Usenet: They hardly knew yee
Reid Goldsborough
And people seem increasingly getting fed up with the ever greater
encroachment of the rabble-rousing rabble, disrupting for disruption's
sake, the look at me types, a worsening of a long trend made possible by
Usenet's wonderful freedom, its flip side. But the paltry number of
posts per day in RCC these days, what, about five a day on average, the
lowest I've ever seen, is mostly the fault of those who have left.
Where have they gone? I miss some, not others. Short list of the AWOL
with a little help from Google Groups:
* Barry Kutner -- local show buddy who got fed up with the dark side of
numismatics, not just RCC
* John Carney -- another local show buddy who may be sailing around the
world right now, maybe looking for sunken treasure, maybe not
* Fred A. Murphy -- old-time collector/dealer of lots of things who knew
lots about the coin business
* Stujoe -- off running his CoinPeople site, or is it now the Stujoe
Collection? or both?
* Phil DeMayo -- getting his law degree no doubt
* Alan Williams -- too many rolls of 2009 cents from the bank to go through
* Eric Tillery -- health problems?
* Steven Preston -- good doc with justifiably bad temper and lots of
Morgans and insights
* R.W. Julian -- bona fide numismatist and uber knowledgeable guy off to
less tempestuous waters
* Tom DeLorey -- another numismatist who appears to have been put off
the by increasing rough and tumble
* Alan Herbert -- yet another numismatist who no longer dares to come here
* A.Gent -- was anything but and changed his handle later
* Larry Calder -- off to a better place than this life
Lots of others too. Changing (Internet) world. More splintered, as with
television. Still lots of community, but you sometimes have to look harder.
--
Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos
Jeff R.
>
> Where have they gone? I miss some, not others. Short list of the AWOL
> with a little help from Google Groups:
> * A.Gent -- was anything but and changed his handle later
...because no-one appreciated the *silver* pun in the name :-(
I'm sure you didn't find my continual corrections of your silly assertions
very gentlemanly, but what the hey. Like most folk, I've just grown bored
at the repetitious junk posted here. I still skim most days, and will
answer any genuine questions where I can help, but...
Since so many people are anxious to believe Internet-spawned rubbish,
there's not much profit in trying to correct it.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png
So feel free, Reid, to misuse metallurgical terms (I believe "eutectic" was
your most recent malaprop) or to claim that wire brushes can melt coin
surfaces (etc. etc. ad. inf.) - I probably won't be there to harass you.
...but I might...
--
Jeff R.
Bruce Remick
"Reid Goldsborough" <reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2mro5m....@news.alt.net...
> Ever more ISPs are dropping their complimentary Usenet subscriptions. And
> people seem increasingly getting fed up with the ever greater encroachment
> of the rabble-rousing rabble, disrupting for disruption's sake, the look
> at me types, a worsening of a long trend made possible by Usenet's
> wonderful freedom, its flip side. But the paltry number of posts per day
> in RCC these days, what, about five a day on average, the lowest I've ever
> seen, is mostly the fault of those who have left.
Apparently, there's little else that needs to be known about coins.
Most all questions have been answered by now. The more chatty types have
migrated to Facebook or Twitter. All that's left here are the daily Googled
news reports, the occasional ForSale ads, and meaningless posts like this.
Meanwhile, just continue to ponder the old RCC, the Oldsmobile, and that
little rubber hose we ran our bikes over at the gas station just to make the
bell ring and the attendant come out.
Frank
>
> Apparently, there's little else that needs to be known about coins.
> Most all questions have been answered by now. The more chatty types have
> migrated to Facebook or Twitter. All that's left here are the daily Googled
> news reports, the occasional ForSale ads, and meaningless posts like this.
>
> Meanwhile, just continue to ponder the old RCC, the Oldsmobile, and that
> little rubber hose we ran our bikes over at the gas station just to make the
> bell ring and the attendant come out.
