Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: harryh89@yahoo.comx
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.nospam.plumpers
Subject: Re: Some Pix postings - Note
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 22:28:25 -0700
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <jlkm8b5a1fvpimaklfqj33rnisk0preaoi@4ax.com>
References: <92ak8b1bptgc5ds0e4n4nvo4aavfdivou1@4ax.com> <040120160940197283%charles@f.frost>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p1b49cb9c257ff8630186394b3dbc9e04a69921ed5819dde1.newsdawg.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Received-Body-CRC: 3943808243
X-Received-Bytes: 2759
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.nospam.plumpers:356
On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 09:40:19 -0600, Charles F Frost <charles@f.frost>
wrote:
>In article <92ak8b1bptgc5ds0e4n4nvo4aavfdivou1@4ax.com>,
><harryh89@yahoo.comx> wrote:
>
>> So what I'm going to do is
>> prepare the index files for all the stuff and post to the o-w group.
>> I'll post the index files here and if something grabs your attention,
>> you can simply visit the o-w group and pick your own selections.
>
>Thanks for all the floods!
>
>> Right now the volume of stuff has been so
>> high, I just can't continue with the effort.
>
>Just a thought: Whenever the overload gets to be too much, why not do
>some very quick first-level filtering, asking yourself "IMO, is this in
>the top 50% or the bottom 50%?", and just ignore the bottom half and
>not post it? Or it could be the bottom 25% if you don't want to omit
>so much material. Nobody's ever going to blame you for that,
>especially since we won't see the discarded stuff anyway so we won't
>know what we're missing.
>
>I imagine that every processing line that deals with high volumes of
>material must have some such basic filtering policy. Think of sorting
>potatoes as they come down the conveyor belt ...
>
>Regards, and happy new year.
Thanks for your comment. The material is highly fragmented with
on-topic interspersed with off-topic. So I've been picking out the
plumper stuff for this group and the non-plumper for the older-women
group. If I cut the gals in half, blindly, first that would hurt them
terribly <G> but second, the intermix'd stuff would still be off-topic
here. I know I've not been chastised for some of my off-topic
posting, but still at a higher volume I would deserve many slings and
arrows (although Usenet has become a kinder, gentler place of late).
Anyway I do appreciate comments of any kind because it tells me there
is still an audience!
--
Delete xx in address.
Mail to: harryh89@yahoo.comxx
|
|