Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
OOH! FLATTERY. WHEN I TELL YOU WHAT TO DO, THEN YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT TO DO.
I DON'T CARE HOW INFORMATION IS POSTED. IT IS THE CONTENT WHICH IS IMPORTANT. Regards Capitol geoff wrote in message ... In message , Capitol writes NO!!!! Regards Capitol So (assuming you can drive), if you go to the continent, you also say "**** this, I'm driving on the left hand side" and spend your time swerving to avoid the foreign *******s driving on the wrong side of the road ? Ignorant **** ! Huge wrote in message ... "Capitol" writes: You missed the point, that, for all government employees, the pensions Do you think you could give consideration to not top-posting, please? -- geoff |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Capitol
writes OOH! FLATTERY. WHEN I TELL YOU WHAT TO DO, THEN YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT TO DO. I DON'T CARE HOW INFORMATION IS POSTED. IT IS THE CONTENT WHICH IS IMPORTANT. Regards Capitol And shouting isn't appreciated either moron -- geoff |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message ,
"Capitol" wrote: Huge wrote in message ... "Capitol" writes: [40 lines snipped] please? Do you think you could give consideration to not top-posting, You missed the point, that, for all government employees, the pensions "Capitol" writes: Huge wrote in message ... Capitol Regards NO!!!! Not a problem. Unless you wanted me to see your postings, that is. No, I think, I'd rather you retained your vital delusions of self importance in telling other people what do! So don't bother to open your mind to a different viewpoint. Regards Capitol Sorry, Huge has a point on this one: 1: Consistency (bottom, OR top) aids readability. Everyone doing different makes it very difficult to follow a thread. 2: Bottom posting is the accepted way of doing things in practically every newsgroup since the year dot. (Ok, "post" posting is more like it; the principle of replying *after* the bit you are replying to is what counts) 3: Almost everyone on this ng bottom posts, and many will correct previous top postings, so the occasional top poster *really* mucks things up. 4: A short 1 or 2 line top post is often missed (unless I'm unusual) when there's a large posting history, as I see the history and automatically page to the first non-indented bit of text (my reader colours the indents differently, first indent gets green, second red. Non quoted text is black and thus instantly recognisable). Having said all that, he did rather bombard you with it, so perhaps he could have been a bit more gentle. Hwyl! M. -- Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html .... ILLITERATE? Write for a free brochure... |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Martin Angove
writes In message , "Capitol" wrote: Sorry, Huge has a point on this one: 1: Consistency (bottom, OR top) aids readability. Everyone doing different makes it very difficult to follow a thread. 2: Bottom posting is the accepted way of doing things in practically every newsgroup since the year dot. (Ok, "post" posting is more like it; the principle of replying *after* the bit you are replying to is what counts) 3: Almost everyone on this ng bottom posts, and many will correct previous top postings, so the occasional top poster *really* mucks things up. 4: A short 1 or 2 line top post is often missed (unless I'm unusual) when there's a large posting history, as I see the history and automatically page to the first non-indented bit of text (my reader colours the indents differently, first indent gets green, second red. Non quoted text is black and thus instantly recognisable). Having said all that, he did rather bombard you with it, so perhaps he could have been a bit more gentle. ??????? He's consistently top posted despite continual requests, but refuses to comply with the convention. He repeatedly comes up with the childish arrogant reply of this is how I do it, like it or lump it. -- geoff |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Jim Ley wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 20:49:48 +0100, "Capitol" wrote: Jim Ley wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 19:16:43 +0100, "Capitol" wrote: But the dollar is still at least temporarily, strong and the economy is growing again. Their government bond rates also have risen over the past few weeks IIRC. The US dollar has dropped 30% against the Euro and other currencies in the last few months, the 4% recent rise isn't relevant... Jim. The Dollar is where it was about a year or so ago relative to the Pound and the euro. No it's not.... My 10 day old economist (I'm in vancouver and it seems I get it way late here unfortunately) has EU-$ at 88 now and 101 a year ago, pound is 61 now and 65 a year ago. I did say a year or so ago, the euro now is currently at the same level relative to the dollar as in early 2000 ie 1.129ish, bearing in mind that the interest rate for the $ is so low and the political uncertainties, I suspect that the Euro will decline relative to the dollar for the rest of this year at least. Over the same period, the £ has varied between $1.39 to 1.67 at least, I've had to watch the exchange rates very carefully to time money transfers to the US to get the optimum rates. I found this useful for the history. http://www.thefinancials.com/currenc..._FX_Forex_Majo rsHome.html I presume you read the Economist article on the state of house prices, there the opinion was that interest rates had to rise AIUI. So it's reasonably similar to the pound yes, it's way different on the Euro. This I am told is the view of the City who are now forecasting increases in all interest rates. Right, "the city" bond prices don't have an awful lot of upward suggestiveness in them. Looking at what people actually do with their money, rather than what the pundits say is often a little more useful, it's certainly at least as useful. I agree with those comments, but with returns on shares now outstripping the majority of government bonds, I still believe the trend for money lending is up. Jim. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
OOH! MORE FLATTERY!
