DCC recommendation ?

On 17 Feb 2006 04:01:19 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:

Then get a non-lame usenet program; there are lots of them out there, and free, too.
--
Steve

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote: [...]

Not with Mozilla/Thunderbird.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:50:54 -0500, Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

Guess he meant a _Microsoft_ browser-based usenet client. Some folks' views of the universe of possibilities are self-limited.
--
Steve

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve Caple wrote:

I'm using Mozilla/Firefox, and it doesn't work with that, either.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18 Feb 2006 04:11:07 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:

What version? 1.5.0.1?
--
Steve

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve Caple wrote:

Yep, and it doesn't work. Face it, the link doesn't work from within a browser, or isn't supposed to. If it does it's only because the browser *isn't* recognized as a browser. Think about it: "direct linking not allowed". What does that mean to you?
The whole point is, nobody is "lying" about the link not working; it doesn't work for browser usenet readers. OTOH, the link is not broken or a fake, it really is there if you can figure it out.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 19 Feb 2006 18:40:14 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net wrote:

Well, I didn't say anything about lying, but I did get my train of thought sidetracked into which browser was being used. I guess I just couldn't comprehend anyone using anything but a dedicated newsreader for usenet.
My main point is what I said before, "get a non-lame usenet program; there are lots of them out there, and free, too." I use tBird for e-mail and Firefox for a browser, but I wouldn't think of using them for usenet when things like 40tude Dialog (and two or three others) are free.
--
Steve

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve Caple wrote:

Does that stuff work with Google groups? Not practically, as far as I can tell. Google has its own advantages- zero footprint and the entire group history is archived and instantly searchable.
The problem is not with the usenet reader, it has to do with the limitations of the site hosting the picture- no html links.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net spake thus:

As you probably know, Google has its own set of problems, whatever its advantages. For instance, in another group I read, there's a guy who likes to use Google's "delete message" feature to edit his postings. Within Google, all looks to be well. However, anyone using a NNTP-based client to read the newsgroup sees all the "deleted" messages, since not many news hosts honor cancel requests.
I still can't see why someone would want to use a web-based host to read and post to newsgroups: slow and cumbersome. But that's just me. (I use Thunderbird, which is very adequate.)
--
Every American is full of Cheney's buckshot.

- Sign on the Grand-Lake Theater, Oakland, CA, Feb. 14, 2006
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 08:05:26 -0800, David Nebenzahl wrote:

Do check out Dialog
--
Steve

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
David Nebenzahl wrote: [...]

And pretty well all posts to all newsgroups exist in multiple copies anyhow. Deleting the message from one host just means there's one less copy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Steve Caple wrote:

Links work from Thunderbird IME. If they're highlighted, they work, ie, Moz starts, and does its thing. If the link doesn't work, the failure is in the browser, not in the Usenet reader, as I understand it.
If you're using a firewall, you may have to fiddle with the privacy settings for some websites to work properly. Zone Alarm, for example, is paranoid about allowing a website to open a window.
Some ISPs will not relay (pass on) a request for a link to some websites, for security reasons, and some websites will refuse a request from some ISPs, for the same reasons. (This can also happen with e-mail.) IOW, a link may not work for a number of reasons.
HTH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:34:34 +1100, mark_newton

I really like the module. Fine work. Do you have any shots other than the 'aerial' photograph. I would really enjoy seeing them if you do.
Ken Day

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ken Day wrote:
> I really like the module. Fine work.
Thanks for the compliment, Ken.
> Do you have any shots other than the 'aerial' photograph. I would > really enjoy seeing them if you do.
I'm dragging the thing outside next weekend to have some photos taken for a magazine article. I'll post some of them when they're ready.
All the best,
Mark.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 13:32:13 +1100, mark_newton

Thanks. I'll be looking forward to seeing them.
Ken Day
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
His url worked for me no problem.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Terry Flynn wrote:

Hey Flynn.... let's something straight right now:
A person DOES NOT need to use NMRA track standards, nor do they need to scratch built turnouts in order to participate in this forum.
Do you understand that?
____ Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Somehow I doubt he does.Actually he reminds me of a showbag "not much value and full of shit" the name kinda sticks for Terry doesn't it :-)
Cheers
Nathan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill Sohl wrote:

All the NMRA H0 track and wheel standards uses a larger check gauge compared to RTR H0 wheels and track. That makes them unimportant for the majority of H0 modellers. If you use the NMRA check gauge on RTR track you get at best bumpy operation, at worst a derailment. The tight tolerances required for the NMRA proto87 standard is impractical if building complex track work. The NMRA RP on car weight results in trains that are to heavy, and it is impractical to weight many models to this RP. It is also bad advice as the formula they use does not result in consistent weight per length of car, which is the best result if you want to run long trains. The NMRA RP results in maximum length trains up to 40% shorter. Se my web page for superior H0 alternatives. Some RP's from the past the NMRA would like to forget, the X2F coupler comes to mind. There current coupler and coupler box RP is unimportant, because Kadee provide a better solution. One NMRA RP I like is about minimum radius.

Terry Flynn
http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html
HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates
DC control circuit diagrams
HO scale track and wheel standards
Any scale track standard and wheel spread sheet
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
::nothing I care to read::
Ah, yet ANOTHER new email address you're posting from...
::PLONK::
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.