Re: test post

matt_left_coast <not@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That assumes the poster HAS ACCESS to test groups. The server I post from
has no test groups.

The term for that would be "broken". Test groups are venerable and
well-established. Ignoring common practice because you can't or won't
or are too lazy or cheap or stupid to get a decent newsfeed does not
make you correct. It makes you a jackass.

There is also no RFC that requires a poster to post test
messages to "test" groups.

There's no rulebook for a lot of things in life. Again, ignoring
netiquette and then yelling about how there's no law about it does not
make you look any more correct.

Oh to have a lodge in some vast wilderness. Where rumors of oppression
and deceit, of unsuccessful and successful wars may never reach me
-- William Cowper

Relevant Pages

  • Re: test post
    ... technical reason (and "Test groups are venerable and well-established" is ... not a legitimate technical reason) that my system is broken, ... I have the FREEDOM to run my systems the way I ... A thing called "netiquette"? ...
  • Re: test sory
    ... messages to test groups, there simply no REQUIREMENT. ... The simple FACT is it is only an issue of ETIQUITE and all your whining does ... the word you are after is NETIQUETTE. ...
  • Re: posting test
    ... server carries test groups, please post future test groups there. ... breach of netiquette is a technical failure I do not know. ... Sorry, but this is a simple breach in netiquette, not a failure. ...
  • Re: test
    ... use *.test groups for your test postings. ... Hint: read the netiquette ... ... Wolfgang Zocher ... Registered Linux User #337888 using Debian GNU/Linux ...