Modest Proposal
Bantari
Would be more fitting these days.
Just saying...
Jeff Nowakowski
Yeah, it's lame. But so is the ".com" site. And I do stress ".com".
The post that follows was captured in the pre-ban stage.
-Jeff
"Most of us certainly can remember the time when this forum had less
advertisment.
It was simply boring. I really had to read some of the articles. Imagine
that! Absolutely boring!
I am very happy about the chances made in the past few weeks/months.
They lead to the right direction.
Here are some of my ideas to improve this forum even more:
- First of all I would make the Go-figue advertisment MUCH bigger
because that Go-discussions banner is very distracting - one could
believe some people here talk about Go.
-the ebay-issue: more of them and just EVERYWHERE. I even thought about
replacing single "bad posts" with advertisment (maybe whole threats too)
-the supporter-feature: Maybe a good idea, but not impertinent enough!
"Supporting" should be much more expensiv - obviously too many people
here can afford it. You could also think of selling administrator-rights
so people can ban, modify, delete as they wish. This must not be
expensive because there are too many boring threats in this forum.
-my personal favorite: make a big button at the starting page with
"please send me spam! SPAM ME!" because lately I don't get much spam
anymore. So I hope this changes soon.
-I enjoy the "product" offer of some users in the "featured products"
which gladly appeared within threads. Genius idea! Maybe I can even pay
people to play and have fun for me?
And now, ladies and gentleman, post what you think...as soon as I have
bought this forum I'll ban you!"
JustAnotherHomoSapiensSapiens
I can't argue with you. It's been a long time since I've been here due
to the noise level.
I would like to offer the alternatives alt.bullshit.wasteoftime or
alt.loginheadache.suppository
But what ever makes people miserable.
alt.abused.bandwidth
Bantari
> Bantari wrote:
> > How about renaming rec.games.go to alt.junk.jbandssdump?
> > Would be more fitting these days.
> > Just saying...
>
> Yeah, it's lame. But so is the ".com" site. And I do stress ".com".
> The post that follows was captured in the pre-ban stage.
All too true...
However - statistically, there is a big difference between 1 post out
of several dozens/hundred that month there, and 17 posts out of 20 or
so the same month here. Noise, or noise-to-sigral ratio, is all about
statistics, you know...
Bantari
> > I dunno. I couldn't bring myself to completely stop reading or posting
> here. It's still a decent link to the community.
Same here.
> But if I were you i'd
> use it to meet "real people" and find other places to talk shop.
I do. :)
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>How about renaming rec.games.go to alt.junk.jbandssdump?
>Would be more fitting these days.
>Just saying...
The major problem of this newsgroup is not the noise. Each newsgroup
has noise. Try de.soc.politik.misc for an example with much more
excessive and distasteful noise, and still that newsgroup is very much
worth reading.
This group's major problem is and has always been the low number of
active contributors. The creation of web-forums has made the situation
more servere. This, however, does not mean that this group or other
newsgroups would have become superfluous but that more writers should
feel encouraged to contribute.
Planar
<6df4cb60-59d7-43a2...@q27g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Bantari <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> However - statistically, there is a big difference between 1 post out
> of several dozens/hundred that month there, and 17 posts out of 20 or
> so the same month here. Noise, or noise-to-sigral ratio, is all about
> statistics, you know...
The effective S/N ratio is not as bad as you make it, thanks to killfiles.
And killfiles are unfortunately not available for godiscussions.com (or other
web-based forums, as far as I know).
--
Planar
remove .invalid from my address to send me mail
"Surprise. Then just use AGA rules and that's it." - Robert Jasiek
Joel Olson
"Robert Jasiek" <jas...@snafu.de> wrote in message
news:au0kv3p3tikgo5i7i...@4ax.com...
I heartily agree. Too few on-topic posters.
Joss Wright
> The effective S/N ratio is not as bad as you make it, thanks to
> killfiles. And killfiles are unfortunately not available for
> godiscussions.com (or other web-based forums, as far as I know).
I doubt that it will swing anyone's view either way, but GoDiscussions.com
has the option to ignore particular users. It tends to be less necessary
due to moderation, but that's a well-explored can of worms I won't open
here. :D
Joss
Bantari
> "Robert Jasiek" <jas...@snafu.de> wrote in message
>
> news:au0kv3p3tikgo5i7i...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> >>How about renaming rec.games.go to alt.junk.jbandssdump?
> >>Would be more fitting these days.
> >>Just saying...
>
> > The major problem of this newsgroup is not the noise. Each newsgroup
> > has noise. Try de.soc.politik.misc for an example with much more
> > excessive and distasteful noise, and still that newsgroup is very much
> > worth reading.
>
> > This group's major problem is and has always been the low number of
> > active contributors. The creation of web-forums has made the situation
> > more servere. This, however, does not mean that this group or other
> > newsgroups would have become superfluous but that more writers should
> > feel encouraged to contribute.
>
Exactly!
This is why I was talking about RATIO and not only about NOISE.
I am aware that each forum has noise... and that noise is also
personal - different people consider different things to be noise or
content. For example - I would bet that jb consider his blabbing to be
anything but noise... very valuable content, perhaps. Same goes for
ss. :)
But, to attract more on-topic posters, they must see the value of
posting here.
And it seems to me - they don't!
Lack of moderation and past experiences might be a big factor.
Current situation might be another one!
My point is - it is hard to combat 3rd-part generated noise without
moderation.
But for regular posters/readers to generate noise "just for fun" is
what sinks this group, I think.
The recent jb/ss babble is just an example.
And it is ongoing...
____________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
> But, to attract more on-topic posters, they must see the value of
> posting here.
> And it seems to me - they don't!
From the observation of the response generated by Robert's very much
on-topic posts about BGA adopting AGA rules on both forums (here and
on GD) it seems to me to be clear that people prefere moderation...
the posts generated 29 responses there vs. 2 here, as of now.
Generally, it seems to me that the posters who like to fight and
quarel and flame remained on rgg (with few notable exceptions), while
the posters who like constructive discussions moved to DG (also with
few notable exceptions.)
So, if we want to "save" and maybe even popularize rgg, we should (a)
stop fighting, and (b) stop spamming and OT posting. Or this forum
will wither away and be reduced to 3 or 4 die-hards posting OT posts
ad nauseam.
Just saying....
______________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>it is hard to combat 3rd-part generated noise without moderation.
Nothing is easier: Just post.
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>From the observation of the response generated by Robert's very much
>on-topic posts about BGA adopting AGA rules on both forums (here and
>on GD) it seems to me to be clear that people prefere moderation...
>the posts generated 29 responses there vs. 2 here, as of now.
That is not because of moderation but because currently more people
like web-based forums and fewer are able to find and handle reading
newsgroups. Many providers don't even offer reading newsgroups and it
asks for installing a newsreader. Some people also like the "unsaved"
low-quality posts on web forums like 1 line smiley "I agree"
statements. Such easily increases numbers of articles on web forums
but does not contribute to its quality - only maybe its social
entertainment value.
Bantari
> That is not because of moderation but because currently more people
> like web-based forums and fewer are able to find and handle reading
> newsgroups. Many providers don't even offer reading newsgroups and it
> asks for installing a newsreader. Some people also like the "unsaved"
> low-quality posts on web forums like 1 line smiley "I agree"
> statements. Such easily increases numbers of articles on web forums
> but does not contribute to its quality - only maybe its social
> entertainment value.
Well...
I am reading this newsgroup for years now through the Google portal,
no need for my provider to provide usenet and no need for me to
install usenet-reader software. The software just gives you another
option, but if somebody likes "web-based forum" they can read rgg just
as fine! The functionality is sufficient for me, and always was...
some other groups, high-traffic groups (like rgcp) I have to use
readers for, to filter stuff... but rgg is fine through google if
somebody cares about it. So your argument is weak.
As for the one-liners and the quality of posts...
The more people you have on a forum the more such one-liners you have.
This is true for GD as well as it was true for rgg when it was still
very much "alive". So, if more people start posting here there will
also be more of those silly one-liners. So this argument of yours is
weak as well.
However - what is not present on moderated forum like GD is the
incessant purposeful garbage of some posters (no need to mention
names, I believe), as well as the constant fights, flames, and
bickering of the past (yes - of the past - because other than the few
trouble-makers of one camp there is hardly anybody left here to fight
with)... And I think *this* is mainly what people prefere on GD as
opposed to rgg. Each time rgg comes up (and this does not happen
often) the comments are not vrey flattering, and they are usually
pointed at the fights and at the garbage posted by some. So I take it
this is why people don't come here much.
So - I will stick to my initial evaluation that it is the content, not
the format of a forum that people are voting with their feet for. I
know this is the case for me, and for everybody I talked to about
that. To be honest - the only person *ever* that presented a good
argument in favor of rgg was you, Robert. Still - the argument was
not sufficient to sway many people (as a matter of fact - it swayed
nobody as far as I can tell). I wish it was not so, but there it is.
________________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
> On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 17:06:36 -0700 (PDT), Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >it is hard to combat 3rd-part generated noise without moderation.
>
> Nothing is easier: Just post.
I believe I just did.
Multiple times, if I count correctly. :)
However - for posting to make sense, there have to be those who read.
Otherwise - what's the point.
And this is the stage that rgg approaches... for me.
the "What's the point?" stage...
_____________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
> wrote:
>
> >From the observation of the response generated by Robert's very much
> >on-topic posts about BGA adopting AGA rules on both forums (here and
> >on GD) it seems to me to be clear that people prefere moderation...
> >the posts generated 29 responses there vs. 2 here, as of now.
By the way - as of now the count is 113 on GD vs. 2 here.
And its quite an interesting discussion, if I say so myself.
Nol all posts are of the "I agree" type, at least until now.
Which really makes me doubt your arguments, Robert.
Sorry.
___________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Matthew Woodcraft
Bantari <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So - I will stick to my initial evaluation that it is the content, not
> the format of a forum that people are voting with their feet for.
Of course another very important advantage of the forum is that it can
show proper game diagrams.
In principle I think the forum is a much better idea. But I find it
very inconvenient in practice. With a newsgroup I can just select a
group and read (or choose to ignore) all the messages going on from
wherever I last left off. How do I do the same on godiscussions.com?
-M-
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>So - I will stick to my initial evaluation that it is the content, not
>the format of a forum that people are voting with their feet for.
IMO, usually the contents of GD is not good enough to be interesting
for my reading. There are quite some other reasons why I don't like
GD, but the most interesting for you might be that I dislike its bad
structure into subgroups. The structure does not separate subgroups
clearly from each other and so one has to read all so as not to miss
what one might want to read. This means clicking a lot just to see if
something worth reading is there at all.
Bantari
> IMO, usually the contents of GD is not good enough to be interesting
> for my reading. There are quite some other reasons why I don't like
> GD, but the most interesting for you might be that I dislike its bad
> structure into subgroups. The structure does not separate subgroups
> clearly from each other and so one has to read all so as not to miss
> what one might want to read. This means clicking a lot just to see if
> something worth reading is there at all.
Personal preference I can understand.
