AGB FAQ Wiki
Charmed Snark
My first motivation for this was to move my AGB Recording FAQ
offsite somewhere. But it is also my hope that others here will
contribute to it, making it a more generally useful FAQ site for
this group. Their HTML editor is fairly easy to use.
I would really like to see someone contribute to the "guitar
playing" and theory aspects for FAQ that we have in this group. I
may contribute a limited amount of that, but it would be nice to
have some others contribute as well.
If you want to contribute to this wiki :
1. Create a "username" for yourself at atwiki.com
2. Visit the link above, scroll to the bottom. There
you should see my email address rendered in your
browser (I am administrator). See notes at
bottom of this post if my email address does
not appear.
3. Email me with your username, and I'll add you to
the wiki membership.
PLEASE PUT "AGB WIKI" ON THE SUBJECT LINE of your
message to avoid getting accidentally blacklisted
as a spammer (I get a lot of spam and bounce as
much of it as I can). I do check subject lines
however.
4. After I add you to the wiki membership, you'll be
able to add/edit wiki content.
For those of you that already have sites of your own, you can link
to them, or to portions of them (non-commercial). Just be aware of
any "terms of use" for the atwiki site that we don't want to
violate. Categorize your content to make it easy for the vistors to
navigate and drill down.
Additionally, if you have posted music tracks, then by all means
create a special category on the wiki front page for that and
provide your forwarding links to it.
Thanks, Snark.
==============
Javascript Notes:
I have posted my email address in the bottom of the wiki
front page using some very simple javascript to avoid
automated email address harvesting.
If no email address appears, it may be because you have javascript
disabled. If that happens, do a "View->Source" to view the HTML
code, and search for cogeco.ca (or '@'). You should be able to
reconstruct my email address from the code snippet there.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: 22 Mar 2007 14:16:20 GMT
> Subject: AGB FAQ Wiki
Hi Snark;
Do you have a real name we could address you by?
I think everyone appreciates the good intentions behind this effort and
initiative of yours, but I personally have an objection or two that I'd like
to bring up and discus.
First, taking a quick look at the editor I find this line at the top:
"This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
I would prefer that before making such a decision and official affiliation
claim you discuss it with the group first, check the group's by-laws, and
follow whatever other protocols might be in order.
In short, I would prefer and perhaps even insist that until you do procure
official status and sanctions you maintain your page as a wholly separate
independent entity with no claim to being an officially authorized extension
and representative of this group, AGB, as in being synonymous,
one-in-the-same, identical or "identity". This would specifically include
removing identifiers such as "AGB" and "alt.guitar.beginner" except where
appropriately used in some kind of passing-reference context. The page name
itself agb.atwiki.com (the agb prefix) might be debatable, though probably
not enforceable and nor would I personally make an issue of it (I don't
think) assuming the other matters were addressed and corrected. Even the
title of this message is making some assumptions and taking some liberties
along similar lines (if you see what I mean).
I have other concerns too, the fact that the site and page is not a true
wiki-engine and wiki-style editor for starters (as far as I can tell), but I
think we need to get past point-one before going further.
Again, thank you for your efforts, Snark, despite these identity issues and
objections.
Thanks
Roger
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
>> From: Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh>
>> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>> Date: 22 Mar 2007 14:16:20 GMT
>> Subject: AGB FAQ Wiki
>>
>> I have created a free wiki at the following site for this group:
>>
>> http://agb.atwiki.com
> Do you have a real name we could address you by?
Yes
> First, taking a quick look at the editor I find this line at the
> top:
>
> "This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>
> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official
> affiliation claim you discuss it with the group first, check the
> group's by-laws, and follow whatever other protocols might be in
> order.
Several people have over the years created FAQs for this and other
groups.
> In short, I would prefer and perhaps even insist that until you do
> procure official status and sanctions you maintain your page as a
> wholly separate independent entity with no claim to being an
> officially authorized extension and representative of this group,
For what purpose? Would that improve the value of it?
Let me just state that I am entirely happy with someone else running
the whole thing. But since no one in the time that I have been part
of this group is stepping up the plate, I am willing to get it
started.
> I have other concerns too, the fact that the site and page is not
> a true wiki-engine and wiki-style editor for starters
What is a "true" wiki-styled editor?
> Again, thank you for your efforts, Snark, despite these identity
> issues and objections.
>
> Thanks
> Roger
Noted. Any other comments from others?
Snark.
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: 22 Mar 2007 18:26:55 GMT
> Subject: Re: AGB FAQ Wiki
>
> On 22 Mar 2007, "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in
> alt.guitar.beginner:
>
>>> From: Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh>
>>> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>>> Date: 22 Mar 2007 14:16:20 GMT
>>> Subject: AGB FAQ Wiki
>>>
>>> I have created a free wiki at the following site for this group:
>>>
>>> http://agb.atwiki.com
>
>> Do you have a real name we could address you by?
>
> Yes
Would you mind too much sharing your name with us please? I mean, it would
be nice to know who our leader is by name.
>> First, taking a quick look at the editor I find this line at the
>> top:
>>
>> "This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>>
>> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official
>> affiliation claim you discuss it with the group first, check the
>> group's by-laws, and follow whatever other protocols might be in
>> order.
