RFD: rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey
Mortaine
unmoderated group rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey
Newsgroup line:
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey The books and worlds of Mercedes Lackey.
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of a
world-wide unmoderated Usenet newsgroup rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey.
This is not a Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time.
Procedural details are below.
RATIONALE: rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey
This request to change the name from alt.books.m-lackey to
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey is due to the fact that the current
newsgroup, which has been expanding rapidly, has begun to lose current
as well as potential subscribers due to the practice of many news
servers dropping the alt.* hierarchy. This form of self-censorship is
damaging to the newsgroup, both by censoring the users who were once
part of the alt.books.m-lackey community, and by preventing users who
would like to become a part of that community. Therefore, I request
that alt.books.m-lackey be renamed to rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey,
subject to the vote and approval, as outlined in usenet policy.
CHARTER: rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey is an unmoderated group dedicated to the
following topics:
1. Discussion of the books and worlds of Mercedes Lackey
2. Role-playing and storytelling in a generic fantasy setting
3. Discussion of any topics of interest to readers of Mercedes Lackey
4. Administrative posts, including the FAQ for the newsgroup.
Posters to rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey will be expected to follow the
Usenet FAQ on netiquette.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
================================
The Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) presently used by the newsgroup
alt.books.m-lackey will be used by the new newsgroup to avoid
duplication of effort.
END CHARTER.
PROCEDURE:
This is a request for discussion, not a call for votes. In this phase
of the process, any potential problems with the proposed newsgroups
should raised and resolved. The discussion period will continue for a
minimum of 21 days (starting from from when the first RFD for this
proposal is posted to news.announce.newgroups). All discussion should
be posted to news.groups.
At the end of the discussion period, a Call for Votes (CFV) will be
posted by a neutral vote taker.
This RFD attempts to fully comply with Usenet newsgroup creation
guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and
"Writing an RFD". Please refer to these documents if you have
questions about the process.
DISTRIBUTION:
news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
alt.books.m-lackey
<abml...@vader.com> a mailing list for subscribers of the
alt.books.m-lackey newsgroup. One can subscribe to the mailing list
by sending an email to <abmlcomp...@vader.com>.
vj
*vj...@ns.net (vj) wrote:
*<original post snipped>
*>After going back and reading the post regarding the naming of newsgroups I
*>just received today in this group, I would be more convinced than ever to
*>leave the name for the group as general and a like the old as possible.
*>vicki
*<sig snipped>
*Vicki,
*I like your comments on the naming, and it seems that this is going to
*become the hot topic for the newagroup change.
*The question seems to be:
*1.Do we go with rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey and put the "no fan-fic"
*statement in the charter (which is not explicitly stated yet) and
*follow rjordan's precedent of living authors?
*2. or do we switch to rec.arts.books.m-lackey and, still putting the
*"no fan fic" statement in the charter (which I think probably should
*be there & was kind of an oversight) and follow tolkein's way.
*mortaine.
*mort...@ufcp.com
*http://www.ufcp.com/employee/steph/steph2.htm
*-----------------------------------------------
*Humility is like Zen; once you think you've got it, you don't.
I happen to feel very strongly................that to keep the group as
easy to find as possible, and to avoid LIMITING it by being too specific,
that we name it rec.arts.books.m-lackey.
Admittedly, that may be because I have a problem with "speculative fiction"
to begin with............it could be incredibly misleading...........but my
object is to keep the group as EASY TO FIND as possible..........since we
seem to attract "newbies" and since we have something of a reputation to
uphold regarding being a "flame-free" area. We've worked hard on this - I
don't want it changed..........my biggest concern is that we not be
"limited" as to topic of discussion................our discussions do tend
to be VERY strange and off-subject.........full of inuendo and suggestion
and just plain fun ---- none of which, obviously, has anything to do with
Ms. Lackey's writing ---- just that we try to keep the "ideals" of the
books within the group --- "there is no one, true way".
I am firmly of the opinion that rec.arts.books.m-lackey would be a better,
easier place to continue this, if we have to move.
vicki
(@)-----------------]Quote of the Day[-----------------(@)
| There's nothing quite like being able to |
| LEGITIMATELY pass the responsibility. |
| Quentin - Winds of Fate - 180 |
(@)----------------------------------------------------(@)
John Novak
>As far as the worry of how people can find
>rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey if it isn't called
>rec.books.m-lackey, one easy way is to keep a permanent pointer
>to the new group posted in alt.books.m-lackey.
Duh. I should have mentioned this, but didn't. Stupid me.
As the rasfwrj FAQ keeper, I tend to post the rasfwrj FAQ to both
rasfw and rasfwrj (as well as the news.answers groups which are
appropiate). A short pointer to rasfw.ml could be posted every other
week or so to rasfw, as well.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
The Humblest Man on the Net
Charles Lacour
>In <4ig9sp$q...@falcon.ns.net> vj...@ns.net (vj) writes:
>>I happen to feel very strongly................that to keep the group as
>>easy to find as possible, and to avoid LIMITING it by being too specific,
>>that we name it rec.arts.books.m-lackey.
>Please explain to me how a group can be difficult to find?
>Most .newsrc files are thousands of lines long. You don't look
>through one without a text editor.
>Gawrsh, text-search on 'lackey' and there you go!
>John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
Re the statement "you don't look through one without a text editor" --
false to fact. I found a.b.m-l by simply going through the list of
newsgroups and seeing the name. I didn't go through the thing with a text
editor -- Free Agent (the newsreader I'm using) keeps it in a compressed
form and it's not possible to go through it with a text editor (or anything
else useful).
You expressed incredulity in an earlier post that no one knew how to do a
"grep on a .newsrc" file. Quite simple, they don't have Unix systems. The
days when Usenet was 99% Unix users are long gone.
More to the point, if I were searching through such a file in the first
place, I would search for "books" or "book" -- I would unquestionably NOT
search for "arts.sf.written". I _might_ search for "lackey", if the thought
that such a newsgroup might exist occurred to me (it hadn't when I
originally found the group). Mercedes Lackey is one of approximately 150
authors I think well of, and if I had been trying to find people with
common interests, searching for that one author's name is not a tactic I
would have chosen.
Actually, in many respects, the most appropriate name might be
"rec.books.f&sf.m-lackey". (Yes I heard the argument that 'sf' is a
long-standing (10 years) tradition. 'F&sf' is a longer-standing (40-60
years) tradition.) "Rec.arts" immediately puts me in mind of paintings and
sculpture, both of which I have little interest in.
Charley
John Novak
> You expressed incredulity in an earlier post that no one knew how to do a
>"grep on a .newsrc" file. Quite simple, they don't have Unix systems. The
>days when Usenet was 99% Unix users are long gone.
Then extend the concept into whatever system you work with. If your
software doesn't provide you with easy access to the information about
what groups exist, then your software or platform are _broken_.
Period.
I don't care if you grep a .newsrc. I don't care if you call up some
arcane windows file into a clipboard. I don't care if the file is
compressed, but it lets you display a list of all newsgroups which
match a certain pattern.
But if you can't do something along those lines, then something (eithe
the software, the platform, or the user) is seriously bent out of
shape.
Ultimately, that's not my problem, nor do I believe it's a legitimate
reason to flout a perfectly legitimate system of naming. I've never
believed that substandard software was a reason to do anything
affecting the rest of the world.
Anyone with any amount of sophistication at all can find a group with
"m-lackey" in the title regardless of what the prefix actually is. It
becomes even easier with a biweekly pointer from rasfw and the
existing alt group (which, the way alt groups are, will never, ever
die.)
Implying that people couldn't find rasfw.m-l, when people have managed
to find not only rasf.w and rasfw.r-j for years now is fairly
insulting to the very people you want to attract.
> Actually, in many respects, the most appropriate name might be
>"rec.books.f&sf.m-lackey". (Yes I heard the argument that 'sf' is a
>long-standing (10 years) tradition. 'F&sf' is a longer-standing (40-60
>years) tradition.)
Never happen.
First, & is an invalid character for newsgroup names, last I looked.
Second, whether you like the connotation of "arts" or not, books goes
under rec.arts, not just rec. So you'd want r.a.b.sfs.m-l.
