Re: Strange problem with low energy light bulb

[John Fields]

Without taking sides on any other issues, IMO the old rule not to top post
is out of date! It is much more appropriate in today's environment to top
post.

 

[John Fields]

But the old rule to avoid unpleasant language is as valid as ever. How can
you rabbit on about top posters and still resort to foul language?

 

[FrediFizzx]

Quite frankly, anyone that can't handle a top post must have
malfunctioning brain connections of some sort. I really don't have any
problems with top or bottom posts; it's those sideways ones that get me.
;-)

FD

 

[Arfa Daily]

Without taking sides on any other issues, IMO the old rule not to top post
is out of date! It is much more appropriate in today's environment to top
post.

Not on Usenet ...

Arfa

 

[John Fields]

Quite frankly, anyone that can't handle a top post must have
malfunctioning brain connections of some sort.

---
Quite frankly, your "Quite frankly" seems designed to cast you in
the role of an authority on top posting, while your bottom post
shows that you accede to the wisdom of the masses. Good move.

Secondly, it's not a question of not being able to "handle" it, it's
more a question about why a top poster considers his response to an
earlier question important enough to try to juggle time so that his
response will seem to be placed before the question.
---

I really don't have any
problems with top or bottom posts; it's those sideways ones that get me.
;-)

L
i
k
e

t
h
i
s
?

 

[Albert Manfredi]

Mostly people choose what is readily available at an affordable price.

Universal dislike for something counts as more than just "what is
readily available at an affordable price." Sorry.

Or not, discotecques use deep pounding bass to give their customers a dance
beat. Doesn't seem to drive them away

Yes, but there's a big difference between *prolonged* bass and
periodic bass, perhaps at approximately 1 Hz or so. Which is
reminiscent of a heartbeat, therefore natural and presumably pleasing.

Or more likely just ending up with another example of the irrational
behaviour patterns of humans.

I don't think it's irrational to expect humans to be put off by
sources of articial light whose color temp is not what they evolved
with. Defense mechanisms typically work that way, matter of fact.

Anyway, this has to be one of the longest threads in usenet history
(probably not, actually).

Bert

 

[Lostgallifreyan]

Universal dislike for something counts as more than just "what is
readily available at an affordable price." Sorry.

Damnit, will you quit that, you're annoying! I let it pass when you
dismissed my argument, because it wasn't that important, you were 'only'
claiming to speak for a huge populace on matters of preference, as if you
had such a mighty insight into so many. Now, you claim 'universal dislike'!
You're not content to settle for mere hubris, you need omniscience.

Just stick to some science and let the preferences take care of themselves.

 

[Lostgallifreyan]

Hmm, sorry, the dismissal came from someone else, so I shouldn't be
berating you for that. Even so, it's not appropriate to make claims for
such universality. If you don't like it, say so, but don't try to claim for
a universe! Most of it has ideas of its own.

 

[FrediFizzx]

---
Quite frankly, your "Quite frankly" seems designed to cast you in
the role of an authority on top posting, while your bottom post
shows that you accede to the wisdom of the masses. Good move.

Secondly, it's not a question of not being able to "handle" it, it's
more a question about why a top poster considers his response to an
earlier question important enough to try to juggle time so that his
response will seem to be placed before the question.

It's not a question at all. If someone replies to me with a top post, I
will reply to them with a top post. If someone replies to me with a
bottom post, I will reply to them with a bottom post. The ultimate
netiquette. There is really no logic to either form. Threading a reply
is a different case which the logic is to reply after the other poster's
reply. Unless there is just a short overall comment then it would be
just as logical to top post it.

FD

 

[Poxy]

Without taking sides on any other issues, IMO the old rule not to top
post is out of date! It is much more appropriate in today's
environment to top post.

Ahh. You're one of those people who call being considerate and respectful of
prevailing customs "political correctness" yes?

 

[Arfa Daily]

It's not a question at all. If someone replies to me with a top post, I
will reply to them with a top post. If someone replies to me with a
bottom post, I will reply to them with a bottom post. The ultimate
netiquette. There is really no logic to either form. Threading a reply
is a different case which the logic is to reply after the other poster's
reply. Unless there is just a short overall comment then it would be just
as logical to top post it.

FD

Never-the-less, the convention is one to one e-mail, reply on the top. One
to many Usenet, reply to the bottom, and the protocol that has always been
used on sci.electronics.repair, which is where this thread originated before
it was cross posted to all of the others. If "Sally" and you and the others
who are commenting on posting protocol, come from one of the other groups
which are now carrying it, and you have different accepted practices on
yours, that's fine, but - no offense intended - please don't criticise the
way it's done here.

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

Arfa

 

[Meat Plow]

I have to strongly disagree. I think top poasting is rude,
inconsiderate and completely inappropriate where Usenet is concerned
be it past or present. Please don't top poast.

 

[Meat Plow]

I disagree. You should never top poast regardless of the orientation of
the poast you are replying to. Best to bottom poast to all replies.

 

[a t e c 7 7]

I have to strongly disagree. I think top poasting is rude,
inconsiderate and completely inappropriate where Usenet is concerned
be it past or present. Please don't top poast.

poast ?
you realise you are wasting your time ?

 

[FrediFizzx]

Never-the-less, the convention is one to one e-mail, reply on the top.
One to many Usenet, reply to the bottom, and the protocol that has
always been used on sci.electronics.repair, which is where this thread
originated before it was cross posted to all of the others. If "Sally"
and you and the others who are commenting on posting protocol, come
from one of the other groups which are now carrying it, and you have
different accepted practices on yours, that's fine, but - no offense
intended - please don't criticise the way it's done here.

Sorry, there is no convention really. People are free to top or bottom
post if they wish on unmoderated groups or email.

Now, do you think it really makes sense to have to scroll down for such
a short reply? And I really didn't see that I was criticizing anything.
I just stated that I don't really care which way someone posts. It is
always fairly easy to figure out. I just figure there is no reason to
be a tight-ass about it. My work here is done.

FD

 

[Mr.T]

Universal dislike for something counts as more than just "what is
readily available at an affordable price." Sorry.

IF we were talking *universal* dislike then I might agree.

I don't think it's irrational to expect humans to be put off by
sources of articial light whose color temp is not what they evolved
with.

No *proof* though that artificial light MUST be different from natural
light.
Only the preferences of many accustomed to it being so.

Defense mechanisms typically work that way, matter of fact.

I'm interested to know what's the "defence mechanism" that benefits from low
color temperatures?

Anyway, this has to be one of the longest threads in usenet history
(probably not, actually).

A hell of a long way from it actually.

MrT.

 

[Mr.T]

Without taking sides on any other issues, IMO the old rule not to top post
is out of date! It is much more appropriate in today's environment to top
post.

And far more reasonable to do what you prefer and accept that others have
the same choice.

MrT.

 

[Mr.T]

---
One has nothing to do with the other, "Sally",
True.

and by top posting you brand yourself as an intellectual midget
whose grousing about fowl language is for the birds.

Abusive language without intellectual substance brands the poster as an even
bigger moron than those who incessantly complain about top posters.

MrT.

 

[a t e c 7 7]

Abusive language without intellectual substance brands the poster as an even
bigger moron than those who incessantly complain about top posters.

MrT.

Hear hear

 

[Mr.T]

At least that which doesn't settle in your lungs I guess. Current research
shows micro particulates as being very hazardous.

Thanks

Since he provided no epidemiological studies to show the long term *proven*
effects of any of them on the human body, what exactly are you thanking him
for?
I'll keep an open mind while awaiting some FACTS.

MrT.