But if you make inference from that into general state of things, this
is where I drwa the line.
As for subgroups... there are none here at all, so this should
actually be an argument for GD rather than against.
Other than that, I actually have no argument with what you say.
And my point was not why *you* should switch to GD, but why most
people already switched. *You* do what *you* think best for *you*.
Its your problem, and its your choice. I am just sorry to see this
forum degenerate so, and my argument was directed more at people like
jb and ss than at you. You are doing a sort-of in-a-weird-way
acceptable work here.... so go on, do what you do. You are certainly
not part of the problem with rgg.
But there *is* a problem with rgg.
Or people would not be moving off to GD.
_______________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
<matth...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> In principle I think the forum is a much better idea. But I find it
> very inconvenient in practice. With a newsgroup I can just select a
> group and read (or choose to ignore) all the messages going on from
> wherever I last left off. How do I do the same on godiscussions.com?
I do not really wish to use rgg to advertise for GD.
Or, at least, not too bluntly.
But tell me, in what way the New Posts section is insufficient for
you? It lists all threads which are new since you last logged in...
and it shows all the threads which still have unread posts... in
addition, you can do the same by going forum-to-forum.... and so on.
_________________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Matthew Woodcraft
> I do not really wish to use rgg to advertise for GD.
> Or, at least, not too bluntly.
I think it's too late to worry about that now :-).
> But tell me, in what way the New Posts section is insufficient for
> you? It lists all threads which are new since you last logged in...
> and it shows all the threads which still have unread posts... in
> addition, you can do the same by going forum-to-forum.... and so on.
'New Posts' gives me a list of threads with new material, but I don't
see how to get to the right point in each thread. Starting on the last
page and reading backwards until I see something familiar isn't a very
good solution.
-M-
Bantari
wrote:
> I think it's too late to worry about that now :-).
I am sorry, but I did not start this thread with this in mind.
I don't remember who brought GD first, but talking about it was not my
intention. All I wanted was to draw attention to the problems this
forum faces. Which are rather serious, as I see it.
> 'New Posts' gives me a list of threads with new material, but I don't
> see how to get to the right point in each thread. Starting on the last
> page and reading backwards until I see something familiar isn't a very
> good solution.
Well, you can always display the tree view... and arange the posts in
reverse order....
Ultimately, there is no perfect solution. And there probably is no
method which directly corresponds to your favorite newsreader
software. Its a learning curve, but not really a steep one... and the
bother is not really that great. If, for example, you switch to a
different newsreader (your favorite one is not supported anymore, for
example) - you will have the same or even more problems adjusting to a
new interface.
But again - whatever you personally prefere.
For me, I will live with the little inconveniences in order to have a
good conversation. After all, I already compromise - for example I
type what I wish to say instead of saying it - this is an inferior
interface for having a discussion. But I live with it in order to have
the discussion at all, since this is the only way, for now.
Another compromise is - I go to a forum where discussions are
meaningful and plenty.
And where most posters are well-behaved, and where chaff is minimal.
I wish it was on here, but unfortunately it is not.
That's all.
________________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
-
>> Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> From the observation of the response generated by Robert's
>>> very much on-topic posts about BGA adopting AGA rules on
>>> both forums (here and on GD) it seems to me to be clear that
>>> people prefere moderation... the posts generated 29
>>> responses there vs. 2 here, as of now.
Yes, many of the GoDiscussions.Com people clearly prefer
moderation. Indeed, their trend is to have everybody become
moderated in a New World Odor. Furthermore, the robots will
be doing all that moderating because the robots are "most" fair:
http://www.wvwnews.net/images/teaser/sheeple.jpg
"Are We Giving The Robots That Run Our Society Too Much Power?"
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_are_we_giving_the
Atmospheres heavy with recruitment seek general coercion
and manipulation of their forum participants. Even lurkers were
not free to come and go as they please. Recruitment coupled
with moderation is the very -essence- of toilet training, so that
typists can aspire to "best in show" as they obediently wag their
cute little troll fodders for Sir Lancelot's master mentoration thrust.
Having a moderator also means that we don't need to blame other
people for our own lack of ability to foster a positive contribution.
It is constantly necessary to recreate new forums so that
simple google search on archives won't be accomplishing more
of that similarly mindless repetitive madness. Things must again
be retyped, retyped again, and again retyped, & otherwise one
cannot keep one's name-exposure prominent for cybermedia
scenery. Without name-exposure one dies in the cyberspace.
Topics that develop more "hits" via page visitations are also
more marketable, key toward the goals of membership increase
which swell the ranks of faithful followers. Intoning those sacred
mantras of special URLs will eventually lead one along a garden
path of enlightenness, fashionably -bordered- with yellow bricks.
Friendly strokes are casually exchanged, sometimes three pats
on the back for a couple of light rubs, then deep tissue massage
combined with feather brushing, oooohs & aaaahs plus smileys.
Periodically one must visit the alternative forae to explain why
the grass is so much greener on the other side of the fence and
that big ducks -waddle- ever so much more evanescently when
they prance and prattle with skillful aplomb. This border-crossing
behavior has been studied at length by three social scientists and
two anthropologists with degrees in ethnomusicology and botany,
amplified by use of poetry within footnotes, counterpoint for the
endnotes, and supplemented by several thousand bibliographical
references with cross-indexing, pagination, title and frontispiece.
Let's be definitive on this point: AGA Rules did not originate
from Washington, D.C. There's another possibility of "pass stone"
with each resumption of play. I did not find any mention of that at
GoDiscussions.Com, perhaps due to its "moderated forum" nature.
Or, are "pass stones" required for -each- pass after resumption of
play? When "everybody" agrees to cooperate there is just another
universe of parallel "everybodies" who disagrees. Dr. Straw says:
"Nothing wrong with using the same rules which have
been in place for 2000 years, give or take 1000 years."
So "time" is a validator, for some, excepting those rebels who view
"time" as an inertia against which a revolution must needs struggle.
One "advantage" of GoDiscussions.Com is a penchance for dwelling
upon inessential, even idiotic, Go Questions such as stacking stones.
Fortunately, none other than that impressive mathematical prowess
of Bill Spight leapt to their rescue: -( the late date of April 2007 )-
"Stacking is there: 'attempting to play on an occupied intersection'."
--------- into those jaws of battle sploodged bantari:
"...based on your strong personal conviction that scientific
approach is somehow inherently better than traditional approach,
and if we only made sufficient effort, we'd be rolling in puppies."
http://www.godiscussions.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5947&page=12
No definitions of terms were given, particularly that of "puppies."
At the least 'bantari' has managed more than 1,000 posts to that
weblog, keeping his -inane- chatter away from the critical crowd.
Apparently an absense of critique is required to sustain presence.
This is no crucible, quite obviously, which might hone sharpness.
Not a very efficient means by which to scroll through discussions.
Chiefly a forum where people seek to talk without resolving issues,
which indicates -failure- to exercise -proper- moderation on posts.
"I leave it to the rules gurus." - bantari
Implying that anything "bantari" has to offer may be immediately
crumpled, shredded, ripped, burned, & tossed into a circular file.
"Bantari" <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> By the way - as of now the count is 113 on GD vs. 2 here.
> And its quite an interesting discussion, if I say so myself.
> Nol all posts are of the "I agree" type, at least until now.
The -count- mattered to him, not content or quality of posts.
----------------------------------
"Bantari" <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> But there *is* a problem with rgg.
> Or people would not be moving off to GD.
Then may I suggest that you move off to GD and stay there?
After all, it seems to be more of a "click & suck" data-merge.
We could apply the process of moderating r.g.g. as well, to
confine all references about the GD to GoDiscussions.Com .
Conversely, to keep things "fair and balanced" make certain
that you discuss r.g.g. on GoDiscussions.Com, IF YOU CAN.
I seek a forum where headers are quickly displayed, where
I can scan and select in bits and pieces, where people or things
uninteresting to me may be easily ignored, where I may "scan"
(and delete, if necessary), where archive search quickly brings
back informative articles to avoid the retyping of everything on
every day, and where one might encounter some reality of raw
emotional expression so that people don't need to wear masks
of false pretense which -indulge- in distractions of fake niceties.
I wonder where such forums might be found, why there needs
to occur a projective babbling that accuses others of babbling.
- regards
- jb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.theonion.com/content/amvo/charlton_heston_dies
"No, I'm pretty sure you're thinking of Mickey Rooney.
Charlton Heston has been dead for at least five years."
- Rodrigo Bennet, Brick Layer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Woodcraft
>On Apr 8, 1:39=A0pm, Matthew Woodcraft <matth...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
>> I think it's too late to worry about that now :-).
> I am sorry, but I did not start this thread with this in mind.
> I don't remember who brought GD first, but talking about it was not my
> intention. All I wanted was to draw attention to the problems this
> forum faces. Which are rather serious, as I see it.
Sorry, I meant it's too late to expect rec.games.go to recover. So
helping people use GD is doing us all a favour.
>> 'New Posts' gives me a list of threads with new material, but I don't
>> see how to get to the right point in each thread. Starting on the last
>> page and reading backwards until I see something familiar isn't a very
>> good solution.
> But again - whatever you personally prefere. For me, I will live with
> the little inconveniences in order to have a good conversation.
Well yes, but we don't have to say that's all there is to it. Software
is there to be improved, and we can't be the first people to consider
this problem.
-M-
Jeff Nowakowski
> Well, you can always display the tree view... and arange the posts in
> reverse order....
> Ultimately, there is no perfect solution. And there probably is no
> method which directly corresponds to your favorite newsreader
> software. Its a learning curve, but not really a steep one...
Funny that you should call a poor interface a "learning curve". Web
forums are are an incredible step backwards in basic usability. It is
also claimed by the site operator that he can't run it without charging
people money or beating them over the head with ads. Somehow in 2008,
when we have gigahertz computers, gigabytes of memory, and gigabits of
bandwidth, serving up a web page to a couple dozen of people ad a time
is expensive.
-Jeff
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>As for subgroups... there are none here at all, so this should
>actually be an argument for GD rather than against.
It makes reading RGG easy.
>But there *is* a problem with rgg.
There is no newsreader that renders RGG style ascii diagrams into nice
graphics. Here beginners have less courage to ask questions (I do not
understand why but so it is) and they get fewer answers than on GD or
SL. Maybe these are important factors.
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>But tell me, in what way the New Posts section is insufficient for
>you? It lists all threads which are new since you last logged in...
It means to enable cookies first and then call GD. If one does not do
this consistently and bothers to login each time (nasty), then one
cannot benifit from such a feature.
>and it shows all the threads which still have unread posts...
There is a big difference: The GD GUI has much bigger fonts within
much less space than can be set in a typical newsreader. Hence the
today's posts are not convient, not to mention a newsreaders advanced
features like column sorting.
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>And where most posters are well-behaved
Are they? On GD, I have to defend my editing style and frequency of
posts. On RGG, no one would criticise such, except once every 5 years
in private email. I like the much greater degree of tolerance here.
Blocher's spokesman
"Robert Jasiek" <jas...@snafu.de> wrote
> I like the much greater degree of tolerance here.