Third, you're proposing something that skips too deeply into the
hierarchy-- you wouldn't just be proposing r.a.b.fsf.m-l, but you would
be implying either a group called r.a.b.fsf to parent that group, or at
the very least, a host of r.a.b.fsf.* groups to justify the
'placeholder' status of r.a.b.sfs. That latter has happened
occasionally if memory serves-- I think the rec.games.frp hierarchy
was set up that way, but then rec.games.frp already existed and it
later split, the hierarchy wasn't created _ex nihilo_.
Clearly, you're not supporting a full-blown hierarchy of single author
books. It would be extraordinarily ill-advised to try. And clearly,
there is no r.a.b.sfs, and there very likely never will be. The group
is rec.arts.sf.written, and it's doing just fine. It's there because
rec.arts.sf-lovers was an antique group which split many years ago,
and because the combination of SF media are considered enough of a
distinct culture to be grouped together by genre rather than media.
No one wants to move it, and trying to move it would be utterly
pointless.
>"Rec.arts" immediately puts me in mind of paintings and
>sculpture, both of which I have little interest in.
Them's the breaks. I always thought engr should have been one of the
original Big Seven (or Eight) hierarchies, and that comp.* should have
been placed in engr.comp.*.
If you wanna play with Usenet, you generally have to pay some lip
service to the established traditions and precedents, just like
anywhere else. The precedent in this case says very loudly,
"rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey."
And the bottom line from this corner is, I will vote against the group
if the proposed name is r.b.m-l or r.a.b.m-l, regardless. I strongly
suspect a significant number of others will as well.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
Radas
>j...@cegt201.bradley.edu (John Novak) wrote:
>>In <4ig9sp$q...@falcon.ns.net> vj...@ns.net (vj) writes:
>>>I happen to feel very strongly................that to keep the group as
>>>easy to find as possible, and to avoid LIMITING it by being too specific,
>>>that we name it rec.arts.books.m-lackey.
>>Please explain to me how a group can be difficult to find?
>>Most .newsrc files are thousands of lines long. You don't look
>>through one without a text editor.
>>Gawrsh, text-search on 'lackey' and there you go!
>>John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
> Re the statement "you don't look through one without a text editor" --
>false to fact. I found a.b.m-l by simply going through the list of
>newsgroups and seeing the name. I didn't go through the thing with a text
>editor -- Free Agent (the newsreader I'm using) keeps it in a compressed
>form and it's not possible to go through it with a text editor (or anything
>else useful).
Ditto. In fact one thing that has had me somewhat dubious about the
entire thing is that I doubt I would have done the non-subscribed
browsing of the group that lead me to subscribe if it had been
"buried" down in the recs instead of the alts.
> You expressed incredulity in an earlier post that no one knew how to do a
>"grep on a .newsrc" file. Quite simple, they don't have Unix systems. The
>days when Usenet was 99% Unix users are long gone.
> More to the point, if I were searching through such a file in the first
>place, I would search for "books" or "book" -- I would unquestionably NOT
>search for "arts.sf.written". I _might_ search for "lackey", if the thought
>that such a newsgroup might exist occurred to me (it hadn't when I
>originally found the group). Mercedes Lackey is one of approximately 150
>authors I think well of, and if I had been trying to find people with
>common interests, searching for that one author's name is not a tactic I
>would have chosen.
I'm not sure what I would have searched for. SF of s-fiction maybe,
or fantasy, but I'm not sure I would search for books or written. So
maybe it isn't so bad.
--Radas--(jlo...@tfb.com)
"Um, Madison? Who's that?"
"Just some human. Followed me home. Can I keep her?"
--Madison and Gralli, Wandering Star by Terri S. Wood
Bethany Jo Weber
assuming everyone who's posting knows what they're talking about, which is
sure sounds like they do, our choices are:
1) We can name our group rec.arts.books.m-lackey or rec.books.sf.m-lackey
or whatever, annoy a lot of people by flouting the naming conventions, and
get voted down, ending up with no rec. group at all,
or
2) Name our group rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey and get our group.
If these are indeed our options, then it seems to me that #2 is the way to
go. I think most people who are reasonalby familar with the Usenet know to
look for authors under rec.arts, and I can't imagine someone who's
interested in Misty's books not being interested enough to look and see
what's under a sf.written hierarchy when they see one even if they do think
the sf stands for science fiction. Is the Robert Jorden newsgroup
languighing away for lack of postings? And if it's a question of having to
go page by page through 6,000 newsgroups to find a single group -- well,
our group now is hard to find under those conditions, too. Harder to find,
maybe, since there's no standardization of conventionsin the alt. hierarchy
-- I mean, we're under alt.books.m-lackey and discussion of Anne
McCaffery's works is under alt.fan.pern. But lots of people seem to find
us now despite the difficulties. The faithful persevere! :-)
Bethany
The opinionated Official Weredragon
------------------Offical Weredragon of Rice University-------------------
"The truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination."
-Garak, DS9, "Improbable Cause."
But reality is *always* an excuse for lack of imagination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote of the week, month, whatever:
"A clean and neat dwelling place is the sign of a disturbed mind."
-Skandranon, Mercedes Lackey, "The Black Gryphon"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Novak
>1) We can name our group rec.arts.books.m-lackey or rec.books.sf.m-lackey
>or whatever, annoy a lot of people by flouting the naming conventions, and
>get voted down, ending up with no rec. group at all,
>2) Name our group rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey and get our group.
A reasonable summary of the situation.
>Is the Robert Jorden newsgroup
>languighing away for lack of postings?
Categorically, absolutely, positively not.
It's been well over a year since the last book was published, and
rasfwrj still generates many posts daily and still attracts new users
on a very regulat basis.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
François-Xavier de Montgolfier
->I'm not sure if finding the group is even an issue. From the posts
->here, assuming everyone who's posting knows what they're talking
->about, which is sure sounds like they do, our choices are:
->1) We can name our group rec.arts.books.m-lackey or
->rec.books.sf.m-lackey or whatever, annoy a lot of people by flouting
->the naming conventions, and get voted down, ending up with no rec.
->group at all,
->or
->2) Name our group rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey and get our group.
[end of the post edited to gain space]
->Bethany
->The opinionated Official Weredragon
I totally agree with Bethany. I think we've got basically one decision
to make: do we want to go in the "rec" hierarchy, in which case we've
GOT to name the group rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey, or do we hate the
name so much we prefer staying in alt?
I, for one, would like to go in the rec hierarchy. First, because more
people (I think) would find us there (the alt hierarchy is a mess, and
is the less distributed hierarchy), AND because we'd wait less for the
posts to appear. I've been watching the speed of abm-l (time lag
between posting time of an article and seing it appear on my server)
and in several big-eight groups, and clearly the "big eight" groups
are *much* faster. Some posts take more than a week to reach my
NNTP-server in abm-l, while *no* post takes more than 3 days to reach
my server if it's in a "big eight" group.
Thus my vote goes for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. Of course, if some
of the most vocal people of the group can't or won't post to raswm-l,
my vote will change... but I think we should go there.
FiX
"I see millions of frogs on tiny crutches"
Kermit
vj
Montgolfier) reads:
*Thus my vote goes for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. Of course, if some
*of the most vocal people of the group can't or won't post to raswm-l,
*my vote will change... but I think we should go there.
*FiX
I won't.
vicki
(@)-----------------]Quote of the Day[-----------------(@)
| That which does not overcome us, strengthens us. |
| This will be good for them. |
| Kra'heera - Winds of Fate - 306 |
(@)----------------------------------------------------(@)
John Novak
>Montgolfier) reads:
>*Thus my vote goes for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. Of course, if some
>*of the most vocal people of the group can't or won't post to raswm-l,
>*my vote will change... but I think we should go there.
>*FiX
>I won't.
Why?
Bethany Jo Weber
: scribbling on walls from f...@litp.ibp.fr (François-Xavier de
: Montgolfier) reads:
: *Thus my vote goes for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. Of course, if some
: *of the most vocal people of the group can't or won't post to raswm-l,
: *my vote will change... but I think we should go there.
: *FiX
: I won't.