> Several people have over the years created FAQs for this and other
> groups.
Hosting an existing and official AGB group FAQ is one thing, this is another
thing entirely, wouldn't you say?
>> In short, I would prefer and perhaps even insist that until you do
>> procure official status and sanctions you maintain your page as a
>> wholly separate independent entity with no claim to being an
>> officially authorized extension and representative of this group,
> For what purpose? Would that improve the value of it?
For purposes of "truth in advertising" one might say, for starters. The
value of it is yet to be seen, or determined, I think it's fair to say,
wouldn't you agree?
> Let me just state that I am entirely happy with someone else running
> the whole thing. But since no one in the time that I have been part
> of this group is stepping up the plate, I am willing to get it
> started.
As I said earlier, Snark, I know your intentions are good, and the spirit of
your effort and initiative _is_ appreciated, but there are a myriad of
issues that might be discussed as to standards, content, editorial last-word
or arbitration, "baby-sitting" of the page, which means daily checking of
_all_ content for recent changes. The mere fact that power-of-attorney in
granting or restricting "permission to edit" in your hands or any other
single person's hands alone is worth discussing, wouldn't you agree?
>> I have other concerns too, the fact that the site and page is not
>> a true wiki-engine and wiki-style editor for starters
>
> What is a "true" wiki-styled editor?
Wikipedia is and uses a true wiki-style editor as well as accepting bits of
html. Have you ever worked at wikipedia or similar site?
Here is a page, for example, to which I have contributed extensively. My
identity at wikipedia is "Cyclocifra".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viol
>> Again, thank you for your efforts, Snark, despite these identity
>> issues and objections.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Roger
> Noted.
thank you
Roger
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
>>>> I have created a free wiki at the following site for this
>>>> group:
>>>>
>>>> http://agb.atwiki.com
>>
>>> Do you have a real name we could address you by?
>>
>> Yes
>
> Would you mind too much sharing your name with us please? I mean,
> it would be nice to know who our leader is by name.
1. Actually, you could probably find out by googling this group and/or
the net. USENET never forgets you know. :)
2. I am _not_ making any attempt to be "the leader".
I may be late reporting to the mother ship, but I don't want to be your
leader.
>>> First, taking a quick look at the editor I find this line at the
>>> top:
>>>
>>> "This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>>>
>>> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official
>>> affiliation claim you discuss it with the group first, check the
>>> group's by-laws, and follow whatever other protocols might be in
>>> order.
>
>> Several people have over the years created FAQs for this and
>> other groups.
>
> Hosting an existing and official AGB group FAQ is one thing, this
> is another thing entirely, wouldn't you say?
Well, ***OFFICIAL*** alt.guitar.beginner charter reads thusly:
>From ga...@animov.demon.co.uk Mon Nov 30 10:35:04 1998
>Path: news.isc.org!news.stanford.edu!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!
> woodstock.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!
> animov.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail
>From: ga...@animov.demon.co.uk
>Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>Subject: cmsg newgroup alt.guitar.beginner
>Control: newgroup alt.guitar.beginner
>Date: Mon, 30 Nov 1998 18:33:09 GMT
>Sender: ga...@animov.demon.co.uk
>Approved: mja...@hotmail.com
>Message-ID: <3662e4e...@news.demon.co.uk>
>Reply-To: ga...@animov.demon.co.uk
>NNTP-Posting-Host: animov.demon.co.uk
>Keywords: guitar.beginner
>X-NNTP-Posting-Host: animov.demon.co.uk:194.222.155.73
>X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 912450888 nnrp-11:7484 NO-IDENT
>animov.demon.co.uk:194.222.155.73
>X-Complaints-To: ab...@demon.net
>X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230
>Lines: 11
>Xref: news.isc.org control.newgroup:155186
>
>coments
>
>during october alt.guitat was duscussed in
>alt.config
>
>this was my proposal
>
>verbatim
>alt.guitar.beginner
>
>there was substantial online interest in this newgroup
Source: ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/control/alt/alt.guitar.beginner.gz
Soooo, I don't think I'll be looking over my shoulder for any USENET
police any time soon.
>>> In short, I would prefer and perhaps even insist that until you
>>> do procure official status and sanctions you maintain your page
>>> as a wholly separate independent entity with no claim to being
>>> an officially authorized extension and representative of this
>>> group,
>
>> For what purpose? Would that improve the value of it?
>
> For purposes of "truth in advertising" one might say,
Like the stuff we see daily in AGB? :)
> for
> starters. The value of it is yet to be seen, or determined, I
> think it's fair to say, wouldn't you agree?
I'm just saying that its not that important for this effort to be all
official, sanctioned by a yet to be determined body, have committee
meetings blah blah blah. Look at the group's charter. There was
interest - and there it was.
If there is no interest in this wiki, it will just wither and die, or
others will spring up in its place. Either way, it will work itself
out-- which is pretty much the spirit of any wiki anyway.
> As I said earlier, Snark, I know your intentions are good, and the
> spirit of your effort and initiative _is_ appreciated, but there
> are a myriad of issues that might be discussed as to standards,
> content, editorial last-word or arbitration, "baby-sitting" of the
> page, which means daily checking of _all_ content for recent
> changes.