The crickets are very tolerant. I wish it were different. The real killer
of use group is the spamming that is getting totally out of control on the
higher activity groups.
Blocher's spokesman
"-" <jazze...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47fbe88b....@news3.isomedia.com...
> Periodically one must visit the alternative forae to explain why
> the grass is so much greener on the other side of the fence and
> that big ducks -waddle- ever so much more evanescently when
> they prance and prattle with skillful aplomb. This border-crossing
> behavior has been studied at length by three social scientists and
> ...................
Gawd,
I can't even tell if you are rendering a compliment or an insult there.
Blocher's spokesman
"Jeff Nowakowski" <jef...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in
>
> Funny that you should call a poor interface a "learning curve". Web
> forums are are an incredible step backwards in basic usability. It is
> also claimed by the site operator that he can't run it without charging
> people money or beating them over the head with ads. Somehow in 2008,
> when we have gigahertz computers, gigabytes of memory, and gigabits of
> bandwidth, serving up a web page to a couple dozen of people ad a time is
> expensive.
>
> -Jeff
The one thing that drives me crazy over there is the page loads twice- or
something like that. It loads and you start to navigate the page then
pictures or something loads in and it resets your mouse position as if it
were a brand new page update. It is AWFUL.
Bantari
> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 14:04:14 -0700 (PDT), Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >And where most posters are well-behaved
>
> Are they? On GD, I have to defend my editing style and frequency of
> posts. On RGG, no one would criticise such, except once every 5 years
> in private email. I like the much greater degree of tolerance here.
On rgg people criticize much smaller things, as you well know.
And the only reason you came under fire for your quoting is that you
really make it hard to read - especially when a much better mechanism
does exist. But its not even that - its more your attitude of "i know
best what is better for you to read" and that "my time is so important
and valuable that I cannot possibly take 5 seconds to adjust y
posts". People would get over the qotes easily if they did not feel
that you think you know better and that you think them all silly for
adhering to the forum's standards. I know you never said these words,
but this is the perception you create, or so people tell me.
Also, on *this* forum you *do* adhere to posting standards, most of
the time, so there is no reasons to criticize you... at least not for
that.
______________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 13:04:31 -0700 (PDT), Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >But tell me, in what way the New Posts section is insufficient for
> >you? It lists all threads which are new since you last logged in...
>
> It means to enable cookies first and then call GD. If one does not do
> this consistently and bothers to login each time (nasty), then one
> cannot benifit from such a feature.
This is one's personal choice.
I could as well say that you cannot benefit from all the nifty perks
usenet readers enjoy without downloading 3rd party programs, which are
often buggy or whatnot.
The thing is - it is what it is.
It is your preference to post here or there or both... or not at all.
I really fail to see how this whole thing degraded into bashing GD.
I think it is very good to have different forums so people can chose
what they personally like better. Don't you?
____________
-Bantari
Bantari
> a couple dozen of people
It is more than just "a couple of dozen", even at a time.
Rgg has 918 subscribers, while GD has over 2200.
Monthly traffic is also much greater, and it is growing...
To privately run a webpage, somebody needs to pay for it.
Do it for free, and with better interface, and people will move to
your site.
Simple.
richard mullens
> On Apr 7, 10:53 pm, Robert Jasiek <jas...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 17:06:36 -0700 (PDT), Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>it is hard to combat 3rd-part generated noise without moderation.
>>
>>Nothing is easier: Just post.
>
>
> I believe I just did.
> Multiple times, if I count correctly. :)
> However - for posting to make sense, there have to be those who read.
> Otherwise - what's the point.
>
I read r.g.g - even if less frequently.
Some time ago I visited godiscussions.com but found it not to my taste.
Jeff Nowakowski
>
> It is more than just "a couple of dozen", even at a time.
I seriously doubt that. Whenever I've been there, I've never seen more
than a couple of dozen people listed as "Viewing". Just how many
requests per second do you think this number will generate? Remember
"Viewing" just means they hit the site within a certain time frame.
This site could have been hosted on a 486 PC from the early 90s.
Seriously, I'm not kidding.
> Rgg has 918 subscribers, while GD has over 2200.
> Monthly traffic is also much greater, and it is growing...
That traffic is easily handled by what you get at a bare minimum from
any host.
> To privately run a webpage, somebody needs to pay for it.
> Do it for free, and with better interface, and people will move to
> your site.
> Simple.
I'm perfectly happy with the newsgroup interface. Also, people won't
jump ship unless there's some significant advantage. I can't dispute
that a large number of people are used to web forums, seem ok with ads,
and like to have heavy-handed moderation. So while I am free to bemoan
where people choose to discuss Go, I acknowledge ultimately that what
the people want, they get.
-Jeff
Bantari
> I'm perfectly happy with the newsgroup interface. Also, people won't
> jump ship unless there's some significant advantage. I can't dispute
> that a large number of people are used to web forums, seem ok with ads,
> and like to have heavy-handed moderation. So while I am free to bemoan
> where people choose to discuss Go, I acknowledge ultimately that what
> the people want, they get.
Now, the question is, can anything be done on this end to make rgg
more attractive? Obviously, more on-topic posts and less bickering
(hint hint), but anything else? And how to accomplish that?
_____________
-Bantari
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
[GD editing style]
>its more your attitude of "i know best what is better for you to read"
First of all I am concerned to have the time to write at all. With
GD's default quoting style, I simply do not have the time. So I cannot
use it. On GD, I need to use a faster quoting style or to never quote
anything. All this has nothing to do so far with how well the layout
may be for others to read. That is only a secondary decision.
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>I really fail to see how this whole thing degraded into bashing GD.
If you advertise GD, you should expect that it is also criticized.
"Bashing" would be something different.
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>Rgg has 918 subscribers
Where do you get that number from? At each newsnet provider, there are
subscribers. To know all figures, you would need to violate data
protection rights. A google membership list tells you only a small
fraction of all subscribers.
Kirk McElhearn
Yes, I get my messages via a newsgroup reader program, so I'm not
listed is being "subscribed" anywhere...
Kirk
--
Read my blog, Kirkville
http://www.mcelhearn.com
Joel Olson
"Robert Jasiek" <jas...@snafu.de> wrote in message
news:mh1ov3prt6ureq207...@4ax.com...
Otoh, its very easy to include sgf.
Robert Jasiek
<joel_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Otoh, its very easy to include sgf.
There are forums where attaching SGF files is twice as easy, so I
would not call the GD method _very_ easy. Already attaching HTML is
nasty though. Why is there any restriction on file type at all?
Ben Finney
> Rgg has 918 subscribers
rec.games.go is a Usenet newsgroup, distributed via NNTP over servers
worldwide. To my knowledge, there's (fortunately) no way of getting a
complete count of all subscribers to a newsgroup.
What does this 918 figure represent? Where did it come from?
--
\ "You've got the brain of a four-year-old boy, and I'll bet he |
`\ was glad to get rid of it." -- Groucho Marx |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Kirk McElhearn
>> Otoh, its very easy to include sgf.
>
> There are forums where attaching SGF files is twice as easy, so I
> would not call the GD method _very_ easy. Already attaching HTML is
> nasty though. Why is there any restriction on file type at all?
For newsgroups to allow attachments, they have to be in the "binaries"
tree. That's not currently the case for rgg.
Planar
Jeff Nowakowski <jef...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> Funny that you should call a poor interface a "learning curve". Web
> forums are are an incredible step backwards in basic usability.
Note how in the good old days, we had a simple protocol and a large choice of
client software, all competing on features, leading to some pretty good
interfaces. The new way of doing things is one server, one client and no
competition. The poor interface (and slow evolution) follows logically from
this.
I can't help but notice that we saw the same evolution with Go Servers. Is it
somehow unavoidable?
> It is
> also claimed by the site operator that he can't run it without charging
> people money or beating them over the head with ads. Somehow in 2008,
> when we have gigahertz computers, gigabytes of memory, and gigabits of
> bandwidth, serving up a web page to a couple dozen of people ad a time
> is expensive.
One of the advantages of rgg that I didn't see mentioned here, is that it is
guaranteed to remain free, unmoderated, and non-commercial. GD, has
none of these guarantees.
--
Planar
remove .invalid from my address to send me mail
"Surprise. Then just use AGA rules and that's it." - Robert Jasiek
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>For newsgroups to allow attachments, they have to be in the "binaries"
>tree. That's not currently the case for rgg.
Therefore attachments here are posted inline.
Reinhold Burger
I've also noticed some regulars on GD referring to rgg users in general
as "trash" and "cockroaches". All without any censure from the GD
moderators, as far as I can tell. Or, in fact, censure from anyone on
the forum.
Reinhold
Reinhold Burger
In case it wasn't clear from Jeff's post, this was some piece of satire
that someone tried to post on GoDiscussions.com. (Whether it was lame
is besides the point.)
The user was then banned - I think this was the only post he/she
made - and as far as I can tell, the user account was later removed
altogether (at least, it doesn't show up on the member's list), and
the thread deleted.
Reinhold
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
> Bantari wrote:
>> How about renaming rec.games.go to alt.junk.jbandssdump?
>> Would be more fitting these days.
>> Just saying...
>
> Yeah, it's lame. But so is the ".com" site. And I do stress ".com".
> The post that follows was captured in the pre-ban stage.
>
> -Jeff
>
> "Most of us certainly can remember the time when this forum had less
> advertisment.
> It was simply boring. I really had to read some of the articles.
> Imagine that! Absolutely boring!
>
> I am very happy about the chances made in the past few weeks/months.
> They lead to the right direction.
>
>
> Here are some of my ideas to improve this forum even more:
>
> - First of all I would make the Go-figue advertisment MUCH bigger
> because that Go-discussions banner is very distracting - one could
> believe some people here talk about Go.
>
> -the ebay-issue: more of them and just EVERYWHERE. I even thought about
> replacing single "bad posts" with advertisment (maybe whole threats too)
>
> -the supporter-feature: Maybe a good idea, but not impertinent enough!
> "Supporting" should be much more expensiv - obviously too many people
> here can afford it. You could also think of selling administrator-rights
> so people can ban, modify, delete as they wish. This must not be
> expensive because there are too many boring threats in this forum.
>
> -my personal favorite: make a big button at the starting page with
> "please send me spam! SPAM ME!" because lately I don't get much spam
> anymore. So I hope this changes soon.
>
> -I enjoy the "product" offer of some users in the "featured products"
> which gladly appeared within threads. Genius idea! Maybe I can even pay
> people to play and have fun for me?
>
>
> And now, ladies and gentleman, post what you think...as soon as I have
> bought this forum I'll ban you!"
Kirk McElhearn
>> For newsgroups to allow attachments, they have to be in the "binaries"
>> tree. That's not currently the case for rgg.
>
> Therefore attachments here are posted inline.
I've never seen an attachment in rgg...
Unless you mean ascii diagrams or the text of SGF files.
Jeff Nowakowski
>
> In case it wasn't clear from Jeff's post, this was some piece of satire
> that someone tried to post on GoDiscussions.com. (Whether it was lame
> is besides the point.)
