I am using Agent 5.00/32.1171 and WinRAR
>>>3.62. They are working fine for me (as far as I can tell) but am
>>>wondering if it would be to my advantage to switch to the releases you
>>>have included with the tools? What might the differences be for me?
>>>Thanks =-)
>>>
>>Ok.. first things first.
>>That <agent.ini> file is of no use to you MamaT.
>>
>>It is only good for the version of Agent included in the post.
>>The <agent.exe> and the <agent.ini> are there so as to get everyone on the
>>same page when help is _needed_.. just to get going.
>>When newbs have the basics, then it is encouraged they
>>"do their own thing".
>>So, where you are able to get any other version of Agent going,
>>not needing any help, then those people do not need the files, at all.
>>The tutorials on how to set up the screens may be of some help
>>in their version as Agent at that level of config is basically still the
>>same, and ABCP does run a little differently to other binary froups.
>>Soo a read and a check of some screens would be a wise thing to check out.
>>
>>And that is what the <agent.ini> file is about. Where we have folks who do
>>not have English as a first language or folks who can run Word and Paintshop
>>like a Pro but have never setup a Usenet client, nor know _anything_ about
>>installing programs and configuring them.. those folks, they are the ones
>>the <agent.ini> file is delivered for.. a kinda "lock and load" scenario.
>>Three easy steps kind of thing.
>>1. Run the exe as an install.
>>2. Replace the <agent.ini> file.
>>3. Add your user name and server details
>>
>>..and start testing.
>
>That's what I was thinking, basically you took the program, made all
>the necessary changes and set ups within it, then saved it that way to
>distribute to the new user so you know exactly where they are set
>which makes helping them a much easier task for both ends!
>
You got it. As "unconventional" as it is, for Usenet, the delivery does work.
Ok.. not everyone is going to accept the lesson , but it sure helps those
who do think and want to progress quickly in producing output, fast.
As Pixie said earlier we all learn different ways and some .. heh heh , a LOT..
want to see some drawings on the paper before they change or
do anything.. so to speak.
>>Many will quickly find the screens in their install and change them to
>>whatever they want. Obviously this has happened many times here (aBCP)
>>since the files were first built as the "noise" from...
>>" I cant get this thing to work" has dropped considerably.
>>
>>As you know there are dozens of ways to set stuff up.
>>What I did was to sort out what does work for ABCP.. build an install
>>around those parameters and carve out the <agent.ini> file so as to have a
>>start that did not require people to register the program.
>>Look at the recent debacle with Newsbin as an example?
>>Folks paid that guy money, the tool did not work.. and do they get a refund??
>>Not on your Nelly!
>>So.. the way I thought was.. "here is a free 'old version' to stat with, and when
>>you get going - maybe six months - the option to purchase an upgrade is there".
>>From memory I think the tutorials actually say that.. ummmm
>>
>>As to WinRaR?
>>If nobody is questioning your posts as to unpacking..?.. then leave your WinRar
>>install alone, leave it be.
>>The minute someone does post "Waaaah your post is corrupt" and no
>>one else seconds it.. then point _them_ to the version posted.
>>IF OTOH there are a number of knowing folk pointing at your posts
>>all of a sudden then it is likely one of two things (for ABCP only)..
>>1. the machine is running other programs when packing archives.
>>Some here like to watch TV while they are building 25MB uploads!
>>2. the install of WinRar is borked.
>>
>>The tutorials discuss WinRaR in depth, The reason being there are two
>>prime problems in ABCP.
>> Splitting design files archives(folders of)..
>> Splitting the archive at posting time.
>>These are two very different things.. with different actions required.
>>And the resulting misunderstanding when packing is the main workload
>>for helpers here in trying to redirect folks to what works.
>>Currently there are four posts to the group very few will ever see.
>>Once upon a time I used to grab these and repost them.
>>I gave up on that 'incentive'. I have the files so the posts just float on,
>>many are none the wiser.
>>
>>Packing for Usenet is a difficult concept to grasp as it is entirely different
>>to what one would do when sending eMail attachments.
>>Most of us helper folk understand this confusion.
>>
>>Hope you haven't nodded off <g>
>Not at all, and appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions.
>Hopefully others that have questions will read this as well.
>
This may 'sound' a tad cynical. I can't help that .. it is Truth.
I myself am moving into the fifth year of subscription to ABCP.
In those years I have identified pretty much the crossection of
character types that inhabit this Group.
There are those here that will _never_ accept Usenet conventions.
That very small wing of folk will always make things difficult
for everyone as name shifting is encouraged (by me) just to keep
the snoops guessing. As an aside you would maybe be surprised to
hear just how "Usenet stupid" most House designers and their
Pinkerton agents are. I can't tell you how I arrived at that as they
too are reading this post../LMAO
I digress..
There are again a core group who have a common bond.. one
which will always ensure ABCP moves on. All of us in that group do
not always agree, and that is healthy.. for ABCP, but none of us true
believers will ever turn away from the main group.. those who want to
learn so as to share and share safely.
It is Usenet, and contributing is always done freely by those whose
only expectation is of themselves.. to do it better..
>Thanks again =-)
>
now worries.. I truly wish you enjoy the things that you find.
--
Catholic nuns of the Order of the Sacred Heart
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 |
|