KCLUG February 2006

kclug@kclug.org

41 participants
43 discussions

RE: test
by Jeremy Fowler 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

Wow... You are a piece of work, aren't ya? That is an excellent philosophy. I bet that kind of attitude has them coming around for miles just to be in the presence of greatness such as yourself. How does it feel to be such an important person? I bet it feels great, huh? Wow... -----Original Message----- From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org]On Behalf Of Jason Clinton Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 10:14 AM To: Kendric Beachey Cc: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Re: test In my experience, conflict within organizations and groups does two things: * defines the group * weeds out crap And I've seen my share of conflicts... -- Jason Clinton <me(a)jasonclinton.com>

2 1

RE: test
by Jeremy Fowler 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

Wow, that has to be the most egotistical, self-righteous, pompous bullshit that I have read today. Who died and named you King Klug? This debate has raged on since the beginning and you will never be able to make everyone think and act the way you do. Why is it always the little things that just bug the piss out of someone? Take a chill pill, and deal with it. This is a very low volume list, and if you don't like it, you can kiss my Ruby ass. "I love the smell of napalm in the morning." - Lt. Col. William Kilgore, Apocalypse Now -----Original Message----- From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org]On Behalf Of Jason Clinton Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 2:51 PM To: Frank Wiles Cc: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Re: test On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 14:25 -0600, Frank Wiles wrote: > I certainly understand your frustration, but instead of getting angry > about it, just do what I do. If I can't read the E-mail, I move on... I appreciate your tempered response and a more rational approach to the issue however, I find that I can not just let it slide. I am personally invested in the vitality of the local Linux community. In the past 3 years I have taught Linux classes to the community for free in my free time; in the last year I have employed no less that 5 members of this mailing list; excluding this last year, I manned the boot at ITEC for three years; and finally, I assisted in the deployment and implementation of the new, locally hosted KCLUG server. My job in Linux, the Ruby book that I'm writing, the local employment pool, the KC Ruby Users Group who's mailing list I administer, the furtherment of OSS ideology ... ALL of these are related and dependent on a healthy community -- especially locally. So, I would appreciate it if people would try to avoid being inconsiderate of others. Every mailing to this list is on permanent record and, more importantly, has a lasting effect on those who read it. Please consider the consequences, however small, when you hit send. -- Jason Clinton <me(a)jasonclinton.com>

8 16

RE: test
by Jeremy Fowler 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

You mean wait 3 months before YOU start this argument all over again. You want some salient arguments, how about this: I also use Outlook at work, and the mailing list is delivered to my work address. Now in order to bottom post, like you demand that I do and have it be legible, I have to turn on prefixes in the Email Options. We have a group policy that requires all messages be spell checked before they are sent. This policy prevents me from disabling it locally. Whenever Outlook is set to Prefix mode, spell check insists on checking the entire message. Now many people do no use proper spelling, or bother spell checking their emails. I find it extremely annoying having to spell check someone else's message along with mine on every reply that I send. If I leave my Email Options on "Include Original Text", Outlook will only spell check my reply and not the entire email. So it is a big hassle for me to go into Options, turn on Prefixes, Bottom-Reply to a KLUG post, go back into Option turn off prefixes just to make YOU happy. My happiness is more important to me than yours, I'm sorry to say... -----Original Message----- From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org]On Behalf Of Jason Clinton Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 9:33 AM To: Frank Wiles Cc: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Re: test On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 09:25 -0600, Frank Wiles wrote: > Ok this is really getting ridiculous people. I was hoping that > KCLUG would eventually pick back up and improve the signal to stupid > ratio, but it obviously hasn't. Instead of attacking the discussion how 'bout making some salient arguements? Or I guess we could just all throw up our hands and wait another 3 or so months until we have this flame war all over again. Let's fix it. > Jason, this post is what finally did it for me. Some tips for your > future, it's probably not wise to cuss at the community you have such > a vested interest in and for something as silly as mailing list > posting formats. Read that again, it's at a person, not the community as a whole. It accurately and succinctly conveys my frustration. > There are some really important and useful things > to be upset and passionate about in the real world, maybe you should > take up one of those as your crusade instead? I have a ton of crusades on my plate. Any one of these is no reason to disregard others. Especially if less that 24 hours of heated email exchange could make a difference... > Your "concerned participation" is driving people away. I'm leaving and > I would wager I won't be the only one. I imagined that it might have that effect. It has before. But then again, anyone leaving this list is making the *same* argument that I am: signal to noise ratio is getting to low. Lets fix it. Don't walk away. -- Jason Clinton <me(a)jasonclinton.com>