Thanks for clarifying. My point was to illustrate the commercial nature
of the ".com" site, and how quickly the complaint was scrubbed from the
site.
When I said the ".com" site was lame, I wasn't referring to that banned
post, but just the nature of posts there in general. It's boring. To
each their own, of course, but I get the feeling that despite how
Bantari has made himself a home there, he misses the real discussions
that could only have happened on rec.games.go.
-Jeff
Planar
Reinhold Burger <rfbu...@cs.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> I've also noticed some regulars on GD referring to rgg users in general
> as "trash" and "cockroaches". All without any censure from the GD
> moderators, as far as I can tell. Or, in fact, censure from anyone on
> the forum.
Censorship has this nasty tendency to be self-serving.
Michael Alford
Aha! we've hit upon the real answer - Bantari misses the old flames and
since the "server wars" are a dead issue, he's brought up rgg vs gd to
stimulate such! OK. I find rgg the better of the two, and by a very
wide margin. GD is difficult to use and the censorship, or lack thereof,
depending on issue and poster, is a major disappointment and more than
enough reason not to go there.
Michael
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
> the text of SGF files.
That is indeed the by far most common application of an inline
attachment.
Jeff Nowakowski
>
> Aha! we've hit upon the real answer - Bantari misses the old flames and
> since the "server wars" are a dead issue, he's brought up rgg vs gd to
> stimulate such!
To be fair to Bantari, he didn't bring up rgg vs gd, I did. However,
it's the elephant in the room. You can't discuss how rgg is devoid of
content (hence the off-topic crap sticking out like a sore thumb)
without discussing where many of the old posters have moved to. I tried
to warn Bantari a year ago when he started redirecting "serious" topics
to the ".com" site.
Maybe Bantari can redirect posters on the ".com" site to rec.games.go?
You know, for those topics too hot for them to handle? I'm sure that
will go over well.
My modest proposal: Any time the mods at the ".com" site lock down a
discussion, say "please move this to rec.games.go". Then we could have
our newsgroup back.
-Jeff
Robert Figura
> It is more than just "a couple of dozen", even at a time.
> Rgg has 918 subscribers, while GD has over 2200.
your counting cannot possibly be correct.
Regards
- Robert Figura
--
/* mandlsig.c v0.23 (c) by Robert Figura */
I=1702;float O,o,i;main(l){for(;I--;putchar("oO .,m>cot.bitamea\
@urigrf <raguFit erobR"[I%74?I>837&874>I?I^833:l%5:5]))for(O=o=l=
0;O*O+o*o<(16^l++);o=2*O*o+I/74/11.-1,O=i)i=O*O-o*o+I%74*.04-2.2;}
Kirk McElhearn
>> the text of SGF files.
>
> That is indeed the by far most common application of an inline
> attachment.
Then it's technically not an attachment.
Bantari
I get the feeling that despite how
> Bantari has made himself a home there, he misses the real discussions
> that could only have happened on rec.games.go.
Real discussions do not depend as much on the medium as they depend on
the people. It is true - I have had many discussions on rgg, and now I
have many on GD. And some on rgg as can be seen, lol. So, I do not
really miss the discussions, since I do have the opportunity to engage
in them.
What's more, I find the discussions on GD more eatisfying because they
are, on average, at a higher level. And also there is much less chaff
and flames which were always present here, and still are as I can see.
I find discussions on GD more satisfying because I can do there what I
always wanted to do here, but never really could - condict a
meaningful and civilized conversation about a controversial topic.
I have absolutely no problem with posting on 2 forums.
And I think there is room for both, a moderated and an unmoderated
one.
Now, having explained the above, I still like rgg, mostly for
historical reasons... nostalgia and all that. And it irks me how it
has degenerated into jb/ss barf-bag. I know that the best solution for
that problem is to post more on-topic stuff... so, since I am not sure
I consider myself a "regular" here anymore, in spite of everything, my
initial post was aimed at shaking the "regulars" into doing something
about it.
Instead - it seems that all the "regulars" seem to care about is vent
their bitterness about a ".com" forum and rise to the defense of rgg
as if it was still the greatest. What a familiar picture, lol. And
what a dissapointment... But it is my fault to have expected something
different... after all, I should have known better by now. ;)
_____________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
> Aha! we've hit upon the real answer - Bantari misses the old flames and
> since the "server wars" are a dead issue, he's brought up rgg vs gd to
> stimulate such!
Jeff does not speak for me, malf.
So please - do not try to infere my motivations from what *he* says.
He is not all that smart, you know... ;)
And he does not know me.
Besides...
When I need flames, I can just go to ch 33 and watch you flogging some
dead horse.
But still - if I desired flames (or a good laugh), I'd be on ch33
every day talking to you.
Well - I'm not!
Because this is not what I am after.
_____________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 19:00:08 -0700 (PDT), Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Rgg has 918 subscribers
>
> Where do you get that number from? At each newsnet provider, there are
> subscribers. To know all figures, you would need to violate data
> protection rights. A google membership list tells you only a small
> fraction of all subscribers.
Well, this is what it tells me. :)
Bantari
wrote:
> Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com> writes:
> > Rgg has 918 subscribers
>
> rec.games.go is a Usenet newsgroup, distributed via NNTP over servers
> worldwide. To my knowledge, there's (fortunately) no way of getting a
> complete count of all subscribers to a newsgroup.
>
> What does this 918 figure represent? Where did it come from?
Well, it came from google... and its the number of people subscribed
to the forum, according to them. I am not sure how they have derived
this number. But I will grant that it is probably only a part of
people who read rgg...
Still, the point is not in numbers but in trends.
I hope nobody here is deluded enough to deny that the rgg readership
(and postership, if that's even a word) is on the steep decline... one
only needs to check the number of posts each month... and most of the
posts are being send these days is the jb/ss drivel. This is pretty
much the issue I am trying to shake into awareness - but somehow we
keep side-stepping it in favor of discussing GD, me, or google's
numbers...
_________________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
-
> Michael Alford wrote:
>> Aha! we've hit upon the real answer - Bantari misses the
>> old flames and since the "server wars" are a dead issue,
>> he's brought up rgg vs gd to stimulate such!
Jeff Nowakowski <jef...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> To be fair to Bantari, he didn't bring up rgg vs gd, I did. However,
> it's the elephant in the room. You can't discuss how rgg is devoid
> of content (hence the off-topic crap sticking out like a sore thumb)
> without discussing where many of the old posters have moved to.
> I tried to warn Bantari a year ago when he started redirecting
> "serious" topics to the ".com" site.
To be fair to Michael, both of you brought up "rgg vs gd" (sic!).
Not unlike asserting that one must choose between orange juice
vs. lemon juice, (as if they cannot be mixed). Apparently there is
some difference of opinion concerning what comprises a serious
discussion; even whether discussions are best served by serious
attitudes. To the crowd of people who seek to offset "rgg vs gd"
they might best be served by moving this entire "modest proposal"
thread to GoDiscussions.Com. Furthermore, by moving the thread
there, proponents of this discussion thread would also move there.
As for what may have motivated this thread: there seems to be
a general consensus among the Chess Community that Sam Sloan
is perhaps the only honest person in the bunch, who managed to
obtain documentary evidence of corruption at the higest levels of
the USCF. By "corruption" I mean diversion of sponsorship funds
to purposes other than their intended purpose. The "overhead"
for managing corporate sponsorship of scholastic Chess might be
80%, far in excess of usual administrative costs when managing
a charity. Susan Polgar's lucrative contract is thereby wrapped
into a "scholastic Chess" program under rubric of "administrative
overhead." General pattern appears to be loads of money for the
big rock stars with very little, if any, trickling down to the various
up-and-coming mediocre players. When Susan Polgar mentions
the "Chess for Girls" program she is referencing her own salary.
The "Bill Goichberg mafia" computers crunch the chess games
of all players on the "outside" so that breaking through the ranks
and claiming tournament prizes is rendered much more difficult.
This is an, as yet, poorly researched area concerining misuse of
computational equipment, to which Chess has succumbed a bit.
At this point an only solution for the USCF is declared bankruptcy.
They hide USCF shennanigans so that corporate sponsors won't
discover them. If they really wish to promote scholastic chess
then they'll pass on sponsor money toward tournament prizes,
especially in ghetto neighborhoods where Chess Instruction,
(or Go Instruction), has been demonstrated to reduce crime.
As I have suggested previously, if we do not demand open
books and financial transparancy, Go Gaming Organizations can
drift into patterns similar to the USCF. Symptoms already appear.
If you do not support dissemination of news concerning the
corruptions, and avenues for potential corruption, in our official
gaming organizations then you are part of the problem instead
of part of the solution. Awareness of corruption by members in
a voting organization is our primary recourse and also the proud
legacy by which we have inherited a society of democracy. The
kindled spirit of public participation in their public affairs does not
always burn brightly for all. Moreoever there are many suppressive
persons (SPs) who seek to extinguish those lights of participation.
Suppressive persons are also identified by cliques who define
others in terms of being "insiders" and "outsiders." SPs neither
pursue nor advance an ethos of social inclusion. Instead they
are constantly whining about loneliness when they feel that there
are not enough commiserators to share their company of misery.
We have discovered evidence of SPs on rec.games.go in the
form of "killfilers" and certain individuals incapable of responding
to discussion questions. Simultaneously, those individuals next
wish to complain about an "absense of discussion" which they
have chosen to absent themselves from. Certain topics are taboo
for SPs, or they have simply not cultivated depth of understanding
nor warmth of empathy to appreciate virtues of cultural diversity.
> Maybe Bantari can redirect posters on the ".com" site to
> rec.games.go? You know, for those topics too hot for them
> to handle? I'm sure that will go over well.
Perhaps this newsgroup is "too hot for them" to handle?
Well, if you can't stand the fire then get out of the kitchen ...
> My modest proposal: Any time the mods at the ".com" site lock
> down a discussion, say "please move this to rec.games.go".
> Then we could have our newsgroup back.
Ah, nostalgic reminiscing about a broken record? Yet,
the nature of "news" is progressive, so going "back" is out of
the question. If you want your "old newsgroup" then browse
through its archives. If you seek to replay the old themes then
you will quite likely encounter responses which post old URLs.
Lot's wife looked back and turned into a pillar of salt. Eventually
this thread will turn into yet another salt-lick for slurpy tongues.
- regards
- jb
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Death & Destruction are preoccupations of Jews:
Israeli designs 'Who killed Barack Obama?' T-shirts
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1%2C2506%2CL-3527989%2C00.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Bantari
> On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 18:51:17 -0700 (PDT), Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> First of all I am concerned to have the time to write at all. With
> GD's default quoting style, I simply do not have the time.
First of all, what does it matter if you adjust the quoting *after*
you press SEND or *before*? Time is still the same and the problem is
avoided, no? When you press the QUOTE button, the text is created with
GD default quotes, which you then have to go and manually edit to suit
your needs. Why not adit it "after" posting, during the process of
saving it to your archive? 1 second too much??