Capitol geoff wrote in message ... In message , Capitol writes OOH! FLATTERY. WHEN I TELL YOU WHAT TO DO, THEN YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT TO DO. I DON'T CARE HOW INFORMATION IS POSTED. IT IS THE CONTENT WHICH IS IMPORTANT. Regards Capitol And shouting isn't appreciated either moron -- geoff |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 23:48:19 +0100, "Capitol"
wrote: No it's not.... My 10 day old economist (I'm in vancouver and it seems I get it way late here unfortunately) has EU-$ at 88 now and 101 a year ago, pound is 61 now and 65 a year ago. I did say a year or so ago, the euro now is currently at the same level relative to the dollar as in early 2000 ie 1.129ish, a year or so is 3 years, pretty wide error bars you accept, you sound like my DIY efforts. Jim. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
SEE REPLY TO HUGE & GEOFF
Capitol Bob Eager wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 22:13:24 UTC, "Capitol" wrote: OOH! FLATTERY. WHEN I TELL YOU WHAT TO DO, THEN YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT TO DO. I DON'T CARE HOW INFORMATION IS POSTED. IT IS THE CONTENT WHICH IS IMPORTANT. What a silly little boy. *plonk* -- Bob Eager rde at tavi.co.uk PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3, P70, PC/AT.. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Andrew McKay wrote:
Unemployment figures are another one that really annoy the hell out of me (and I happen to have direct experience with this one in the last 12 months). Gordon keeps beating on about how unemployment is less than 1m and the lowest for 40 years. Some of us cant even qualify for JSA at all Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Mine too.