Usenet is a valuable resource where you can post without fear of being
censored or banned
by some "moderator" of a corporate site for saying something that puts
the host corporation
in a bad light. Posters on blogs and nonprofit websites risk
offending the egos or prejudices
of the owner, and may likewise find themselves banned.
Ebay has message boards, but takes adverse action against members for
REPORTING scams!
Of course, for decades it has been
known that the coin trade publications will not "bite the hand that
feeds them."
The downside is that the openness of Usenet also lets in the trolls
who relish in causing
disruption.
----
Frank Provasek Rare Coins
http://www.frankcoins.com Ebay FRANKCOINS
Member ANA, Texas Numismatic Assoc, Texas Coin Dealers Assoc,
PCGS, NGC, & ANACS authorized dealer, Texas Auctioneer Lic 11259
Bob F.
news:b7d783d5-759c-4b5b...@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>The downside is that the openness of Usenet also lets in the trolls who
>relish in causing disruption.
Fwankie, Fwankie, Fwankie, don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Where else could you spin your paranoid conspiracy tales about how the
entire numismatic community is out to get you and your eBay auctions?
I forget, are you the professional numismatist you claim to be on eBay
or the engineer you claim to be on Amazon? I'm cornfused!
PC
"Bob F." <b...@april2009.invalid> wrote in message
news:gqvra2$oiq$1...@news.motzarella.org...
Case in point.
Frank Galikanokus
Maybe, just maybe, once the free usenet is gone the trolls will be gone
too.
I use Giganews now. http://www.giganews.com/
The service is great and the cost is minimal. Trolls may not want to
pay.
JAM
Mr. Jaggers
> Ever more ISPs are dropping their complimentary Usenet subscriptions.
> And people seem increasingly getting fed up with the ever greater
> encroachment of the rabble-rousing rabble, disrupting for disruption's
> sake, the look at me types, a worsening of a long trend made possible
> by Usenet's wonderful freedom, its flip side. But the paltry number of
> posts per day in RCC these days, what, about five a day on average,
> the lowest I've ever seen, is mostly the fault of those who have left.
>
> Where have they gone? I miss some, not others. Short list of the AWOL
> with a little help from Google Groups:
[list snipped]
I don't think you're going to find any organization or club that keeps its
same members year after year, decade after decade. Each of us goes through
life facing this challenge and that, which divert our attention and our
treasure from things we once held dear. As for the alleged influx of
trolls, well, think back five years (that's my tenure here) and you'll see
two individuals who at that time constantly stalked two of our regulars. A
quick flick of the killfile switch and zipzap, they're gone, if you're so
inclined.
A lot of the individuals in your list left during and immediately after the
lawsuit, and several more at the time of the alt.life.sucks affair. In the
former, some of them may have brought on their own troubles, and in the
latter, well, look at society at large, and all of a sudden those guys seem
like the guys in your hunting club. It takes all kinds. Thank goodness.
The person I miss the most is Amistad, who has found other interests to
occupy his hours and resources.
The persons I miss the least are those who leave and then briefly return to
tell us what a bunch of cads we all are, and how much more civil is the talk
on this or that moderated board, then disappear for good. About them I say,
thank God and Greyhound they're gone.
James
Jud
Mr. Jaggers wrote:
> The person I miss the most is Amistad, who has found other interests to
> occupy his hours and resources.
>
Larry used to run the swaps, which I miss as well. It was a thankless
and time consuming job that he took on, for the benefit of others.
Yeah...I miss Amistad too.
Mr. Jaggers
Fortunately I've been able to maintain somewhat regular email communications
with him. He's doing well, shooting his blasters a lot, and fixing to
retire later this year. Who knows, he may rediscover numismatics.
James
flip...@aol.com
> Where have they gone? I miss some, not others. Short list of the AWOL
> with a little help from Google Groups:
>
> * Phil DeMayo -- getting his law degree no doubt
Nope, just lurking
Bruce Remick
> Bruce Remick wrote:
>
>> Apparently, there's little else that needs to be known about coins. Most
>> all questions have been answered by now. The more chatty types have
>> migrated to Facebook or Twitter. All that's left here are the daily
>> Googled news reports, the occasional ForSale ads, and meaningless posts
>> like this.