> So I cannot
> use it. On GD, I need to use a faster quoting style or to never quote
> anything.
Second of all - this is just a snow-job.
I personally think that you are either lazy or enjoy being obnoxious,
or both.
No offense.
But listen... lets calculate.
For the few dozen posts you have made to GD, it would take me maybe 5
min to adjust *all* your quotes in *all* your posts with a good text
editor. Possibly less than 5 min. I do operations like that to my
webpages occasionally, on a larger number of files, so I know...
Don't tell me you cannot possibly spare 5 min every few dozen posts
you make (which is what - every 6 months?)
Or lets calculate it differently... you make about 1 post to GD every
3 days... it would take you what? 20 seconds to adjust that one post
(probably much less time than that, but ok...)? So you basically
saying that you cannot possibly spare 20 seconds every 3 days to make
the life of hundreds of people that would otherwise have read your
posts easier? It is simmply too much bother for you to give this 20
seconds every 3 days. And you admit it freely and seem to think this
is a great argument. And you wonder people find you arrogant?
Please...
You are talking about thousands of posts...
But nobody asks you to go back and change all the text files you
have... and you don't really post enough to GD for time to really be
an issue. And yet you *do* make it an issue - which ticks people off.
And so, you lose readers because you are unwilling to give 20 seconds
of your time every 3 days or so.
How petty are you, Robert??
> All this has nothing to do so far with how well the layout
> may be for others to read. That is only a secondary decision.
Third of all - this is part of the problem - the readers perceive that
you consider them to be "a secondary conecrn" of yours, while your own
valuable writings and your own precious 20-seconds-every-3-days to be
the primary issue. Art for the sake of art, so to say, and to hell
with the audience. Such attitudes have their place, but not really on
a open forum... If you really do not care that much about people
reading what you write, just write it, save it on the disk, and case
close. No need to mess with forums, no? But if you care that people
read what you write and maybe even discuss with you, you should show
some appreciation for that.
This is mainly why some people find you arrogant, full of yourself,
and unconsiderate.
Not me, of course... but this is the point I was trying to make.
I am not sure how to spell it any clearer...
Think about that - I have already invested more time in trying to do
you a personal favor and explain why you are perceived the way you
are... more time that you will *ever* spent on editing quotes on *any*
forum... or at least - for a long time to come. And yet *you* cannot
spend 20 seconds every 3 days??? This is really pathetic. No offense.
Now, if you need more explanation, contact me privately.
I find the necessity to publicly tell you all his somewhat...
embarrassing...
I find the fact that you fail to understand all that... disturbing.
_______________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>Instead - it seems that all the "regulars" seem to care about
There are times when one, as a regular, simply cannot post more. New
people need to pop up as well.
Jeff Nowakowski
>
> I find discussions on GD more satisfying because I can do there what I
> always wanted to do here, but never really could - condict a
> meaningful and civilized conversation about a controversial topic.
Where's the meaningful and civilized conversation about Frank and
MoyoGo? What I see is that Frank is allowed to post his one-sided view
of things, and no rebuttal is allowed. So now the plebs at the ".com"
site think he's being put down unfairly by the man, and never get to
hear the gory details of what happened.
The thing about rec.games.go is that no matter how uncivilized the
debate could get, many points of value eventually emerged. People could
then decide for themselves what they considered valuable. I guess for
many LOL types this was too much to handle.
> I have absolutely no problem with posting on 2 forums.
> And I think there is room for both, a moderated and an unmoderated
> one.
As you have witnessed, there really isn't room for two forums. Even
you, one of the regulars of rgg that lived for the debates and have even
gotten flak for your style on the ".com" site, no longer regularly post
in rgg. The forum has lost critical mass.
> Instead - it seems that all the "regulars" seem to care about is vent
> their bitterness about a ".com" forum and rise to the defense of rgg
> as if it was still the greatest.
You came here in critique of what was left. I'm having an open and
honest debate about what happened. Yes, I resent the web interface, the
censorship, and the commercial nature of what has replaced rec.games.go.
Just because the message doesn't sit well with you doesn't make it a
problem with me or rec.games.go.
You keep insisting that the ".com" site is not worth discussing, that
somehow the people remaining must be "shaken up". Sorry, that's not
reality. The reality is that Usenet in general has been losing
readership, and has been replaced with heavily moderated and often
commercial web forums.
-Jeff
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>Don't tell me you cannot possibly spare 5 min every few dozen posts
>you make (which is what - every 6 months?)
It is probably more than 5 min and it is not the only pure
administrative activity.
>you make about 1 post to GD every 3 days...
GD is not the only place I post to.
>And you wonder people find you arrogant? [...]
>and you don't really post enough to GD for time to really be
>an issue. And yet you *do* make it an issue - which ticks people off.
You overlook or cannot know all my other administrative activity.
>But nobody asks you to go back and change all the text files you
>have...
An archive can be used only if it is usable.
>If you really do not care that much about people
>reading what you write
I do not care much about what they think about the layout but I do
care much about my contents.
>This is mainly why some people find you arrogant, full of yourself,
>and unconsiderate.
I do not publish to the internet less contents in more heavily edited
layout just to possibly avoid such opinions. I write for those reading
contents - not for those fitting layout to their one and only scheme.
Joel Olson
"Jeff Nowakowski" <jef...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote in message
news:Uf7Lj.34$qe...@newsfe06.lga...
The next step (not yet taken afaik) in the trend to insularity is the Go
listserv.
Joel Olson
"Bantari" <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e635c769-2c27-468d...@m1g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Better Jeff than nothing at all.
And the group is not catching nearly the spam I see elsewhere.
Joel Olson
"Joel Olson" <joel_...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:1E9Lj.2386$GE1...@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
Correction - probably not listserver. What are those systems called that
distribute questions and answers among subscribers?
The ones its so hard to discover?
Bantari
Sigh....
Maybe we can mirror the forums? lol
On Apr 9, 10:51 am, Robert Jasiek <jas...@snafu.de> wrote:
> It is probably more than 5 min and it is not the only pure
> administrative activity.
Other administrative activity will be the same regardless of how you
express the quotes within the files. After you are done with the
manual conversion (the 5 min every few months) - you will have exactly
the same files that you like, formatted as you like, and whatever you
need to do with them then is no concern of mine. It does not even
touch what we are arguing here.
> GD is not the only place I post to.
So what of other places?
Nobody asks you to post there any differently then you already do.
Whatever you do on GD, and whatever manual edits you have to perform
on THOSE files, should not, in any way, influence what you do
elsewhere.
> You overlook or cannot know all my other administrative activity.
No.
I just say the are the same either way. Whtever they are...
Once you have the text file in the form you want, you need to do the
same administrative duties and operations weather you edited the file
BEFORE posting or AFTER posting.
> An archive can be used only if it is usable.
So?
What does THIS have to do with anything!
Your archived files wil be in the form you like, so the archive will
be as usable as ever. And if not, then it is certainly not the problem
of GD but of your design.
It seems to me you do n0ot understand what I am suggesting.
So here it goes, slowly.....
EDIT YOUR FILES AFTER YOU PRESS SEND BUTTON, NOT BEFORE!
The end product will be exactly the same.
All these areguments about your whole database and how much time you
need to spend to make it usable are just a smoke-screen here. I also
suggested a simple script - this will actually speed things up for
you. So if you don't want to ask anybody, it might be a wise
investment to learn how to write it yourself. In the loing run, a lot
of your precious time will be freed from your "administrative dutise",
or whatever...
> I do not care much about what they think about the layout but I do
> care much about my contents.
Do you care if they care?
For most people the presentation is almost as important as content.
I have seen many good ideas shot down and rejected becouse of the
arrogance of the author who thought that proper presentation does not
matter.
> I do not publish to the internet less contents in more heavily edited
> layout just to possibly avoid such opinions. I write for those reading
> contents - not for those fitting layout to their one and only scheme.
And yet you quote on rgg the wasy it is accepted here.
And you write your pages in HTML (a very poor one) rather than in TEX,
for example.
And I assume you store your file in text rather than in rtf or doc
format.
And you send your email using the email protocol rather than the
telnet protocol.
And so on....
Face it - wherever you go and whatever you do - you have to adjust to
the medium and the protocol it uses. This means conventions and the
way things are done. There is no way around it, and to argue otherwise
is just plain dumb.
Sorry...
_______________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
Bantari
> Where's the meaningful and civilized conversation about Frank and
> MoyoGo?
Not here, that's for sure. :)
> You keep insisting that the ".com" site is not worth discussing, that
> somehow the people remaining must be "shaken up". Sorry, that's not
> reality. The reality is that Usenet in general has been losing
> readership, and has been replaced with heavily moderated and often
> commercial web forums.
Listen, kid.
Don't put words in my mouth, pls.
I am not saying that GD is not worth discussing.
Just the opposite - it is well worth discussing. Especially here!
Start athread, discuss the .com site all you want! I might even take
part, who knows...
But this is not the point, kid.
All I am saying is that this is not the point I was trying to make
when I posted my initial post. If you wish to discuss any random -com
site, start your own thread and discuss to your hearts content. I
wonder how many people will chime in. ;)
The fact is, kid - this forum is degenerating.
If you want to reflect this fact into a bitter discussion of GD, with
all your gripes and bullshit, then so be it... I was hoping to have a
meaningful discussion about how to restore rgg... but I guess part of
the problem is that "meaningful discussion" is unknown here. And least
- unknown to you. Sorry.
________________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
-
Bantari <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have seen many good ideas shot down and rejected
> becouse of the arrogance of the author who thought
> that proper presentation does not matter.
If an idea really is good then it will survive even the
arrogance of its author.
> ... wherever you go and whatever you do - you have to ...
Sorry, the phrase "have to" is simply not in a Go Player's lexicon.
"Bantari" <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The fact is, kid - this forum is degenerating.
Was doing just fine until "bantari" showed up.
> I was hoping to have a meaningful discussion about ...
Next time, try calling some 1-800- sex-chat telephones.
Define your words, i.e. "meaningful", while not in terms
of how many sick-fucks you indoctrinate into wallowing.
- regards
- jb
----------------------------------------------------------------
Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered In U.S. War On Iraq "1,197,469"
http://informationclearinghouse.info/
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bantari
> Next time, try calling some 1-800- sex-chat telephones.
You seem to have experience with that....
So... what sex-chat numbers are you using?
You know... just man-to-man question... you *are* a man, right?
Robert Jasiek
wrote:
>EDIT YOUR FILES AFTER YOU PRESS SEND BUTTON, NOT BEFORE!
Needless to say, I do not want to create ugly formatting myself.
>you have to adjust to the medium and the protocol it uses.
I rather like to see one protocol for all purposes but you have
already bowed to the PC industry? :)
-
> (-) wrote:
>> Next time, try calling some 1-800- sex-chat telephones.
Bantari <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You seem to have experience with that....
> So... what sex-chat numbers are you using?
I said 1-800-sex-chat ... Didn't say I was using.
> You know... just man-to-man question... you *are* a man, right?
Sorry, I don't indulge in sex-chat with man-to-man .
