suggested solution to "no archive"

[alexy]

From the recent thread on panel door questions from a newbie, it sounds like lots of folks share my frustration with this guy wanting to milk the group while preventing his questions from being archived. It is also starting to generate discord, which might be the intent.

I'll suggest a course of action:

Each time he or someone else posts with this "no archive" crap, the first person to notice it should reply, quoting his entire message including headers (see Morris Dovey's post in the referenced thread, or my own sample there) and top post (there is a place for everything, even top posting) our own little made-up header: "x-no-answer:yes"

This will do three things:

1) defeat whatever purpose he has in this no archive crap. By making it ineffective, we can confirm what I suspect--that the only reason he is doing it is that it irritates some folks here. 2) remind those here who share this feeling not to respond. 3) MAYBE help it sink in to the OP that preventing his posts from being archived will probably reduce the volume and quality of help he can get here.

[nailshooter41]

This seems like there is a mountain being made from an ant pile in regards to this "problem". I think it is getting too time consuming and serious when some start formulate retaliatory measures and encourage others to jump on board with their execution.

My simple suggestions, and they are not meant to offend.

If you feel like you are being screwed with by a thread subject or its poster, don't reply.

If you think it is a troll, don't reply.

If you don't like the tone of the thread, don't reply.

And certainly, don't ever let yourself get milked (unless you want to).

Just a thought or two...

Robert

If you feel like the OP is ungreatful, lazy or stupid, don't reply.

[John Doe]

I agree in general about XNoArchive authors, I usually suspect them, but I don't easily follow your argument.

When I'm looking for stuff in the USENET archive, sometimes I read the original post just to get an better idea of what the replies mean, but since you should quote relevant text in your reply, whatever questions you answer will be archived. On the other hand, if a reply author giving an answer posts XNoArchive, then (after a time) there's nothing in the archive except the original question.

If you don't like XNoArchive authors, you should enable/read header information when you read a post and act accordingly. Most people don't bother and probably don't care. If I were answering a question posed by an XNoArchive author, I might quote his (or her) header and put it at the bottom of everything else. Or instead just pass it by.

Whatever. Have fun with it.

[alexy]

That's probably because I presented it as if it were a logical argument. It's not--it's an emotional reaction.

[alexy]

Yeah, I agree. But the recent thread shows lots of name-calling, digging up of dirt, etc. I was just trying to offer an alternative, similar to the "PLONK" with which lots of people announce their kill-filing of someone--no real purpose except a way to express the author's feeling without getting down in the muck.

[John L. Poole]

For the record, I was unfamiliar with the "x-no-archive:yes", especially when it appears *after* the mail's header which caused me to believe such a field was outside of the protocol given it's appearance after an empty line.

a well written entry about this, including reference to Google's policy and rationale which is what I was mainly interested in.

[nailshooter41]

NSIP

Alex - completely agree with you and understand why you posted what you did. I am not sure why, but the whole deal of wanting to disappear after a drive by post is annoying to me, too. I have always felt the strong suit of these NGs are their archives. So if we get a lot of paranoids out there that don't want to be identified or linked to a question that they have posted, it can make it hard to follow later on for anyone that has been strongly encouraged by the net nannies to search all possible archives before posting a question.

I guess over the last few years I have gotten more of a "couldn't care less" attitude about this stuff. Most of the bluff and bluster that you see here wouldn't take place if two men were standing face to face, and certainly wouldn't if one bitch slapped the other one for running his mouth too much. I have been in construction for 30 years; trust me... you don't talk to each other and keep teeth the way some do on this NG.

So it looks silly at first, then tiring after that. If you notice, many times it is the same guys that are bellowing.

I have a tendency to glance over the topics and responses now, and if it gets pissy or too smarmy, I just don't read the thread. I guess what I was trying to impart to you was the same idea - it isn't worth your time or trouble to even read those threads when everyone starts unzipping for the big pecker competition.

Robert