Happy New Year with "Lumières d'Opale"

[Lumières d'Opale]

Hello and happy New Year,
The “Lumières d’Opale” ("Lights of Opal") Gallery presents pictures
from the Côte D'Opale where the light is always changing. Some photos
strongly raster are aimed to try to cross eyes digital photography and
pointillist painting.
Discover a new selection of 20 new photos of August 2010: numbering
Lumo 1182 to 1163.
The Gallery, periodically enriched, today presents approximately 270
photos, easily accessible. Downloading and using non-profit are
allowed, subject to mentioning the source.
The site is no profit. I am an amateur photographer. I use optical
Leica, "Panasonic tz6" apparatus.
For optimal vision full screen: click View/full screen, then click
"Slideshow" at the top left
ATTENTION: to achieve this gallery, click the correct address:
http://picasaweb.google.com/Lumieresdopale
Sincerely,
Daniel

[Noons]

ATTENTION: to achieve this gallery, click the correct address:http://picasaweb.google.com/Lumieresdopale

Nice stuff. Thanks for sharing.

[Troy Piggins]

Post by Noons

Post by Lumières d'Opale
http://picasaweb.google.com/Lumieresdopale

Nice stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Have you relaxed your strong views on what countries people can
post from in aus.photo? ;) Poor Daniel Rocha... he posted here
a couple of years too soon. :)

[Noons]

Post by Troy Piggins

Post by Noons

Post by Lumières d'Opale
http://picasaweb.google.com/Lumieresdopale

Nice stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Have you relaxed your strong views on what countries people can
post from in aus.photo? ;) Poor Daniel Rocha... he posted here
a couple of years too soon. :)

Anyone from anywhere can post here, if it is about photography.
Not the crap that comes from the pbase trolls.
And certainly not the personal attacks that characterize the posters from that
craphole.
That will get the swift treatment.

[Noons]

Post by Noons

Post by Troy Piggins

Post by Lumières d'Opale
http://picasaweb.google.com/Lumieresdopale

Nice stuff. Thanks for sharing.

Have you relaxed your strong views on what countries people can
post from in aus.photo? ;) Poor Daniel Rocha... he posted here
a couple of years too soon. :)

Anyone from anywhere can post here, if it is about photography.
Not the crap that comes from the pbase trolls.
And certainly not the personal attacks that characterize the posters from that
craphole.
That will get the swift treatment.

And it better not be cross-posted. Which this one wasn't.

[Troy Piggins]

[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 16 lines snipped |=---]

Post by Noons
Not the crap that comes from the pbase trolls.
And certainly not the personal attacks that characterize the
posters from that craphole.
That will get the swift treatment.

And it better not be cross-posted. Which this one wasn't.

Actually he did worse. He posted the same thing individually to
several groups. Cross-posting is the recommended method of
posting to many groups, but keep it down to just a few. ;)

[dj_nme]

Post by Troy Piggins

[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 16 lines snipped |=---]

Post by Noons
Not the crap that comes from the pbase trolls.
And certainly not the personal attacks that characterize the
posters from that craphole.
That will get the swift treatment.

And it better not be cross-posted. Which this one wasn't.

Actually he did worse. He posted the same thing individually to
several groups. Cross-posting is the recommended method of
posting to many groups, but keep it down to just a few. ;)

I though that it was crossposted, as it showed up almost in every photo
NG I could find.
Individual posting is much worse, as the individual victims (each NG)
think that they are alone and there is no discussion about this spamming
of Usenet (except here, apparently).

It is slightly amusing to me that it's about the only thing to show up
in the hived-off groups from rec.photo.digital (eg: r.p.d.zlr,
r.p.d.dslr, etc.), especially after all the whining to get them created
in the first place from the instigators.

[Troy Piggins]

[---=| Quote block shrinked by t-prot: 9 lines snipped |=---]

Post by Troy Piggins
Actually he did worse. He posted the same thing individually to
several groups. Cross-posting is the recommended method of
posting to many groups, but keep it down to just a few. ;)

I though that it was crossposted, as it showed up almost in every photo
NG I could find.

Have a look at one of those message and see what's in the
Newsgroups: header. If all of them are in that, it's
crossposted. If just that group is in that header, it's
individually posted to the groups.

I checked on the ones that popped up in the groups I subscribe to
and it was individually posted. Could be a news server thing.

