jeff

I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.

--
jeff

Pop-N-Fresh wrote:
> not really a violation he put OT in the subject :-)
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>
>>Thanks. You got me thinking of the original Bo and Luke, and that Plymouth
>>dealer I used to walk by on the way to high school. Definitely a newsgroup
>>charter violation.
>>
>>Earle

jeff

I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.

--
jeff

Pop-N-Fresh wrote:
> not really a violation he put OT in the subject :-)
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>
>>Thanks. You got me thinking of the original Bo and Luke, and that Plymouth
>>dealer I used to walk by on the way to high school. Definitely a newsgroup
>>charter violation.
>>
>>Earle

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

I have never reported even blatant spam if there's an "Off Topic"
warning in the subject line, after that statement it's up to the reader
as to whether they want waste their time reading it or not.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

jeff wrote:
>
> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.
>
> --
> jeff

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

I have never reported even blatant spam if there's an "Off Topic"
warning in the subject line, after that statement it's up to the reader
as to whether they want waste their time reading it or not.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

jeff wrote:
>
> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.
>
> --
> jeff

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

I have never reported even blatant spam if there's an "Off Topic"
warning in the subject line, after that statement it's up to the reader
as to whether they want waste their time reading it or not.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

jeff wrote:
>
> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.
>
> --
> jeff

Lon

Would that be a worse felony than top posting with a wasted .sig line
that has nothing more useful than your name in it.... such that anyone
following up with a compliant newsreader would find all of the older
content chopped off unless that .sig is corrupted by adding three dots
or similar to it?

Call the posting police!!!

jeff proclaimed:

> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.
>
> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of
> ignorance.

-- ...
jeff

Pop-N-Fresh wrote:

> not really a violation he put OT in the subject :-)
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>
>> Thanks. You got me thinking of the original Bo and Luke, and that
Plymouth
>> dealer I used to walk by on the way to high school. Definitely a
newsgroup
>> charter violation.
>>
>> Earle

Lon

Would that be a worse felony than top posting with a wasted .sig line
that has nothing more useful than your name in it.... such that anyone
following up with a compliant newsreader would find all of the older
content chopped off unless that .sig is corrupted by adding three dots
or similar to it?

Call the posting police!!!

jeff proclaimed:

> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.
>
> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of
> ignorance.

-- ...
jeff

Pop-N-Fresh wrote:

> not really a violation he put OT in the subject :-)
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>
>> Thanks. You got me thinking of the original Bo and Luke, and that
Plymouth
>> dealer I used to walk by on the way to high school. Definitely a
newsgroup
>> charter violation.
>>
>> Earle

Lon

Would that be a worse felony than top posting with a wasted .sig line
that has nothing more useful than your name in it.... such that anyone
following up with a compliant newsreader would find all of the older
content chopped off unless that .sig is corrupted by adding three dots
or similar to it?

Call the posting police!!!

jeff proclaimed:

> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of ignorance.
>
> I disagree. Putting OT in front is an open admission that one is
> violating the charter of the newsgroup. This, to my thinking is worse
> than someone who blunders in with something off topic out of
> ignorance.

-- ...
jeff

Pop-N-Fresh wrote:

> not really a violation he put OT in the subject :-)
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
>
>> Thanks. You got me thinking of the original Bo and Luke, and that
Plymouth
>> dealer I used to walk by on the way to high school. Definitely a
newsgroup
>> charter violation.
>>
>> Earle