On 16 Dec 2009 19:43:46 GMT, JimB0ss (no@spam.org) wrote:
>
>>For those who are not Criterion collectors but rather are just looking
>>for the best version of a movie title, this is NOT the best version
>>of this movie title.
>
>Hi there, Free Agent!
>
>Yep, absolutely correct -- and this is why it's rather hard to get )
>
>But if you're after the best possible print, go for MoC version, 'cos Criterion's
>release had been made almost ten years ago, and technology did advance quite
>significantly since then.
>
>>P.S. And thanks for starting up the new group
>
>That wasn't me -- I've just asked Astraweb to add it to their index, that's it. Looks
>like (and I hate to admit it) we should be thanking for it The One Who Hates My Guts
>(and likes to lecture everyone in sight). Yeah...
Hey Jim,
What you've done/and are doing (have Astraweb add the group and
posting to build up retention) is what I was expressing appreciation
for.
But I suspect that "it" didn't start up either group in the sense of
sending the required message to the config group on Usenet and getting
servers to pick up the group. It makes lots of claims about itself
which are often not always true -- I'd want to see a copy/link to that
control message before I'd be expressing any thanks.
Either way, it's not really important enough to get into. Sending one
of those startup messages for an alt group is not that big a deal --
one reason there are so many empty and erroneous alt groups.
As far as the latest diatribe against Astraweb and message length,
it/she may sound like it knows what it's talking about and is somehow
an expert you need to be concerned about. But based on passed
experience, I wouldn't buy into it (or anything else claimed) without
checking it out against other sources and what others say. And others
don't say anything in agreement with her on this.
So I wouldn't worry about any of it.
Free Agent
|
|