This is the kind of stuff that standards bodies and book publications
are made of. We know how quickly standards bodies move, and I am in no
way proposing an online book effort.
Look at wikipedia. How much can you trust it at the end of the day?
Would you use it to guide yourself through a bomb disposal? ("Cut the
brown wire", wikepedia.org).
Somebody has to "admin" the site, and as I said before, it doesn't have
to be me. But it cannot be left completely open either, since vandalism
will reign in that mode.
> The mere fact that power-of-attorney in granting or
> restricting "permission to edit" in your hands or any other single
> person's hands alone is worth discussing, wouldn't you agree?
I don't think world domination is a risk from this effort.
>>> I have other concerns too, the fact that the site and page is
>>> not a true wiki-engine and wiki-style editor for starters
>>
>> What is a "true" wiki-styled editor?
>
> Wikipedia is and uses a true wiki-style editor
You just state that it does, but don't say why.
> as well as
> accepting bits of html.
You _can_ do this, at atwiki (I've already added Javascript to the
front page for example).
> Have you ever worked at wikipedia or
> similar site?
Yes. Just because it is different from something else you have used
doesn't make it "wrong".
> Here is a page, for example, to which I have contributed
> extensively. My identity at wikipedia is "Cyclocifra".
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viol
That's fine Roger, but what is the point of that example? Wikipedia is
serving a slightly different audience, in an encyclopedia like context.
That is entirely different than what I had in mind for a simple
collection of answers to FAQs in this group. If we have to do this by
committee, it won't get done at all.
I'll just summarize the approach that I was hoping for: Something
simple enough to use, yet free, and secure from vandalism to address
the simple needs of this group and perhaps develop other uses for it.
After all, we can't have people putting up stuff like "Lumpy loves
Dylan's vocals". Like the charter, keep it free man.
if it flies, it flies. If it flops, then fine. I continue with my
guitar practice either way. ;-)
no66y©
"Roger E. Blumberg" wrote in message
> "This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>
> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official affiliation
> claim you discuss it with the group first, check the group's by-laws, and
> follow whatever other protocols might be in order.
This is an unmodorated newsgroup. People can basically do/say what they want
as long as it does not infringe their ISP's AUP.
I guess you could describe it as "A wiki style rescourse to help folks on
alt.guitar.beginner or similar newsgroups" but that's essentially saying the
same thing but with far more words. We wanna play guitar, not argue
semantics.
Also, it doesn't say the "official" wiki anything.
CS did start a while back with the recording FAQ, this is just a natural
extension I would have thought.
And, its damn good. many thanks to CS for taking time out to write and
upload the pages.
Dutifully bookmarked
--
No66y©
Those who find they're touched by madness
Sit down next to me.
Virtual Preserve are here!
www.soundclick.com/bands/virtualpreserve
Reply to address is a spam trap.
Use no66y [at] breathe [dot] com
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: 22 Mar 2007 20:18:15 GMT
> Subject: Re: AGB FAQ Wiki
>
> On 22 Mar 2007, "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in
> alt.guitar.beginner:
>
>>>>> I have created a free wiki at the following site for this
>>>>> group:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://agb.atwiki.com
>>>
>>>> Do you have a real name we could address you by?
>>>
>>> Yes
>> Would you mind too much sharing your name with us please? I mean,
>> it would be nice to know who our leader is by name.
> 1. Actually, you could probably find out by googling this group and/or
> the net. USENET never forgets you know. :)
Now I think you're just being difficult to-be-difficult, and cute, but still
being evasive, Jimbo. Cooperation is important to the success of any effort
as such as the one you propose. Correct?
> 2. I am _not_ making any attempt to be "the leader".
I do know that, Jimba, but I was just trying to illustrate a point.
> I may be late reporting to the mother ship, but I don't want to be your
> leader.
You are not late. The Equation-ship is led by a statement which I am unable
to express to you fully at this time.
>>>> First, taking a quick look at the editor I find this line at the
>>>> top:
>>>>
>>>> "This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>>>>
>>>> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official
>>>> affiliation claim you discuss it with the group first, check the
>>>> group's by-laws, and follow whatever other protocols might be in
>>>> order.
>>
>>> Several people have over the years created FAQs for this and
>>> other groups.
>>
>> Hosting an existing and official AGB group FAQ is one thing, this
>> is another thing entirely, wouldn't you say?
> Well, ***OFFICIAL*** alt.guitar.beginner charter reads thusly:
> Source: ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/control/alt/alt.guitar.beginner.gz
I must inform you Jimbo that the hyper-link you provided requires a key
which I do not posses.
> Soooo, I don't think I'll be looking over my shoulder for any USENET
> police any time soon.
I am happy to learn this.
>>>> In short, I would prefer and perhaps even insist that until you
>>>> do procure official status and sanctions you maintain your page
>>>> as a wholly separate independent entity with no claim to being
>>>> an officially authorized extension and representative of this
>>>> group,
>>
>>> For what purpose? Would that improve the value of it?
>>
>> For purposes of "truth in advertising" one might say,
> Like the stuff we see daily in AGB? :)
People see things differently I've observed. That is the truth I see daily.
I think it is fair to say however that some statements are simply not true
in earthly reality.
