Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
Alan Browne wrote:
> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>
>> Maybe you live in Australia and everything is upside down?
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>> Art
>>
>> If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste, I invite you to
>> enter the discussion at my blog:
>>
>> http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/
In order to minimize confusion for you Alan, (since that seems to be an
ongoing theme in this thread) I am responding intermingled with your
questions, so it is clear which statement I am responding to.
>
> Do you have to top post?
Yes. I have no intention to change that, but thank you for asking.
Makes for confusion.
For you and a small other number of people, to which I apologize.
However, it so streamlines responses for both myself and the majority of
those who read threads that I intend no change.
And further, you really
> do not need to post links to your e-waste project all the time (we seem
> them a lot) unless in a sig; which of course should not be top posted.
>
You see it a lot, because I answer a lot of questions here. It is my
current sig and it will remain where it is, except for you, this time.
By the way, I will warn all that may consider going to my blog, that it
has the most recent additions at the top of teh blog, just like my
postings. If you find that causes you undue angst, you may choose not
to click on the link.
Thank you for your concern,
Art
If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
I encourage anyone who considers posting placement of more significance
than the content of the messages to PLEASE filter out my postings,
because, frankly, I'm not posting for you anyway, and you waste my time
(and others) dealing with the debates about it when I could be answering
and discussing more interesting things and reader could be doing the same.
So, to all the "Alan's" out there... I am not not going to change my
posting style and I am the least bit offended if you filter out my
posts, please just don't bother posting about it.
Thank you.
Art
If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:
Alan Browne wrote:
> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>
>>> Do you have to top post?
>>
>> Yes. I have no intention to change that, but thank you for asking.
>
> Then *plonk* to you.
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
In article <hIAEk.1721$cs4.1418@newsfe01.iad>,
Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
> > Arthur Entlich wrote:
> >>
> >> Maybe you live in Australia and everything is upside down?
> >>
> >> ;-)
> In order to minimize confusion for you Alan, (since that seems to be an
> ongoing theme in this thread) I am responding intermingled with your
> questions, so it is clear which statement I am responding to.
> > Do you have to top post?
!!! =)....
> Yes. I have no intention to change that, but thank you for asking.
That's a pity, Art, for it may be yourself who is
breach of the generally accepted 'norm' for posting
within Usenet.
Only those neither versed nor experienced in the
ways of Usenet will continue to 'top-post'. They
are often youngsters who've not been around for
very long - or perhaps are Microsoft Users who've
been issued with a broken, (or rather a badly
factory-set), Usenet 'News Reader'...
Please look at the few, very informative, helpful
and easily downloadable newsgroups involved in the
Usenet heirarchy: news.newusers.*.*
...where both the suggested requirements - and sound
reasoning - is available for everyone, (often very
new to the scene of Usenet), to absorb.
You will notice that the 'standard', or norm, for
Usenet is 'bottom posting', or within a discussion,
'inter-leaved posting'.
There are indeed good reasons for /not/ top posting -
often because a top-poster is disrespecting their
intended audience by having them dig about in the
text looking for whatever comment is being replied
to.
This especially affects those who are 'lurking',
or who may have omly just arrived on the scene.
(For every poster it has been reckoned there are
more than ten lurkers).
Remember also that this 'audience' does not just
come from the USofA ..but from countries right
around the whole Globe - few of whom will share
conventions that only a USofAer might think is
'normal'.
That's an awful lot of highly intelligent,
sophisticated and often very patient people with
whom one might well be communicating!
Top-posting may also be lazy ..as one should also
be able to reply to individual points made within
a discussion - not normally possible for someone
who is top-posting. (Also, 'top-posting is oft
used by junior execs under pressure, who are too
insignificant to have either their own secretaries
or Personal Assistants to edit and personalise their
hurried e-mail replies)! ;'))
Another matter often forgotten - regardless of
posting format 'norms' is the ability to cut out a
whole amount of uneccessary text from a reply ..thus
making the whole a great deal more streamlined.
A lot of posters don't bother with editing and sadly
so, as few readers have little time to waste self-
editing a mountain of quotes, digging about somewhere
in the body just to enable the following of a
discussion.
> Makes for confusion.
Yes ..this is correct - and indeed the very reason
that Usenet has always asked all it's correspondents
to adhere to the norm of 'bottom' or 'interleaved'
posting ..right from the very earliest days when
replies were merely heading between a few academic
institutions.
The confusion may not be our confusion - but that of
the intended recipients, who can be left wondering just
what it is a poster is replying to.
A great pity ..for some replies have an excellence
and an authority that makes them well worth reading! )
> For you and a small other number of people, to which I apologize.
> However, it so streamlines responses for both myself and the majority of
> those who read threads that I intend no change.
