Newsgroups: alt.religion.kibology Path: news.cinenet.net!news.ececs.uc.edu!newsrelay.netins.net!newsfeed.dacom.co.kr!nntp.kreonet.re.kr!fnews.nuri.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!199.172.62.14!world!ppp0a034.std.com!user From: mmcirvin@world.std.com (Matt McIrvin) Subject: Re: Sorry Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 16:51:52 GMT References: <3385c1d7.16585334@news.onramp.net> <33756276.396651@news.autobahn.mb.ca> Nntp-Posting-Host: ppp0a034.std.com Organization: Software Tool & Die, Brookline MA X-Newsreader: MT-NewsWatcher 2.3fc4 Lines: 43 Xref: news.cinenet.net alt.religion.kibology:29811 In article <33756276.396651@news.autobahn.mb.ca>, gary@remove_this_anti-spam_field.autobahn.mb.ca (Crackpottier) wrote: > On Thu, 15 May 1997 07:57:29 GMT, eholmes@onramp.net (E.Holmes) wrote: > > > > I just accidentally marked everything READ. Which means the kewl > > articles I've been reading and re-reading for a week, and marking > > unread so I could follow-up later when I felt more creative and/or > > less unfunny, all got marked read > > k3wl! The Forte people must have some kind of averaging thing > working hear in the hopes of making it all work out. On average, > at least. Lots of people tell me that they actually mark articles unread after reading, for later response. I've never done this. Instead, I squirrel away copies of the ones that are funny or interesting enough that I might want to re-read them someday; but if I don't follow up to them immediately, I probably won't do so later, unless I'm reminded of something I want to follow up to by seeing somebody *else's* followup, in which case I'll follow the reference chain back to the original article. I figure that, at least on a.r.k, it doesn't matter much *which* articles I happen to follow up to. When an idea for a weird, elaborate a.r.k post slowly starts jelling in my head, I sort of let it sit there until it's fully formed, and when it *is* fully formed-- which usually happens *while* I'm reading a.r.k-- I'll follow up to some essentially arbitrary thread, concoct a segue into the idea (the more forced and nonsensical, the better), and take it from there. Sometimes I actually start a new thread, but that's rare. Sometimes I go intentionally for the threads that have turned serious and slightly angry and are in danger of turning into flamewars. I'll post silliness in an attempt to raise somebody's spirits. Of course, some people have killfiled the thread and won't see my post at all, but, see, it's *conceptual* art. -- Font-o-Meter! Proportional Monospaced ^ http://world.std.com/~mmcirvin/