: vicki
: (@)-----------------]Quote of the Day[-----------------(@)
: | That which does not overcome us, strengthens us. |
: | This will be good for them. |
: | Kra'heera - Winds of Fate - 306 |
: (@)----------------------------------------------------(@)
Dare I ask why?
Bethany
Kate Nepveu
Distribution:
vj (vj...@ns.net) wrote:
: scribbling on walls from f...@litp.ibp.fr (François-Xavier de
: Montgolfier) reads:
: *Thus my vote goes for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. Of course, if some
: *of the most vocal people of the group can't or won't post to raswm-l,
: *my vote will change... but I think we should go there.
: *FiX
: I won't.
: vicki
Your loss.
--
Kate Nepveu kne...@lynx.neu.edu
---------------------------------------------------------
Just a sec, Brain--I think I'm finally getting somewhere!
--Pinky, in a hamster's wheel, _Animaniacs_
mort...@ufcp.com
>: I won't.
>: vicki
>Your loss.
>--
Our loss, too, Kate. In case you hadn't noticed, vicki's an extremely
vocal member of abml!
mortaine
mort...@ufcp.com
http://www.ufcp.com/employee/steph/steph2.htm
-----------------------------------------------
Wesley Struebing
> Re the statement "you don't look through one without a text editor" --
>false to fact. I found a.b.m-l by simply going through the list of
>newsgroups and seeing the name. I didn't go through the thing with a text
>editor -- Free Agent (the newsreader I'm using) keeps it in a compressed
>form and it's not possible to go through it with a text editor (or anything
>else useful).
Charley, just a "techie" point here - Free Agent DOES permit a search
pf newsgroup names (that's how I found TeamOS2, for example...)
However, even if it wren't possble, I'm not sure I see a *real*
problem here. In fact, knowing how names are constructed, it, to me
anyway, would be quite logical to scroll down to sf.written and start
looking there.
> You expressed incredulity in an earlier post that no one knew how to do a
>"grep on a .newsrc" file. Quite simple, they don't have Unix systems. The
>days when Usenet was 99% Unix users are long gone.
Well, while not technically true, I agree with the spirit ofwhat you
say. However, and I mean no disrespect, so what?
> More to the point, if I were searching through such a file in the first
>place, I would search for "books" or "book" -- I would unquestionably NOT
>search for "arts.sf.written". I _might_ search for "lackey", if the thought
>that such a newsgroup might exist occurred to me (it hadn't when I
>originally found the group). Mercedes Lackey is one of approximately 150
>authors I think well of, and if I had been trying to find people with
>common interests, searching for that one author's name is not a tactic I
>would have chosen.
True. I wouldn't start my search by author, either. Which is why,
after lurking here for a bit, I'd go with what appears to be the
standard USENET name. If for no other reason, it's consistent with
what has already been established, and whch most other groups seem to
have no real problem with.
> Actually, in many respects, the most appropriate name might be
>"rec.books.f&sf.m-lackey". (Yes I heard the argument that 'sf' is a
>long-standing (10 years) tradition. 'F&sf' is a longer-standing (40-60
>years) tradition.) "Rec.arts" immediately puts me in mind of paintings and
>sculpture, both of which I have little interest in.
>Charley
Take care and keep the faith!
Wes
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Communications Decency Act of 1996 -
Small Minds Bring You Small Products
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
str...@ix.netcom.com str...@aol.com
Wesley Struebing
>In <4itkou$a...@clark.zippo.com> vj...@ns.net (vj) writes:
>>Montgolfier) reads:
>>*Thus my vote goes for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. Of course, if some
>>*of the most vocal people of the group can't or won't post to raswm-l,
>>*my vote will change... but I think we should go there.
>>*FiX
>>I won't.
>Why?
>--
>John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
>http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
>The Humblest Man on the Net
I tend to wonder that myself. If the group concerns soemthing of
which you feel something *good*, and the "new" group would continue
that tradition, I find it difficult to see why a name for the group
should prevent one from subscribing to, reading there, and posting to
it. Especially if the group has a name consistent with current USENET
naming conventions.
Or am I misunderstanding something here?
DonnaB
writes: >
> Actually, in many respects, the most appropriate name might be
> "rec.books.f&sf.m-lackey". (Yes I heard the argument that 'sf' is a
> long-standing (10 years) tradition. 'F&sf' is a longer-standing (40-60
> years) tradition.) "Rec.arts" immediately puts me in mind of paintings and
> sculpture, both of which I have little interest in.
But, when you think about it further, surely you must realize that literature
is one of the arts, right? And, the world of literature is mostly books. To me
it would be unfortunate for people to think only of certain visual, graphic,
applied arts when thinking of a type of recreational group comprised of
artistic components. Maybe words need to reclaim their status as part of the
arts.
And, if you look at the rec.* heirarchy, you see: rec.* : animals, answers,
antiques, aquaria, arts, audio, autos, aviation, backcountry, bicycles, birds,
boats, climbing, collecting, crafts, drugs, equestrian, folk-dancing, food,
gambling, games, gardens, guns, heraldry, humor, hunting, juggling, ...,
sports, ..., etc. It just makes sense to me. But, maybe I am just more
comfortable with the naming structure. More of my interests fall under
rec.arts.* than anywhere else as it happens.
~DonnaB
"Happiness is nothing more than good health and a bad memory." - Dr. Albert
Schweitzer
William George Ferguson
poll.
I said I'd give my take on rec.arts.books.m-lackey and
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey and here it is.
rabm-l is clearly the more intuitive name of the 2. I wouldn't
automatically think of looking for authors under sf.written (I
wouldn't automatically think of sf.written existing). That said, I've
spent the last few weeks mostly-lurking in the ras* and rab*
heirarchies. The posts in the ras* heirarchy are far more similar in
title, content, and tone to abm-l than the posts to the rab* heirarchy
(personally, having lurked in rec.arts.books since the first mention
of making a big 8 group came up, I would say it would be better named
rec.arts.literature. A good place to go for discussion of, say, the
works of Jane Austen or Ernest Hemingway). The usenet folks are right
in this much; on a like to like basis, rasw* is a better match.
If we hold a straw poll (and I strongly recommend that we do), I would
vote '3' (Vote yes for either), but I would rather we not pursue an
RFD for rabm-l unless there is massive active support for it in abm-l
first.
One other thing. My 2nd biggest concern with submitting the RFD was
the possibility that it would create divisiveness on abm-l. I
sincerely hope that whichever side of the name question you support
and however the final result comes out, that you agree to disagree
with people taking the opposite view and don't let it affect your
behavior to others. This has actually been true so far, I've seen
regulars who have come done firmly on opposite sides the the name
question, responding to each other in friendly terms on other threads.
I strongly hope this continues.
My 1st biggest concern from the beginning is, of course, that we put
our heads up out of the foxhole and let the bad guys see where we are.
Benign neglect is usually a desirable status.
John Novak
>rabm-l is clearly the more intuitive name of the 2.
Only to people unfamiliar with the Big Eight naming conventions in
general, and the rec.* hierarchy in particular.
Taki Kogoma
message <4j4koo$c...@cegt201.bradley.edu> to news.groups:
>In <31559064....@news.primenet.com> fr...@primenet.com (William George Ferguson) writes:
>
>>rabm-l is clearly the more intuitive name of the 2.
>
>Only to people unfamiliar with the Big Eight naming conventions in
>general, and the rec.* hierarchy in particular.
One must, however, grant that the population that doesn't know Big-8
naming conventions from a hole in the ozone layer outnumbers us
namespace freaks by a considerable margin...
Gym "NO on r.a.b.m-l, ABSTAIN on r.a.sf.w.m-l." Quirk
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk - qu...@unm.edu | "I'll get a life when someone
(Known to some as Taki Kogoma) | demonstrates that it would be
Retired 'Secret Master of | superior to what I have now."
rec.arts.startrek' | -- Gym Quirk
William George Ferguson
speak to the regular inhabitants of abm-l, not the usenet community as
a whole.
I'll talk about my take on rabm-l and raswm-l in a separate post
Although I subscribed and lurked in n.g as well as relevant r.a.*
groups once it appeared likely an RFD would be issued, I've only made
one post on this thread (when the question of posting volume came up).