>> for
>> starters. The value of it is yet to be seen, or determined, I
>> think it's fair to say, wouldn't you agree?
> I'm just saying that its not that important for this effort to be all
> official, sanctioned by a yet to be determined body, have committee
> meetings blah blah blah. Look at the group's charter. There was
> interest - and there it was.
But I think the issue was more about who _is_ the group which wears the name
AGB. If there was no one particular name then there would be no thing to
object to. That is really what I have been saying. Am I communicating my
thoughts clearly? I will try again if I must.
> If there is no interest in this wiki, it will just wither and die, or
> others will spring up in its place. Either way, it will work itself
> out--
Same as you, I think that is true.
> which is pretty much the spirit of any wiki anyway.
The spirit of wiki is one of cooperation first and foremost. The particulars
of that joint venture are spelled out fairly well before hand in my
experience. This is also part of the thing I have been trying to communicate
to you and others reading this thread.
>> As I said earlier, Snark, I know your intentions are good, and the
>> spirit of your effort and initiative _is_ appreciated, but there
>> are a myriad of issues that might be discussed as to standards,
>> content, editorial last-word or arbitration, "baby-sitting" of the
>> page, which means daily checking of _all_ content for recent
>> changes.
> This is the kind of stuff that standards bodies and book publications
> are made of. We know how quickly standards bodies move, and I am in no
> way proposing an online book effort.
Standards exist for a reason. I think standards are important to establish,
maintain, and even review periodically. Standards matter to me. They matter
more and more every day, I find.
> Look at wikipedia. How much can you trust it at the end of the day?
> Would you use it to guide yourself through a bomb disposal? ("Cut the
> brown wire", wikepedia.org).
I invited you to please look at wikipedia as a model for the type of
endeavor you propose. I will now go one step further by sending you some
front row seats.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About
Reading is required and have no power to change that.
> Somebody has to "admin" the site, and as I said before, it doesn't have
> to be me. But it cannot be left completely open either, since vandalism
> will reign in that mode.
I agree with you. There are many things to consider.
>> The mere fact that power-of-attorney in granting or
>> restricting "permission to edit" in your hands or any other single
>> person's hands alone is worth discussing, wouldn't you agree?
> I don't think world domination is a risk from this effort.
I think you are correct, unidentified-man.
>>>> I have other concerns too, the fact that the site and page is
>>>> not a true wiki-engine and wiki-style editor for starters
>>>
>>> What is a "true" wiki-styled editor?
>>
>> Wikipedia is and uses a true wiki-style editor
> You just state that it does, but don't say why.
I can only ask you to do your homework. I can not do it for you. Wiki-text
and wiki-editing is not like html. It is much simpler, it is very easy. That
is one of the main attractions of wikipedia, and it is at the root of it's
success. I am not willing to explain all the details to you here now even if
I could.
>> as well as
>> accepting bits of html.
>
> You _can_ do this, at atwiki (I've already added Javascript to the
> front page for example).
Html and java are not attractive to many people. Keeping things simple is a
tenant everyone will benefit from.
>> Have you ever worked at wikipedia or
>> similar site?
> Yes. Just because it is different from something else you have used
> doesn't make it "wrong".
If you have worked at wikipedia I'm not sure why we are having this
discussion. Are you telling me that I have been spending my time foolishly
with you?
>> Here is a page, for example, to which I have contributed
>> extensively. My identity at wikipedia is "Cyclocifra".
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viol
> That's fine Roger
I did add my name to it, so it had better be '-). And thank you for saying
so. The standards set-down at the outset, and the degree and kinds of
maintenance and enforcement in place there, promote and place value on
quality, which in the end is the only thing that can ever attract quality
contributions. But the results are no better than the participants in any
event. This is true.
> but what is the point of that example? Wikipedia is
> serving a slightly different audience, in an encyclopedia like context.
> That is entirely different than what I had in mind for a simple
> collection of answers to FAQs in this group. If we have to do this by
> committee, it won't get done at all.
If not by committee then by some individual who is an experienced planner.
> I'll just summarize the approach that I was hoping for: Something
> simple enough to use, yet free, and secure from vandalism to address
> the simple needs of this group and perhaps develop other uses for it.
> After all, we can't have people putting up stuff like "Lumpy loves
> Dylan's vocals". Like the charter, keep it free man.
You can keep _your_ web site as free as you chose. If Lumpy doesn't mind
what you do in his name, then neither do I. That's between you and him to
agree upon.
> if it flies, it flies. If it flops, then fine. I continue with my
> guitar practice either way. ;-)
Practicing guitar is a good thing. But we were talking about your use of the
name _AGB_ on your web site wiki, among other things.
Roger
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net>
> Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:57:24 GMT
> Subject: Re: AGB FAQ Wiki
>
>
>
>> From: Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh>
>> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
>> Date: 22 Mar 2007 20:18:15 GMT
>> Subject: Re: AGB FAQ Wiki
>>
>> On 22 Mar 2007, "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in
>> alt.guitar.beginner:
>>
>>>>>> I have created a free wiki at the following site for this
>>>>>> group:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://agb.atwiki.com
>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a real name we could address you by?
