A6 2.5 TDI 140bhp (5-cylinder)

Dear or dear, are you going for the record number threads to drag out to the point of tedium or something?

My view of usenet is that, as someone else put it, it is an exchange of information - if I have a question that I'd like an answer to, then I'll post it and await a answer (hopefully a useful one). If anyone else wants to, then they can. If I feel I have something worth contributing to a thread, then I'll post it up. Simple really. Hardly self-important.

What was that expression about a pot and a kettle?

Peter

It is.

That's correct.

Of course I do. It's just that I do not agree with the basic premise.

The idea that my time is less valuable than yours is the foundation of your assumption. You may not wish to see it that way, but it's true nonetheless. If you do not make any attempt to learn the information for yourself, then why should anyone take the time? In addition, there are different types of questions, like "who is the best independent Audi mechanic in Blackpool?" That's a question that might be impossible to look up, but where USENET would be a good resource. Unlike a technical specification question where the answer is

*probably* available outside of USENET, *and* is most like much more authoritative. If you think this isn't true, ask in USENET what octane number signifies, or the merits of synthetic oil over non-synth.

Peter and I have discussed this before - you're coming in a bit late.

In any case, there is a remedy for those who feel negatively toward my ideas - its called "learning to use your newsreader."

The irony is delicious.

Spider

Takes two to tango, sir.

It can be that. Or, it's the lazy way of getting someone else to do your homework for you. If you want to know something like what a good tire for winter driving might be, then I think USENET is a fabulous place for that. Or even a quick how-to for getting the belly pan off for oil changes. The manual isn't all that clear, if you've never done it before.

But for questions where all it takes is a like 'net search, why would you do anything else, unless, as I say, you consider your time more valuable than someone elses'?

"Post a little question, wait around for someone to answer." No work for me, and I the info I get is free. Nice deal for me.

Please explain how that applies in this case.

My advice to you is this: if you don't like my tone or my commentary, you may activate your newsreader's functions as is necessary to avoid my postings. Or do you need a tutorial?

Spider

Halleluia!

The answers to everything (within reason) are outside Usenet, but they're also available within. Despite what you may believe, that gives people a choice to how they want to find the answer to their question. The useful thing about Usenet is you can post a question, let people argue of the answer (or something completely off topic...) and by the time you next look hopefully the correct answer will have emerged. Whereas something like google, you have to shift thru all the static info, without being able to ask the authors any further questions in order to validate their point. I'm not saying that anyone elses time is more valuable than anyone elses, you dont have to post an answer, you could have ignored it. If everyone ignored Peter he would have been forced to Google it when he had some spare time, but surely your first port of call should be the easiest option, unless of course you like making things hard for yourself.

I know, but i like a good arguement :)

I'm sure it is, but my sweet and sour chicken was probably better.

And who appointed you chief w*nker? Ah, ok. You won that title hands down, on merit. Keep digging

"Answers" does not imply "accurate answers." Ref. "Octane" and "synth vs. non-synth."

What I believe has nothing to do with anything. What I know is that people who are lazy come to USENET, drop their questions, and expect correct answers. As I have pointed out, not all questions are equal.

Costing you nothing. No time, no effort, no nothing. Lazy and arrogant attitude.

Ah, but at least you have looked. You have made an effort to answer your own question, and come up confused.

"My manual says that to get the lightbulb out, I should turn the socket anticlockwise, but when I do, it turns 5mm and stops. Any hints on how to get the bugger to move?"

Rather than:

"How do I get the lightbulb out of my Type XX?"

The first instance showed that the person actually read, and tried to do the thing, but was stymied. The second one says "solve my problem for me, I am too lazy to think for myself." It also invites such comments as "RTFM," and "take it to your mechanic" - just noise.

No, of course those things aren't being said. Nobody wants to give the impression that they think they are better than anyone else.

Which has nothing at all to do with the first part of the sentence.

An adult would be eating crow.

Spider

Then, for the benefit of those who are not quite as on-the-ball, maybe you should quit posting replies, if you find it "tedious."

I notice that your original post does not include that info. Now, how am I to know that you even tried to look up something? Magic?

It depends on how thorough your search was.