Primarily I was waiting to gird my loins and fight the good fight
against outside attackers if necessary. It wasn't. The only real
debate on the RFD is on naming conventions. To summarize this:
There is a fairly large contingent of abm-l regulars who prefer
rec.arts.books.m-lackey (which was in fact my first assumption of what
the proposed title would be) over the proposed
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. This seems to be for, primarily, 2
reasons. 1, putting an author discussion group under books seems
intuitively correct, and 2, frankly, rabm-l maintains a strong name
similarity to abm-l, minimizing change (and change is unsettling).
The usenet community as a whole prefers having author discussion
groups for fantasy and science fiction authors under sf.written,
primarily because of the history of how the heirarchies grew, and
similarities in discussers/discussions.
Someone has already suggested a straw poll. I strongly recommend that
we do this. If necessary, I will even agree to be vote-taker,
although there may be others with better resources. I'm not actively
campaigning for the role (or any other) but I'm willing to do it if
that what's needed to get the straw poll. The straw poll should be on
the group name only (there is no argument about any other aspect of
the RFD, as far as I've seen), and should have the form:
1. Would you vote yes for rabm-l and no for raswm-l
2. Would you vote yes for raswm-l and no for rabm-l
3. Would you vote yes for either one
4. Would you vote no for either one
If the combination of 2 & 3 above don't get the vast majority
(significantly better than 2/3rds), or if said majority isn't well
over 100 votes, then the RFD proponents should withdraw the RFD and
not request a CFV. Practically speaking, if you don't have the
support in abm-l, it ain't gonna pass in news.groups.
If 1 & 3 get significantly better than 2/3rds and has over 200 votes,
we may want to look at a revised RFD with rabm-l as the proposed name.
The reason for the 200 votes above, is that is what it would take as a
minimum, to over-ride the people who would vote against it on the
basis of name alone.
So far, the only people who would vote no are the ones who vote no
against any new group proposal just because (15-25 voters), and people
who would vote no based on the name structure. If there are enough
people on abm-l who would vote no against raswm-l, based on the name,
to bring the yes votes in abm-l below 100 then we shouldn't CFV
(actually I wouldn't want a CFV if enough people here said that they
would vote no that it might split or damage the abm-l community).
If we do revise the RFD to rabm-l, there will be a lot more discussion
on n.g and a lot more virulent discussion. If the regulars actively
supported it in abm-l, especially Vicki Jean and McFluffy, it is
within possibility, but by no means guranteed, that we could have the
200+ votes necessary to over-ride the news.group and r.a.b who would
vote no based on strongly held views of naming conventions (It can be
done, there are examples within the last year of new groups being
created over active (100+ vote) opposition, it's just much more
difficult). So far, the Captain has been pretty much neutral on the
issue, and Vicki Jean has been neutral on rabm-l and actively opposed
to raswm-l.
If support in abm-l is only lukewarm, lets find out now and pull the
plug rather than debate in a much wider and more rough-and-tumble
arena. The advantage is, if the alt heirarchy does become an
untenable home due to some of the factors that led to the RFD to begin
with, we are not restricted by the 6-month waiting period for
re-submission if it never goes to CFV (least that's what I
understand).
Iain Sharp
j...@cegt201.bradley.edu "John Novak" writes:
> In <31559064....@news.primenet.com> fr...@primenet.com (William George
> Ferguson) writes:
>
> >rabm-l is clearly the more intuitive name of the 2.
>
> Only to people unfamiliar with the Big Eight naming conventions in
> general, and the rec.* hierarchy in particular.
>
> --
> John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
> http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
> The Humblest Man on the Net
>
Which, forgive me, is most of the 'newbies' on the net.
NOTE - I have no problem with either name. I don't think r.a.s.w.m-l is as
intuitive to someone looking for the group, particularly with the RL usage of
sf (yes I know what it means HERE, I'm talking about the way it is used in the
rest of the english speaking world), but on the other hand. I probably wouldn't
think of books offhand either. I found the current group by spending three
hours paging through a list of available groups on my software.
SUBNOTE - NO my software is not capable of running searches, the file is too
large to edit using my hardware and not in a good form anyway and my level of
DOS (6.2) posesses no method of grepping. The only way for me to check out the
groups is to read the whole bloody list (and my machine is too small to run
windows and netscape at the same time). Sad innit?
I did get as far as r.a.sf.w.r-j and my thought was 'but I thought he wrote
fantasy', I made a mental note to check the shelves the next time.
I appreciate that you 'should' check the rules of your livingspace, but how
many people actually DO? (and as another sub-point, where are they? (the rules))
Firesong (who now regrets the whole d*mn idea.)
--
Fire to warm you, song to lighten your heart.
The opinions of this user tend to vary from minute to minute.
François-Xavier de Montgolfier
->First, note that this is not cross-posted to news.groups as I want
->to speak to the regular inhabitants of abm-l, not the usenet
->community as a whole.
Great idea, and <gripe> WHY DIDN'T WE THINK OF THAT BEFORE?
->I'll talk about my take on rabm-l and raswm-l in a separate post
[edited because the post is going to be looong]
->1. Would you vote yes for rabm-l and no for raswm-l
->2. Would you vote yes for raswm-l and no for rabm-l
->3. Would you vote yes for either one
->4. Would you vote no for either one
I vote for #2. Or, if some people (vicki for example) say there is *no
way* they're going to post in raswm-l, I'll vote for #4.
I think it would be a *very bad* idea trying to create rabm-l for
mainly 5 reasons:
1. We would be voted down. If you've read n.g, you've seen that
several "badly-named" ngs have been turned down with more than 400
votes against the proposed group... we can't fight against so much
people. Remember, we're going to fight against ALL n.g lurkers, plus
Tale, plus several proheminent figures in n.g. There will probably be
a post in news.admin* saying "these people want to create chaos in the
rec. hierarchy", and *lots* of newsadmins are going to vote against
this
2. It would create a bad precedent if ever it passed, and we could say
goodbye to our nice, *flame-free* NG. I'm quite sure we'd got a lot of
flames just because of the name issue, and to have several dizains of
POed newsmasters posting in rabm-l is not something I'm looking for.
3. Even if the group is "Taled", some newsmasters won't carry it.
Thus, we don't gain any visibility, and may even have problems about
getting the posts that we don't have currently...
4. I don't want to go against usenet naming rules. Even if the rules
make no sense (which is the case)...
5. People will remember the vote for rabm-l, and if we need to go in
the rec. hierarchy, we'll have a harder time because of this.
->If the combination of 2 & 3 above don't get the vast majority
->(significantly better than 2/3rds), or if said majority isn't well
->over 100 votes, then the RFD proponents should withdraw the RFD and
->not request a CFV. Practically speaking, if you don't have the
->support in abm-l, it ain't gonna pass in news.groups.
Agreed. I think we should think really fast on this issue, and if we
can't reach a consensu, we should wisdraw the proposal. What I mean is
that if some people stand firm in their decision of not moving to
raswm-l, we should just drop the RFD: I don't want to see the group
without Vicki or Fluffy or Hunter or Evergreen or Spooky or... guess
you got my point... Anyway, if (for example) Vicki says she won't move
to raswm-l, I will vote "no" on the proposal...
->If 1 & 3 get significantly better than 2/3rds and has over 200
->votes, we may want to look at a revised RFD with rabm-l as the
->proposed name.
I think we must at least have 400/500 votes if we want a chance to
pass... and I, for one, will *not* vote for rabm-l... I will move
there if it passes the CFV, but only because I don't want to loose the
group. I will *not* be happy about it!
[edited]
->If support in abm-l is only lukewarm, lets find out now and pull the
->plug rather than debate in a much wider and more rough-and-tumble
->arena. The advantage is, if the alt heirarchy does become an
->untenable home due to some of the factors that led to the RFD to
begin
->with, we are not restricted by the 6-month waiting period for
->re-submission if it never goes to CFV (least that's what I
->understand).
Again, I agree completely with this.
FiX
OBvicki: IIRC, you told you wouldn't move to raswm-l... care to
explain why?
[sent to George and vicki (sorry, George, you said you would agree to
take the votes...)]