>
> meaningless, discussing the nature of what we're using to discuss coins,
> how it has evolved over the years.
God, you're the serious one! I meant that MY post-- my reply to yours-- was
meaningless. If you have a guilty conscience about the profoundness of your
original, that's something you will have to live with.
>
> I have to take issue as well with your remarkable statement that there's
> little else that's needed to be known about coins. Some scientist a few
> years before 1905 said the same thing about science, and I suppose people
> have always been saying similar things about lots of subjects. There's
> lots left to be learned about coins, though with individuals the longer
> you're around the less there's typically left to learn and with coin types
> the newer they are the less uncertainty and debatability that typically
> exists.
Apparently you are so buried in your acedemics and numismatic philosophy
that a faceteous remark never registers with you.
>
> Agree with you about social networking sites. There's also the
> blogosphere, with many people, particularly younger people, liking a place
> to call their own where they can hold forth and let people in as they
> like. I still like the open commons approach of Usenet and e-mail lists,
> even moderated ones, over blogging as group conversation.
>
> The Googled news reports by stonej and Arizona Coin Collector are the best
> aspects of RCC right now. The worst aspect is the three or so attack guys
> using anonymous handles who have pretty much taken over and ruined things.
> One guy goes after a dealer here every time he posts with meaningless
> attacks. Others seem to randomly attack people, without wit or
> intelligence, telling them "Shut the f**k up!" and so on when they doesn't
> like their posts, newcomers, old-timers, doesn't matter. A good number of
> truly knowledgeable collectors, dealers, and academic types (and not only
> the ones I mentioned in my initial post) have left RCC specifically
> because of the attack guys, because they've been meaninglessly attacked
> this way, and I've heard from several who still occasionally lurk, when
> they've responded to posts of mine through email rather than publicly and
> said they were doing this because (they felt) RCC has become an attack
> group.
>
> You still have a few advanced collectors such as Mr. Jaggers who try to
> help out wherever they can. You also still have Those Who Can Never Be
> Wrong, arguing and arguing no matter what, with only a minority of people
> confident or honest enough to concede points, but this has always been an
> aspect of online communications, one of its aspects like flaming that's
> much more prominent than with in-person communication. But it's the attack
> stuff, always an aspect, that's gotten worse.
>
> It's kind of sad, the way things are here, this group having lost not only
> most of its posters and posts but also most of its vibrancy and
> usefulness. At least Anka is still here.
Yeah, but what about that rubber bell hose? You never rode over one on a
bike? I suppose not.
Edwin Johnston
I had a chat with Kyle Mutcher today, who has been busy with other
things lately. He said he may be interested to design another r.c.c.
trade coin. I told him the group is pretty dead these days and he said
maybe something like that will bring a few back.
btw - Reid may be interested in the Athenian Owl Tetradrachm design that
Kyle made last summer.
Bob F.
> It's kind of sad, the way things are here, this group having lost not
> only most of its posters and posts but also most of its vibrancy and
> usefulness. At least Anka is still here.
C'mon Reid, take some of the blame.
You're a puffed-up, pretentious blowhard much given to pontificating
with self-righteous pomposity and have turned off numerous posters with
your long-winded diatribes.
Michael Benveniste
<reidgol...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Ever more ISPs are dropping their complimentary Usenet subscriptions.
>And people seem increasingly getting fed up with the ever greater
>encroachment of the rabble-rousing rabble, disrupting for disruption's
>sake, the look at me types, a worsening of a long trend made possible by
>Usenet's wonderful freedom, its flip side.
People have been longing for the "golden age of Usenet" since at least
1993. The term "Endless September" dates to early 1994, and Usenet
has been an Internet backwater for the better part of a decade. The
only reason we don't see more spam here is that for the most part
spammers no longer bother.