- regards
- jb
-------------------------------------------------------------
UN expert stands by Nazi comments
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7335875.stm
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Nowakowski
> On Apr 9, 10:44 am, Jeff Nowakowski <jef...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>> Where's the meaningful and civilized conversation about Frank and
>> MoyoGo?
>
> Not here, that's for sure. :)
It may not have been civilized, but at least all viewpoints were heard.
> Listen, kid.
Sounds like Frank's style of posting has rubbed off on you. You call me
names in the very same post that you claim to be looking for meaningful
discussion?
> All I am saying is that this is not the point I was trying to make
> when I posted my initial post. If you wish to discuss any random -com
> site, start your own thread and discuss to your hearts content.
My comments were on topic, even if you don't want to hear them. From
the practical point of view, there's no sense asking what can be done to
revive the newsgroup without discussing the alternate forum. What's
good and bad about each? Is it worth spending effort on the newsgroup
if the alternative is better? You have indicated that you are
nostalgic. That's not a very convincing reason for others to spend effort.
From the emotional point of view, it's legitimate to air grievances.
You were one of the ones who helped godiscussions.com get off the ground
and encouraged others to go there. You and others insisted that the two
forums wouldn't compete with each other. This was sheer fantasy and now
you see the results. So for you to poke around the ashes to "shake up"
the regulars who remain is galling. If you can't accept that criticism
as an honest grievance then there's nothing to discuss.
-Jeff
Planar
<dc2553c0-06b5-48b4...@b5g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
Bantari <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Art for the sake of art, so to say, and to hell
> with the audience. Such attitudes have their place, but not really on
> a open forum...
Bantari, you really sound like a control freak. So what if Robert wants to use
a different quoting style? So what if it doesn't please everybody? Just chalk
it up to artistic licence and stop thinking about it. It's not worth all the fuss.
And if a little originality doesn't have its place on a given forum, then it just
isn't an open forum.
-
> (-) wrote:
>> We have discovered evidence of SPs on rec.games.go in the
>> form of "killfilers" and certain individuals incapable of responding
>> to discussion questions. Simultaneously, those individuals next
>> wish to complain about an "absense of discussion" which they
>> have chosen to absent themselves from. Certain topics are taboo
>> for SPs, or they have simply not cultivated depth of understanding
>> nor warmth of empathy to appreciate virtues of cultural diversity.
Renli <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote:
> We? SPs? Suppressive Persons? Oh. You're a scientologist.
> That explains everything.
$cientologists pay for their tech. Which already excludes me.
Recommend that you view these YouTube videos 1.000 times:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFBZ_uAbxS0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6qH_-0fY_Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IawUK166cVQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cc_wjp262RY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21i4j5_bs40
And, no, you don't need to pay for their tech, so you're not
in danger of becoming a $cientologist for watching them.
> I understand that a study of the USCF and "sam sloan" etc.
> may be beneficial in a way to white guys trying to create
> their own go organization independant of the asian organizations
> or asian go culture.
If Go is going to be promoted via national organizations then,
yes, there will be at least one "go organization independent
of the asian organizations or asian go culture." After all, the
world population is not entirely asian. As for "white guys" --
unless you are the #1 player in the universe sometimes you
will be playing the "black guys" instead of the "white guys."
> The problem is, that such people aren't really relevant in the
> "go world". The sooner you realise this, and stop talking about
> sam sloan (lol) the faster we can allow ourselves to be assimilated
> into asian go culture.
Sam Sloan's relevancy far exceeds your own. He is/was
president of Ishi Press Japan, publisher of a significant number
of Go Materials, and Go Books, some of which may be in your
bookshelf. As for Chess relevancy, the asian world does not
obtain those deep dividing distinctions among various cognitive
skill boardgames. Ni-Hon Ki-In is translated "Japan Chessman
Institute" by Systran Pro v3.0. Sam Sloan's world championship
at Chinese Chess among non-Chinese players in 1988 also far
exceeds your own relevancy for things in asian gaming world.
If you really sought assimilation, then you'd be there by now.
> And yes, I am speaking as a KGS 6 dan when I say this is true,
> and "more better" than the western way of doing things. Stop
> cutting yourself off and isolating yourselves from the asian go
> clubs and start merging with them and supporting them. Set
> yourself up as a branch, not as an independant body. If you
> have the humility to do this then maybe your average
> membership can hit dan instead of 5k something.
Notice that you made reference to some overinflated rating
when attempting to bolster your own lack of rational argument.
If you really had a case to present then you would simply show
your valid argument, which avoids logical fallacies, without any
reference to the irrelevant shininess of those chrome bumpers.
As for "cutting"/"isolating" - asian philosophy can be yin/yang,
correct? Disconnection may be another side of a coin whenever
connection occurs. I recall this was a feature of the game Hex.
Conversely, in Hex, if one side is disconnected then the other
side is connected, a proof illustrated by Nash's beautiful mind.
Where there is active recruitment among youth scholastic
the average membership will not "hit dan." For example, the
average age of USCF members is eleven years old. Though
noteworthy in terms of recruitment, an average playing ability is
understandably deflated. Raw numbers by themselves require
a -proper- interpretation to understand what these represent.
------------------------------------------------
"Renli" <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote:
> [ ... ] I vote for the death of usenet.
You could do your part by turning off your computer. :-)
> - discussions on a private forum are of a *much* higher level.
Can you get there and not have to return to us "low-lifes" ?
- regards
- jb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
More Insanity - FDA Approves Vaccine For 'Diarrhea'
http://news.aol.com/health/story/ar/_a/fda-clears-vaccine-for-diarrhea-virus/20080404072409990001
---------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA Okays Second Rotavirus (Diarrhea) Vaccine
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Vaccines/tb/9017
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ted S.
> I don't think that is the solution. Obviously as on-topic messages
> increase jb/ss/etc will post more off-topic messages. This is the
> pattern so far, anyways. So I think it would be better if either jb/
> etc changed their tune, or if they were somehow removed from the NG.
I don't see his posts: that's what a kill-file is for.
Of course, you're using the louse Google Groups interface, which doesn't
have kill-files.
--
Ted S
fedya at bestweb dot net
Now blogging at http://justacineast.blogspot.com
Bantari
> On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 16:10:42 -0700 (PDT), Bantari <bant...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> Needless to say, I do not want to create ugly formatting myself.
I thought your whole argument was based on the fact that formatting
did not matter to you as far as your database worked...
> I rather like to see one protocol for all purposes
Such thing does not exist.
Unless you wish to use the ">>" quotes in phone conversations as
well... lol.
But tell you what.
You do what you do, and you live with the consequences.
I decided that my arguments are good, your's are bad, and that I said
all that I wanted to say about this issue, both in here and on GD. It
is your decision to post as you like, and it is my decision to read
what you post or not.
________________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
-
> (-) wrote:
>> If Go is going to be promoted via national organizations then,
>> yes, there will be at least one "go organization independent
>> of the asian organizations or asian go culture." After all, the
>> world population is not entirely asian. As for "white guys" --
>> unless you are the #1 player in the universe sometimes you
>> will be playing the "black guys" instead of the "white guys."
Renli <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, the way I look at it however is that we don't know how
> to run a go organization.
Why should anybody "run" it ? The tasks are: (a) maintain
track of individual ratings from tournament reports, (b) schedule
and/or assist with scheduling & logistics of various tournaments,
(c) raise funds for tournament prizes, (d) publish the promotional
materials, (e) outreach for recruitment and training of the young
players, (f) communications with other organizations, international
events, guidelines for development of strong mediocre players
toward pre-professional and professional ranks, (g) explanations
for media inquiries, (h) distribution of books, software, and other
learning materials. (i) website maintenance for accuracy/currency,
(j) many other sundries I have not time to be listing at length...
> Look at Korea in the 50s. They constructed their own pro organization
> and are now at (or near) the top of the international Go community. We
> clearly need to learn from their example and not from sam sloan's.
You are confusing the organization with the strong players.
These are two different topics. Organizations may be staffed by
strong players, mediocre players, weak players, or combination
where strong players bully the other players. My concept was to
select organizational members based upon life skills external to
Go Ability, even preclude strong players from the administration.
Several clouds of troubles seem to follow Sam Sloan wherever
he goes, an aspect that by itself does not impugn his integrity but
supplies further cause for inquiry: why do not more people share
in Sloan's keep perceptions and moral imperitives ?
If you can break down the specifics of examples you think are
valuable as models for organization then this discussion might be
worthy of attention. Getting to the facts requires effort & labor, tho.
>> Sam Sloan's relevancy far exceeds your own.
> It isn't about me.
It is about you when you are the author of slanders upon Sloan.
>> Sam Sloan's world championship
>> at Chinese Chess among non-Chinese players in 1988 also far
>> exceeds your own relevancy for things in asian gaming world.
>> If you really sought assimilation, then you'd be there by now.
> Sure, but I don't care about Chinese chess. in much the same
> way I don't want a job at IBM.
Curious. You portend to teach in China and yet you insist
upon not caring about one of the major aspects in Chinese
recreational cognitive skill boardgame activity? Don't you find
your own curtailment self-limiting, lacking in expected ambition?
You might not work at IBM but you might need to prepare other
students for the viability of work at IBM. As you tried to say
earlier, "This isn't about you." :-)
>> Where there is active recruitment among youth scholastic
>> the average membership will not "hit dan." For example, the
>> average age of USCF members is eleven years old.
> Yet all their eleven year olds are a tiny fraction of the total number
> of eleven year olds. Here in China the opposite is true. I teach at
> two "elite" private highschools (for which I am highly paid) and I
> can observe directly the number of students learning go (wei-qi)
> and wushu in highschool.
I spoke of the "average age." I did not say that anybody was
exactly eleven years old. (Though we may infer that it is -likely-
that there are some eleven year old members in an organization
which has an "eleven year old average" age.) In terms of what
you observe, this would need to be set aside owing to the facts
of what larger databases report, in -excess- of your experience.
> Frankly, while the USCF is to be commended, in comparison
> to asia they are ass-backwards. If I was to run a pro organization
> in the US, and I just might one day, I'd overake the USCF and run
> it into the ground, they wouldn't be able to compete with my
> organization in terms of recruitment, or anything remotely
> approaching cultural integration.
Why would the USCF accept your leadership when your
stated goals are to "run it into the ground" ? It seems to me
that you have just severely compromised your own credibility.
> If I were you, I'd make plans now to ditch the USCF and start
> supporting a go organization. Although who knows, you're probably
> old enough to pass away before a US native organization trains
> it's first pro ;-)
I do support Go Organizations, though not to the extant that
my support could be twisted into some potential for corruption:
diversion/misappropriation of funds for non-intended purposes.
As for Chess one alternative is for local regional organizations
to conduct their own rating and reporting systems, handle their
own tournament organizing and publish their own bulletins and
magazines. Local regional organizations could contact with the
International Chess Federations directly. This situation is not
much unlike the -splitting- of Italy's Go Organizations, and why
it is crucial for International Federations to accept the alternative
organizations whenever corruption sets in, as it is periodically
expected to do. Moreover, many alternatives need also occur
for International Gaming Agencies, so that -all- players have a
bargaining position and are not handicapped by idiots in charge.