E. W. Bennefeld
>Whish probably includes me. I found abml because I thought, as
>someone who likes reading books, that alt.books.* (and rec.books.* )
>an obvious place to look ; that was intuitive. If you need to learn
>a whole set of rules on how rec.* or the Big 8 works to find
>something then it is not intuitive. Which said, I'm not really sure
>why the group has to move at all and I don't really care if it ends up
>in rec.books.* or rec.arts.* so long as the group keeps the same
>character and doesn't lose any of the regular posters.
>For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
Greetings and welcome! Glad you decided to come out and say hello.
I'm not sure, but I think I found the alt.books.m-lackey group on John
Breslin's Science Fiction web page, myself.
E. W. Bennefeld Fragrance in the night ...
wic...@polaristel.net flowers outlined softly by
Fargo, North Dakota USA cloud-sifted moonlight.
[From Seasonal Quartets]
Paul Harris
>In article <4j4koo$c...@cegt201.bradley.edu>
> j...@cegt201.bradley.edu "John Novak" writes:
>> In <31559064....@news.primenet.com> fr...@primenet.com (William George
>> Ferguson) writes:
>>
>> >rabm-l is clearly the more intuitive name of the 2.
>>
>> Only to people unfamiliar with the Big Eight naming conventions in
>> general, and the rec.* hierarchy in particular.
>>
>> --
>> John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
>> http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
>> The Humblest Man on the Net
>>
>Which, forgive me, is most of the 'newbies' on the net.
Whish probably includes me. I found abml because I thought, as
Michael D. Steeves
Iain Sharp <fire...@firesong.demon.co.uk> wrote:
= I appreciate that you 'should' check the rules of your livingspace, but how
= many people actually DO? (and as another sub-point, where are they?
= (the rules))
And why is it my responsibility to worry about those that don't bother
to learn what they're doing? The unwillingness of others to conform to
the accepted standard is *their* problem, not mine.
As far as where, try news.announce.newusers, news.groups.questions, or
news.newusers.questions on Usenet, and rtfm.mit.edu for anonymous ftp.
--
Death before dishonor / Drugs before lunch
-Aspen Gun and Drug Club
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
http://www.cs.uml.edu/~msteeves | mste...@cs.uml.edu
Bethany Jo Weber
: Okay, let me see if I have all this straight:
: 1. We have decided that we want to move from alt to rec.
: 2. If we attempt to put ourselves into rec.art.books (like the
: Tolkien people), we will be voted down by the namespace purists,
: and we will not have our new rec group.
: 3. If we attempt to put ourselves into rasfw, we will NOT make a large
: number of new enemies who would vote us down, and we will have our
: new group.
: Assuming that we're sure about #1, and that we Lackey fans are reasonably
: intelligent people (ones who will be able to find the group wherever we
: end up, especially if we leave a pointer in abml), the choice seems pretty
: obvious to me...
Yes, I agree completely.
According to the nice (and very patient) newsgroup-creating-type-people who
have been following this arguement, we have two options:
1. Move to a rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey neswgroup
2. Stay in the alt.books.m-lackey newsgroup
Note that a rec.arts.books.m-lackey newsgroup is NOT A VIABLE OPTION!
The issue is NOT whether we name our group rec.arts.books.m-lackey or
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. The issue is whether was want a rec. group
at all. If we do it's name WILL HAVE TO BE rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey.
If we try to form a group with a different name, we will probably be voted
down,and may be at a significant disadvantage if we want to try again.
The rec. heirarchy, like a decent bookstore, apparently likes to keep
sci-fi/fantasy books in the sci-fi/fantasy section, so that people don't
have to keep pushing them aside to get to the cookbooks. I'm not sure why
people seem to be taking issue with that. Wanting to keep as much
organization as possible in their heirarchy seems like a perfectly
reasonable thing to me, and voting down a disruptive group that
wants to mess things up (that's us) seems reasonable also.
On this newsgroup, we don't want lots of strict organization. That's
fine. It's our playground, and we'll play by whatever rules we see fit.
The rec. section of the Usenet in general is NOT our playground and if
we want the advantages that come of playing on it, we have to follow the
rules they've set.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the above is the situation as I
understand it.
: Edna
: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
: John & Edna Huelsenbeck
: jo...@mws4.biol.berkeley.edu ed...@mws4.biol.berkeley.edu
: http://mw511.biol.berkeley.edu/john/edna.html
: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Charles Lacour
>Charley, just a "techie" point here - Free Agent DOES permit a search
>pf newsgroup names (that's how I found TeamOS2, for example...)
>However, even if it wren't possble, I'm not sure I see a *real*
>problem here. In fact, knowing how names are constructed, it, to me
>anyway, would be quite logical to scroll down to sf.written and start
>looking there.
I was thinking more of people like myself who were just browsing through
the list of group names. You say "knowing how names are constructed" --
that's my point. A large (and probably larger by the day) segment of the
users of Usenet know nothing of these rules. I feel that the approach that
"they should learn the rules before they play the game" is an ivory-tower
one. I would prefer to use a name that is more likely to garner people with
common interests in the real world.
>> You expressed incredulity in an earlier post that no one knew how to do a
>>"grep on a .newsrc" file. Quite simple, they don't have Unix systems. The
>>days when Usenet was 99% Unix users are long gone.
>Well, while not technically true, I agree with the spirit of what you
>say. However, and I mean no disrespect, so what?
Two pieces to this: first, my (somewhat sarcastic) comment was directed at
the author of the "do a grep on a .newsrc" remark. He seemed to think that
all Usenet users were medium-expert users of Unix. Three years ago, that
was probably true. Nowadays, I would guess that about 60% use DOS/Windows,
20% use Macs, and the remaining 20% are "other", including Unix. The vast
majority of the dos/Windows and Mac users are NOT sophisticated users. They
treat computers much like cars: "I turn it on, I turn this, press that and
it goes." They don't have the expertise to do anything like a multi-item
grep on a file (most of them would view that phrase as gibberish), nor do
they WANT to have it.
Second piece: your phrase "while not technically true" would seem to imply
that 99% of all Usenet users _are_ Unix users. Say who??!?? (Unless
you're counting the servers which hold all the stuff, in which case I
suppose you could "technically" be correct. <g>)
>Wes
By the way, I wrote a rather... ornery (for lack of a better word) tirade
about rec.arts people. I would like it to be known that I do NOT classify
you with the people I was objecting to. I have only seen two posts by you,
but both were friendly and helpful. If all of the other people from
rec.arts (or possibly news.groups, looking at the header) were like you, I
would never have jumped on my high horse. Thanks.
Charley
Charles Lacour
>: *Thus my vote goes for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. Of course, if some
>: *of the most vocal people of the group can't or won't post to raswm-l,
>: *my vote will change... but I think we should go there.
>: *FiX
>: I won't.
>: vicki
>Your loss.
^^^^^^^^^^^
>Kate Nepveu kne...@lynx.neu.edu
I'm rapidly moving to the view that a move to rec.arts.[anything] is a
bad idea. Gratuitous denigration like this is why. I have seen more
put-downs, denigration, and sneering (all varieties of flaming) in this
thread than in a month's worth of the other stuff in this group.
To answer one question that seems to be popping up fairly often that I
have not seen anyone else answer: It very much does make a difference what
name we operate under. Some people see (or don't see) group names based on
the names' closeness to one they're already dealing with. In short, we are
going to get a lot more of the rec.arts people involved. Judging by the
people from that arena who have posted to this group so far, the natives
are NOT friendly.
Since some of these low-grade flames have been directed at me, I may not
be completely unbiased here. I'd like to hear from some of the abm-l
people: look over the various posts on this subject from the "outsiders"
(the rec.arts people who were not involved with abm-l before this came up).
In my opinion, their attitude is high-handed, sneering and condescending;
and they show a marked predilection for sly not-quite-insults designed to
make the recipient feel inadequate, stupid and/or unreasonable. I'd like to
know whether (in the opinions of the abm-l'ers) I'm imagining things.
Charley
David Wren-Hardin
Charles Lacour <cla...@airmail.net> wrote:
>I feel that the approach that
>"they should learn the rules before they play the game" is an ivory-tower
>one. I would prefer to use a name that is more likely to garner people with
>common interests in the real world.