If the parameters you used generated 30 screens, then you really need to learn how to properly use a search engine, and how to set up parameters as to excluse false-positives.

Well, really, here's where you give up the game, isn't it? Here, you are admitting, finally, that you consider your time "more important" than the poor sap who is just trying to be helpful. This is exactly the attitude I despise.

Part of the give and take of USENET is the idea that you actually have some sort of respect for your fellow human. Part of that is that you actually show that you have attempted to answer your own question, and come up empty, or with answers that aren't complete. Like the A4 timing belt issue - USENET is the perfect forum for those questions, because the manual, the revised TSB and the conventional wisdom are all at odds.

"Saving time" is your bottom line, I can see that very well. Too bad it comes at the expense of others...

If that's what I actually thought, then, yes, it would be arrogant. But I have never even suggested such a thing, and trying to re-image it thus is just base dishonesty on your part.

Then maybe you and others ought to look up the meaning of the word. It is clear that you (and others) do not quite grasp it's definition.

To say nothing of getting into a pissing match, hmm?

Spider

Erm, you started the "of USENET" thing. I have hardly ever used this wonderful information technology and I am indeed a novice. I think you also started the "bitch at posters whose content is not to yor (sic) liking" with your unhelpful and smartarse remark in response to AstraVanMan's original post, followed by your ridiculous attempts to defend your pride and to patronise me and the other posters. Given the form you have displayed so far, I'm surprised and a little disappointed you didn't feel moved to have a pop at the question I posted here recently.

As I said, I am a novice, as you have so masterfully deduced Sherlock. However, that does not disqualify me from responding to your vacuous and superior comments on other posters' efforts. I would feel stirred to respond to a pseudointellectual twerp like you in any circumstance, not just on "USENET." I agree I have come across much worse sorts than you, but I must say the old joke about the internet disproving the theory that "an infinite number of monkeys on typewriters would in time reproduce the works of Shakespeare" is certainly borne out by you and your ilk.

Well, in my job I usually get to watch others wield the shovel, but I'm not averse to helping you dig your hole. I'm glad you find me amusing and hope I have brightened up your little computer life.

When you learn to read and to compehend, I'll learn to be a sooper-dooper-power-user just like you.

Kind regards

Rachael

Dip me in tar and roll me in feathers. I should have said "a large number of monkeys..."

An infinite number would get the job done in zero time. Unfortunately, since there's only one born every minute we can't get together an infinite number, though AOL seems to be working on that.

Cheers Rachael

I give up, you're obviously just a miserable old todger with nothing better to do than moan over the slightest little thing. Were you just having a bad day when you started this arguement, or are you really that pathetic all the time? You must be very lonely if you are!

Goodbye

Good luck Peter!

No, actually you did. By butting in to offer your high-and-mighty "wisdom." Just sit down, shut up, and apply your filters and be done with it.

So, instead of following your own advice, you ironically jump right into the mud. Hypocrite.

Your feelings of inferiority are not my concern.

No, like all those folks that have tons of "electronic courage" you would sit quietly by while a discussion went on.

But I'm glad that you wish to imagine otherwise.

What was that about superiority, again?

I love irony - it's really the best part of USENET.

Except I am not in any way digging any "hole." See, when you're in over your head, it's best to bow out as gracefully as possible. That's your free clue.

Ah, yes, a little more of that irony that I love so...

I comprehend just fine, but thanks for yet more irony.

You should have paid attention to that "whoosh!"

No, really, the pleasure has been all mine.

Spider

So, my original comment was right on the money. Thanks for the admission.

That "fact" is one you just made up. Lying and/or hyperbole do not make your argument any stronger.

The real "fact" is that I would prefer *some* effort, as a measure of respect to those who you wish to spend time and effort in giving you information that you do not currently possess. I'm not sure what part of that you are having difficulty understanding.

You are not pardoned. You obviously know how to type, so narrowing parameters just isn't that hard. It doesn't take much expertise, just a little, tiny, almost-not-worthy-of-mentioning bit of work.

Because you're lazy and arrogant, yeah I got that already.

Like the "fact" you posted above? THis ought to be rich...

Yet I took time and effort to try and help - which is more than you were willing to do for yourself. Instead of being gracious, you decide that you need to be holier-than-thou over the whole issue.

