Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Cool .sigs  was RE: How long has it been?
From: jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner)
Date: 14 Oct 92 00:20:48 EST
Distribution: usa
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

i tried sending this via email, but it choked. if you don't care about
sig files hit 'n' now.

To: 01ksdavis@bsu-ucs.uucp (Rebel without a clue.)
Subject: Re: Cool .sigs  was RE: How long has it been?
Newsgroups: alt.romance

In article <1992Oct13.184629.10543@bsu-ucs.uucp> you write:
> jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu (jason 'Think!' steiner) writes:
> > 
> > $ set flame
> > 
> 	Thanx for the info.  Knew if I asked nice enough on one of
> the nets, I would be directed by another kindly usenetter-NOT!

you got what you wanted, didn't you?

> >all the biggest, ugliest, most useless and
> > wasteful .sig files end up there. why? so they can be rightfully
> > derided as the monstrosities they are.
>
> 	It's so obvious that you don't like .sigs.  That's okay, as it is a
> free country (at least I know America is, I don't know where you 
> are coming from, for all I could know, it could be Toledo, Spain.

no, i -like- sigs. i have about 20 myself. i just don't like when
they're 20 lines long and crossposted to 3 groups and quoted 
repeatedly and followed up by requests for more and, well, you get 
the idea.

> > believe it or not, you, Kyle S. Davis have had your .sig warlorded
> > a -number- of times.
> 	Really, I feel honored.  I checked, and it was only there once.

your news spool expires too quickly. 

> >the bat one is even less original and wasteful and has been there 
> >even more often.
> > 
> > if you want ASCII art, fine. start a mailing list. better yet,
> > just buy a CD-ROM with an archive of alt.fan.warlord.
>
> If, obviously the reason why you don't like sigs is because you are stuck
> with a modem that only runs at perhaps 2400 baud, then my odds of 
> coming along with a CD-ROM for my Ami are as about the same as your 
> odds of coming along with a 19.2K modem for you Ami.

pfah! i use my Amy for what it should be used for its true purpose,
playing games. and i don't have to bother with piddly 19.2 modems.
-some- of us have 1.5K leased line and local ethernet. and last
time i checked i had 600megs free for storing as many ugly .sigs
as i want.

> >but -don't- append 20 line .sig files to 4 line messages.
>
> Last time *I* counted, it was eight.  No more, and currently no 
> less.

i was commenting on that repulsive ASCII pic you quoted. your 
sig file was just the icing on the cake. oh yeah, 8 lines is exactly
twice the size recommended.

> >it's stupid. it wastes space and time on computers and messages 
> >around the world.
>
> On the contrary, I think with some studies, it can show that graphically-
> orientated .sigs are better on eyes (providing a refreshing pause 
> from text only) than the endless monotony of text.

so what? it still takes up tons of space time. most of us have newsreaders
that break up the flow for us, thanks. not everyone is fortunate
enough have virtually unlimited disk space and online time.

> > AND IT SHOWS WHAT A CLUELESS NEWBIE YOU ARE!
> 	                       /\/\/\
> This shows that while you don't like .sigs, you *do* like personal 
> names.

your point?

> Including mine.  The thing is, the reason why I came up with this 
> creature that  you despise so, is to let people know where I am 
> coming from.  

and you can't fit your name and address on 2 lines? sorry, that's
just incompetent.

> > we are not impressed. anyone who's been on the net more than a 
> > month has already seen enough vampire bats and Amiga checks to 
> > last a lifetime.
>
> Obviously you don't pay ANY attention to any of the Amiga newsgroups, 
> because I have been usenetting for over a year now. I *NEVER* tire 
> of .sigs. The only thing that I do tire of ARE PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO 
> WANT TO PUT DOWN ANYBODY ELSE FOR ANY REASON AT ALL, BE IT WHAT 
> YOU DEEM TO BE A STUPID QUESTION OR WHAT YOU THINK THEY SHOULD DO.

look, dude, you're taking this a bit too seriously. i don't especially
hate your sig. i don't -care- if you keep using it. as i said, a
few extra bytes don't matter on the systems i'm using. but it -does-
for a lot of people. what i objected to was not your sig. it's
ugly, yes, but it isn't killing anyone. it was *re*posting that
ANSI pic to -3- wrong groups and *encouraging* stuff like that.

hell, i didn't even flame the person who posted it originally!

