| Guest |  Electricity Question
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 20:24:00 +1000, Alan S <nothere@there.com>
wrote in <e8ohf311hb1f1g6o81hrtumq9l8dul87i0@********> :
>On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 04:42:08 GMT, kangaroo16
><kangaroo16@invalid.com> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>>It cost me very little to draft a letter for my doctor's
>>>signature and to carry a current prescription for my meds.
>>>
>>>
>>>Cheers, Alan, Australia
>>
>>Thanks for the support, Alan.
>>
>>Question: Do you find my posts hard to understand? You seem
>>very perceptive.
>>
>>Actually, the only "expertise" I can claim as being a successful
>>U.S. migrant of Australia.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Kangaroo 16
>
>Not hard to understand, but I do have a tendency to skip any
>but very important posts that exceed a couple of paras. So,
>those that were long I didn't finish.
>
>Two words you might considering adding to your lexicon, one
>to do, one to aim for:
>
><snip>
>brevity
>
>(well, you did ask:-)
1/ Had I the motivation, which I don't.
As to "snipping", firstly I see no need for it. New material is
easily spotted by the signs preceding the words, and on the
browser I use, it is in a different colour as well.
2/ In my experience on usenet, which is considerable, people
often snip others posts to avoid answering questions, or even to
try to change what earlier authors have written.
3/ When on a particular thread, I personally find it annoying to
have to refer to an earlier post, or sometimes even to my
original post.
4/ We aren't communicating by Morse code, or even by telex
standards. There is plenty of space at high speed transmission
and reception for text only messages using ASCII or ANSI.
5/ I touch type at around 55 wpm, so I don't find it difficult
to write fairly long posts, in any groups am following. My
reading speed is many times that.
6/ What I consider a waste of space and time is reading HTML
posts that have coloured type, photos attached, etc. ...Which is
precisely _why_ I use ASCII or ANSI plain text.
No problem reading a 3,000 to 5,000 word message in plain text.
However, color is a distraction, music is a distraction, blinking
text is a distraction...and I very seldom open any attachments to
a post.:-)
Reading a novel, such as "Gone With The Wind" takes about
two and a half hours.
Yes, they do have tapes and C.D.'s of "talking books" here. I've
sampled them, but find them extremely irritating. I wonder where
they find people who read aloud at what seems to be 20 to 30
words per minute? :-)
7/ As you and others probably have noted, I give usenet
references when I feel it desirable to do so.
However, if I go to a site, and it starts laboriously downloading
a photo before displaying any text, I quickly drop off it and go
to another source. I speak and read English, and don't need
illustrations, especially when they come before text.
If I am looking for some obscure info about a 'roo, I don't
require an illustration. I know what they look like. Have
hunted them, have eaten them. [Quite nice lean meat, actually!]
Were I to look for a particular recipe for roast pork, I don't
want or need a photo of the finished dish. Let alone illustrated
instructions on how to kill or butcher a pig, let alone a photo
of a live pig.:-)
8/ As to brevity, someone once said "I write long letters as I
lack the time to edit or condense them."
As you and others may have noticed, I don't usually proofread
what have written off the top of my head. I write it, usually
run a quick spellcheck, but that is about all.
9/ I don't consider a usenet post as a book suitable for
publication. If writing a book, would probably take far more
care on the original draft, proofread it, revise it, provide
footnotes and references, and so on.
O.K. perhaps some people don't read as rapidly as I do, or
have never learned to touch type.
I used to live in a fairly remote area in the US, and was in my
late teens before even saw a black and white T.V.
Even though have long had PAL color, I very seldom watch
a T.V. program, even the news. Would much prefer 30 minutes or
an hour reading the news off various internet resources.
The last program I followed in detail was the terrorist
incident of 9/11. In retrospect, even that waste of time,
as could have got more info by catnapping and listening to the
radio news, and even more by checking various sources on the net.
10/ However, as they say "different strokes for different folks".
I really don't give a damn how many people on the this group read
my posts, or, for that matter if anyone does :-)
Both this group and the immigration group are very slow. From
memory, neither group has had even 10 posts a day. Can read
the average number of posts on both groups in well under five
minutes.
In other groups, some with 200 posts a day, I never had any
trouble keeping up!
Admittedly, am retired, no kids, and probably have much more
free time than others do :-).
Cheers,
Kangaroo16
>
>Cheers, Alan, Australia
|