Nor is this surprising. Usenet was designed for use by known posters
from trusted IP addresses. In a world of anonymous redirectors and
throwaway accounts, an unmoderated forum with no effective ability to
delete posts just isn't stable, and can easily be poisoned by just a
couple of people.
>But the paltry number of posts per day in RCC these days, what, about
>five a day on average, the lowest I've ever seen, is mostly the fault
>of those who have left.
Isn't that sort of like blaming the passengers for abandoning a
sinking ship? I'm currently paying a nominal sum to individual.net
for Usenet access, so I'll probably stick around out of sheer inertia.
But more often than not, I'll take a quick look at the topic list and
simply move on.
--
Mike Benveniste -- m...@murkyether.com (Clarification Required)
Don't succumb to the false authority of a tool or model. There
is no substitute for thinking.
Reid Goldsborough
>> But the paltry number of posts per day in RCC these days, what, about
>> five a day on average, the lowest I've ever seen, is mostly the fault
>> of those who have left.
>
> Isn't that sort of like blaming the passengers for abandoning a
> sinking ship?
That was just in jest. Should have included a <g>. Of course you can't
blame people for moving on. Free world. Usenet is a good example of how
a good thing, freedom, taken to an extreme can have bad consequences,
same with any institution. Usenet isn't all bad and never was all good.
It has changed, is all, as everything does.
Jerry Dennis
> "Frank" <fr...@frankcoins.com> wrote in message
>
> news:b7d783d5-759c-4b5b...@f19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >The downside is that the openness of Usenet also lets in the trolls who
> >relish in causing disruption.
Frank, you proved your point. 'Nuff said.
Jerry
Jerry Dennis
Actually, Larry is still into numismatics. Like a lot of the old
regulars, he moved on to other interests, but hasn't given up on
coins. Last I heard, he was working on a new chord for his guitar;
A6.
Jerry
Bob F.
> Bob F. wrote:
>
>> C'mon Reid, take some of the blame.
>> You're a puffed-up, pretentious blowhard much given to pontificating
>> with self-righteous pomposity and have turned off numerous posters
>> with your long-winded diatribes.
>
> And not because of attack posts like this from you and people like
> you. Gee,
Odd that you would view an honest assessment of your posting history
here as an "attack".
Oh well.
I'll leave you to your inappropriate use of <g> and LOL and the rest of
your puffed-up buffoonery.
*PLONK*
Frank
> C'mon Reid, take some of the blame.
> You're a puffed-up, pretentious blowhard much given to pontificating
> with self-righteous pomposity and have turned off numerous posters with
> your long-winded diatribes.
Reid is a professional journalist who has dozens of web pages online
of
his original research in numismatics. You really think his
informative posts
turn people off, while you constantly nymshift to force people to see
your
insane posts?
Mr. Jaggers
> On Apr 1, 2:52?pm, "Mr. Jaggers" <lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com> wrote:
>> Jud wrote:
>>> Mr. Jaggers wrote:
>>
>>>> The person I miss the most is Amistad, who has found other
>>>> interests to occupy his hours and resources.
>>
>>> Larry used to run the swaps, which I miss as well. It was a
>>> thankless and time consuming job that he took on, for the benefit
>>> of others. Yeah...I miss Amistad too.
>>
>> Fortunately I've been able to maintain somewhat regular email
>> lot, and fixing to retire later this year. ?Who knows, he may
>> rediscover numismatics.
>>
>> James
>
> Actually, Larry is still into numismatics. Like a lot of the old
> regulars, he moved on to other interests, but hasn't given up on
> coins. Last I heard, he was working on a new chord for his guitar;
> A6.
He hasn't mentioned Lucille to me in several months. Do you have that on
recent authority?