>>>>
>>>> Yes
>
>
>>> Would you mind too much sharing your name with us please? I mean,
>>> it would be nice to know who our leader is by name.
>
>
>> 1. Actually, you could probably find out by googling this group and/or
>> the net. USENET never forgets you know. :)
>
>
> Now I think you're just being difficult to-be-difficult, and cute, but still
> being evasive, Jimbo. Cooperation is important to the success of any effort
> as such as the one you propose. Correct?
>
>
>> 2. I am _not_ making any attempt to be "the leader".
>
>
> I do know that, Jimba, but I was just trying to illustrate a point.
Please forgive my having calling you Jimbo, Snark, both here and any other
similar instances herein. And the same apology goes out to Jimbo himself.
Using other people's name in vain, so to speak, is not a good thing. But it
was an honest mistake here. I am in fact quite tired and in need of rest.
That leads to errors. ;-) I hope I've been able to communicate my main
thoughts successfully nevertheless
0-Roger
raymo
"Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in message
news:C22831EE.52D80%rblu...@jps.net...
What if it was authored by the 'AGB WIKI TEAM'? That would surely
differentiate such a subset from the rest of the group (should that be a
concern).
I mean, let's face it - this group aint moderated, opinions will always
vary, no one's losing any money (or countenance, based on some threads I've
seen here), so what's at stake, really?
Raymo.
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "raymo" <ray.s...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:36:41 +1100
Hello Raymo;
I think your "AGB Wiki Team" idea is one of the best ideas I've heard all
day, this new day of ours. Spring my have sprung by golly. I think people
should flesh that out a little more, and it may be very simple. I suspect
many things may be simpler that once though, once people put their heads
together. I'm all for it. It's not so much about differentiating one group
from another though, it's about community. I think that's an important
distinction.
What's at stake? really? Without getting all mystical on you I'll just say a
good learning lesson. If I _were_ to get mystical about it though, I might
say: our lives, our planet, our future, our children, and stuff like that.
But there's really nothing very cryptic in there. That's pretty simple
language and concepts I think.
You know, I was just prompted to consult Wikipedia for the meaning of the
words Mysticism, mystic, mystical, and was very pleasantly surprised. I
honestly didn't really know. I think it's worth sharing with you now, what I
learned, for some strange reason.
. . ."Mysticism from the Greek mustik?V (mustikos) "an initiate" (of the
Eleusinian Mysteries, must?ria (musteria) meaning "initiation"[1]) is the
pursuit of achieving communion or identity with, or conscious awareness of,
ultimate reality, the divine, spiritual truth, or God through direct
experience, intuition, or insight; and the belief that such experience is an
important source of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. . .
Very odd. And the timing, impeccable.
I think we are cooking now Greg.
I think I may owe Stephen an apology. Mystics are _exactly_ what we need
right now. My my.
I will have to do some home work now, This I find interesting, I have to
narrow things down, focus it better. No "ultimate reality" weirdness in
terms of the end of "cosmic time" or something. The end or final reality,
face reality, what is real in the end is what matters. I have lots to play
with here yet. We gotta keep it real, this I know, it's key. I was meaning I
have to lean more about what the earlier mystics said, did, left behind for
us or something. If I'm barking up the wrong tree I'll keep looking,
elsewhere. Can't hurt, we need help, lots of masters at what they do.
Talented people who want to help but don't know how, yet. If we put our
lives in the hands of our politicians, we will die. If we put our lives in
the hands of an army of artists, we might just pull this off. I mean we need
lots of help from many quarters. But who has their hearts in it? Who's the
most creative? Lots of intelligence too, brain pool. Many messages, many
recipients, targeted. specifically to them. And which thems? No time to f**k
around. Go as high up as you can get. Cut the right corners. The delivery
matters, simplicity matters. What to they need. Meet their need, somehow, as
if lives depended upon it. In the end, what would you give, how many inches?
Do they understand we are in deep shit? They need to understand we are in
deep shit. Make them understand. Use language they will understand. It can
be done. Models, models, models. We know about models. Time for a revival
alright. Arise, please. Make it attractive, beautiful. Artists are the
masters of that, it's what we do, best. It is childs-play to us, but we do
take it seriously. And music, it is the high art. Musicians have so much
power, if they only knew. Sing, I beg you. Interpretation. by very careful,
and good at it. Reinterpret, it's tricky business. Find the flip-side
interpretation if you need it. Either or both and neither. That helped me,
for some things, but be careful, interpretation is crazy shit sometimes.
Filter carefully. X-factor(s). Stuff happens. Rest, food, exhaustion, We
know that too, artist's do. Been there many times no doubt, haven't you.
Lord, if you multiply and combine those creative juices, for one single
collective objective, what is it that can't be done? Need money? Be honest.
People want to help. Tell them _exactly_ what you are doing, your intent.
Experienced planers. Master Planners. Not just artists either, per say. An
army of artists. What models do armies use that we can us, to our benefit,
peacefully. Masterplanners are one thing. They are many things. They know
many hats, inside and out. That's why they can put the pieces together. I
never knew an artist who wasn't an explorer by nature. When you explore you
learn. It does add up.