I am not particularly excited about where pros are trained.
Pros will need international travel anyway. Whether this occurs
before or after turning pro is of little consequence. The motive
within gaming organizations behind a drive for pro certification
appears to stem from an ego-preoccupation of bigshot H.Ns.I.C.
If there were a test to remove ego-preoccupied individuals from
an organization, it might be rather useful as a management tool.
No capable player was prevented from turning pro. There seems
instead to be a "decision-point" for each strong player whether
they plan to sustain burdens & obligations of professional Go.
- regards
- jb
----------------------------------------------------------------
Did you Know? The Golden Ratio (Phi=1.61803...) can be
expressed using four 4's as ( sqrt(4) + sqrt(4! - 4) ) / 4 .
http://www.shyamsundergupta.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------
-
> (-) wrote:
>> The tasks are: (a) maintain
>> track of individual ratings from tournament reports, (b) schedule
>> and/or assist with scheduling & logistics of various tournaments,
>> (c) raise funds for tournament prizes, (d) publish the promotional
>> materials, (e) outreach for recruitment and training of the young
>> players, (f) communications with other organizations, international
>> events, guidelines for development of strong mediocre players
>> toward pre-professional and professional ranks, (g) explanations
>> for media inquiries, (h) distribution of books, software, and other
>> learning materials. (i) website maintenance for accuracy/currency,
>> (j) many other sundries I have not time to be listing at length...
Renli <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote:
> you have listed the priorities of a bullshit USCF.
Yes, I haven't the foggiest idea of what they really do. It was
all just a wild guess. I'm not suggesting that these were listed in
order of priority. By no means could I claim anything complete.
> You did not include top priorities of training top players.
I don't regard the training of top players as an administrative
function of the gaming organization. It's the responsibility of top
players to study as much as they can on their own, perhaps in a
discipleship relation with one or more _sensei_ characters. Then
there's the _insei_ academy where they can all play each other
every day to get strong. In terms of administrative maintenenace,
however, that's pretty much a no-brainer and not much of a task.
Top players are already self-starters & don't need encouragement.
> Nor did you list as a top priority the outreach and educational
> programs, nor any plan of cultural integration. Oh, and the reason
> why I didn't consider e) to cover these topics is because it is not
> a matter of outreach.
We can all agree that "outreach and educational programs"
are not the top priority for everybody. They become a top priority
for those who determine that these should be a top priority. As
with the arts quite a lot concerning Go stems from volunteerism.
> If you are any good they will come to you. The problem is all this
> pathetic outreach nonsense. You need to go to a major city like
> new york or toronto, pick the top 3 or 4 schools, drop $10 or $20
> grand on em to run a branch office/go club there, and then start
> running annual tournaments. This for example would cost less than
> $100k for the first few years - Now, am I to assume that this money
> was not available? Of course it was, it was just used for stuff that
> didn't really do jack shit for the go community, considering the
> opportunity cost of what it was used for.
I have sought to obtain budget transparency but the people
concerned keep trying to peddle the myth that we have budget
transparency already. Of course anybody who campaigns on the
promise to obtain budget transparency is immediately branded a
"threat to the established order" or "antithetical to the goals of an
organization" whose premise is founded upon secrecy of affairs.
We would need to know exactly how much money everybody was
paid, down to precise details of every check written, every itemized
portion of expenditure, each capital fund & accounting process.
Moreover, there is lattitude in assessing proper use of money.
I do -not- define corruption in terms of money expenditure upon
"unnecessary" projects, estimated only by my opinion. Corruption
has a more general meaning in terms of diversion/misappropriation
of funds not according to their original intent, not according to the
wishes of sponsors, and not according to membership aspirations.
The premise that "everybody ought to play Go" needs closer
inspection. Even a broader premise that "everybody ought to play
some cognitive skill boardgame" should sustain severe scrutiny.
Paradoxically, the ubuiquity of Internet may tend to work against a
perception that physical branch offices need to be opened at schools.
School boards could simply annex math/physics/chemistry curricula
with a segment on cognitive skill gaming, requiring instructors to
gain facility with the presentation, and offering clubs as an elective.
One could say, just as well, that students need more exposure to
music, history, civics, constitutional law, philosophy, literature,
computer science, biology, botany, geology, etc., but the problem
is not chiefly an inability of school libraries to offer these subjects.
Instead the problem stems from lack of student motivation in a
culture of rampant television, video-games, instant gratification.
Employers do not recognize the value of hiring game experts,
and why should they when we examine the behavioral records
of USCF, and/or the "server wars" and petty quarrels among the
gaming contributors? When a teacher confronts lack of student
motivation sometimes the discourse narrows down to one-on-one
and then there aren't enough hours in a day to address the entire
classroom of poorly motivated students.
Yet the key notion is to try your idea and attempt to determine
some means by which its success or failure can be evaluated.
> That is why you (we) don't know how to run a go oriagnization;
> our priorities are wrong. I mean come on lol look at the history of
> the pro org in korea, and tell me we didn't make 25 mistakes in a row?
Those "25 mistakes in a row" need elaboration, please. Not
doubting your thesis, yet according to established evidentiary rules...
>>> Look at Korea in the 50s. They constructed their own pro organization
>>> and are now at (or near) the top of the international Go community. We
>>> clearly need to learn from their example and not from sam sloan's.
>> You are confusing the organization with the strong players.
> We have strong players, and go wasn't as popular in korea back then.
Do you propose to hire strong players on salary and put them on tour?
>> These are two different topics. Organizations may be staffed by
>> strong players, mediocre players, weak players, or combination
>> where strong players bully the other players.
> Here in america we have NAMT. Well, if korea had THAT MANY pros back
> in the 40s and 50s maybe they could have sped up their go development
> because IIRC they started with ONE. I find it really strange that we
> have all these pros living in the USA and Canada and yet we have no
> national pro organization.
There's a "tipping point" from which a sufficient number of pros
constitute a "national pro organization." We haven't reached that yet.
> There is only one explanation; the go organization here sucks and/or
> is not REQUIRED. If this is to change, then the go organization here
> must change, fundamentally. We're probably talking about ditching
> the old org and going with a new one.
Without an extensive and thorough analysis, it's quite likely that
the "new one" won't be much different from the "old org." Parents
typically believe that they won't make the same mistakes as before.
>> My concept was to
>> select organizational members based upon life skills external to
>> Go Ability, even preclude strong players from the administration.
> Mmm, yes, I suspected something like that was at the core of the
> current problem. Fill the org with people for whom which go is a
> minor priority. And you will have a shitty org.
The "current problem" is -not- presently characterized by my
axiomatic. We have now in place a system whereby strong players
simply bully the weaker players. Once they become strong players
there is talk about having to "earn a right to speak." They reference
ratings in an effort to garner political credibility. They no longer
abide with egalitarianism and equality of individuals in the voting.
In other words, once achieving some playing strength they cannot
resist the urge to bully others, maybe due to the feature that they
had to endure considerable bullying to obtain their playing strength
and so they are simply reflecting back what was dished out to them.
The quality of an org depends upon member participation in
their own organization. We have the means whereby the member
participation could be made to work on a grand scale, i.e. by the
procedures of internet voting via email. Votes for all issues would
be made public and members would be asked to verify the list of
published names as authentic Go Players they recognize from the
club meetings they attend at least three or four times per year. No
vote would become effective until the public tally was validated by
quorum from all members who cast their email automated ballot.
The budget would be published, itemizing all of the individual
expendures in excess of $1. People who staff that organization
might be Go Players, or not, but they cannot neglect their fiduciary
duties because they were devoting too much time at playing Go.
I speak from experience, having managed many of the affairs of
a prima donna _sensei_ who was confused about contracts, utility
bills, driving an automobile, shopping, and the news generally.
>> Several clouds of troubles seem to follow Sam Sloan wherever
>> he goes, an aspect that by itself does not impugn his integrity but
>> supplies further cause for inquiry: why do not more people share
>> in Sloan's keep perceptions and moral imperitives ?
> Frankly if sam sloan is innocent, whatever that means, then following
> his troubles with comments would be ridiculous and frankly, stupid.
> I'm not a stupid person. I also note that if they're true, they don't
> affect me because I don't care about sam sloan.
Sam Sloan is not being charged with anything so the question
of innocence or guilt does not arise. Even if he were being charged
with some infraction then under an American system of jurisprudence
any person is innocent until proven guilty. Of course if you do not
follow that precept from American jurisprudence then you are an
enemy of the Constitution and deserve to be deported to Siberia.
If you don't have Sam Sloan, however, then who would present
the expose of investigative journalism and file the lawsuit in court?
> And if Ishi Press can't deliver a book I want I'll order it from
> another publisher. It's painless and quick. So all this nonsense
> about sam sloan is actually irrelevant, in a very objective way,
> to the american go community. I don't know why people keep talking
> about it. It makes them sound very stupid for beating a dead horse.
You claimed that Sam Sloan is irrelevant. Yet Sam Sloan plays
Go, Chess, Chinese Chess, maybe Shogi. How would any of that
render him irrelevant? Moreover he is/was a book publisher, strong
player in championship matches for Chinese Chess & Western Chess,
and serves as an irritating gadfly to stir the soup and cook it evenly.
>> If you can break down the specifics of examples you think are
>> valuable as models for organization then this discussion might be
>> worthy of attention. Getting to the facts requires effort & labor, tho.
> And a lot of money. And, the money will come, JB.
You believe that money solves problems. Yet you do not
see that money also creates problems. It is not just about money.
> Even on the internet on IGS and KGS there are some real jerks
> who are in power, who use their power to shit on people and
> not to promote go. All of them are going to be removed.
Since they're going to be removed someday may we have the
envelope, please, and read out their names straight away?
>>>> Sam Sloan's relevancy far exceeds your own.
>>> It isn't about me.
>> It is about you when you are the author of slanders upon Sloan.
> See what I mean? It's self evident. It isn't about me :) It's about
> *you*. You, and people like you. The author of slanders upon
> Sloan? Hahahahaha - Right, and I'm not a dan strength player
> right? Would you like to see my 4d certificate? You're a card,
> JB. Arguing with reality. Aren't morons grand?
Once again you've gone into your typical pattern of nonsense.
Little do you realize how you came upon your own reputation.
>>> Sure, but I don't care about Chinese chess. in much the same
>>> way I don't want a job at IBM.
>> Curious. You portend to teach in China and yet you insist
>> upon not caring about one of the major aspects in Chinese
>> recreational cognitive skill boardgame activity?
> There are only so many majors you can take in university,
> to draw an apt parallel.
You don't need to be a player to appreciate others who do.
>> Don't you find
>> your own curtailment self-limiting, lacking in expected ambition?
> See thats the thing; I go for quality JB, not quantity. If I wanted I
> could be strong in go, chess, and chinese chess - maybe gomoku
> too - but I don't have time for all that. I focused on go, and one
> other discipline, in addition to my work. And it's been very
> rewarding, I've seen places in go few westerners ever will.