> >>.sig deleted because posting of .sigs twice (in the same article) 
> >>does waste space.

THAT was my point. got it?

> Checked out the rating myself.  Was rather proud that I was even 
> worth mentioning.  The only reason why the border is incomplete is 
> because I never have the time to fix it.

don't apologize. you have enough time to reply to flames, fix you
sig file.

> > see what i mean?
>
> NO, all I see is THAT YOU FEEL YOURSELF SUPERIOR TO ANYBODY ELSE 
> ON THE NET WHO HAPPENS TO DISAGREE WITH YOU (IN SOME CASES JUST BY EXISTING) 
> FOR SOME REASON.

wrong bucko. i don't even -know- you, much less know enough to 
disagree with you. i just object to your inappropriate & horrendous 
use of bandwidth. i used the flame format to hopefully get the 
message out to some other people out there. that's no longer needed, 
which is why i'm writing a relatively serious reply via email.

> > so why did i post this big long article, wasting as much bandwidth
> > as you are? SO YOU WON'T FUCKING DO IT AGAIN! get the point? good.
>
> You realize you can't stop me from doing it again, and if you feel this 
> strongly about something, you could just set up a kill-file with 
> anybody who has ever posted a sig.  Course, this would include 
> yourself :-) 

*sigh* you don't get it do you? i couldn't care less about your
posts. hell, you might even have something good to say. and that
wouldn't solve the problem of you quoting unnecessary garbage
to 3 different groups.

> You also will realize that you can't stop me from FUCKING again. 
> Really, does your mother know you talk like this to people you 
> don't even know?

fuck, yeah. :^)

> > $ unset flame
            ^^^^^
see this? a flame, in internet parlance, is a wildly accusatory
and abusive post used to make a point. only clueless newbies
take them 100% seriously. if you can't take the flames, get
off the net. i'm replying to you and trying to explain my motives
so that you'll hopefully -learn- something you didn't the
first time around.

> SORRY about that, didn't realize that the article was being 
> crossposted into  eternity.  But still, at least that way I found 
> out about the .sig  newsgroup.

see? it did serve a purpose. who knows, before long you might
be warlording .sigs all on your own.

> > jason "golly, did i say that?!?!" steiner
>
> yeah, I guess you did.  You know, I have been thinking, maybe if I convert
> my .sig file into binary and compress it and THEN replace my old 
> sig with this, those who really want to see it CAN, and those who 
> don't want to see it can just believe that their receiving end 
> isn't holding up.

it's not a new idea, but it's a tolerable one. good luck, don't take
flames so seriously, and fix that silly lookin' sig.

> > --
> > `,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`  jsteiner@anwsun.phya.utoledo.edu ,`,`,`
> -- 
> See, here is your .sig.  A one-liner with an email address that *might*
> if conditions are favorable and assuming that anybody would want to 
> email you anyway.  The eighty-column issue is sort of relevant, I 
> guess.  You see, I have 132 columns (that's why the message might 
> be garbled.

ok, i understand that. i've done 300 columns on my workstation before,
but it's kinda hard to read. 80 columns (actually 72) is the defacto
internet standard tho, so you might want to consider following it.

> Because of your constructive criticism, I *promise* to work on my .sig. 
> I *will* still have a .sig because I believe that they are 
> worthwhile things, and you can't change my belief in that anymore 
> than I can change the fact how rude you can be to people who you've 
> never met.

it was a -flame- fel'. flames are supposed to be rude. in fact,
there are whole groups dedicated to being rude, where it's considered
an art. i had thought an amiga person would be aware of this.

again, i'm not against .sigs. (should i include all 22 of mine in this
post? naah.) i don't even warlord. it was the fact that that
huge bat pic quoted so much, and your .sig just got caught in
the crossfire.

jason

hmm. seems my random .sig picker grabbed the shortest one i have.

--
me
Newsgroups: alt.romance