Richard J. wrote:
Poldie wrote:
James Farrar wrote:
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 11:03:42 +0100, Paul G
wrote:

In message , James
Farrar writes
At the point I answered, no replies was visible (using Google
Groups).

Well, then, use a real news server and newsreader.

No.

Well, then, expose yourself to ridicule.

Someone (in this came, James) appears to have forgotten that
regardless
of the method used to view usenet articles, due to their usenet's
of propagation, there is no guarantee that one usenet provider
will be quicker to receive articles than another provider. [1]

Actually, I did not forget this; I applied the maxim in footnote 1.

Articles propagation is not necessary linear. Genuine question:
Why exclude people using a different method of reading usenet
articles from yourself?

Frankly, Google Groups may be the worst thing to happen to Usenet
since 1993. If people who use GG to read and post to Usenet are not
aware that that is, in fact, what they are doing, they are quite
likely to say or do silly things.

The technical barrier to Usenet entry is lower with GG; but that in
itself requires GG users to be more technically savvy.

You're the one making basic mistakes regarding Usenet! I'm a
programmer who can't be bothered to install a newsgroup reader on
every machine I connect to the 'net with.

Fair enough. Actually, Google must have been particularly slow that
evening; it's included your last post in less than 10 minutes.

Yes, I made a post to alt.test shortly afterwards which took hours to
turn up - usually it's pretty quick.

Your "sin" in using GG might have been overlooked if you hadn't made a "basic
mistake" in your answer!

How dare I use Google instead of what some nerd has on his list of
acceptable Usenet clients! Imagine the ridicule I'll now face amongst
my peers - can I ever again show my face in polite society?

The answer I gave was what I honestly believed to be true at the time.
If my wife asks to borrow my travelcard once I'm home from work I'm
hardly likely to tell her "no - go and buy your own!" before ripping
mine up in front of her, and I'd be suprised if anyone else would. The
Oyster webpage has this Q&A:

Q) Can I share my Oyster card if it has pay as you go with Auto top-up?
A) Yes, as long as you only have pay as you go on your card. If you
also have a season ticket on your Oyster card, it must not be used by
anyone else.

It doesn't mention travelcards. And as has been implied elsewhere in
this discussion, there's no difference between someone ordering an
Oyster Travelcard and then giving it to someone to keep, and buying two
travelcards at a station and handing one to someone to keep.

Poldie wrote:
Richard J. wrote:
Poldie wrote:
James Farrar wrote:
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 11:03:42 +0100, Paul G
wrote:

In message , James
Farrar writes
At the point I answered, no replies was visible (using Google
Groups).
Well, then, use a real news server and newsreader.
No.
Well, then, expose yourself to ridicule.
Someone (in this came, James) appears to have forgotten that
regardless
of the method used to view usenet articles, due to their usenet's
of propagation, there is no guarantee that one usenet provider
will be quicker to receive articles than another provider. [1]
Actually, I did not forget this; I applied the maxim in footnote 1.

Articles propagation is not necessary linear. Genuine question:
Why exclude people using a different method of reading usenet
articles from yourself?
Frankly, Google Groups may be the worst thing to happen to Usenet
since 1993. If people who use GG to read and post to Usenet are not
aware that that is, in fact, what they are doing, they are quite
likely to say or do silly things.

The technical barrier to Usenet entry is lower with GG; but that in
itself requires GG users to be more technically savvy.
You're the one making basic mistakes regarding Usenet! I'm a
programmer who can't be bothered to install a newsgroup reader on
every machine I connect to the 'net with.
Fair enough. Actually, Google must have been particularly slow that
evening; it's included your last post in less than 10 minutes.

Yes, I made a post to alt.test shortly afterwards which took hours to
turn up - usually it's pretty quick.

Your "sin" in using GG might have been overlooked if you hadn't made a "basic
mistake" in your answer!

How dare I use Google instead of what some nerd has on his list of
acceptable Usenet clients! Imagine the ridicule I'll now face amongst
my peers - can I ever again show my face in polite society?

The answer I gave was what I honestly believed to be true at the time.
If my wife asks to borrow my travelcard once I'm home from work I'm
hardly likely to tell her "no - go and buy your own!" before ripping
mine up in front of her, and I'd be suprised if anyone else would. The
Oyster webpage has this Q&A:

Q) Can I share my Oyster card if it has pay as you go with Auto top-up?
A) Yes, as long as you only have pay as you go on your card. If you
also have a season ticket on your Oyster card, it must not be used by
anyone else.

It doesn't mention travelcards. And as has been implied elsewhere in
this discussion, there's no difference between someone ordering an
Oyster Travelcard and then giving it to someone to keep, and buying two
travelcards at a station and handing one to someone to keep.

Unfortunately that's not true. There are three different products being
talked about in this discussion:

- Oyster with only pay-as-you-go credit on it
- Oyster with a season ticket on it (7-day travelcard, month travelcard
or longer)
- Paper One Day Travelcard (ODTC)

Only the first of those can be shared with other people. Neither an
Oyster with a season ticket nor a paper travelcard can be shared with
someone else.

When that Q&A you quote talks about season tickets, it is talking about
seven-day or longer tickets (which are always a type of travelcard).
One-day travelcards do not exist on Oyster.

--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London