Why am I telling you this? I'm just winging it. I don't know why, other than
it feels right, to me, and right now. I told Stephen, if Maya knows the
answer, please bring her, now. It's time. The next day, or was it two?, it
came. It doesn't matter who or what Maya is, I don't think, what mattered
was the intent. I was really serious, when I said those words, it's time,
That's a word Stephen has been using a lot, intent. It happened here, at
AGB, so where else should I say it. Is this just all crazy shit? Am I making
any sense to anyone here? Am I boring anyone too much? I do apologize for
that, taking so much of your time. I have to read this once before I send
it. Well even a scan up the page tells me it's not all that long. Lots of
content at least, or at least I think so '-).
I have learned a lot being here, a whole lot. I owe you my thanks, everyone
at AGB. You see, I am a beginner too. I can interpret that last sentence
many ways though. I've practiced that art, of interpretation. I may be a
master at it, on a good day. So why am I telling this stuff to you, I'm
doing the best I can, to help you. That's all I've ever wanted. It may
contain a few pearls, like a gift or two. Years ago I said here, "they left
you a gift", that's what artists do. That's what artists do. I want you to
be you.
0-Roger
raymo
Why you! You've been dipping into Greg's random text generator, haven't
you!?
Raymo.
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
>
> "Roger E. Blumberg" wrote in message
>> "This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>>
>> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official
>> affiliation claim you discuss it with the group first, check the
>> group's by-laws, and follow whatever other protocols might be in
>> order.
>
> This is an unmodorated newsgroup. People can basically do/say what
> they want as long as it does not infringe their ISP's AUP.
Thanks for bringing that up no66y. As an unmoderated newsgroup, there
is no real "charter". As such, one could say, NOTHING is off topic in
this group, although we all understand from the group name that it has
to do with guitars and beginners.
> I guess you could describe it as "A wiki style rescourse to help
> folks on alt.guitar.beginner or similar newsgroups" but that's
> essentially saying the same thing but with far more words. We
> wanna play guitar, not argue semantics.
And that is just what it is -- one resource.
> Also, it doesn't say the "official" wiki anything.
Does anybody have an office for alt.guitar.beginner ? ;-)
The wiki is just one resource. For our purposes, let's just take the
Nike approach and "just do it".
Snark.
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
>> On 22 Mar 2007, "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in
>> alt.guitar.beginner:
>>
>>>>>> I have created a free wiki at the following site for this
>>>>>> group:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://agb.atwiki.com
...
>>>>> First, taking a quick look at the editor I find this line at
>>>>> the top:
>>>>>
>>>>> "This is the start of alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>>>>>
>>>>> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official
>>>>> affiliation claim you discuss it with the group first, check
>>>>> the group's by-laws, and follow whatever other protocols might
>>>>> be in order.
Ok. I have changed the heading to read:
"This is the Unofficial alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
If that is still a problem, then I can't help you.
>>>> Several people have over the years created FAQs for this and
>>>> other groups.
>>>
>>> Hosting an existing and official AGB group FAQ is one thing,
>>> this is another thing entirely, wouldn't you say?
No, it was never meant to be "official", and now the heading says its
"unofficial", so this doesn't matter. In fact, the idea of a charter
has little meaning in the context of any alt.* group:
From: http://www.xs4all.nl/~wijnands/nnq/nfaq.html
For alt.* groups, there is no "official" source for Charters. However,
at ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/control/ you will find a large archive
of "newgroup control messages", including those for alt.* groups. Those
"control messages" often contain Charters, when one exists.
So for AGB, there is no "official" anything. Just anarchy.
>> I'm just saying that its not that important for this effort to be
>> all official, sanctioned by a yet to be determined body, have
>> committee meetings blah blah blah. Look at the group's charter.
>> There was interest - and there it was.
>
> But I think the issue was more about who _is_ the group which
> wears the name AGB.
It doesn't matter. The entire alt.* is pure anarchy anyway.
>> which is pretty much the spirit of any wiki anyway.
>
> The spirit of wiki is one of cooperation first and foremost.
Didn't I invite participants? DIdn't I offer to turn it over to someone
else? This _is_ cooperation.
> Standards exist for a reason. I think standards are important to
> establish, maintain, and even review periodically. Standards
> matter to me. They matter more and more every day, I find.
As a statement, I have no disagreement. But it has little relavance
here. I don't think anyone in this project wants to use this resource
to propose new standards.
> I invited you to please look at wikipedia as a model for the type
> of endeavor you propose. I will now go one step further by sending
> you some front row seats.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FAQ
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About
I won't wast my time reading this unless you tell me what it is that
you want me to take away from that reading. I've skimmed this stuff
before, and fail to see the need to do it again.
The problem, I think, is that you don't understand the endeavour. This
wiki is just an unofficial, informal, resource for people here in AGB.
Nothing less, nothing more. Being unofficial, being informal, means
that anyone here can contribute. Sure there will be some corrections,
and adjustments along the way, but who cares? Sure it will lack
official credentials, but who is going to care? If they do care, they
can search out other credible sources. Is everything you read on the
internet credible anyway?
The official, credible, premium content is already covered by other
sources, like wikipedia (it may not be perfect, but I do find it a
valuable resource). People like yourself are already contributing to
those resources. I would be foolish to suggest starting another
"official" resource like that, and you would be correct to dis it. But
that is _not_ the kind of resource I am speaking of here.