Individual posting is much worse, as the individual victims (each NG)
think that they are alone and there is no discussion about this spamming
of Usenet (except here, apparently).
It is slightly amusing to me that it's about the only thing to show up
in the hived-off groups from rec.photo.digital (eg: r.p.d.zlr,
r.p.d.dslr, etc.), especially after all the whining to get them created
in the first place from the instigators.

Many USENET users filter out posts cross-posted to "too many"
groups, I know I do. It's a way of keeping out spam, and there
aren't too many legitimate reasons to post to any more than 3 or
so groups. That's why they have individual groups with
specialised topics. Sometimes it's useful and necessary, but
rare occasions and 2 or 3 groups max should suffice in my
experience.

I have a fairly extensive set of rules/filters for news reading
to keep out garbage (whether that's spam, OT conversations,
flame wars etc) and by far the most complex rules I have are for
the photography groups. So much off-topic discussions, threads
going off on tangents, flaming. I don't understand why.
Don't really care. Just an observation.

And of course you could point out that here I am, jumping in on
this thread and taking it OT. Sorry. I'll stop now.

[Noons]

Post by Troy Piggins
Many USENET users filter out posts cross-posted to "too many"
groups, I know I do.  It's a way of keeping out spam, and there
aren't too many legitimate reasons to post to any more than 3 or
so groups. That's why they have individual groups with

Geee, I wonder why cross-posting would then be a "recommended" method?

[Troy Piggins]

Post by Noons

Post by Troy Piggins
Many USENET users filter out posts cross-posted to "too many"
groups, I know I do.  It's a way of keeping out spam, and there
aren't too many legitimate reasons to post to any more than 3 or
so groups. That's why they have individual groups with

Geee, I wonder why cross-posting would then be a "recommended" method?

I believe the reason why it's recommended is that most of the
good newsreaders will mark a message as read in one group, and if
you open another group it was cross-posted to it will be marked
as already read there. Much better than reading the same
messages over and over.

RFC for Netiquette Guidelines:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855

In particular:
"If you feel an article will be of interest to more than one
Newsgroup, be sure to CROSSPOST the article rather than
individually post it to those groups. In general, probably only
five-to-six groups will have similar enough interests to warrant
this."

[Noons]

Post by Troy Piggins

Post by Noons

Post by Troy Piggins
groups, I know I do. It's a way of keeping out spam, and there
aren't too many legitimate reasons to post to any more than 3 or
so groups. That's why they have individual groups with

Geee, I wonder why cross-posting would then be a "recommended" method?

I believe the reason why it's recommended is that most of the
good newsreaders will mark a message as read in one group, and if
you open another group it was cross-posted to it will be marked
as already read there. Much better than reading the same
messages over and over.

Which simply means cross-posting should not be used. Otherwise, why do it if
"good newsreaders" will make it useless or hide it?
Sorry Piggo: on this one we'll have to agree to disagree.

Post by Troy Piggins
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
"If you feel an article will be of interest to more than one
Newsgroup, be sure to CROSSPOST the article rather than
individually post it to those groups. In general, probably only
five-to-six groups will have similar enough interests to warrant
this."

Yeah, but why then not point out this one:
(same RFC, precedes the one you mentioned, there are also other entries)

- In NetNews parlance, "Posting" refers to posting a new article
to a group, or responding to a post someone else has posted.
"Cross-Posting" refers to posting a message to more than one
group. If you introduce Cross-Posting to a group, or if you
direct "Followup-To:" in the header of your posting, warn
readers! Readers will usually assume that the message was
posted to a specific group and that followups will go to
that group. Headers change this behavior.



Cross-posting clearly is an abnormal situation that should be avoided or warned.

[Noons]

Post by dj_nme

Actually he did worse.  He posted the same thing individually to
several groups.  Cross-posting is the recommended method of
posting to many groups, but keep it down to just a few.  ;)

I though that it was crossposted, as it showed up almost in every photo
NG I could find.
Individual posting is much worse, as the individual victims (each NG)
think that they are alone and there is no discussion about this spamming
of Usenet (except here, apparently).
It is slightly amusing to me that it's about the only thing to show up
in the hived-off groups from rec.photo.digital (eg: r.p.d.zlr,
r.p.d.dslr, etc.), especially after all the whining to get them created
in the first place from the instigators.

Actually, cross posting is the worst choice and there is NOTHING
written anywhere recommending it on the Usenet.
And it will be damned here for as long as necessaqry until all trolls
get it that the Usenet is not a frere for all for scams.

Got it?