Regards Capitol Jim Ley wrote in message ... On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 23:48:19 +0100, "Capitol" wrote: No it's not.... My 10 day old economist (I'm in vancouver and it seems I get it way late here unfortunately) has EU-$ at 88 now and 101 a year ago, pound is 61 now and 65 a year ago. I did say a year or so ago, the euro now is currently at the same level relative to the dollar as in early 2000 ie 1.129ish, a year or so is 3 years, pretty wide error bars you accept, you sound like my DIY efforts. Jim. |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Capitol wrote:
snip I don't call 3% wonderfully low inflation. From memory, I think we had a 100 year period with no inflation a couple of centuries back! I believe the US inflation figure is in the 1% region, but they just reduced taxes! 3% is very high if you are not working. Bills still have to be paid Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Michael McNeil wrote:
"Essjay001" wrote in message ... What amazes me is that we have to insure each person to drive a car. I used to live in the Middle East (Sultanate of OMAN) in 2000. I bought a new car, a MATIZ only £3000. I insured the 'car' for about £100 fully comp. That insurance meant the car was insured. Sounds like a good place to start a touring holliday. Yup you could tour war zones -- Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Capitol
writes OOH! MORE FLATTERY! Capitol Hardly -- geoff |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Ben Blaney
writes Capitol wrote: OOH! MORE FLATTERY! Capitol You are a ****ing ****. Ben - you're so good with wuurds -- geoff |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
geoff wrote:
In message , Ben Blaney writes Capitol wrote: OOH! MORE FLATTERY! Capitol You are a ****ing ****. Ben - you're so good with wuurds "Capitol" makes it so easy for me! -- Ben Blaney GSF1200 VFR800 CBR600 CD200 "We stopped only for fuel" |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Ben Blaney
writes geoff wrote: In message , Ben Blaney writes Capitol wrote: OOH! MORE FLATTERY! Capitol You are a ****ing ****. Ben - you're so good with wuurds "Capitol" makes it so easy for me! D'you think she's Stan's SO? -- geoff |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In article , Essjay001
writes What amazes me is that we have to insure each person to drive a car. I used to live in the Middle East (Sultanate of OMAN) in 2000. I bought a new car, a MATIZ only £3000. I insured the 'car' for about £100 fully comp. That insurance meant the car was insured. Anyone who had a valid licence and my permission could drive it on that insurance. Its the same here *but* you're only covered third party, was that the same in Oman? A good test of insurance is making a claim, as a company we had real problems in the middle east -- David |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com wrote:
Essjay001 wrote: What amazes me is that we have to insure each person to drive a car. I used to live in the Middle East (Sultanate of OMAN) in 2000. I bought a new car, a MATIZ only £3000. I insured the 'car' for about £100 fully comp. That insurance meant the car was insured. Anyone who had a valid licence and my permission could drive it on that insurance. A UK licence was legally valid. All insurance in the UK is a total rip off which is why so many people drive with out it. ISTR that when I first started driving (actually riding m/cycles) that this was the case here. That would be 1974. Anyone confirm/deny this? In the 60s and 70s yes, it was still possible to get 'any driver' insurance cover. I think it just sort of faded out as people wanted to save money by going for limited driver policies. (It also fulfils people's desire not to allow others to drive their car.) -- Chris Green ) |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 22:59:39 +0000 (UTC), "Essjay001"
wrote: Some of us cant even qualify for JSA at all I qualified last year, despite remaining a director of my own Ltd. The fact was that the company had no income and no reserves, so couldn't pay salary. Once the necessary checks had been made that we weren't trying it on the Job Centre had no problem paying contributions-based JSA - it is an entitlement for all, providing that you have a healthy record of paying NI. C-based JSA is limited to a maximum of 26 weeks, after that you get diddly squat unless you qualify for income-based JSA (and magically after 26 weeks when you lose C-based you mysteriously become "employed" again as far as Gordon Brown is concerned - go figure!). It's the I-based JSA that is nasty. Once you fall into that trap you are into fantasy land where the Job Centre can tell you which job you are going to apply for and you can't say "it doesn't pay enough!". Basically if the local dairy need someone to clean the cow dung out of the sheds, you are an instant candidate. Have you noticed that B&Q seem to have lots of helpful staff in the sheds recently? They don't appear to be the geriatrics of a couple of years ago. Andrew Do you need a handyman service? Check out our web site at http://www.handymac.co.uk |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 23:20:30 +0000 (UTC), "Essjay001"
