Re: Re:Subject?
From: Phil \(purplehaz\) (I.fix.probs_at_for.you)
Date: 05/04/04
- Next message: Al: "Re: Flashlight"
- Previous message: ColeMan: "RE: Service Pack 1"
- In reply to: phrogee: "Re: Re:Subject?"
- Next in thread: phrogee: "Re: Re:Subject?"
- Reply: phrogee: "Re: Re:Subject?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 17:18:37 -0400
I wouldn't know how to do that as it is frowned upon in newsgroups. If you
want to post info for others to see then just start a new thread and say
something like here's how I solved this. This way we don't think its a
question and others may read it to see how you solved it. Of course after a
short time it will fall down on the group list as others post, but it will
be at the top for a bit anyways. Just the nature of this extremely busy
group.
phrogee wrote:
> O.K. I apologize. I can see where you thought I want to start a new
> thread from an old thread. I guess starting a new thread is really
> what is being done. The object of what I'm asking is for your reply
> to go to the top of the list. This can be helpful when a pertinent
> answer to a good question can be useful to many others. Most people
> don't scroll down very far for older messages and they are forgotten.
> Somehow you take the message ID and paste it after news: etc. etc.
> and this is what I'm trying to find out, how to do it correctly.
>
> I have/had no intensions of upsetting anyone when I posted.
>
>
> "Phil (purplehaz)" <I.fix.probs@for.you> wrote in message
> news:unqLzvgMEHA.3712@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> Dude, what the hell are you smoking? Break out. I simply answered
>> your original question. You are surely confused on how newsgroups
>> work. I didn't go looking for your old post from days ago, I didn't
>> want to. I answered the question you asked. Your original question
>> was about if you should start a new thread or stay in the same
>> thread and I answered you. You said nothing about having a look at
>> your old post to see if I could help, you asked a question and I
>> answered it. What is this you "found" and what is its realavance to
>> the orignal question is this thread? Get a clue.
>>
>> phrogee wrote:
>>> Gee, look what I just found..........................
>>>
>>> Re: Upgrade from Home to Pro Problem. <---------------------Look
>>> Here!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>>
>>>> I get my facts from the internet and then tried it myself. Where do
>>>> you get your ignorance? Now, if you want the link, ask nicely and I
>>>> might provide it. Here are things that xp pro does that with tweaks
>>>> xp home will do: Run a IIS web server
>>>> Advanced file sharing and security functionality
>>>> Uninstall messenger
>>>> Access to advanced user management screen
>>>> Acess to domain resources without specifying a password each time.
>>>>
>>>> Woody wrote:
>>>>> Where do you get your facts? Surely you must be making this up as
>>>>> you go along.
>>>
>>> Kind of shot you response to me all to hell, didn't
>>> it???????????????????????
>>>
>>> Looks like Woody caught on fast to your inane responses!
>>>
>>> Wise up, I'm not a newbie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>
>> Again I have no idea what you're talking about here. Woody was
>> ignorant to the fact that xp home can be tweaked to do things xp
>> pro. I explained to him that there are ways to do this. So actually
>> shot his ignorant response to hell. I proved him wrong......... so
>> again what are you talking about. You are a newbie, it's pretty
>> clear. And your very confused as well.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Phil (purplehaz)" <I.fix.probs@for.you> wrote in message
>>> news:%23Ey3AZfMEHA.3016@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> phrogee wrote:
>>>>> "Phil (purplehaz)" <I.fix.probs@for.you> wrote in message
>>>>> news:e9w66XeMEHA.128@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> phrogee wrote:
>>>>>>> Might be a little OT, but how do you reply to an older thread
>>>>>>> in a new thread without the thread going to the old post? Where
>>>>>>> do you paste the message ID, etc? Using OE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't. Always reply in the original thread so all can see
>>>>>> what your talking about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From 3 or 4 days ago? Get serious!
>>>>
>>>> Yes, from 3-4 days ago. If you posted a question and someone
>>>> replied and you want to reply again stay in the same thread. That
>>>> person should have messages they answered marked for easy reading
>>>> for at least 7-10 days, so they will still respond. I usually will
>>>> keep checking messages I responded to for 5-7 days. If no other
>>>> replies show up, I stop checking it. Most likely if the person
>>>> that was helping you is good they will continue to help untill you
>>>> need no more. If you want to re-post your original question then
>>>> go right ahead. 3-4 days waiting to re-post is fine, just stay in
>>>> that thread once you receive replies.
- Next message: Al: "Re: Flashlight"
- Previous message: ColeMan: "RE: Service Pack 1"
- In reply to: phrogee: "Re: Re:Subject?"
- Next in thread: phrogee: "Re: Re:Subject?"
- Reply: phrogee: "Re: Re:Subject?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