And this is exactly why the world is sliding into a pit of sin and
depravity. Why is it so cruel to suggest that people learn the ropes
before entering a new forum ? Especially when that forum is populated
with people who were there before you and have ways of conducting
business that have developed over years ? Do we change the rules of the
road just because a bunch of bumbling sixteen year olds get the chance
to drive every year ? "learing the rules before they play" isn't
an ivory tower approach, it's a _real world_ approach. Pleading ignorance
is no excuse.
>The vast
>majority of the dos/Windows and Mac users are NOT sophisticated users. They
>treat computers much like cars: "I turn it on, I turn this, press that and
>it goes." They don't have the expertise to do anything like a multi-item
>grep on a file (most of them would view that phrase as gibberish), nor do
>they WANT to have it.
Whether it's grep, search, or whatever, doing a pattern search is hardly
intense system administration, and any decent newsreading sortware is able
to do it. If yours doesn't, it's broken. Period. Yes, when someone first
fires up their newsreader, they probably just start flipping through
groups. But it will soon become apparent that there are a whole fuckload
(bite me CDA) of groups, and that there must be an effecient was of
finding them. If someone is so stupid that they can't figure out how
to do it, then I'd just as soon bury my newsgroup so deep in the hierarchy
that their lame, inbred ass will never find it.
--
David Wren-Hardin | Confusion will be my epitaph.
bd...@midway.uchicago.edu | As I crawl a cracked and broken path.
http://student-www.uchicago.edu | If we make it we can all sit back and laugh.
/users/bdh4/ | -King Crimson on Grad School
David Wren-Hardin
Charles Lacour <cla...@airmail.net> wrote:
>
> I'm rapidly moving to the view that a move to rec.arts.[anything] is a
>bad idea. Gratuitous denigration like this is why. I have seen more
>put-downs, denigration, and sneering (all varieties of flaming) in this
>thread than in a month's worth of the other stuff in this group.
>
>and they show a marked predilection for sly not-quite-insults designed to
>make the recipient feel inadequate, stupid and/or unreasonable. I'd like to
>know whether (in the opinions of the abm-l'ers) I'm imagining things.
While there may have been a lot of sneering, flaming, whatever from
the rec.arts people, you should note that what they are flaming is
not the idea of rasfwm-l, or even the general concept of a big 8
single author group (the very idea of which was anathema to the net
a few years ago) but are flaming attitudes of "but it'll be too
hard for the newbies" or "I'm so special if I don't get the name I want
I'll hold my breath and turn blue". I bet that most of the sneering
rec.arts people will vote "Yes" for rasfwm-l if it comes up.
Huelsenbeck
Lacour) wrote:
<snip>
..
.. I'm rapidly moving to the view that a move to rec.arts.[anything] is a
.. bad idea. Gratuitous denigration like this is why. I have seen more
.. put-downs, denigration, and sneering (all varieties of flaming) in this
.. thread than in a month's worth of the other stuff in this group.
..
Actually, I thought these people were coming out of the news.groups area,
not rec.arts.* (note the cross-posting at the tops of the messages). Most
of these folks will vanish after our vote, and I don't think the essential
character of our group will change, regardless of what we call it.
Edna
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
John Novak
[On posting to rasfwm-l]
>>: I won't.
>>Your loss.
>^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Kate Nepveu kne...@lynx.neu.edu
> I'm rapidly moving to the view that a move to rec.arts.[anything] is a
>bad idea. Gratuitous denigration like this is why.
This is gratuitous denigration? A simple statement that it would be
her loss if she chose not to particpate in a group, solely because of
some unarticulated bias against a newsgroup name? Gratuitous
denigration?
<Shrug>
You must not run into people with opinions very often.
Jason Hatter
: Since some of these low-grade flames have been directed at me, I may not
: be completely unbiased here. I'd like to hear from some of the abm-l
: people: look over the various posts on this subject from the "outsiders"
: (the rec.arts people who were not involved with abm-l before this came up).
: and they show a marked predilection for sly not-quite-insults designed to
: make the recipient feel inadequate, stupid and/or unreasonable. I'd like to
: know whether (in the opinions of the abm-l'ers) I'm imagining things.
IMO, you are overstating things. The "outsiders" are here because some
people asked about moving from an alt.* to a rec.* group. They are
taking the time to explain to us WHY the name we (meaning the people of
abm-l who want to move to the rec.* groups; personally, my provider isn't
going to be dropping the alt.* groups anytime soon, so I'm not worried)
is not going to be accepted. The lady who's quote you underlined
(presumably to illustrate her "unfriendliness"; I deleted the quote when
replying) was responding to Vicky's comment about not moving to whatever
group. "Your loss" seems an appropriate response to "I won't", and it's
certainly much more appropriate than "You're a stupid idiot for not doing
it." They don't HAVE to help us. They were kind enough to do it.
Instead of being told they whys and wherefores of the heirarchy, and why
what we want won't work, we could be doing this blindly, and be voted
down with no chance of success. Now, we may actually get a rec.* group
started...
Jason
who doesn't see WHY people have such a fuss over rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey
but is totally satisfied with alt.books.m-lackey
John Novak
>I was thinking more of people like myself who were just browsing through
>the list of group names. You say "knowing how names are constructed" --
>that's my point. A large (and probably larger by the day) segment of the
>users of Usenet know nothing of these rules.
Many of us would consider this a problem. And many of us really
aren't afraid to say so, even though it might fall under your
definition of "gratuitous denigration."
Still, I'm really not sure where all this is coming from. All this is
is a nice friendly discussion on naming nomenclature. I've only had
to explain it two or three times already.
>Two pieces to this: first, my (somewhat sarcastic) comment was directed at
>the author of the "do a grep on a .newsrc" remark. He seemed to think that
>all Usenet users were medium-expert users of Unix.
That would be me, and personally, I don't care what the search
mechanism is, if your software can't do it, it's broken.
Iain Sharp
pa...@easynet.co.uk "Paul Harris" writes:
> Iain Sharp <fire...@firesong.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Which, forgive me, is most of the 'newbies' on the net.
>
> Whish probably includes me. I found abml because I thought, as
> someone who likes reading books, that alt.books.* (and rec.books.* )
> an obvious place to look ; that was intuitive. If you need to learn
> a whole set of rules on how rec.* or the Big 8 works to find
> something then it is not intuitive. Which said, I'm not really sure
> why the group has to move at all and I don't really care if it ends up
> in rec.books.* or rec.arts.* so long as the group keeps the same
> character and doesn't lose any of the regular posters.
>
> For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>
> Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
>
>
Welcome, welcome, welcome. I have moved your delurk so as to avoid upsetting
news.groups users.
but thrice welcome nonetheless.
Firesong (the welcoming)
cper...@kean.ucs.mun.ca
> In <4j9kgn$r...@news-f.iadfw.net> cla...@airmail.net (Charles Lacour) writes:
>
> [On posting to rasfwm-l]
>
>>>: I won't.
>>>Your loss.
>>^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>Kate Nepveu kne...@lynx.neu.edu
>
>> I'm rapidly moving to the view that a move to rec.arts.[anything] is a
>>bad idea. Gratuitous denigration like this is why.
>
> This is gratuitous denigration? A simple statement that it would be
> her loss if she chose not to particpate in a group, solely because of
> some unarticulated bias against a newsgroup name? Gratuitous
> denigration?
>
> <Shrug>
>
> You must not run into people with opinions very often.
>
> John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
> http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
> The Humblest Man on the Net
We do. Often. We don't dismiss them with `your loss'.
Cheryl
Charles Lacour
First off, I didn't realize it was cross-posted to news.groups as well as
abm-l. Apologies to all those in news.groups who have NOT been involved in
this.
Secondly, I judged these people a little too harshly. There have been
several reasonable and rational posters from (I presume) news.group who
have spoken up recently. At the time I wrote the thing, the ratio of
unpleasant people to pleasant was about 5 to 1. The true ratio seems to be
(so far) about 50/50.