wrote: Factually incorrect OMAN is a wet state Apologies, I assumed it would be the same as Saudi where booze isn't tolerated. Andrew Do you need a handyman service? Check out our web site at http://www.handymac.co.uk |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message ,
geoff wrote: In message , Martin Angove writes In message , "Capitol" wrote: Sorry, Huge has a point on this one: 1: Consistency (bottom, OR top) aids readability. Everyone doing different makes it very difficult to follow a thread. 2: Bottom posting is the accepted way of doing things in practically every newsgroup since the year dot. (Ok, "post" posting is more like it; the principle of replying *after* the bit you are replying to is what counts) 3: Almost everyone on this ng bottom posts, and many will correct previous top postings, so the occasional top poster *really* mucks things up. 4: A short 1 or 2 line top post is often missed (unless I'm unusual) when there's a large posting history, as I see the history and automatically page to the first non-indented bit of text (my reader colours the indents differently, first indent gets green, second red. Non quoted text is black and thus instantly recognisable). Having said all that, he did rather bombard you with it, so perhaps he could have been a bit more gentle. ??????? He's consistently top posted despite continual requests, but refuses to comply with the convention. He repeatedly comes up with the childish arrogant reply of this is how I do it, like it or lump it. Yeah, ok, point taken. Sometimes I'm too pacifistic for my own good. Not sure all the bad mouthing and swearing helps though - perhaps a simple tactic of ignoring him (or killfiling him) will help regulars. Hwyl! M. -- Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html .... Hi! I'm a tagline virus! Steal me & join in the fun! |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Andrew McKay wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 23:20:30 +0000 (UTC), "Essjay001" wrote: Factually incorrect OMAN is a wet state Apologies, I assumed it would be the same as Saudi where booze isn't tolerated. Oman and the UAE are quite westernised. Now that the oil is running out they are turning to tourism and people won't go on holiday if they cant get a drink. You watch Kuwait will be the next to relax alcohol laws. Most of the new hotels there have bar in the design but for the moment they are called coffee bars Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
NEEDS TO BE WITH SUCH A LIMITED VOCABULARY.
Capitol Ben Blaney wrote in message ... geoff wrote: In message , Ben Blaney writes Capitol wrote: OOH! MORE FLATTERY! Capitol You are a ****ing ****. Ben - you're so good with wuurds "Capitol" makes it so easy for me! -- Ben Blaney GSF1200 VFR800 CBR600 CD200 "We stopped only for fuel" |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
parish wrote:
Not to mention we poor *******s with Mortgage Endowment Policies :-( Thats another story. Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Steve Firth
writes Dave Plowman wrote: In article , Capitol wrote: OOH! FLATTERY. WHEN I TELL YOU WHAT TO DO, THEN YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT TO DO. I DON'T CARE HOW INFORMATION IS POSTED. IT IS THE CONTENT WHICH IS IMPORTANT. Then why are you wasting bandwidth? Stuff that, I demand to know why he's wasting oxygen that could be more usefully employed keeping a whelk alive. -- A nasty looking dwarf throws a knife at you... It's not big and it's not clever -- geoff |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
David wrote:
In article , Essjay001 writes Its the same here *but* you're only covered third party, was that the same in Oman? Not as far as I am aware A good test of insurance is making a claim, as a company we had real problems in the middle east Where abouts? -- Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Owain wrote:
"Essjay001" wrote | I don't call 3% wonderfully low inflation. From memory, I think we | had a 100 year period with no inflation a couple of centuries back! | I believe the US inflation figure is in the 1% region, but they just | reduced taxes! | 3% is very high if you are not working. Bills still have to be paid 3% inflation is very high compared to savings interest rates; many people with moderate savings are seeing their savings dwindle every month against inflation. Not to mention we poor *******s with Mortgage Endowment Policies :-( Owain |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:47:45 +0000, parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com
wrote: Not to mention we poor *******s with Mortgage Endowment Policies :-( We cashed ours in a few months back. Represented a loss on the original investment, but it was minimal compared with the loss that would have occurred had we run to term. Andrew Do you need a handyman service? Check out our web site at http://www.handymac.co.uk |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Essjay001 wrote:
wrote: Oman has always allowed alocohol as far as I know, certainly when we lived there from 1980 to 1987 alcohol was easy (and legal) to buy. In fact while we were there things tightened up a bit in that a limit on the amount one could buy per month was imposed, but it was a pretty generous limit. There have been limits in the not too distant past but the main point of this was to stop the locals getting too much. Were you there with Airworks? No, I was with PDO. When we were first there PDO had their own store and rules for alcohol, they were steadily brought more into line with the other outlets as time went on. -- Chris Green ) |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 05:33:25 +0100, Andrew McKay