Yeah, wherever you go, there you are. Got your baggage?
>> You might not work at IBM but you might need to prepare other
>> students for the viability of work at IBM. As you tried to say
>> earlier, "This isn't about you." :-)
> Right - so I don't know why you keep asking me personal questions.
Which of the questions did you consider to be personal?
- regards
- jb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Vote Mugabe or You Die". Inside Zimbabwe, the Backlash Begins
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/10/zimbabwe1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
bear
> How about renaming rec.games.go to alt.junk.jbandssdump?
> Would be more fitting these days.
> Just saying...
There are exactly three choices, no four:
- quit
- start a MODERATED newsgroup on USENET for "Go"
- start a ".org/.net/com" Forum
- start an old style listerve on "Go" with a digest version
Other than that, in the main USENET has now long been the realm of
LCD (lest common denominator) which = spam and junk.
I have not time nor capital to do these things, otherwise I surely would have
done one of the three constructive options above long ago.
_-_-bear
-
> Bantari wrote:
>> How about renaming rec.games.go to alt.junk.jbandssdump?
>> Would be more fitting these days.
>> Just saying...
bear <bear...@netzero.net> wrote:
> There are exactly three choices, no four:
> - quit
> - start a MODERATED newsgroup on USENET for "Go"
> - start a ".org/.net/com" Forum
> - start an old style listerve on "Go" with a digest version
You forgot the (obvious) fifth solution:
- `bantari', and other whiners like him, are the cause
of their own problems and could just go away.
We are here, attempting to clean up corruption from the gaming
communities, despite the kicking and screaming which attempts
to prevent such actions.
> Other than that, in the main USENET has now long been the
> realm of LCD (lest common denominator) which = spam and junk.
Your statement was accompanied by "present company excepted" ?
> I have not time nor capital to do these things, otherwise I surely would
> have done one of the three constructive options above long ago.
In other words, translated: "`Bear' doesn't do any constructive options."
- regards
- jb
----------------------------------------------------------------
Population Reference Bureau Study Highlights Coming Immigration Flood
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=4180
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bantari
> - `bantari', and other whiners like him, are the cause
> of their own problems and could just go away.
You seriously do not think that enough people went away already???
Ok, you you do not want/need me in here. Splendid! So I will make you
a deal: Whenever I post anything here - please, just ignore it. Can
you live with that? Or are you so starved for conversation that you
feel compelled to post responses to people you think should just "go
away"?... I ignore you most of the time - and trust me, it works
GREAT!!!
Practice discipline, grasshopper.
_______________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
-
> Bantari wrote:
>> Ok, you you do not want/need me in here. Splendid! So
>> I will make you a deal: Whenever I post anything here - please,
>> just ignore it. Can you live with that?
If you reference me I'm not going to "just ignore it."
>> Or are you so starved for conversation that you feel compelled
>> to post responses to people you think should just "go away"?...
>> I ignore you most of the time - and trust me, it works GREAT !!!
Ignoring might be a root of ignorance, correct ?
Renli <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote:
> He's starved for the conversation. He doesn't get it when
> he's ignored - he just resorts to posting dozens of off topic
> messages, trying to "troll" up a conversation, even if
> (understandably) the replies are filled with hatred at his
> puerile posting patterns.
Renli admits that he considers "hatred" a valid emotion?
Perhaps that's why he requires such an inflated rating, so
he can "hate" all those who don't inflate their ratings, too.
Surely there are loftier reasons for becoming a strong player.
Moreover, there's very little room at the top, and they won't
appreciate somebody who brings "hatred" to their little group.
Frankly, I'm not at all interested in what says the troll fodder.
- regards
- jb
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Info & Advice about California Red Light Camera Tickets
http://www.highwayrobbery.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Renli <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey JB, I don't hate you because you're 2k. I hate you because
> you're an idiot. And I have proof.
Apparently your "courage" stems from the faceless internet.
Many people consider utterances as yours enourmously stupid
where people abide in common community (i.e. physical address,
locations of personal property, status of the "hag" and so forth).
Since I stipulate to being an idiot, I'll save you the trouble of
presenting your proof. I'll remind you that my vote equals yours
for the context of political election in a social democracy. On a
jury I would award the verdict to the side which wastes the least
time in the courtroom. Your scene does not connect for me...
- regards
- jb
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.oliverrichman.com/
------------------------------------------------------
-
>> Renli <oliver.rich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hey JB, I don't hate you because you're 2k. I hate you because
>>> you're an idiot. And I have proof.
> (-) wrote:
>> Apparently your "courage" stems from the faceless internet.
>> Many people consider utterances as yours enourmously stupid
>> where people abide in common community (i.e. physical address,
>> locations of personal property, status of the "hag" and so forth).
Renli <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah and if we were neighbors you wouldn't make racist comments
> about me. You also wouldn't think I was Chinese.
If we were neighbors I'd ask you to identify that racist comment.
I'd also video-record everything for rebroadcast onto YouTube.
> You also wouldn't make the kind of ridiculous accusations - and lol,
> as if anyone here for more than 5 minutes would be fooled by your
> "many people consider" bullshit. MANY MANY MORE people
> consider you a troll and a fool, JB.
Those who consider me a troll are troll fodder. I'm not so
foolish as to issue personal "hate" speech for the archives, tho.
> Faceless internet indeed, if we met in real life I'd give you a 4h
> teaching game and you'd thank me for it. And why? Because the
> faceless internet works for you as much as how you think it works
> for me.
Ah, you neglect to realize that there is no "teaching game"
unless somebody agrees to accept a "student game" on their part.
I'm asking you, however, "What is it that you teach?" Hate speech?
>> Since I stipulate to being an idiot, I'll save you the trouble of
>> presenting your proof. I'll remind you that my vote equals yours
>> for the context of political election in a social democracy.
> You're right this is a democracy but you do not have a vote.
Hmmm. Doesn't appear that you fathom the fundamental
elements of fair play. More of your "teaching" perhaps?
> It's the people who read this that vote and frankly, you're an idiot,
> and they don't need me to tell them that. I know, I know - it is one
> of the most hurtful things I could do, to present you with the
> objective truth - but I do it only because I love you and I know
> it will foster a positive change.... one day.
We have no argument about being an idiot, but the people
of whom you reference are even more cowardly than you, not
merely hiding behind faceless internet but also being faceless.
As for "love" the definition is supplied by the recipients and
not by the dispenser. Otherwise you're merely an abuser without
the slightest notion of "love" -- maybe more of what you "teach."
>> On a jury I would award the verdict to the side which wastes the
>> least time in the courtroom. Your scene does not connect for me...
> The least time? Wow you sure post a lot of off topic bullshit, jb. No
> more questions, your honor!
"Off-topic" occurs during "time-out" - or have you forgotten?
Has anybody neglected to identify this `bantari' thread as "off topic" ?
- regards
- jb
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Toxic Fumes, Blisters & Brain Damage From Dairy?
http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/34145
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bantari
> You're still taking boscole seriously after all these years? Haven't
> you *learned* anything? :)
Good point...
I grew up with a strong conviction that "everybody can be reasoned
with provided enough effort is put into the communication"... I keep
testing this idea on jb occasionally, but I am getting close to the
sad realization that the idea has exceptions. :)
Oh well...
_____________
-Bantari
http://www.bantari.net/
-
> Renli wrote:
>> You're still taking boscole seriously after all these years?
>> Haven't you *learned* anything? :)
Perhaps he's just humor-impaired. Give him more time.
Bantari <ban...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I grew up with a strong conviction that "everybody can be reasoned
> with provided enough effort is put into the communication"... I keep
> testing this idea on jb occasionally, but I am getting close to the
> sad realization that the idea has exceptions. :)
Bantari doesn't put effort into communication. He doesn't
answer questions posed in our exchanges. He's "hit and run"
like Renli -- perhaps a little backchannel tryst between them --
and he just cannot abide in his own resolution to ignore me
most of the time, although he keeps indicating he will do so.
Bantari's notion of communication doesn't involve question
and answer. For Bantari "communication" means playing those
familiar mindless party games that Bantari wants to play: judge,
jury, arbiter and executioner of what -defines- communication.
Tyranny, of course, is not quite the same a formal theory which
identifies a sender and a receiver, transmission parameters, etc.
Since we seem to be sharing what we grew up with, now
it's my turn. I grew up with the conviction that there would be
people in this world we would never understand, even among
people we would meet in various ways, face-to-face, faceless,
or only indirectly via hearsay. After more thorough inquiry with
philosophy it occurred to me that we would never understand
even the people we thought we should understand, and then a
more robust claim that we would not even understand ourselves.
It surprises me how often I hear of somebody's frustration and/or
unhappiness because they couldn't understand somebody. They
may have been chasing after delusional rainbows & pipe dreams.
Well, trying to understand is certainly a project -- maybe a worthy
one -- but of the nature that one's project to understand might be
without any ultimate goal and expectation. The "conclusions"
one attempts to draw were fraught with peril and highly suspect.
The blather that masquerades for comprehension is thick as
a brick. Bantari has it in spades, apparently, because he has
imagined going through so much of his life accomplishing bits
and pieces of "understanding" here and there. At the basis of it
is perhaps his disclosure of latent homosexual fraternity having
pederasty and pedophilic overtones, coupled with obsessions
over pairs of tits or heavy boobs, such as USCF's "red carpet."
Making statements like that, however, might instill understanding.
----------------------------------------------------------------
> (-) wrote:
>> If we were neighbors I'd ask you to identify that racist comment.
>> I'd also video-record everything for rebroadcast onto YouTube.
"Renli" <oliver....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> That's another reason you're such an idiot, JB.
Perhaps a video loop-track of your hate speech will suffice.
>> Those who consider me a troll are troll fodder. I'm not so
>> foolish as to issue personal "hate" speech for the archives, tho.
> Maybe not anymore, but several such hate speeches, by you,
> are already in the archives.
I searched rigorously for the word "hate" already. Have you?
>> I'm asking you, however, "What is it that you teach?" Hate speech?
> See? Pure idiot :)
Another loop-track for ya? Lifting heavy rocks at rec.martial-arts?
>> Has anybody neglected to identify this `bantari' thread as "off topic" ?
> No, because outing you as a loser, troll and idiot, is completely on-
> topic given the shitstorm of lies and off-topic barf you've thrown up
> on the ng the last little while.
No, meaning that nobody has "neglected to identify" ... ???
I maintain an Excel Spreadsheet with Boolean propositional logic,
indexed by googlelizer and their URLs. Your "shitstorm" appears to
be entirely under control. You might need to crack the combination
lock for getting from A-to-Z. You'll need a running start to leap over
those skanky vowels. Add numbers & punctuation: you'll get ASCII.
- regards
- jb
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poll: Bullshit Is Most Important Issue For 2008 Voters
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/poll_bullshit_is_most_important
------------------------------------------------------------------------
picture of Renli cyber-immortalized as "shit talking idiot"
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=24002&content=songinfo&songID=243091
------------------------------------------------------------------------