Get rid of Quicken

I think it's kinda cute.... ;-)

I would like an option to delete the quoted text. I end up doing it manually.

All use groups should post the latest message on the top.

All toilet paper should unroll from the top.

Any other questions?

"Mr.Jan" wrote in news:d19a244c-2974-4946-abe3- snipped-for-privacy@37g2000prx.googlegroups.com:

Yes, should the lid be left open or closed?

But please leave enough text behind so that folks know what you are replying to.

This is a function of the news group client (software) that is being used. Using google groups web style won't give you any options.

Heck, we are in a Google Group on Quicken...Of COURSE we are discussing whether it should post from oldest to newest or newest to oldest. No need to leave text!

AARP has a nice feature on their otherwise dreadful groups, it puts a link to the original message.

And finally to Andrew: If I am using my bath, it is up or down depending on ....... In the half bath in the hall, I try to keep it down. Seems polite.

"Mr.Jan" wrote in news:00d3c28d-0f2b-42bc-9cd3- snipped-for-privacy@v23g2000vbi.googlegroups.com:

So sorry, Jan, you are using Google groups as a gui to access . So you are participating in usenet, not a commercial forum, in spite of giving revenue to google through its ads.

No, we are not. You may be using googlegroups to access this newsgroup, but it's a Usenet newsgroup, not a Google group.

That is interesting. Does Google have actual groups then?

Google is great for searches, however for UseNet access it TOTALLY sucks. There is absolutely NO NEED to use Google to access UseNet and there are some fine FREE servers available, such as the one I use, "aioe.org".

Yes. Start here:

Google also provides access to Usenet groups such as this one for those folks that do not have have access to a news server.

Unfortunately spammers have found that it is easy to send spam using Google groups interface and there are efforts to filter out messages sent using Google groups. You commented about the spam that you see in this group. I see very little spam because the news server that I use filter out the spam.

Yes, Google allows people to create their own groups. For the most part they are not circulated around the world like Usenet groups.

Yes, but they are greatly inferior to Usenet, in my view. The only thing Google is good at, with respect to groups, is searching messages posted on Usenet. They are the best at that.

I strongly recommend you dump Google for what you're using it for and replace it with a real newsreader. You will likely find it a much better experience (once you get used to the newsreader).

Well, the older I get, the more I don't know. I didn't like the Google groups thing and now I see what is causing it. I much prefer the style of Yahoo Groups and I keep an ID over there for such things. On the other hand, this is a very good group regardless of how I get to it and I like getting the summary every morning. So, use more than one vendor seems to be the rule.

-- Three messages ago you read: Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?

Two messages ago you read: Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?

A: Bottom-posting.

In the previous message you read, after scrolling down: Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?

A: Bottom-posting.

Q: Why is bottom-posting such a bad thing?

And now, if you scroll down far enough, again, you learn:

Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?

A: Bottom-posting.

Q: Why is bottom-posting such a bad thing?

A: Because since every moron quotes everything in the message to which they are replying, you end up reading the same stuff again, and again, and again until you barf.

John Carter wrote:

How far down did you have to scroll to read this?

While I'm a fan of bottom-posting, I'm also a fan of leaving a snippet of the previous post, making it easier to follow the thread.

Notan

But I DIDN'T write that, did I?

I think we can all agree that there is way too little snipping going on. The notion that every message must be the entire thread is ludicrous.

Doug