Re: framers-digest V1 #287 (Auto-Reply)

["John Pilla" <JPILLA@xxxxxxxxx>]

This  Response is an Auto-reply to your E-Mail, 
courtesy of GroupWise.

I am Out-of-the-Office.
I Will check V-Mail.
I Will check E-Mail Monday, 24 Jan.  

~john  

>>> framers 01/14/00 15:58 >>>


framers-digest        Friday, January 14 2000        Volume 01 : Number 287

----------------------------------------------------------------------

  Subjects in this Digest:
Test of both lists
New Adobe User Forums Live!
Topic summaries
Explantion related to testing
Re: Explantion related to testing
Problematic mechanical dysfunctionality
Re: Watermarks & Graphics
speaking of testing

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 14:56:37 -0500
From: Jay Smith <jay@JaySmith.com>
Subject: Test of both lists

There seems to be some time/date problems somehow between the two lists
and also lack of activity on the omsys list.

This test message was sent at 14.55 EST (USA) by my clock, to both lists
at the same moment.

Will both go through?  And how will they be datestamped?

Jay

- -- 
Jay Smith

e-mail: Jay@JaySmith.com

Jay Smith & Associates
P.O. Box 650
Snow Camp, NC  27349  USA

Phone: Int+US+336-376-9991
Toll-Free Phone in US & Canada:
	1-800-447-8267
Fax: Int+US+336-376-6750

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 12:14:25 -0800
From: mlevine <mlevine@Adobe.COM>
Subject: New Adobe User Forums Live!


The Adobe User to User Forums are now better than ever!

Adobe announces it's new and improved User to User Forums, using Web Crossing,
the leader in Web-based discussion software.  You can expect faster performance,
an enhanced "Adobe" look and feel, and a lively community in which to share your
Adobe-product questions and experiences.

Check out the User to User Forums at
http://www.adobe.com/support/forums/main.html

If you have registered for the forums in the past, you will have to register
again as a new user.  

Also, feel free to send us your feedback at
userforums@adobe.com 

Enjoy! 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 13:53:51 -0800
From: Peter Spicer <pspicer@dascom.com>
Subject: Topic summaries

Hello everyone,

I hope many of you have benefitted from the SUMMARY reports recently
submitted by Christopher Bey ("SUMMARY - Adding new tags to TOC list -
how?") and Susan Arbing ("SUMMARY and thanks: Changing the colour of
bullets and numbers"). I even had a brief chat with Chris who said he was
new to the list and was just following the instructions to post a summary!!
And what a well-constructed, useful summary it is. 

There are still many topics that come up on the list, get resolved behind
the scenes (correspondence off list) - and then are never heard from again.
Sometimes responses on-list are not always accurate. But a new FM user
might not know this. A summary statement can clarify what the successful
answers are. Summary statements on this list are a great way to collect
tips and tricks items and generate articles for InFrame, etc. I encourage
everyone on the list to remember to summarize the successful results of
your question(s). There are many hundreds of "lurkers" on the list and many
newcomers to FM who are learning.

Also, I would like to see the list make more references to  the many good
InFrame (http://www.inframe-mag.com/index.html) articles as much as
possible when responding to questions. This is a great resource. Some
people are putting a lot of personal time into providing this resource. And
there is an increasing number of repeated questions from newcomers.

Thanks and keep up the good communication.

Peter

****************************************************************************
Peter Spicer                  Senior Technical Writer / Course Developer
IBM / Tivoli Security Business Unit   Santa Cruz, CA   831-460-3679

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:58:56 -0500
From: Jay Smith <jay@JaySmith.com>
Subject: Explantion related to testing

Greetings,

Earlier today I sent a test mailing to both lists.  My intent was to
make sure that there was activity on the omsys list and to attempt to
see the difference in time stamping.

Well.... Guess what!  The FrameUsers.com new listserv software
automatically rejects tests.  In subsequent correspondence, Brad
explained that to me and also indicated that he has amplified/clarified
the information contained in the automatic response regarding such
rejections.

So, thanks to those that responded to me regarding this test.  I still
don't have a comparison, but that's life.