No ..it is not the majority. The majority do not
top post. You will realise this if you, like me,
have moved around and been involved with Usenet,
worldwide, now over some decades, from very early
days...
Please. Art, don't take offence at comments made
regarding the Usenet 'norm' of not of top-posting.
They are not intended to distress ..but rather to
suggest a manner of making oneself better able to
appear as an authoratative 'figure' who has indeed
been around Usenet for very many years!
...so, without intending nor taking offence; perhaps
a slight word to the Wise who may read this..? )
As for yourself, Art, I enjoy your posts. They are
indeed intelligent, well-written, thoughtful and
always very informative.. ) Thank you for that!
hh.. )
Bill ZFC
(..and sincere apologies for rattling on, this one
time only)..
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
On Oct 1, 1:44 am, "Bill (Adopt)" <ad...@billsimpson.com> wrote:
> > > Do you have to top post?
>
> !!! =)....
>
> > Yes. I have no intention to change that, but thank you for asking.
>
> That's a pity, Art, for it may be yourself who is
> breach of the generally accepted 'norm' for posting
> within Usenet.
Personally, I agree bottom posting is preferred over top posting. But
at this point I don't think it's worth the bother and effort to
debate. Google Groups for example has practically unlimited
retention, and as such it's easy enough to dig for the comments in
context. The convention was established during the age of before
"tin" or "trn" (threaded news reader). It's pretty clear who's
replying to what, and one can always scroll up to read the message in
context.
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
Because I do not wish to appear to be ignoring Bill's very thoughtful
and respectful posting regarding top versus bottom posting, and yet not
wishing to once again engage publicly in this debate (as has been
mentioned, it is probably archived - at least 5 times) I wanted to
respond with this brief statement. I hope Bill's posted email is one
where he can receive replies, so I can bring my reply to him privately.
If not, Bill, please feel free to provide me with a way to contact you.
I can be reached at:
e-printerhelp(at)mvps(dot)org
(at) = @
(dot) = .
Art
If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:
Bill (Adopt) wrote:
> In article <hIAEk.1721$cs4.1418@newsfe01.iad>,
> Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>>> Do you have to top post?
>
> !!! =)....
>
>> Yes. I have no intention to change that, but thank you for asking.
>
> That's a pity, Art, for it may be yourself who is
> breach of the generally accepted 'norm' for posting
> within Usenet.
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
Bill (Adopt) wrote:
> In article <hIAEk.1721$cs4.1418@newsfe01.iad>,
> Arthur Entlich <e-printerhelp@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>> Arthur Entlich wrote:
>>>> Maybe you live in Australia and everything is upside down?
>>>>
>>>> ;-)
>
>> In order to minimize confusion for you Alan, (since that seems to be an
>> ongoing theme in this thread) I am responding intermingled with your
>> questions, so it is clear which statement I am responding to.
>
>>> Do you have to top post?
>
> !!! =)....
>
>> Yes. I have no intention to change that, but thank you for asking.
>
> That's a pity, Art, for it may be yourself who is
> breach of the generally accepted 'norm' for posting
> within Usenet.
>
> Only those neither versed nor experienced in the
> ways of Usenet will continue to 'top-post'. They
> are often youngsters who've not been around for
> very long - or perhaps are Microsoft Users who've
> been issued with a broken, (or rather a badly
> factory-set), Usenet 'News Reader'...
>
> Please look at the few, very informative, helpful
> and easily downloadable newsgroups involved in the
> Usenet heirarchy: news.newusers.*.*
>
> ..where both the suggested requirements - and sound
> reasoning - is available for everyone, (often very
> new to the scene of Usenet), to absorb.
>
> You will notice that the 'standard', or norm, for
> Usenet is 'bottom posting', or within a discussion,
> 'inter-leaved posting'.
>
> There are indeed good reasons for /not/ top posting -
> often because a top-poster is disrespecting their
> intended audience by having them dig about in the
> text looking for whatever comment is being replied
> to.
>
> This especially affects those who are 'lurking',
> or who may have omly just arrived on the scene.
> (For every poster it has been reckoned there are
> more than ten lurkers).
>
> Remember also that this 'audience' does not just
> come from the USofA ..but from countries right
> around the whole Globe - few of whom will share
> conventions that only a USofAer might think is
> 'normal'.
>
> That's an awful lot of highly intelligent,
> sophisticated and often very patient people with
> whom one might well be communicating!
>
> Top-posting may also be lazy ..as one should also
> be able to reply to individual points made within
> a discussion - not normally possible for someone
> who is top-posting. (Also, 'top-posting is oft
> used by junior execs under pressure, who are too
> insignificant to have either their own secretaries
> or Personal Assistants to edit and personalise their
> hurried e-mail replies)! ;'))
>
> Another matter often forgotten - regardless of
> posting format 'norms' is the ability to cut out a
> whole amount of uneccessary text from a reply ..thus
> making the whole a great deal more streamlined.