Finally, since the people I object to are coming from news.groups, and not
rec.*, the argument that we should possibly avoid the rec.* hierarchy may
be spurious. (It also may not -- one presumes these people who act so
proprietary about the rec.* hierarchy plan to do something with the groups
that get created, as otherwise their opposition is rather pointless.)
If someone already beat me to mentioning these points, fine -- I
intentionally am posting this BEFORE I look at any replies.
Again, to anyone who got castigated unfairly, my apologies.
Charley
Deb Clark
> <major snippage>
> and they show a marked predilection for sly not-quite-insults designed to
> make the recipient feel inadequate, stupid and/or unreasonable. I'd like to
> know whether (in the opinions of the abm-l'ers) I'm imagining things.
>
<sigh> No, Charley, I don't think you are. I, too, have noticed the character has gone
rapidly down-hill when reading this particular thread. I'm very sad to see this, because I'm
getting ready to move to Illinois in a month or two and I'll lose my University-provided net
access. Which means I'll have to go through a private provider, and it appears several of
them don't allow access to the alt.* newsgroups. I'd really hate to lose you all. It's
going to be bad enough to be in a new place, trying to make new friends, but to lose some old
friends in the process is going to make it really rough. <heavy sigh>
This thread has been very informative to me. It's unfortunate that some don't seem to
appreciate the difference between ignorant and stupid. According to Webster, ignorant is
defined as: ". . . UNAWARE, UNINFORMED UNLEARNED mean not having knowledge; IGNORANT may
imply a general condition or it may apply to lack of knowledge or awareness of a particular
thing;. . ." while stupid is: "1a: slow of mind : OBTUSE 1b: UNTHINKING, IRRATIONAL 1c:
lacking intelligence or reason . . ."
I freely admit I am ignorant in some areas. I vehemently object to be addressed as if this
means I am stupid. Intolerance of ignorance constitutes stupidity in my book. Thankfully,
such stupidity is not displayed by those who regularly (or even, for the most part,
irregularly/occasionally) participate in this group. If moving to the rec.* heirarchy means
that such stupidity would occur on a regular basis, then we will, in effect, be losing this
group anyway.
Is there any way to prevent this from happening, where ever we call home?????
--
Deb
************************************************
“Imagination is more important than knowledge.”
Albert Einstein
************************************************
John Novak
>> You must not run into people with opinions very often.
>We do. Often. We don't dismiss them with `your loss'.
Well you were expecting what, exactly?
Cajoling and begging someone to come and participate in a group?
I'd already asked her why she wouldn't participate based on the naming
issue, and no answer was forthcoming.
No answer has come forth in the mean time, either.
Fred Ives
ruthless snippage
>
> Whish probably includes me. I found abml because I thought, as
> someone who likes reading books, that alt.books.* (and rec.books.* )
> an obvious place to look ; that was intuitive. If you need to learn
> a whole set of rules on how rec.* or the Big 8 works to find
> something then it is not intuitive. Which said, I'm not really sure
> why the group has to move at all and I don't really care if it ends up
> in rec.books.* or rec.arts.* so long as the group keeps the same
> character and doesn't lose any of the regular posters.
>
> For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>
> Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
Gotcha Welcomewelcomewelcomewelcome!
what a place to delurk! You couldn't make it easy and state up front it
was a delurk!
Get ready for the virtual food. Pull up a chair comfy rock or tree to
lean against. Have some fresh out of the oven chocolate chip cookies and
asorted other goodies coming your way.
Jezzerey What's life without a little magic!
fi...@instanet.com
jenmat
>In article <4j4koo$c...@cegt201.bradley.edu>
> j...@cegt201.bradley.edu "John Novak" writes:
>> In <31559064....@news.primenet.com> fr...@primenet.com (William
George
>> Ferguson) writes:
>>
>> >rabm-l is clearly the more intuitive name of the 2.
>>
>> Only to people unfamiliar with the Big Eight naming conventions in
>> general, and the rec.* hierarchy in particular.
>>
>> --
>> John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
>> http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
>> The Humblest Man on the Net
>>
>Which, forgive me, is most of the 'newbies' on the net.
Whish probably includes me. I found abml because I thought, as
someone who likes reading books, that alt.books.* (and rec.books.* )
an obvious place to look ; that was intuitive. If you need to learn
a whole set of rules on how rec.* or the Big 8 works to find
something then it is not intuitive. Which said, I'm not really sure
why the group has to move at all and I don't really care if it ends up
in rec.books.* or rec.arts.* so long as the group keeps the same
character and doesn't lose any of the regular posters.
For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
Bright Greetings!
Welcome, welcome and welcome! I looked up this newsgroup on the advice
and the encouragement of a good friend, so I can't say if I would have found
it otherwise. I've been trying to stay about of this name debate. I have
little to say on the matter except that if and when we move, I hope we don't
lose the friendly atmosphere of this group of people. I also hope we don't
lose it over this name debate. We can disagree, but let us do it with
courtesy.
Jennifer of White Shadow
Jadefire
Uh, which Usnet group did you just delurk in, Paul, alt.books.m-lackey or
news.groups?
You left both groups on your posting list, you see!!
Anyway, Welcome, welcome, welcome!
Sending to you, via inter-continental virtual throw (Shane Warne is sooo
jealous of my arm) one non mad cow infected Beef pie!
(Sorry about the cow joke, I couldn't resist...)
Seeya Starside!
Jadefire
ech...@alpha2.curtin.edu.au
----
'Dehydration - 34%, Recollection of previous evening - 2%, embaressment factor - 91%. Advise repair schedule:- off line for 36 hours, re-boot startup disk, and replace head - wow, what a night!' - Kryten
- Red Dwarf -
mort...@ufcp.com
>In <1996Mar27.051816.1@leif> cper...@kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:
>>> You must not run into people with opinions very often.
>>We do. Often. We don't dismiss them with `your loss'.
>Well you were expecting what, exactly?
>Cajoling and begging someone to come and participate in a group?
>I'd already asked her why she wouldn't participate based on the naming
>issue, and no answer was forthcoming.
>No answer has come forth in the mean time, either.
>--
>John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
>http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
>The Humblest Man on the Net
I doubt that you will receive any comment from vicki on this subject,
as she is so disgusted by the flaming on this thread (due, in large
part, to the news.groups members) that she has chosen to state her
decision and have nothing more to do with the big-8 hierarchy. She
has indicated that she will not participate in a rec. newgroup for
mercedes lackey. I do not know how she plans to vote, or if she plans
to abstain on this vote, and I do not think it appropriate to ask.
It should be enough to know that she will not join
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. "Your loss" does not, to me, seem to be
an expression of an opinion or anything close to a useful comment; it
seems to be rather callous and cruel.
I wish we could have made it perfectly clear to the abm-l readers that
there would be a high level of flames and the like due to the fact
that news.groups tends to have a lot of people who do not go in for
gratuitous (and fun) role-playing and "fluff". Unfortunately, this
was overlooked before posting the RFD, and I apologize for that
oversight. It seems I have not properly warned the constituents of
abm-l, and they came into the fray somewhat unarmed. ("Forewarned is
forearmed")
Let me make this perfectly clear:
1. We are in the RFD stage. This _is_ the time to discuss the
proposed newsgroup, including its name. Anyone is welcome to discuss
the proposal, since it may affect anyone, even those not in the
current abm-l group.
2. The RFD posted was for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. This has not
changed. There has not been enough support for
rec.arts.books.m-lackey to warrant changing the RFD.
3. The Charter has changed to include a fan fic statement. I will
probably run it by the other proponents this weekend and it will be
posted next week (thus beginning another 21-day discussion period).
I also want it to be known (since it may be unclear) that there are
_4_ voting options on this proposal. You may vote NO, in which case
your vote will cancel out 2 YES votes. You may vote YES. You may
vote ABSTAIN. You may choose to not cast a vote at all.
Voting requires that you send an email to the neutral vote-taker, who
has not been assigned yet, since we are not yet in CFV, and a 2nd RFD
will need to be posted. It is open to EVERYONE who can read
newsgroups and send email. It is not recommended that we solicit
votes from the on-line services, though a pointer from those services
may be appropriate, if you have access to them. However, it should be
clear that _all_ discussion about the proposed group should be posted
to news.groups, which is an open forum.