James
sgt23
> On Wed, 01 Apr 2009 02:46:45 -0400, Reid Goldsborough
>
Not to flame, but more FYI. If you check some groups usenet has been
around since the early 80s. I may be wrong, but I think usenet was
under another name at one time. I'm sure I will be corrected if I am
wrong.
Bob F.
>Reid is a professional journalist who has dozens of web pages online of
He is also a self-important fuddy-duddy who is excessively pedantic.
While you, OTOH, are a whining crybaby who seeks to blame others for
your faults.
Have a nice day!
Michael Benveniste
> Not to flame, but more FYI. If you check some groups usenet has been
> around since the early 80s. I may be wrong, but I think usenet was
> under another name at one time. I'm sure I will be corrected if I am
> wrong.
You're mostly right.
Usenet was "invented" in 1979. At first, the term referred to a
specific network of sites using a set of shared newsgroups. In
1982, the first Usenet RFC is published under that name.
But 1993 has its own significance, since that's when the Usenet
"went commercial" in a big way. To quote Nathan Mehl (c. 1999):
"Usenet is dead. AOL killed it, Prodigy drove the nails into the
coffin, and WebTV buried it. (Earthlink pissed on the grave
and AT&T Worldnet stole all the flowers.)
My own first online post was in 1975. It was on a system called PLATO
at the University of Illinois. It wasn't a month until I was reading
complaints about a first-time poster, and it was me! I observed my
first flame war soon after that, although it was a couple of more
years before I found myself in the middle of one.
Take all such "golden age" stuff with a large crystal of your
favorite ionic compound. I'm certain that two years after smoke
signals were invented, the early adopters were complaining about
the damn newbies and how they were ruining visibility for everyone
else. Not to mention the racket of too many people banging rocks
together.
When we finally get faster-than-light communications, the first
message will read "Test." The second message will read "me too."
The third message will be a pornographic holograph, and the fifth
message will read "M*ke m*ney fa$t! I turned 6 qystals into 36,000
qystals in just 15 days!"
--
Michael Benveniste -- m...@murkyether.com (Clarification required)
Legalize Updoc.
Frank Galikanokus
Some of the other groups I read have over 1,000 post every day.
RCC has some of the lowest number of posts but not as much junk.
JAM
Reid Goldsborough
> But 1993 has its own significance, since that's when the Usenet
> "went commercial" in a big way. To quote Nathan Mehl (c. 1999):
> "Usenet is dead. AOL killed it, Prodigy drove the nails into the
> coffin, and WebTV buried it. (Earthlink pissed on the grave
> and AT&T Worldnet stole all the flowers.)
That people overreacted to the popularization of Usenet, and more
recently to its diminishment, doesn't mean it hasn't changed. It's
inevitable, I think, that it'll continue to decrease in usage and go,
perhaps, the way of Gopher, though because of its still large
established base of users it'll no doubt hang on much longer. Usenet's
decline has to do in part with Usenet, in part with competing online
group discussion technologies, and in part with the culture at large.
The culture has become more coarse over the past generation, as seen
through the old media of film and music as well as new medium such as
Usenet. Flamewars did indeed exist from the beginning, or close to it,
but I'd suggest they're far more prevalent percentage-side today, that
the signal-to-noise ratio is the lowest it has ever been on Usenet, and
this is one of the main contributing factors to Usenet's decline.
I still see Usenet as having the best potential for the most
wide-ranging and engaging discussion. But the relatively small number of
disruptive posters, participating without revealing their real or their
full names, who post exclusively or largely to disrupt, have ruined
things and will only continue doing so, and Usenet's big weakness is
that it makes this possible, irrespective of the moderated newsgroups.
Look at "Bob F." as a case in point. He offers nothing substantive to
this discussion, only attack. He posts anonymously, so he doesn't feel
constrained by common civilized checks against sociopathological
behavior. After attacking he hides away under his big, bold *PLONK*
declaration and continues attacking. There are far too many like him.
Killfiling is a tool that can ameliorate things, but it's only partially
successful against blatant disruption.
