Howdy John, and to get the love fest out of the way at the beginning,
I have allways liked your posts, often learned something, and forget
that you are not blind as your insight and understanding of VI comp
related issues surpasses that of many blind users/maybe we should make
you an honorary blind-guy. Trust me, that would be better than the
real thing. ...Stupid grin...


J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message
,
"bando?ers@gmail" writes:

If your time is short, don't read this, as most of it has been said/a
couple of posts crossed while I was composing this...
but I still want to put it all in perspective.

. It is good to hear from one for whom this particular discussion was
started (or at least the a.c.b-u 'group was added); we sighted folk can
argue what we think makes things harder or easier for you, but it is
always good to have input from someone who knows. ..

I just wanted to throw in my two cents on this,...

my mb10 in box was plenty big. Times have changed, but just because
we have something there is no reason to waste it./every packet we send
and receive is moved by electricitty which usually comes from some

. An interesting point. Whether the equipment uses more power when
communicating than when idling I don't know; I suspect that it does, but
the difference is minimal, and that there are a few circumstances where
it even uses less. Bt on the whole, it probably is more. ..

dirty origin. Don't know about the UK, but in the US many places are
short on band width, and the same is true here in southern Mexico.

. I suspect that the format of text emails and posts - i. e. whether
top, bottom, or interposted, and whether in plain text or other such as
HTML - makes very little difference to bandwidth shortages compared to
pictures, sound, and video. ..

Agreed. I was referring to the big picture, and mostly on the server
end. Don't think there would be any noticable savings of energy, and
little bandwidth when uploading, but when d-loading %80+ requoted
material, and god forbid multi-formats times many users..., but sure
it's not HD video.]

block quotetter that much to me, but please!
don't make me wade through five or ten lines of the same old muck just
to see your one-liner!

. Agreed! Certainly snip, and arguably if you're just posting a
one-liner, don't quote at all! Many news clients can be configured not
to quote. ..
[]
block quote
. It is the normal convention on usenet
to quote some of the posting to
which one is replying, so that anyone joining the thread can get some
idea of what you're on about.
block quote end
SOME is the opperant word here.
....

. We agree again. ..
I'd say "judicial snipping" should only leave the most important
facts

. We're singing from the same sheet! ..
[]
block quote
...how much to leave in
place for the benefit of newcomers is always a matter of personal
judgement, and there is no correct answer.
block quote end

Agreed, but I am opposed to always reverting to the lowest common
denominator,

. If by that, you mean leaving the whole of the original post in place,
especially if only adding one line especially if at the top, I agree
with you! ..

or the constant retelling of the same old story
that everyone has heard, just because one nube has come in to the

. However, if I detect someone genuinely is new to usenet (or to a
newsgroup that favours bottom-posting, and/or snipping and
interposting), I prefer to politely explain to them what is "local"
custom, rather than flame them. ..
Yes, that is partly what I ment; but I was also referring to "teaching
to the dumbist kid in the class", or posting for the laziest nube on
a group.
The good teacher teaches to the%50 in the middle of the learning curve/
I prefer to raise the bar a few points higher.
That being said, we all can miss the obvious, and flame wars waste a
lot of good band-width too.

[]
Yeppers, my whole point is that good usenet policy and polotic puts a
burden of claritty
on the poster, so some thoughtful quoting is helpful.

. Again we are in agreement! ..

So, please, people, this is a blind-users group! Let's keep the
clutter down!

. Well, it's now in five 'groups. I first came across it in
uk.tech.broadcast I think, though I am now reading it in the blind
'group. It might be worth stressing the point to posters in other
'groups what Burt says there - many blind folk "read" via speech output,
so quoting that hasn't been snipped very well - or not at all - wastes a
lot of time. I've tried to snip as much as possible (shown by "[]"),
while still leaving enough to make the context clear, but I'm still
aware that I've left rather a lot.

Burt Henry
[]
. Thanks again for giving us a real viewpoint from the other side, as it
were. ..
--
I think it is the same side: the side of thought which you are surely
on my man.
and here are somethings in reply to another part of this thread you
are on...
("my bit" refers to J.P.)
[snip]
my bit:
.. I have seen suggestion that speech software might indicate who is
saying what by using a different voice (or at least pitch). Does any
such software (that anyone here is using, anyway) actually do that?
(AFAICT, Window-Eyes doesn't.) ..
[snip]

I use JAWS and NVDA at the moment, and there is no feature that I know
of that can be configured to change voice in response to quote level,
although I think it could be arranged in some future version.
(probably would only work with oe, as jfw and win-eyes are optimized
to and for the ms monster) ..
[snip]

quoting:

block quote
I feel that it is good etiquette to follow the pattern of the majority
in the group/list to which you are subscribing. Thus, it is probably
bad etiquette to post using interleaved quoting in a blindness related
email list where everyone else top posts for the same reason that it
block quote end


my bit:
.. I agree; the one blind 'group of the (rather strange set of) five
that
this thread is posted to has been very quiet of late (until this
thread!), so I'm not sure what the norm was for it. ..
[snip]
You got that right! Quiet is the norm, and interleaved posting not,
(if I recall correctly). I don't completely object to interleavers,
but more often it seems to be another lazy trait, instead of a tool
used to give greater claritty to a msg.
P.s.-Andrew, if you are reading this,how would you get jfw to change
voice for ""s, and could it be set to change more as the quote level
changes?(as with header levels, (which is pretty useless))?For me the
quote change might be a good one.
AH
Not here using JFW 10. The best it could probably do is either skip
out the lines beginning with or change the voice to something
different. This may end up being more annoying in the end though.
AH
Thanks,
Burt Henry
The only movement I believe in is in the morning after my coffee.