2 1

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

Exactly. There are two problems. The fallback or secondary MX record in DNS and the mail server connection failure that causes the secondary MX record to be used. >-----Original Message----- >From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org >On Behalf Of djgoku >Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 9:50 AM > >> I discussed this at length with Hal on IRC tonight. In 2004, Mike >> Neulip, offered to transfer the domain. We are not going to take him >> up on that. However, we are going to transfer the DNS servers to our >> own, though. I am initiating that request. The result of which will >> take several days if not weeks. For the second time, end of >> thread. Period. > >Has to do with this I presume. I don't know enough about DNS >stuff. So DNS is the problem for the internet connectivity >problem that Hal speaks of here or?: > >> What appears to be happening is this. For some reason there is some >> sort of intermittent connectivity issue with the main kclug.org >> server. There is a fallback MX record that points to the previous >> kclug.org server that is in Chicago which is no longer set >up to receive email for kclug.org. > >Do we have logs of the connection problem does Netstandard >also have logs of these problems? I see there are two problems >connection problems to KCLUG server and DNS stuff right?>

2 1

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

More ranting and raving like yesterday all over a simple question that I posed about an email error. And then my little short bus buddy goes and makes it into a funny. Love the bash.org quote. Beep. Beep. >-----Original Message----- >From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org >On Behalf Of djgoku >Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 9:38 AM > >On 2/17/06, Frank Wiles <> wrote: >> >> Ok this is really getting ridiculous people. I was hoping that >> KCLUG would eventually pick back up and improve the signal >> to stupid >> ratio, but it obviously hasn't. > >Yah it hasn't. Can't we all just get along. Gosh...Idiot... ( >Not calling anyone an idiot just quoting a movie =:0) Napoleon >Dynamite for the people that don't know what I am talking about. ) > >> Jason, this post is what finally did it for me. Some tips for your >> future, it's probably not wise to cuss at the community >> you have such >> a vested interest in and for something as silly as mailing list >> posting formats. There are some really important and useful things >> to be upset and passionate about in the real world, maybe >> you should >> take up one of those as your crusade instead? > >Yah cussing in ML/IRC reminds me of this quote from Bash.org #140580: ><delzi> Arguing in the internet is like running in the special >olympics, even if you win you are still retarded. > >I am not making fun of special people by using this quote, my >point is that arguing/cussing about stuff just makes you feel >like you are in control/authority. I have done something like >this before, and have learned that this isn't the best way to >accomplish things > >So how hard is it to fix the current situation being >connection problems with KCLUG server, is there logs of >"these" problems happening?

1 0

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

> -----Original Message----- > From: On Behalf Of Luke-Jr > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 10:31 PM > > >On Thursday 16 February 2006 15:38, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas > >City, MO wrote: > > >Luke-Jr wrote: > > > eh... want to 'federate' MX backup? :) > > > > Huh? WTF? Over. I'm just saying that maybe we ought to > >look at the secondary MX record in DNS. > > In other words, we could make a list of domains we control > and mail servers we control, and agree to do MX backup for > each other's domains on our mail servers. Now that makes sense. :)

1 0

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 17 Feb '06

17 Feb '06

Huh? WTF? Over. I'm just saying that maybe we ought to look at the secondary MX record in DNS. -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of Luke-Jr Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 8:27 AM To: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Re: test On Thursday 16 February 2006 13:40, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO wrote: > Aha! So the ILLIANA.net server (old server) is there and knows it isn't > supposed to be receiving the messages. I'd say that whoever has the > access to the DNS records for the LUG needs to remove the fallback MX > record completely or shange it to something that can spool and > eventually forward the mail correctly. eh... want to 'federate' MX backup? :)