Jud
Mr. Jaggers wrote:
> He hasn't mentioned Lucille to me in several months. Do you have that on
> recent authority?
>
> James
Last I heard, Lucille was in the capable hands of B.B. King. <G>
Jud
Michael Benveniste wrote:
> My own first online post was in 1975. It was on a system called PLATO
> at the University of Illinois.
THAT brought me back! The first time I ever saw PLATO was at the
University of Southern Illinois in Carbondale. My freshman roommate
was going for his Masters degree there and brought me to the computer
lab. IIRC, they were using a tactile screen, where you could type in
certain words and it would generate a graphic image of what you typed.
I played with it by typing in "The tree jumped over the house", and
the computer generated a picture of a tree, making a running start at
a picture of a house, and then proceded to jump over it. Fun and games
in the 1970's.
Makes me wonder if the PLATO system was endemic to the University of
Illinois tho.
Bruce Remick
> Bruce Remick wrote:
>
>> God, you're the serious one! I meant that MY post-- my reply to yours--
>> was meaningless. If you have a guilty conscience about the profoundness
>> of your original, that's something you will have to live with.
>
> doesn't even make sense. Or were you again meaning something you didn't
> say? Maybe you meant my message was the opposite of profound, that it was
> ignorant and shallow, and that I now feel guilty about ever having posted
> it. OK! Makes sense to me. As you say, I guess I'll just have to live with
> this, this guilty conscience.
You seem to be so into yourself and so immersed in whatever you've posted
about, that any sarcastic or tongue-in-cheek responses go right over your
head. You simply take them as invitations to expound further. Feel free if
it makes you feel useful.
>
> About your talk about rubber hoses and such, I'm afraid S&M is something I
> know only from a distance, from having read about it. I also don't see
> what this has to do with coins. OK, here's a <g>.
Goes to show that you never did read my reply to your post-- or comprehend
it. And that you apparently never rode a bicycle around your neighborhood
by yourself.
Bob F.
"Bruce Remick" <rem...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:v7cBl.7039$Jm4....@newsfe09.iad...
> You seem to be so into yourself and so immersed in whatever you've
> posted about, that any sarcastic or tongue-in-cheek responses go right
> over your head. You simply take them as invitations to expound
> further. Feel free if it makes you feel useful.
You just figured out Reid is a self-important, pompous, pedantic
blowhard?
Bruce Remick
"Bob F." <b...@april2009.invalid> wrote in message
news:gr3k84$iic$1...@news.motzarella.org...
I wouldn't be quite that critical. It just fascinates me sometimes how he
seems to enjoy using paragraphs to make a simple point, attempting to
incorporate all his literary ambitions in the process. Probably some
insecurity there, feeling he must preach to us that way in order to be
accepted. But then we each have our own quirks.
Bob F.
> But then we each have our own quirks.
Not me, I'm perfect in every conceivable way!
Michael Benveniste
wrote:
>Makes me wonder if the PLATO system was endemic to the University of
>Illinois tho.
Well, it was developed at CERL an the U of I in partnership with
Control Data Corporation, so I'd have to say yes.
BTW, there's still an emulation running, in case you're curious if
your memories are accurate:
Mr. Jaggers
I dubbed Larry's blues guitar "Lucille" in honor of the great B.B. Larry
did not object, and he knows exactly what I mean when I mention her!
James the Wailin' Altosaxman
Bruce Remick
> Bruce Remick wrote:
>
>> Goes to show that you never did read my reply to your post-- or
>> comprehend it. And that you apparently never rode a bicycle around your
>> neighborhood by yourself.
>
You forgot your usual <g> and LOL, but I see you did manage to get the "Bye"
in. Wish I could believe you.
Bob F.
Blowhard Goldsborough has threatened to leave countless times but like a
dog to his vomit, he keeps coming back.
Apparently he can't find any other place where anyone will listen to him
bloviate ad nauseum.
I recently cleaned out my killfile to see if I was missing anything of
interest and he popped up again, only to be quickly KF'd again.