Sorry to burst your bubble, Pete, but I find your protestations of innocence highly amusing, and completely hypocritical.

[snipped]

What other uninformed fools on USENET think of my postings is irrelevant to me. If they want to engage in a flamewar, well, that's fine with me.

1.) The comment above was not specific to me, and I in no way wanted to imply I meant myself. My apologies for not being clear on that.

My answer did have relevance, but was indeed not too helpful. But I actually spent some time trying to get it, which was more than you did for yourself.

That's not what you previously implied. Either you are just fooling yourself, or you are not telling the truth. Either way, your admission of "doing more important things" really says all that needs to be said, and proves my point completely.

Well, considering that you actually found a piece of correct information, I would say "yes."

Nor would I expect you to in this case. By your own admission, you just jumped right in and posted, assuming that you'd get your answer with no effort on your part. I am amazed that you think that this doesn't paint you in a selfish light.

That's not the point, but it's an excellent attempt at obfuscation.

The three or four fools who "don't get it" have not offered anything to alt.autos.audi in the way of information in this thread, so I'm just dismissing their opinions as the piss-takes that they are. Whether or not they coincide with your opinion has no meaning.

The funny thing is this: if you had spent as much time doing your search as you have spent in heart-felt defense of your laziness, you'd have had the info without having to post to USENET at all! The irony is simply astounding.

LOL!

Spider

He does it all of the time, probably gets his kicks from it, heh heh!

blah blah blah

Comprehension.......exactly which part of the phrase "A6 2.5 TDI 140bhp (5-cylinder)" justified your starting a "discussion" about 4 and 6 cylinder engines? Or is there something in it that I, the other contributors to this "discussion" and the rest of the English speaking world have missed?

Is it not high time you took your hand off it and climbed back into your tree? Now how do I do this? Messages.....block sender.....ah yes

Rachael x

The only time and effort I'd expect is the minute or so it takes to type a quick reply. I wouldn't expect someone to go and research something for me - I'd only expect them to post an answer that they already knew about, so it wouldn't take much of their time at all. Anyway, I notice Jonathan Morton (the one person that did post an answer that was bang on what I required) didn't begrudge helping me out (even though he'd posted it before!), so I can't see where the problem is.

As do I find yours.

Don't mention it.

Well bless your little cotton socks for trying.

Well, found the information via a post of someone else.

The above paragraph just typifies your "I'm right, everyone else is wrong" attitude. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you any more. Well, that sentence might come to be disproven.

And that's coming from someone who's spent an equal amount of time on this thread, for no other purpose than to come on here and slag me off.

Peter

I thought you liked a good argument? Sheesh - people have no fortitude any more.

Wrong on both counts. I guess you should try a be a bit more perceptive next time, hmmm?

As I recall, you flamed me first, Carl. Is your memory slipping?

Pathetic, heh. I love irony.

Nope, not lonely in the least. Thanks for playing, better luck next time!

Going so soon? We just got to the good part, LOL!

Spider

Which is a minute more than you spent even bothering to look for what you were after. Why are you so important that you should just expect others to spend *any* time giving you free info?

The problem is that you are lazy. The "exchange" of info you keep talking about seems to be a one-way street. Interesting.

Considering I have not proclaimed innocence anywhere, that's an interesting response.

No, you found badging info via google. Unless, of course, that was another fabrication on your part.

No, it typifies the truth. A few Johnny-come-latelys that have offered no useful info, but instead have decided to flame have no relevance at all. Again, I at least gave some info. It was even correct, if not terribly helpful. And these others have offered what, exactly? Where is your righteous indignation, hypocrite?

You're in control of how and when you respond. If you're done, don't respond. Jeez, do I have to tell you how to do every damn thing?

Wrong again, Peter. You'd think by now you'd be tired of being wrong. My point was to teach you a lesson. I don't think you've learned it well yet, but you may come to grow tired of my "slagging" your lazy ass off, and actually put some effort in some information "exchange."

Spider

Just about the same amount as the information you imparted.

Which is basically all you've done in this thread.

Peter

:)

I was doing quite well, you know. Okay, so I have been redesigning my website, so merely lurking in the dozens or so of newsgroups that I visit.

Shall I start a new thread?