wrote: On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:47:45 +0000, parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com wrote: Not to mention we poor *******s with Mortgage Endowment Policies :-( We cashed ours in a few months back. Represented a loss on the original investment, but it was minimal compared with the loss that would have occurred had we run to term. How do you know what the loss would be in the future, and how do you know that you're going to get a better return on them from whatever inenstment you stick in? Jim. |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Hi, as about the only reasoning response, I thought you might like to hear
some reasons. The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE. This is a top posting protocol. Bottom posted replies are a pain in the butt for quick reading of the letters in a theme. Many responses are in fact mid posted where the topic is more complex. If you want to see the problems of mid and bottom posting in a crap news reader, simply look up a complex thread in Google and try to follow it. It is much easier to follow in top posted OE. I have seen a number of responses to various other posters in this newsgroup from a particular pedant who endeavours to promote yesterdays newsgroups standards as the Bible for tomorrow. When he attacked my style of posting I responded and will continue always to do so. IMO There is no style of posting which is best. If the news reader cannot cope with OE style correspondence, then I regret to say, that it is a minority taste. Whether the content is worth reading is another matter. However, I was very impressed with the generally low literary and intellectual quality of the response I received. The education system is certainly failing. If the DIY skills are down to this level, then IMM is right! I shall continue to post in my current style, particularly if it upsets the usenet pedants who are still Canute like, refusing to accept that the present standard is Microsoft and top posting. Congratulations on being the only respondent with a sense of reason and proportion. Regards Capitol Martin Angove wrote in message ... In message , "Capitol" wrote: Huge wrote in message ... "Capitol" writes: [40 lines snipped] please? Do you think you could give consideration to not top-posting, You missed the point, that, for all government employees, the pensions "Capitol" writes: Huge wrote in message ... Capitol Regards NO!!!! Not a problem. Unless you wanted me to see your postings, that is. No, I think, I'd rather you retained your vital delusions of self importance in telling other people what do! So don't bother to open your mind to a different viewpoint. Regards Capitol Sorry, Huge has a point on this one: 1: Consistency (bottom, OR top) aids readability. Everyone doing different makes it very difficult to follow a thread. 2: Bottom posting is the accepted way of doing things in practically every newsgroup since the year dot. (Ok, "post" posting is more like it; the principle of replying *after* the bit you are replying to is what counts) 3: Almost everyone on this ng bottom posts, and many will correct previous top postings, so the occasional top poster *really* mucks things up. 4: A short 1 or 2 line top post is often missed (unless I'm unusual) when there's a large posting history, as I see the history and automatically page to the first non-indented bit of text (my reader colours the indents differently, first indent gets green, second red. Non quoted text is black and thus instantly recognisable). Having said all that, he did rather bombard you with it, so perhaps he could have been a bit more gentle. Hwyl! M. -- Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html ... ILLITERATE? Write for a free brochure... |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Capitol
writes Hi, as about the only reasoning response, I thought you might like to hear some reasons. The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE. This is a top posting protocol. Bottom posted replies are a pain in the butt for quick reading of the letters in a theme. Many responses are in fact mid posted where the topic is more complex. If you want to see the problems of mid and bottom posting in a crap news reader, simply look up a complex thread in Google and try to follow it. It is much easier to follow in top posted OE. I have seen a number of responses to various other posters in this newsgroup from a particular pedant who endeavours to promote yesterdays newsgroups standards as the Bible for tomorrow. When he attacked my style of posting I responded and will continue always to do so. IMO There is no style of posting which is best. If the news reader cannot cope with OE style correspondence, then I regret to say, that it is a minority taste. Whether the content is worth reading is another matter. However, I was very impressed with the generally low literary and intellectual quality of the response I received. The education system is certainly failing. If the DIY skills are down to this level, then IMM is right! I shall continue to post in my current style, particularly if it upsets the usenet pedants who are still Canute like, refusing to accept that the present standard is Microsoft and top posting. Congratulations on being the only respondent with a sense of reason and proportion. Regards Capitol Two of a kind eh? -- geoff |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 19:43:48 UTC, geoff wrote:
Capitol Two of a kind eh? Pity you had to quote it all...I've already killfiled the Capitol Crap... -- Bob Eager rde at tavi.co.uk PC Server 325*4; PS/2s 9585, 8595, 9595*2, 8580*3, P70, PC/AT.. |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message , Bob Eager
writes On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 19:43:48 UTC, geoff wrote: Capitol Two of a kind eh? Pity you had to quote it all...I've already killfiled the Capitol Crap... Sorry about that -I'm ignoring him too from now on as, I understand are quite a few others -- geoff |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 19:43:48 UTC, geoff wrote: Capitol Two of a kind eh? Pity you had to quote it all...I've already killfiled the Capitol Crap... "Killfile" is such a childish response, you guys love all this macho stuff don't you? Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 21:22:09 +0000, parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com
wrote: Capitol wrote: The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE. This is a top posting protocol. Posting style isn't a protocol; OE merely puts the cursor at the top when replying to a post. Ctrl-End will shift it to the bottom. To quote a recent entry on a.h.b-o-u : Posting at the top because that's where the cursor happened to be is like ****ting in your pants because that's where your asshole happened to be. -- John |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
I'm with you Capitol, though the reason I tend to top post is twofold:-
1. every office I have ever worked in MOD or government the latest correspondence is placed on top of the file and that has been a convention since before the computer was invented. 2. those people who insist on no top posting tend not to snip resulting in my having to scroll through piles of clutter before I get to the point. It really F***s me off! It's a bit like the guy who, when you ask him a question, he repeats it the question before he answers. Damn that is so annoying. As for the arguement that top posting places the answer before the question what a load of crap. When I read a top posted answer I have already read the original question in the previous post I don't need to read it again. That fact that some people 'killfile' top posters makes them very childish. Just because a person top posts doesn't mean he has nothing to say. However, having said that we may end up talking to each other. Steve R Capitol wrote: Hi, as about the only reasoning response, I thought you might like to hear some reasons. The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE. This is a top posting protocol. Bottom posted replies are a pain in the butt for quick reading of the letters in a theme. Many responses are in fact mid posted where the topic is more complex. If you want to see the problems of mid and bottom posting in a crap news reader, simply look up a complex thread in Google and try to follow it. It is much easier to follow in top posted OE. I have seen a number of responses to various other posters in this newsgroup from a particular pedant who endeavours to promote yesterdays newsgroups standards as the Bible for tomorrow. When he attacked my style of posting I responded and will continue always to do so. IMO There is no style of posting which is best. If the news reader cannot cope with OE style correspondence, then I regret to say, that it is a minority taste. Whether the content is worth reading is another matter. However, I was very impressed with the generally low literary and intellectual quality of the response I received. The education system is certainly failing. If the DIY skills are down to this level, then IMM is right! I shall continue to post in my current style, particularly if it upsets the usenet pedants who are still Canute like, refusing to accept that the present standard is Microsoft and top posting. Congratulations on being the only respondent with a sense of reason and proportion. Regards Capitol Martin Angove wrote in message ... In message , "Capitol" wrote: Huge wrote in message ... "Capitol" writes: [40 lines snipped] please? Do you think you could give consideration to not top-posting, You missed the point, that, for all government employees, the pensions "Capitol" writes: Huge wrote in message ... Capitol Regards NO!!!! Not a problem. Unless you wanted me to see your postings, that is. No, I think, I'd rather you retained your vital delusions of self importance in telling other people what do! So don't bother to open your mind to a different viewpoint. Regards Capitol Sorry, Huge has a point on this one: 1: Consistency (bottom, OR top) aids readability. Everyone doing different makes it very difficult to follow a thread. 2: Bottom posting is the accepted way of doing things in practically every newsgroup since the year dot. (Ok, "post" posting is more like it; the principle of replying *after* the bit you are replying to is what counts) 3: Almost everyone on this ng bottom posts, and many will correct previous top postings, so the occasional top poster *really* mucks things up. 4: A short 1 or 2 line top post is often missed (unless I'm unusual) when there's a large posting history, as I see the history and automatically page to the first non-indented bit of text (my reader colours the indents differently, first indent gets green, second red. Non quoted text is black and thus instantly recognisable). Having said all that, he did rather bombard you with it, so perhaps he could have been a bit more gentle. Hwyl! M. -- Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html ... ILLITERATE? Write for a free brochure... -- Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