Frank
> Blowhard Goldsborough has threatened to leave countless times but like a
> dog to his vomit, he keeps coming back.
> Apparently he can't find any other place where anyone will listen to him
> bloviate ad nauseum.
> I recently cleaned out my killfile to see if I was missing anything of
> interest and he popped up again, only to be quickly KF'd again.
And tell us again, Finnan, why you have changed your name yet again to
evade OUR killfiles??
Bob F.
>And tell us again, Finnan, why you have changed your name yet again to
>evade OUR killfiles??
And you wonder why you have so many enemies Fwankie?
Since you use GoogleGroups, you don't have a KF, you balloonhead.
Even if you did, you wouldn't use it since your paranoia compels you to
check all posts lest you miss someone talking about you.
Frank
I use a IE plugin called Trollkiller for Google groups.
And I don't have "many enemies" Just a few nutcases with a
sick obsession.
Mr. Jaggers
> On Apr 3, 10:52 am, "Bob F." <b...@april2009.invalid> wrote:
>> "Frank" <fr...@frankcoins.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:ff2b782d-42eb-497b...@w9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> And tell us again, Finnan, why you have changed your name yet again
>>> to evade OUR killfiles??
>>
>> And you wonder why you have so many enemies Fwankie?
>> Since you use GoogleGroups, you don't have a KF, you balloonhead.
>> Even if you did, you wouldn't use it since your paranoia compels you
>> to check all posts lest you miss someone talking about you.
>
> I use a IE plugin called Trollkiller for Google groups.
Now I'm really puzzled. If Bob bothers you so much, and you have
Trollkiller, isn't the solution to this problem achingly obvious?
James
Frank
>
> Now I'm really puzzled. If Bob bothers you so much, and you have
> Trollkiller, isn't the solution to this problem achingly obvious?
>
> James
This month Finnan is b...@april2009.invalid, last month he was
b...@march2009.invalid
Both fake AND constantly changing IDs to circumvent killfiles.
Bruce Remick
> Frank wrote:
>
>> And tell us again, Finnan, why you have changed your name yet again to
>> evade OUR killfiles??
>
> this before under a different handle every time or seemingly every time
> you posted? Weirdness, truly. Usenet weirdness.
>
> At least Bruce Remick uses his real name, though he's posting now like
> he's senile, saying one thing and saying he said another and making no
> sense whatsoever, so it might actually be in his interest to start using
> an anonymous handle as well. I guess it's my fault because I must have
> never road a bicycle around my neighborhood as a kid. He said so! And for
> some weird reason wants me to talk about this. No problem. I did ride a
> bike as a kid, one of which, maybe the last of which, was an "English
> Racer." OK? Sure, I said "Bye" to him, but his goading is just too
> appealing for me to resist.
>
> Anyway, interesting subject, I think, the evolution (and devolution) of
> Usenet. People left some interesting comments, insightful (not just a
> "simple point" -- LOL). But it was inevitable I guess that the thread
> would devolve into flames given how much this has played a part in
> Usenet's degeneration.
I have always used my real name here. I have nothing to hide. So what have
you found that I said and later retracted that causes you such grief? I
find it telling when a person criticizes another to the group instead of to
that person directly. Are you again offering your psychological analysis of
me and others as you so often seem to do?
And I see you have STILL never gone back to read the original remark I made
about the bicycle and the hose, along with its context, yet you seem
continue to enjoy commenting on it as if you knew what you were talking
about. Makes one wonder if this reflects the thoroughness of your research
in other areas. You'd make a good politician in that regard.