>
> A lot of posters don't bother with editing and sadly
> so, as few readers have little time to waste self-
> editing a mountain of quotes, digging about somewhere
> in the body just to enable the following of a
> discussion.
>
>
>> Makes for confusion.
>
> Yes ..this is correct - and indeed the very reason
> that Usenet has always asked all it's correspondents
> to adhere to the norm of 'bottom' or 'interleaved'
> posting ..right from the very earliest days when
> replies were merely heading between a few academic
> institutions.
>
> The confusion may not be our confusion - but that of
> the intended recipients, who can be left wondering just
> what it is a poster is replying to.
>
> A great pity ..for some replies have an excellence
> and an authority that makes them well worth reading! )
>
>> For you and a small other number of people, to which I apologize.
>> However, it so streamlines responses for both myself and the majority of
>> those who read threads that I intend no change.
>
> No ..it is not the majority. The majority do not
> top post. You will realise this if you, like me,
> have moved around and been involved with Usenet,
> worldwide, now over some decades, from very early
> days...
>
> Please. Art, don't take offence at comments made
> regarding the Usenet 'norm' of not of top-posting.
> They are not intended to distress ..but rather to
> suggest a manner of making oneself better able to
> appear as an authoratative 'figure' who has indeed
> been around Usenet for very many years!
>
> ..so, without intending nor taking offence; perhaps
> a slight word to the Wise who may read this..? )
>
> As for yourself, Art, I enjoy your posts. They are
> indeed intelligent, well-written, thoughtful and
> always very informative.. ) Thank you for that!
>
> hh.. )
>
> Bill ZFC
> (..and sincere apologies for rattling on, this one
> time only)..
>
Interesting dissertation. One thing puzzles me... I can't understand how
anybody can think that bottom posting is more considerate of the reader
when the reader has had to scroll down through line after line of quoted
verbiage from post after post only to see a post like this:
> It doesn't matter to me. In the overall scheme of things, I can't
> think of anything much less important than where someone puts his
> replies.
And by the way - before you trot out references to the "Delete" key,
this particular post was meant to be a reply to yours in its entirety,
so deletion would have been inappropriate.
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
In article <gbvqhu$vvo$1@registered.motzarella.org>,
TJ <TJ@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Interesting dissertation. One thing puzzles me... I can't understand how
> anybody can think that bottom posting is more considerate of the reader
> when the reader has had to scroll down through line after line of quoted
> verbiage from post after post only to see a post like this:
Another standard of usenet is known as snipping, (No, not sniping, there
is too much of that as it is) as I have done with this post. In most
cases, when replying to a post there is no need to quote the entire post
as the other person knows what he said.
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 17:35:44 -0400, in comp.periphs.printers Alan
Browne <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>me@mine.net wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:21:28 -0400, in comp.periphs.printers Alan
>> Browne <alan.browne@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Monty wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> Does a maintenance cartridge service life of 32% mean there is
>>>>> 32% left or 32% used?
>>>>>
>>>>> (I assume 'life left' but the display panel is a bit
>>>>> ambiguous).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's 32% used. 100%= Full
>>> Well, from 32% a few days ago and a bunch of prints later, it is
>>> now down to 26%. So the percentage seems to indicate capacity left
>>> to take waste ink and not quantity of waste ink stored.
>>
>> As is depicted on p97, Replacing the Maintenance Cartridge, of the
>> fine manual.
>
>I was asking about the computer display of the printer status, not theon
>machine display. Neither the on machine display, nor the "fine manual"
>explain what the percentages mean.
P.97 has a graphic of the on machine display showing nearly full bars
for the ink cartridges and a completely full one for the maintenance
cartridge and the caption "Maintenance cartridge indicator (showing a
new cartridge)."
If that doesn't explicitly provide the information you originally
asked for, I don't know what does. It would not be a leap of faith to
assume that the driver display used the same weighting scale and it
would then be a trivial exercise to compare the two to verify. If this
is beyond your comprehension or abilities we can't help with that.
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification
Stuart wrote:
>
> Another standard of usenet is known as snipping, (No, not sniping, there
> is too much of that as it is) as I have done with this post. In most
> cases, when replying to a post there is no need to quote the entire post
> as the other person knows what he said.
>
Apparently you didn't read my entire post, or you ignored the paragraph
you snipped away. I was making a point. People seem to have much more of
a snit over those who top-post than those who are too lazy to snip a
quote. I find the lack of snipping MUCH more annoying than top-posting.
Re: Epson 3800 Maintenance cartridge status -clarification 
).... 
)
Linear Mode
