Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Proposed moratorium on discussions of uk.rec.cycling.moderated
23 views
Skip to first unread message
g...@chapmancentral.co.uk
Oct 13, 2012, 6:38:04 AM10/13/12
to
It is clear that there are some issues with uk.rec.cycling.moderated, but dispasasionate discussion of these issues is effectively impossible because the majority of all discussion around the group, including the majority of examples of the supposed issues with the group and its moderation, is started by people committed to the group's failure and concern, in the main, an endless succession of breaching experiments by a small number of people committed to the group's failure.
I therefore propose a moratorium on all discussion of changes to the group, its policies or its processes, until there has been a period of three clear months free of breaching experiments, during which data can be gathered on actual controversies rather than nontroversies generated by bad-faith actions.
Guy
I therefore propose a moratorium on all discussion of changes to the group, its policies or its processes, until there has been a period of three clear months free of breaching experiments, during which data can be gathered on actual controversies rather than nontroversies generated by bad-faith actions.
Guy
John Benn
Oct 13, 2012, 6:42:46 AM10/13/12
to
wrote in message
news:c2d182d9-2f73-462f...@googlegroups.com...
==================================
I propose that you f*** off.
news:c2d182d9-2f73-462f...@googlegroups.com...
I propose that you f*** off.
Bertie Wooster
Oct 13, 2012, 1:15:54 PM10/13/12
to
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 03:38:04 -0700 (PDT), g...@chapmancentral.co.uk
wrote:
>It is clear that there are some issues with uk.rec.cycling.moderated, but dispasasionate discussion of these issues is effectively impossible because the majority of all discussion around the group, including the majority of examples of the supposed issues with the group and its moderation, is started by people committed to the group's failure and concern, in the main, an endless succession of breaching experiments by a small number of people committed to the group's failure.
>
>I therefore propose a moratorium on all discussion of changes to the group, its policies or its processes, until there has been a period of three clear months free of breaching experiments, during which data can be gathered on actual controversies rather than nontroversies generated by bad-faith actions.
I will support this moratorium proposal, once the current rfd and
potential cfv have run their course.
When the current rfd/cfv fails or succeeds we can look forward to the
next in three months' time.
wrote:
>It is clear that there are some issues with uk.rec.cycling.moderated, but dispasasionate discussion of these issues is effectively impossible because the majority of all discussion around the group, including the majority of examples of the supposed issues with the group and its moderation, is started by people committed to the group's failure and concern, in the main, an endless succession of breaching experiments by a small number of people committed to the group's failure.
>
>I therefore propose a moratorium on all discussion of changes to the group, its policies or its processes, until there has been a period of three clear months free of breaching experiments, during which data can be gathered on actual controversies rather than nontroversies generated by bad-faith actions.
potential cfv have run their course.
When the current rfd/cfv fails or succeeds we can look forward to the
next in three months' time.
Alan Braggins
Oct 14, 2012, 4:58:16 AM10/14/12
to
In article <c2d182d9-2f73-462f...@googlegroups.com>, g...@chapmancentral.co.uk wrote:
>It is clear that there are some issues with uk.rec.cycling.moderated, but dispasasionate discussion of these issues is effectively impossible because the majority of all discussion around the group, including the majority of examples of the supposed issues with the group and its moderation, is started by people committed to the group's failure and concern, in the main, an endless succession of breaching experiments by a small number of people committed to the group's failure.
>
>I therefore propose a moratorium on all discussion of changes to the group, its policies or its processes, until there has been a period of three clear months free of breaching experiments, during which data can be gathered on actual controversies rather than nontroversies generated by bad-faith actions.
What a splendid idea, apart from the bit where there's fuck all chance of
>It is clear that there are some issues with uk.rec.cycling.moderated, but dispasasionate discussion of these issues is effectively impossible because the majority of all discussion around the group, including the majority of examples of the supposed issues with the group and its moderation, is started by people committed to the group's failure and concern, in the main, an endless succession of breaching experiments by a small number of people committed to the group's failure.
>
>I therefore propose a moratorium on all discussion of changes to the group, its policies or its processes, until there has been a period of three clear months free of breaching experiments, during which data can be gathered on actual controversies rather than nontroversies generated by bad-faith actions.
"people committed to the group's failure" following any moratorium.
Someone please tell me it's a forgery and the real Guy hasn't lost that
much touch with reality.
g...@chapmancentral.co.uk
Oct 21, 2012, 7:39:00 PM10/21/12
to
After about a year we can RFD to change this group to uk.tumbleweed...
Guy
g...@chapmancentral.co.uk
Oct 21, 2012, 7:40:55 PM10/21/12
to
Guy
Judith
Oct 22, 2012, 4:29:29 AM10/22/12
to
On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 16:39:00 -0700 (PDT), g...@chapmancentral.co.uk wrote:
<snip>
>I think you missed a nuance. The moratorium runs until there have been three clear months without breaching experiments. Each breaching experiment, of course, resets the clock.
>
>After about a year we can RFD to change this group to uk.tumbleweed...
>
>Guy
Now, now - what has brought *you* out of retirement?
No-one interested in your blog?
I have a look every now and again. Aren't you going to share with us your
ill-health?
Is it life-threatening?
--
"I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. I would challenge judith
to find the place where I said I encourage my children to wear helmets." Guy Chapman
Judith then produced the web page where he said "I encourage my children to wear helmets."
Later that day Chapman immediately added the following to the web page:
"This page is out of date and preserved only for convenience" but he left the date last updated as 31/08/2004.
(Guy Chapman Dell Magnet)
<snip>
>I think you missed a nuance. The moratorium runs until there have been three clear months without breaching experiments. Each breaching experiment, of course, resets the clock.
>
>After about a year we can RFD to change this group to uk.tumbleweed...
>
>Guy
No-one interested in your blog?
I have a look every now and again. Aren't you going to share with us your
ill-health?
Is it life-threatening?
--
"I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. I would challenge judith
to find the place where I said I encourage my children to wear helmets." Guy Chapman
Judith then produced the web page where he said "I encourage my children to wear helmets."
Later that day Chapman immediately added the following to the web page:
"This page is out of date and preserved only for convenience" but he left the date last updated as 31/08/2004.
(Guy Chapman Dell Magnet)
Judith
Oct 22, 2012, 4:31:16 AM10/22/12
to
>> I propose that you f*** off.
>
>Yes, that has been your agenda in respect of all advocates of cycling, right from the outset. I congratulate you on having largely succeeded in this aim, with the able assistance of your more repugnant colleagues.
>
>Guy
Good: you read what was posted.
>
>Yes, that has been your agenda in respect of all advocates of cycling, right from the outset. I congratulate you on having largely succeeded in this aim, with the able assistance of your more repugnant colleagues.
>
>Guy
Any chance of you now doing so?
--
Total number of posts to URC from
IP Address:80.254.146.36 over 6 years = 7
Guy Chapman : 5
Lou Knee: 2
Coincidence?
(Guy Chapman Dell Magnet)
0 new messages