Mr. Jaggers
Although you have not ever changed your email (that I know of), you have
recently taken to only posting under your first name. When I see "Frank" as
a screen name, I don't know which Frank I am about to read. Likewise, there
are many Bobs on RCC, some who post regularly, others who post rarely. You,
I, and everyone else here make a decision each and every time we encounter a
posting. Over time we learn which ones to leave be and which ones may yield
desirable information. A guy can get burned even when he is careful about
this. As far as killfiles are concerned, it doesn't seem to me much of an
imposition to plonk someone once a month. In Outlook Express it takes about
5 seconds. If I am offended by someone's postings, but still open them,
even when I am pretty sure that evil lurks there, then whose fault is it
when I get flamed?
James
Bob F.
Seem natural that two of the biggest assholes on RCC should find common
ground.
What makes me laugh is Fwankie talking about "our" KFs as if he had a
friend in the world.
Nick Knight
04/03/2009
>> Now I'm really puzzled. If Bob bothers you so much, and you have
>> Trollkiller, isn't the solution to this problem achingly obvious?
>This month Finnan is b...@april2009.invalid, last month he was
>b...@march2009.invalid
>Both fake AND constantly changing IDs to circumvent killfiles.
Yes, it is an annoyance. But that's all it is. A minor inconvenience to
adjust and move on. I believe I've fixed my killfiles, again, so as not to
be bothered again for several months. We'll see.
It's always puzzled me ... what some people are thinking when they change
their posting email addresses, hoping that someone might not notice and
actually READ some of their rubbish. I remember one such post, many years
ago. Apparently the fellow REALLY wanted to see his post (it was mostly a
personal note), so he posted under a "new" email. Sure, I opened it. It
took about 10 words, and required no absorbtion, for me to figure out who it
was and to simple delete the post and adjust my killfile. Hundreds of words
went unread. Although he did get a chuckle out of me. I don't think that
was the intention, tho :).
If I don't want to read someone's worthless posts, and I happen across one
"by accident" ... what, I'm going to be continue reading it? Sorry, I don't
think so.
Nick
sgt23
> "sgt23" <bravesfandevo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Not to flame, but more FYI. If you check some groups usenet has been
> > around since the early 80s. I may be wrong, but I think usenet was
> > under another name at one time. I'm sure I will be corrected if I am
> > wrong.
>
> You're mostly right.
>
> Usenet was "invented" in 1979. At first, the term referred to a
> specific network of sites using a set of shared newsgroups. In
> 1982, the first Usenet RFC is published under that name.
>
> But 1993 has its own significance, since that's when the Usenet
> "went commercial" in a big way. To quote Nathan Mehl (c. 1999):
> "Usenet is dead. AOL killed it, Prodigy drove the nails into the
> coffin, and WebTV buried it. (Earthlink pissed on the grave
> and AT&T Worldnet stole all the flowers.)
>
> complaints about a first-time poster, and it was me! I observed my
> first flame war soon after that, although it was a couple of more
> years before I found myself in the middle of one.
>
> Take all such "golden age" stuff with a large crystal of your
> favorite ionic compound. I'm certain that two years after smoke
> signals were invented, the early adopters were complaining about
> the damn newbies and how they were ruining visibility for everyone
> else. Not to mention the racket of too many people banging rocks
> together.
>
> When we finally get faster-than-light communications, the first
> message will read "Test." The second message will read "me too."
> The third message will be a pornographic holograph, and the fifth
> message will read "M*ke m*ney fa$t! I turned 6 qystals into 36,000
> qystals in just 15 days!"
>
> --
> Michael Benveniste -- m...@murkyether.com (Clarification required)
> Legalize Updoc.
Thanks for enlightening me and bring me up to date.
Stujoe
> * Stujoe -- off running his CoinPeople site, or is it now the Stujoe
> Collection? or both?
I am inactive in coins although I still have most of the collection. I
no longer do coin websites. Ipop into rcc maybe once every 6 months to
a year to see if it has disappeared yet.
I am much more into photography these days. Less sharks in the water
in that pursuit.
Bill Krummel
"Stujoe" <Stu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:791d5002-31d1-492c...@h23g2000vbc.googlegroups.com...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, it was still nice to see "stujoe" in the "from" column. Are you a
coin photograhy expert?
Bill