In message ,
Andrew McKay wrote: On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:47:45 +0000, parish parish_AT_ntlworld.com wrote: Not to mention we poor *******s with Mortgage Endowment Policies :-( We cashed ours in a few months back. Represented a loss on the original investment, but it was minimal compared with the loss that would have occurred had we run to term. We deliberately didn't. Before we even met, my wife and I both bought smallish houses with endowment mortgages. When she moved into the current house six years ago my wife kept the endowment but the "extra" mortgage was repayment. When I sold my house to move in, I kept the endowment going. When we move again (soon) we will not be intending to rely on anything more than the currently predicted value of the endowments. It just seemed like the best thing to do. Hers has 13 (IIRC) years to run, mine 16 or so. Who knows what will happen in that time, but the penalties for cashing in (several tens of percent) mean that it is (IMO) a far better bet to stay with it - about the only thing that would make it worse would be if the economy deflated, and I think there are a lot of people with a vested interest in stopping that happening. In fact, there's nothing to say that inflation/rates/returns/stock markets won't recover from their present low point and rise again. Whichever way you look at it, it's a gamble. Hwyl! M. -- Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html .... On the other hand..you have five different fingers |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Capitol wrote:
The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE. This is a top posting protocol. Posting style isn't a protocol; OE merely puts the cursor at the top when replying to a post. Ctrl-End will shift it to the bottom. Bottom posted replies are a pain in the butt for quick reading of the letters in a theme. I fail to understand the logic of that statement. In NGs like this one posts tend to be question and answer sessions so if you top post then the answer appears before the question - have you ever seen a FAQ written that way? Many responses are in fact mid posted where the topic is more complex. If you want to see the problems of mid and bottom posting in a crap news reader, simply look up a complex thread in Google and try to follow it. It is much easier to follow in top posted OE. In my experience, when you use Google groups the matches are often in the middle of a thread and, if they are top posted, then you have to scroll down to read what it is a reply to. If the news reader cannot cope with OE style correspondence, then I regret to say, that it is a minority taste. It isn't that the *newsreaders* can't *cope* with top posting, it's the people who don't like it. It certainly isn't a minority taste; quite the contrary in fact. In the majority of Usenet groups top posting is frowned upon. usenet pedants who are still Canute like, refusing to accept that the present standard is Microsoft and top posting. With respect Capitol, Microsoft is *not* the standard. The Internet is a platform-independent. OS-independent, hardware-independent medium; no-one owns it, the standards are defined by agreement, e.g. RFCs and the W3C (of which MS is a member). Asserting that OE is the standard for news is the same as those who assert that Internet Explorer is the standard for the Web and code webpages full of IE-specific code that doesn't display properly, or at all, in other browsers. Now, if they are just their own personal webpages, then they are free to do that, but if they are coding webpages for commercial sites (by which I mean sites that are selling on-line) then they stand to lose business for that company (as am example, Argos has lost business from me because their site only worked in IE - it now works in all browsers). They may (and do) argue that non-IE browsers only account for 5% of web users (a figure that is doubtless wildly inaccurate) but I bet you'll not find a bean counter in the world who would shrug their shoulds at lost revenue and say, "it doesn't matter, it's only 5%". I have read, on more than one occassion, people with the view that MS is the standard (for the web) make statements like, "stuff the W3C; MS sets the standard", which shows an incredible ignorance of what the web and the W3C is. MS is one of many companies and groups who ratify the standards for the Web and IE, since v5, has supported these standards. |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
[OT] Car insurance craziness
Welcome!
