From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,733faa8b7b00c147 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news.uni-jena.de!not-for-mail From: Adrian Knoth Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: [OT] Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Organization: loris.TV Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: ppc201.mipool.uni-jena.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: lc03.rz.uni-jena.de 1124569502 12216 141.35.13.101 (20 Aug 2005 20:25:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@uni-jena.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 20:25:02 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (Debian) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4220 Date: 2005-08-20T20:25:02+00:00 List-Id: Randy wrote: >>>>BTW: your postings sucks pretty much: no valid From, non-unique >>>> message-ID (no fqdn). Perhaps you can correct this. >>>Could someone explain what he is talking about here? >>>I am afraid I don't know. >> Sometimes I help to interpret, but not when the person being unclear >> cannot bother to use civil language. > Yes, I hear you. I thought he was quite rude for no reason. I'm sorry, I never intended to be rude. I'm not a native speaker and I don't know that "sucks" is so negative. My intention was to only state that there are some points which could be improved. Though I prefer complete From-lines and especially a valid reply-to-address (which would let me tell all those things by mail instead of disturbing the audience with it), the real point to critizize is the violation of RFC850. I think you're completely new to usenet so I guess you don't know what I'm talking about. Actually it isn't even your fault, your software is doing wrong. If you read and especially 2.1.7 you'll see that your message-id *must* contain a real domain name. Yours (trnddc03) isn't sufficient. The sense of putting a valid domain name there is to guarantee the uniqueness of message-ids. That's important to identify every single posting all over the world. Any collision would break the primary key property. It's like two persons sharing the same name: you're always getting into trouble when referring to one of them ;) > I'm wondering why he was looking at the header instead of > the message. Maybe he is some hacker looking for a person's > ID to steal. Who knows. You're kidding? -- mail: adi@thur.de http://adi.thur.de PGP: v2-key via keyserver Man kann gar nicht so viel essen wie man kotzen m�chte!