"The Russian Blue" book, anyone?

On 2 Mar 2004 06:20:59 -0800, (Tropical Tim)
wrote:

Bob Brenchley. wrote in message . ..
On 29 Feb 2004 17:01:42 -0800, (Aquagrrl) wrote:

Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
posting is much more common than replying inline.

Only to ignorant or selfish people.

No Bob, you are the selfish, ignorant person. If someone is responding
to a particular statement within a posting, then yes, please do quote
that statement just above your reply.

If you are responding to the entire posting in general, please, please
post at the top. It's really stupid to have to scroll though countless
lines of the same posting time after time just to get to a one line
reply at the damn bottom of all of it.

Rubbish. Top posting is never justified and just shows the ignorance
of the person doing it.

All of you should know by now that Bob Brenchley is a fool and a
troll. He is most likly the only person in the world that thinks of
him as anything else. Please DO post at the top if you are replying to
the entire post and just delete the "old post". That way it saves
bandwidth, time, and a lot of unnecessary reading.

Thanks,

Tim

It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson - however, I reserve the
legal right to charge you for future lessons if you fail to take this
opportunity to correct your errant ways.

I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
flamed!

There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
animals. In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out. My cat has a cat flap
and he comes and goes as he pleases, we are nowhere near road traffic, in
fact we have a large lake and about 25 swans that he has made friends with.
My last cat lived for 17 years and came to no harm, this one is 5 and vey
healthy. However I know it is very different in the US as there are many
predators there, so you tend to have the opposite with most cats staying in.

Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
either way in my opinion. However to say Bob is an abusive pet owner is not
strickly fair. He may certainly be abusive, but he is not an abusive pet
owner by allowing his cat outside, about 30 million other Brits do exactly
the same, in fact I don't know a cat owner that doesn't. I watch one of
your programmes - Aminal Cops I think it is called (the ones based in New
York and Michigan) - now thos that appear on there well they most certainly
are abusive pet owners!!

AK

I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
flamed!

There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
animals. In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out. My cat has a cat flap
and he comes and goes as he pleases, we are nowhere near road traffic, in
fact we have a large lake and about 25 swans that he has made friends with.
My last cat lived for 17 years and came to no harm, this one is 5 and vey
healthy. However I know it is very different in the US as there are many
predators there, so you tend to have the opposite with most cats staying in.

Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
either way in my opinion. However to say Bob is an abusive pet owner is not
strickly fair. He may certainly be abusive, but he is not an abusive pet
owner by allowing his cat outside, about 30 million other Brits do exactly
the same, in fact I don't know a cat owner that doesn't. I watch one of
your programmes - Aminal Cops I think it is called (the ones based in New
York and Michigan) - now thos that appear on there well they most certainly
are abusive pet owners!!

AK

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:44:15 -0000, "AK" wrote:

I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
flamed!

There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
animals.

Foxes, dogs? I had a cat attacked by 2 pitbulls. I had another cat who
got attacked by a whippet - but fortutately she got the upper hand and
ripped the hell out of it :-p That was luck more than anything,
because that particular dog had killed at least 2 cats prior (I knew
the owner and he confimed this).

In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out.

It is the norm now but it's certainly changing. Ten years ago I never
knew *anyone* who kept a cat indoors (me included). Now I can think of
quite a number of people I've come into contact with socially and
through rescue organisations who do so, after years of losing cats to
human intervention.

The area I live in certainly used to be 'safe'. But in recent years
we've had a fair spate of poisonings and cats (and dogs) mysteriously
going missing, local speculation being they're taken for underground
dog fights. I also had a neighbour who took umbrage at my cats walking
along his fence and thought it was acceptable to shoot them with an
air rifle. There's also been a lot of building work around here,
houses springing up everywhere bringing with them more roads and
people and traffic.I suppose you could say, well, these things happen,
got to let animals take risks, but I don't believe that. It's my
responsibility to look after my animals and I do so to the best of my
ability. It would suit me to have them out most of the day, then I
wouldn't have to worry about keeping them entertained!


Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
either way in my opinion.

Ideally a cat should be free to roam, there's no question. But
changing environments mean adapting to the safest means. If I had lots
of fields and no road or railway or animal-haters near me, my cats
could wander in and out as they please. As it happens, I can't afford
to give up my home of over 20 years because the landscape around me
has changed. Maybe one day when I'm rich...

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:44:15 -0000, "AK" wrote:

I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
flamed!

There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
animals.

Foxes, dogs? I had a cat attacked by 2 pitbulls. I had another cat who
got attacked by a whippet - but fortutately she got the upper hand and
ripped the hell out of it :-p That was luck more than anything,
because that particular dog had killed at least 2 cats prior (I knew
the owner and he confimed this).

In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out.

It is the norm now but it's certainly changing. Ten years ago I never
knew *anyone* who kept a cat indoors (me included). Now I can think of
quite a number of people I've come into contact with socially and
through rescue organisations who do so, after years of losing cats to
human intervention.

The area I live in certainly used to be 'safe'. But in recent years
we've had a fair spate of poisonings and cats (and dogs) mysteriously
going missing, local speculation being they're taken for underground
dog fights. I also had a neighbour who took umbrage at my cats walking
along his fence and thought it was acceptable to shoot them with an
air rifle. There's also been a lot of building work around here,
houses springing up everywhere bringing with them more roads and
people and traffic.I suppose you could say, well, these things happen,
got to let animals take risks, but I don't believe that. It's my
responsibility to look after my animals and I do so to the best of my
ability. It would suit me to have them out most of the day, then I
wouldn't have to worry about keeping them entertained!


Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
either way in my opinion.

Ideally a cat should be free to roam, there's no question. But
changing environments mean adapting to the safest means. If I had lots
of fields and no road or railway or animal-haters near me, my cats
could wander in and out as they please. As it happens, I can't afford
to give up my home of over 20 years because the landscape around me
has changed. Maybe one day when I'm rich...

Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
reply...

--

Chaney

Chaney's World
www.chaney.i12.com
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:10:53 +0000, in article
, Bob Brenchley.
wrote:


Rubbish. Top posting is never justified and just shows the ignorance
of the person doing it.


As does not trimming the original post to only the relevant parts.
This also shows the ignorance of the person doing it, particularly
when they are trying to reprimand others for breaching netiquette
guidelines.


It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

Pot, kettle, black eh Bob?

It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
reply...

--

Chaney

Chaney's World
www.chaney.i12.com
"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:10:53 +0000, in article
, Bob Brenchley.
wrote:


Rubbish. Top posting is never justified and just shows the ignorance
of the person doing it.


As does not trimming the original post to only the relevant parts.
This also shows the ignorance of the person doing it, particularly
when they are trying to reprimand others for breaching netiquette
guidelines.


It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

Pot, kettle, black eh Bob?

It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:02:22 -0000, "Chaney" wrote:

Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
reply...

Bottom quoting, to call it what it really is, is a Microsoft invention
- pushed on users *because it is the opposite of common practice and
common sense*.


T.E.D. - e-mail must contain "T.E.D." or my .sig in the body)

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:02:22 -0000, "Chaney" wrote:

Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
reply...

Bottom quoting, to call it what it really is, is a Microsoft invention
- pushed on users *because it is the opposite of common practice and
common sense*.


T.E.D. - e-mail must contain "T.E.D." or my .sig in the body)

In article , Chaney
wrote:

Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
reply...


I was posting in 1988 and definitely didn't see _either_ top- or
bottom-posting as the norm. What I saw amongst the clueful was
judicious editing and a habit of starting a reply on the first
screenful of quoted text.

For long quoted posts, this usually means "middle-posting."

For this post here, where I only quoted a paragraph, posting after the
quote makes sense.

Top-posting is sometimes OK, but is usually inferior to at least
providing _some_ context.

Mostly I wish people would learn to use their editos instead of quoting
a long article and adding some short comment at the top (or the
bottom).

--Tim May