Regards Capitol Essjay001 wrote in message ... I'm with you Capitol, though the reason I tend to top post is twofold:- 1. every office I have ever worked in MOD or government the latest correspondence is placed on top of the file and that has been a convention since before the computer was invented. 2. those people who insist on no top posting tend not to snip resulting in my having to scroll through piles of clutter before I get to the point. It really F***s me off! It's a bit like the guy who, when you ask him a question, he repeats it the question before he answers. Damn that is so annoying. As for the arguement that top posting places the answer before the question what a load of crap. When I read a top posted answer I have already read the original question in the previous post I don't need to read it again. That fact that some people 'killfile' top posters makes them very childish. Just because a person top posts doesn't mean he has nothing to say. However, having said that we may end up talking to each other. Steve R Capitol wrote: Hi, as about the only reasoning response, I thought you might like to hear some reasons. The current standard of newsreader is Microsoft OE. This is a top posting protocol. Bottom posted replies are a pain in the butt for quick reading of the letters in a theme. Many responses are in fact mid posted where the topic is more complex. If you want to see the problems of mid and bottom posting in a crap news reader, simply look up a complex thread in Google and try to follow it. It is much easier to follow in top posted OE. I have seen a number of responses to various other posters in this newsgroup from a particular pedant who endeavours to promote yesterdays newsgroups standards as the Bible for tomorrow. When he attacked my style of posting I responded and will continue always to do so. IMO There is no style of posting which is best. If the news reader cannot cope with OE style correspondence, then I regret to say, that it is a minority taste. Whether the content is worth reading is another matter. However, I was very impressed with the generally low literary and intellectual quality of the response I received. The education system is certainly failing. If the DIY skills are down to this level, then IMM is right! I shall continue to post in my current style, particularly if it upsets the usenet pedants who are still Canute like, refusing to accept that the present standard is Microsoft and top posting. Congratulations on being the only respondent with a sense of reason and proportion. Regards Capitol Martin Angove wrote in message ... In message , "Capitol" wrote: Huge wrote in message ... "Capitol" writes: [40 lines snipped] please? Do you think you could give consideration to not top-posting, You missed the point, that, for all government employees, the pensions "Capitol" writes: Huge wrote in message ... Capitol Regards NO!!!! Not a problem. Unless you wanted me to see your postings, that is. No, I think, I'd rather you retained your vital delusions of self importance in telling other people what do! So don't bother to open your mind to a different viewpoint. Regards Capitol Sorry, Huge has a point on this one: 1: Consistency (bottom, OR top) aids readability. Everyone doing different makes it very difficult to follow a thread. 2: Bottom posting is the accepted way of doing things in practically every newsgroup since the year dot. (Ok, "post" posting is more like it; the principle of replying *after* the bit you are replying to is what counts) 3: Almost everyone on this ng bottom posts, and many will correct previous top postings, so the occasional top poster *really* mucks things up. 4: A short 1 or 2 line top post is often missed (unless I'm unusual) when there's a large posting history, as I see the history and automatically page to the first non-indented bit of text (my reader colours the indents differently, first indent gets green, second red. Non quoted text is black and thus instantly recognisable). Having said all that, he did rather bombard you with it, so perhaps he could have been a bit more gentle. Hwyl! M. -- Martin Angove (it's Cornish for "Smith") - ARM/Digital SA110 RPC See the Aber Valley -- http://www.tridwr.demon.co.uk/abervalley.html ... ILLITERATE? Write for a free brochure... -- Steve R --- One piece, one button suit, timeless fashion. All made by the same manufacturer, no designer label, everybody has one. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|