Think unofficial, informal, even anarchistic, if you will.
>>>> What is a "true" wiki-styled editor?
>>>
>>> Wikipedia is and uses a true wiki-style editor
>
>> You just state that it does, but don't say why.
>
> I can only ask you to do your homework. I can not do it for you.
You were the one dis-ing atwiki's editor.
So you are the one that needs to point out why it is unusable. Is it
too complicated for you? Have you actually tried using it there? You're
the one failing to do the homework ;-)
>>> as well as
>>> accepting bits of html.
>>
>> You _can_ do this, at atwiki (I've already added Javascript to
>> the front page for example).
>
> Html and java are not attractive to many people. Keeping things
> simple is a tenant everyone will benefit from.
Roger, you are arguing in circles. You brought up the issue "can it do
html?" I said yes, and now you're taking me to task because HTML is not
the most suitable way to edit the content?
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viol
>
>> That's fine Roger
>
> I did add my name to it, so it had better be '-). And thank you
> for saying so. The standards set-down at the outset, and the
> degree and kinds of maintenance and enforcement in place there,
> promote and place value on quality, which in the end is the only
> thing that can ever attract quality contributions. But the results
> are no better than the participants in any event. This is true.
The AGB wiki is not in competition with wikipedia. So I don't know why
we are discussing it at all. It is just a wiki-styled resource. As
such it doesn't have to be "same" as the official wiki, or any other.
It will be what we want it to be.
Viva la difference.
> If not by committee then by some individual who is an experienced
> planner.
Does the group AGB have a moderator? Then why are you so worried about
moderating this informal resource?
>> I'll just summarize the approach that I was hoping for: Something
>> simple enough to use, yet free, and secure from vandalism to
>> address the simple needs of this group and perhaps develop other
>> uses for it. After all, we can't have people putting up stuff
>> like "Lumpy loves Dylan's vocals". Like the charter, keep it free
>> man.
>
> You can keep _your_ web site as free as you chose. If Lumpy
> doesn't mind what you do in his name, then neither do I. That's
> between you and him to agree upon.
What!?!? You must have completely missed the point.
>> if it flies, it flies. If it flops, then fine. I continue with my
>> guitar practice either way. ;-)
>
> Practicing guitar is a good thing. But we were talking about your
> use of the name _AGB_ on your web site wiki, among other things.
So far, you are the only one bothered by the AGB reference. The funny
thing (to me) is that it never bothered you before when I used it on my
own web site, as a recording FAQ. So why does it bother you now (out of
curiosity)?
I know there are at least one, if not two FAQs out there (if not more)
that people have started for this group. I'll bet all of them refer to
this group. Does that not bother you? Why is this different? Inquiring
minds want to know.
no66y©
"Charmed Snark" wrote in message
> Thanks for bringing that up no66y. As an unmoderated newsgroup, there
> is no real "charter". As such, one could say, NOTHING is off topic in
> this group, although we all understand from the group name that it has
> to do with guitars and beginners.
Yep, we could discuss blondes, muscle cars, porn, body odour, brunettes,
porn, trees, porn etc
Oh, hang one, we do that anyways.
The worst that could happen is someone takes offence and reports you to your
ISP for posting off topic stuff to an unmoderated newsgroup. Your ISP *may*
send you an email telling you not to be naughty.
> Does anybody have an office for alt.guitar.beginner ? ;-)
Lumpys house it seems!
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
> "Charmed Snark" wrote in message
>> Thanks for bringing that up no66y. As an unmoderated newsgroup,
>> there is no real "charter". As such, one could say, NOTHING is
>> off topic in this group, although we all understand from the
>> group name that it has to do with guitars and beginners.
>
> Yep, we could discuss blondes, muscle cars, porn, body odour,
> brunettes, porn, trees, porn etc
>
> Oh, hang one, we do that anyways.
>
> The worst that could happen is someone takes offence and reports
> you to your ISP for posting off topic stuff to an unmoderated
> newsgroup. Your ISP *may* send you an email telling you not to be
> naughty.
Makes me think of John Cleese <slap> "You've been a naughty boy!"
>> Does anybody have an office for alt.guitar.beginner ? ;-)
>
> Lumpys house it seems!
Like it or lump it!
RichL
evolve over the past couple of days and have kept silent until now.
I'm particularly intrigued by Roger's comments. Although I haven't
been coming to AGB for very long, I have perceived Roger (perhaps in a
somewhat oversimplified sense) as an "outsider" battling conventional
wisdom (e.g., scales). From that perspective, I find it somewhat odd
that Roger in this case is representing "the establishment", from the
point of view of excessive worrying about rules, authenticity, etc.
I personally think that the AGB wiki is an excellent idea, but I think
it would be ruined by creation of a bureaucracy to regulate it.
Roger, who (in your estimation) will constitute "the group"? Your
comments imply a structure to AGB which, as I perceive in the short
time I have been visiting, simply does not exist. As far as I can
tell, AGB = anarchy. In this context, you surely can't mean "everyone
who posts here" as the group? And if not, who shall determine the
makeup of the subgroup that is seen to be fit to make decisions?