6 7

RE: test
by Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

Sorry about the top-posting, excess snippage, and whatever else is annoying you about my message style. I've said before that I am forced to use a crappy mail client at work, currently Outlook '03, previously Outlook XP for a brief time and before that Groupwise 6.0. Groupwise did nothing to help with indenting and putting the nice little ">" symbol or anything else at the beginning of the line of the previous poster's message. By default Outlook doesn't either. I thought I had it all tricked out in Outlook XP and then I got a new system image whipped out on me. Lost all my user settings, .sigs, even custom address book, no biggy. More signs of why not to use MS crap when you don't have to. But I have no choice while at work and do my best with getting info, answers and questions to the list when I have time amoungst all this crappy software to think about Linux. I try to trim extra email addresses, PGP signatures, maillist tag lines, sigs, and cruft that is not pertinant. I even try to use good grammar, punctuation, spelling and use a little coherent thought in my messages. Whether top or bottom posting, I feel my messages are readable and you can follow the thought patterns if you are following a mail thread. Who actually comes in on something in the middle of a conversation and expects to understand an issue without seeing the original message? The WTF message was suppose to go to Luke-Jr only, since I didn't understand his meaning of "federated MX". I still don't. Don't get on people for too much trimming when you did the exact same thing in your postings. You trimmed all of Frank's lucid post except for what was relevant. Makes sense to me, but it is the exact thing you got pissed at me about. I know Tom just likes to poke you with a stick when maillist standards come up, but you act as if I and other users top-post, bottom post, trim or whatever in order to confuse, obfuscate, or piss you off. That could not be further from the truth. I just want to get ideas out there, get things fixed and move on. But that is not the issue, the broken MX record, if that is the problem, is the issue, let's concentrate on fixing that. -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of Jason Clinton Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 2:51 PM On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 14:25 -0600, Frank Wiles wrote: > I certainly understand your frustration, but instead of getting angry > about it, just do what I do. If I can't read the E-mail, I move on... I appreciate your tempered response and a more rational approach to the issue however, I find that I can not just let it slide. I am personally invested in the vitality of the local Linux community. In the past 3 <blah, blah snip> So, I would appreciate it if people would try to avoid being inconsiderate of others. Every mailing to this list is on permanent record and, more importantly, has a lasting effect on those who read it. Please consider the consequences, however small, when you hit send. -- Jason Clinton <me(a)jasonclinton.com>

2 1

Domain Registrars
by Don Erickson 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

Greetings luggites: I have a question about peoples' experiences with domain registrars. I migrated away from Network Solutions about five years ago, and have been mostly content with registerfly.com (although their web interface has expanded until it has become an incomprehensible tangled mass of crap, but I digress) until about a month ago, when they have been unable to renew a domain that was originally registered through them. They're a reseller for ENOM and apparently now they're transferring the domains to themsleves before renewing, which is apparently beyond their capabilities. I received a support ticket email stating that the "transfer" had been approved and the domain would be renewed in a couple of days, but alas, no. This is rather astounding incompetence, so it's obviously time to move on. Anyway, who do you guys use, and what are the normal prices and pros and cons? Cheap is good, but competence is critical. Regards, -Don

2 1

RE: Domain Registrars
by Daniel Siemens 16 Feb '06

16 Feb '06

I find that poehosting.com to be pretty good. Their UI work but it's like everyone else you have to figure it out. 1 Year for a .com is 8.00. -----Original Message----- From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org] On Behalf Of Don Erickson Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 3:39 PM To: kclug(a)kclug.org Subject: Domain Registrars Greetings luggites: I have a question about peoples' experiences with domain registrars. I migrated away from Network Solutions about five years ago, and have been mostly content with registerfly.com (although their web interface has expanded until it has become an incomprehensible tangled mass of crap, but I digress) until about a month ago, when they have been unable to renew a domain that was originally registered through them. They're a reseller for ENOM and apparently now they're transferring the domains to themsleves before renewing, which is apparently beyond their capabilities. I received a support ticket email stating that the "transfer" had been approved and the domain would be renewed in a couple of days, but alas, no. This is rather astounding incompetence, so it's obviously time to move on. Anyway, who do you guys use, and what are the normal prices and pros and cons? Cheap is good, but competence is critical. Regards, -Don _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list Kclug(a)kclug.org http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG February 2006