Jay

- -- 
Jay Smith

e-mail: Jay@JaySmith.com

Jay Smith & Associates
P.O. Box 650
Snow Camp, NC  27349  USA

Phone: Int+US+336-376-9991
Toll-Free Phone in US & Canada:
	1-800-447-8267
Fax: Int+US+336-376-6750

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 01:04:52 GMT
From: jeremy@omsys.com (Jeremy H. Griffith)
Subject: Re: Explantion related to testing

On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:58:56 -0500, Jay Smith <jay@JaySmith.com> wrote:

>Earlier today I sent a test mailing to both lists.  My intent was to
>make sure that there was activity on the omsys list and to attempt to
>see the difference in time stamping.
>
>Well.... Guess what!  The FrameUsers.com new listserv software
>automatically rejects tests.  In subsequent correspondence, Brad
>explained that to me and also indicated that he has amplified/clarified
>the information contained in the automatic response regarding such
>rejections.

Wow.  Does it reject anything with the word "test" in the subject?
That seems an awfully antisocial thing to do to a technical list...
We reject certain phrases used only by porn spammers, but that's it.

>So, thanks to those that responded to me regarding this test.  I still
>don't have a comparison, but that's life.

FWIW, after your earlier note, I started paying attention to time of
post vs. time of arrival.  It's been quite consistent all day.  The
FrameUsers posts take an hour; the Omsys ones take a minute.  Literally.
If you view headers, the time on the topmost Received header gives the
time of delivery by SMTP to your own POP mail server, so comparing that
with the time stamp in the Date header (origination time) will tell you
the latency on the messages.

Why does this matter?  Because the shorter the latency, the quicker the
help to the inquirer, and the fewer the wasted messages repeating the
same answer before the earlier answers start appearing.  Most technical
lists I'm on personally, and I'm on many, have about a five-minute delay;
anything longer would draw a firestorm of protests from busy programmers.
We value our time, and don't want it thrown away by poor tools (or poorly
configured mail systems).

- -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc.
   (jeremy@omsys.com)     http://www.omsys.com/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 01:19:01 GMT
From: jeremy@omsys.com (Jeremy H. Griffith)
Subject: Problematic mechanical dysfunctionality

On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:19:21 -0800, "Lyris" <lyris@lists.frameusers.com> wrote:

So this just came back to me from my previous post, in response to Jay's
censored post...

>Dear Listmember,
>
>This is an automatic response. We try to keep the discussions on the lists 
>at FrameUsers.com on topic.  Your post was rejected because it was off 
>topic according to the subject line of your post or you sent a "t*st" 
>message to the list.
>
>Please don't post off topic messages to the list.
>
>Thank You,
>
>Brad Anderson
>FrameUsers.com List Management

And that is the message Jay must be referring to.  Interestingly,
it came back to me within a minute of posting to both lists.
In the same batch, Lyris sent a message posted by Deborah Snavely
about 2.5 hours earlier.  Does anyone else think these priorities
are just a bit skewed?

And does the automated rejection of posts as off-topic by a machine 
seem even worse?  Even downright uncivil?  Grumph.

- -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc.
   (jeremy@omsys.com)     http://www.omsys.com/

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 08:42:56 -0600
From: ssmither@komint.com
Subject: Re: Watermarks & Graphics

Kathy,

Since I deal with .pcx formats quite a bit, I think the problem you are having
is that .pcx format does not have a 'transparency' setting. The background is
set to a specific color and prints over the watermark. I would suggest using a
graphic format (like EPS) that supports transparent background. Others on these
lists can provide more detailed information about that subject than I can.

Hope this helps.

Sean A. Smither
Supervisor, Service Publications
DataKom Publishing Corporation

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 09:01:15 -0600
From: "Ron Nelson" <rnelson@wavetech.com>
Subject: speaking of testing

I've tried to post several messages to both lists recently, but they've only
shown up on FrameUsers - granted it's taken a couple of hours.  While I
still receive the posts of others from freeframers, none of my posts seem to
come through.  Obviously if anyone is reading this the problem must be
gone...

Thanks,

Ron Nelson

[Ed. note: Ron was not subbed at his posting address. Problem solved.]

------------------------------

End of framers-digest V1 #287
*****************************

** To unsubscribe from framers-digest, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers-digest" (without quotes) in the message body.   **



** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **