Subj : Re: 4BATFAQ Update To : Gerald.Miller@xspamp0.f512.n342.z1. From : Outsider Date : Fri Jan 18 2002 02:58 pm From: Outsider Gerald.Miller@xspamp0.f512.n342.z1.fidonet.org wrote: > > Hello Outsider, > > Friday January 18 2002 07:46, Outsider wrote to Klaus Meinhard: > > O> From: Outsider > > O> Klaus Meinhard wrote: > > >> > >> "Outsider" schrieb im Newsbeitrag > >> news:3C476E1C.4878EC02@yahoo.com... > >> > You post your 4DOS FAQ in alt.msdos.batch, yet fail to post it in > >> > comp.os.msdos.4dos. This makes no sense. Futhermore, if you MUST > >> > post your 4DOS FAQ in a.m.b., you should crosspost to both groups > >> > and set the followup to comp.os.msdos.4dos. > >> > >> My 4BATFAQ is, like Timo's BATFAQ, all about plain (vanilla? MS-?) > >> DOS FAQs. Timo gives DOS solutions, I give 4DOS solutions. It would > >> be totally out of place in c.o.m.4., where different questions are > >> asked. > > O> 4DOS solutions out of place in comp.os.msdos.4dos?? Impossible. They > O> are definitely out of place in alt.msdos.batch. > > I don't understand the problem. Yes, I can see that! > Isn't "alt" shorthand for > alternative? Yes, as in alternative to the "big eight", NOT as in alternative command processor! http://www.faqs.org/faqs/by-newsgroup/ > The 4DOS command interpreter is certainly an > (better ???) alternative to Microsoft's command interpreter. That may be, but 4DOS is not on topic in a.m.b. > O> As i said before, if you insist on posting your 4DOS FAQ to > O> alt.msdos.batch, the *least* you can do is crosspost to > O> comp.os.msdos.4dos and also set the followup to comp.os.msdos.4dos. > O> A.m.b. is for ordinary MS-DOS batch files using the standard command > O> intrepreter only. > > I think you're being silly with your requests. Do you really. Please try and think it through objectively. > Many 4DOS users > never heard about it until there were postings in that area > (freedom of speach issue). Which is why it's ok for Klaus to post a reference periodically. This reference, however, should be crossposted to c.o.m.4. with followup set to c.o.m.4. as well. Where is the problem with that? > If you find the postings to be offensive, then, just ignore them > and read the messages that appeal to you. Sorry, you have misinterpreted the situation, and that is not how it works. Do you ignore all problems and pretend they don't exist? Also *please* explain how 4DOS solutions would be totally out of place in c.o.m.4.? -- MS-DOS 6.22, Windows for Workgroups 3.11, Netscape Communicator 4.08 Line Counting --a programmer's disease. --- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-2 * Origin: Mach2 Systems (1:342/3) .