Perhaps you can see where I'm headed here? IMHO it would take forever
to resolve such issues, let alone start something of substance.
I would suggest that Snark proceed with his plans, and ultimately the
"marketplace" will determine its success or failure. And I wouldn't
worry too much about the lack of an officially sanctioned connection
with AGB. It's not like we are a bunch of internationally recognized
authorities with a single, uniform view!
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
> Snark and Roger, I've been sitting here watching this semi-battle
> evolve ... I find it somewhat odd that Roger in this case is
> representing "the establishment", from the point of view of
> excessive worrying about rules, authenticity, etc.
Hi Rich:
I'm glad that you joined us. Uncloak more often and join the fray ;-)
I didn't really see this as a battle, and in fairness to Roger, there
is a place for all of "establishment", "rules", "order",
"authenticity", "authority" etc. But as you know, I don't see this
being pertinent to the wiki being discussed.
This particular wiki resource can be useful in an anarchistic sort of
way. Certainly, time will tell. If we all have fun with it, then all
the better, win or lose.
> I would suggest that Snark proceed with his plans, and ultimately
> the "marketplace" will determine its success or failure. And I
> wouldn't worry too much about the lack of an officially sanctioned
> connection with AGB. It's not like we are a bunch of
> internationally recognized authorities with a single, uniform
> view!
Uniform view? That's a good one Rich! ;-)
AGB Anarchy!
no66y©
"Charmed Snark" wrote in message
If it where a battle, we'd have to do it this way:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idb2dUtTpuU
RichL
> If it where a battle, we'd have to do it this way:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idb2dUtTpuU
>
> --
> No66y©
> Those who find they're touched by madness
> Sit down next to me.
> Virtual Preserve are here!www.soundclick.com/bands/virtualpreserve
>
> Reply to address is a spam trap.
> Use no66y [at] breathe [dot] com
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
>
> "Charmed Snark" wrote in message
>> I didn't really see this as a battle,
>
> If it where a battle, we'd have to do it this way:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idb2dUtTpuU
I'll have to watch this when I get home. Our company has very severe
blocking policies :(
"This website is blocked as per the Internet and Email Use Policy"
Next thing you know, they'll block us from USENET.
RichL
Yeah, you might have to focus on work while you're at work ; )
BTW Snark, we talked about this before in the context of physics/
quarks/snarks but did you know that in physics there's an object
called a "charmed quark"?
Charmed Snark
alt.guitar.beginner:
> On Mar 23, 1:15 pm, Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh> wrote:
>> On 23 Mar 2007, "no66yŠ" <bou...@bounce.com> wrote in
>> alt.guitar.beginner:
>>
>>
>>
>> > "Charmed Snark" wrote in message
>> >> I didn't really see this as a battle,
>>
>> > If it where a battle, we'd have to do it this way:
>> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idb2dUtTpuU
>>
>> I'll have to watch this when I get home. Our company has very
severe
>> blocking policies :(
>>
>> "This website is blocked as per the Internet and Email Use
Policy"
>>
>> Next thing you know, they'll block us from USENET.
>>
>> Snark.
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
>
> Yeah, you might have to focus on work while you're at work ; )
I actually prefer to be busy. But currently I am waiting for
business specs. Furthermore, they should have exemptions from these
sites for recreational lunchtime viewing. ;-)
> BTW Snark, we talked about this before in the context of physics/
> quarks/snarks but did you know that in physics there's an object
> called a "charmed quark"?
I had forgotten that, but yes, I do remember hearing that many years
ago. There's just so much to like about quarks, isn't there?
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: "raymo" <ray.s...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 23:13:57 +1100
Thank you, Raymo;
That was a very nice thing to wake up to, I chucked, smiled, and was warmed
by it.
Roger
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Charmed Snark <you_no_spam_me@eh>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: 23 Mar 2007 13:15:35 GMT
> Subject: Re: AGB FAQ Wiki
>
> On 22 Mar 2007, "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in
> alt.guitar.beginner:
>
>>> On 22 Mar 2007, "Roger E. Blumberg" <rblu...@jps.net> wrote in
>>> alt.guitar.beginner:
>>>>>> I would prefer that before making such a decision and official
>>>>>> affiliation claim you discuss it with the group first, check
>>>>>> the group's by-laws, and follow whatever other protocols might
>>>>>> be in order.
> Ok. I have changed the heading to read:
>
> "This is the Unofficial alt.guitar.beginner Group Wiki"
>
> If that is still a problem, then I can't help you.
That gap is now bridged. Thank you. I am not hard to please.
Roger
Stephen Calder
>
> What's at stake? really? Without getting all mystical on you I'll just say a
> good learning lesson. If I _were_ to get mystical about it though, I might
> say: our lives, our planet, our future, our children, and stuff like that.
These depend on ensuring that the FAQ for this group is created and
edited by appropriate, authorised people?
--
Stephen
Ballina, Australia
Roger E. Blumberg
> From: Stephen Calder <cal...@in.com.au>
> Newsgroups: alt.guitar.beginner
> Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2007 17:23:07 +1100
> Subject: Re: AGB FAQ Wiki
>
no they're not dependant and that was a bit astray
forgive my being overboard with good intent that day
ok? :)
Roger