Emma is correct in assuming that most of the news.groups members will
not join a rec.*.*.m-lackey newsgroup. The ones who are likely to
join are those who wish to participate in a discussion of Ms. Lackey's
books. Most of the usenet people we've encountered have been very,
very serious about usenet conventions, and will be unlikely to flame a
newsgroup for the sake of flaming. Please note: the "flames" (and
heated arguments) which have appeared in this thread in abm-l have
been cross-posted from news.groups, and are actually a part of the
discussion process. They are in no way to be considered part of the
future tenor of the group. Except for the fact that new members will
join rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey, and that current ones will leave,
the tenor of the group will not change; it is written into the charter
that it is to remain a flame-free and friendly newsgroup. IF THAT IS
UNCLEAR, please make suggestions (and, I hope, cc: to me via email, so
I can receive it quickly) about how the charter to be more clear.
I appreciate anyone and everyone reading this and commenting on it.
Please do not disregard this message; if you continue to have
questions, ask (and pay attention to the answer!) And I apologize for
SHOUTING in the above post.
mortaine.
mort...@ufcp.com
http://www.ufcp.com/employee/steph/steph2.htm
-----------------------------------------------
Humility is like Zen; once you think you've got it, you don't.
mort...@ufcp.com
>> For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>>
>> Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
>Gotcha Welcomewelcomewelcomewelcome!
>what a place to delurk! You couldn't make it easy and state up front it
>was a delurk!
>Get ready for the virtual food. Pull up a chair comfy rock or tree to
>lean against. Have some fresh out of the oven chocolate chip cookies and
>asorted other goodies coming your way.
>Jezzerey What's life without a little magic!
>fi...@instanet.com
Kind of like being Chosen during battle.
"I Choose you. Now get out of the way!"
mortaine. (offering some fresh-squeezed orange juice and a bagel for
delurk-breakfast.
David Ball
I use the purchased version of free agent which is agent
99d at the moment, but from what I remember, this also
applies to Free Agent.
The group list IS a simple text file named "groups.dat"...
The files with the messages in them are in a database
format, but the "groups.dat" file is editable... Theres a
file called "groups.idx" which IS in a non-readable
format...
You don't really need a text editor. Agent has an option
to display all groups, not just the groups you are
subscribed to. The menu option is different on Agent 99d,
but I am pretty sure that free agent has that capability.
Also, once you select the group list you can search it for
text phrases by selecting menu option "edit" and sub-menu
option "find", or "find next". You can also do this from the
keyboard... Crtl-f is find, and Crtl-g is find next.
Of course the usual page-up and page-down work, as well as
the mouse.
Regards,
-- David
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
David Ball: (not the singer) dave...@super.zippo.com
Middle Georgia WEB Magazine: http://www.mid-ga.com
Meth'Kilar: Dragon mage in a.b.m-l db...@ix.netcom.com
_____
Tritiana
> someone who likes reading books, that alt.books.* (and rec.books.* )
> an obvious place to look ; that was intuitive. If you need to learn
> a whole set of rules on how rec.* or the Big 8 works to find
> something then it is not intuitive. Which said, I'm not really sure
> why the group has to move at all and I don't really care if it ends up
> in rec.books.* or rec.arts.* so long as the group keeps the same
> character and doesn't lose any of the regular posters.
>
>
> Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
>
>
>
It's really fun here, hope you have fun too. Now that we know you exist,
you'll have to tell us more about yourself.
Pull up whatever's comfy and unoccupied to sit on and have some fresh
bread, chees, and fruit. Can't forget the virtual hugs!
Welcome again!
Tritiana
Taki Kogoma
message <4jem71$j9r@ns2> to news.groups:
>I doubt that you will receive any comment from vicki on this subject,
>as she is so disgusted by the flaming on this thread (due, in large
>part, to the news.groups members) that she has chosen to state her
>decision and have nothing more to do with the big-8 hierarchy. She
>has indicated that she will not participate in a rec. newgroup for
>mercedes lackey. I do not know how she plans to vote, or if she plans
>to abstain on this vote, and I do not think it appropriate to ask.
"Flaming"?
Ye gods, people. Grow a skin!
(Uh oh. I guess this may qualifiy as a flame to these poor shrinking
violets...)
In my monitoring of this thread, I have yet to see anything that goes
above 'lukewarm' on the flame-o-meter. Sure, poeple have expressed
blunt, to the point opinions. That's the way Usenet is. If you can't
deal with people saying what they think without cushioning it with a
plethora of warm fuzzies, then I don't think that Usenet is the medium
for you.
Frankly, I've seen much more heat and vitriol in rec.arts.books and
rec.arts.sf.* than in this room-temperature thread. If you find this
degree of forthrightness disturbing, then perhaps you shouldn't even
*try* for the big-8.
Gym "Torn between disgust and amusement" Quirk
--
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk (Known to some as Taki Kogoma) qu...@unm.edu
Just an article detector on the Information Supercollider.
KC2: Boursy++++ Grubor(?) Fomin+
William George Ferguson
><snip>
[snip]
>> For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>>
>> Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
>>
>>
>>
>Welcome and many greetings!
>It's really fun here, hope you have fun too. Now that we know you exist,
>you'll have to tell us more about yourself.
>Pull up whatever's comfy and unoccupied to sit on and have some fresh
>bread, chees, and fruit. Can't forget the virtual hugs!
>
>Welcome again!
>
>Tritiana
Quick reminder time (and this is the closest you're likely to see me
netcopping).
When the discussion veers away from the RFD (or other topics which may
be cross-posted) be sure to remove the other newsgroups from your TO:
or Newsgroups: line on your response. As long as it's reasonably
friendly and somewhat interesting, it's on-topic here, and friendly
greetings have Always been on-topic here, but that's not necessarily
true of cross-posted newsgroups
Kevin Eastman
Thursday March 28 1996 11:35, mort...@ufcp.com wrote to All:
m> 2. The RFD posted was for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. This has not
m> changed. There has not been enough support for
m> rec.arts.books.m-lackey to warrant changing the RFD.
I had not heard anything about this until the rasfml thing came about. If I had
seen discussions about using rabml, I would have been in here supporting it.
Personally, I think a non specific genre classification woild be better to
place an author, as authors do tend to sometimes write books that do NOT fall
under the specific classification. Do the members in that group then declare
that the non-genre book is persona non grata. I do no think this will happen,
but the roadwork is layed out for this to happen.
I can go either way on the issue. Even though I would prefer rabml, I can
handle it if I am voted down, and will still continue to post in the Mercedes
Lackey newsgroup, whichever newsgroup name is used.
Kevin
... DOS never says EXCELLENT command or filename...
--
|Fidonet: Kevin Eastman 135:69/7
|Internet: keas...@nether.linknet.ccinet.ab.ca
|
| Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.
Susan Rebecca Sebranek
rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey), you write:
-Hello em...@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU!
-
-Tuesday March 26 1996 14:31, em...@Kanpai.Stanford.EDU wrote to All:
-
- e> rec.arts.sf.written as a haven for fantasy 'and' science fiction
- e> discussion if most single fantasy author groups end up under
-
K: I quite disagree with you here. Namely for the fact that Sci-Fi and Fantasy
K: should NOT be grouped together. They are two completely genres. That is like
K: grouping Music and poetry. The two are completely seperate and should
be K:.either generically grouped or have their own grouping catagory.
-
-
-Kevin
This is something that has been debated quite a bit on alt.books.m-lackey
because a good bit of us (being by and large, newbies) didn't know, until
the RFD and crossposting began between the Lackey newsgroup and the
news.whatever newsgroup. The "sf" in rec.arts.sf.whatever stands for
"speculative fiction," not "science fiction." Now, I'm still doing
double-takes whenever I see that "sf" because I have to keep telling
myself that it _doesn't_ mean sci fi.
So, therefore, "sf" means basically anything that has been written and
published that is fiction, whether it be fantasy, science fiction, or this
or that.
Susan
ShadowBlade
<snippy>
>Whish probably includes me. I found abml because I thought, as
>someone who likes reading books, that alt.books.* (and rec.books.* )
>an obvious place to look ; that was intuitive. If you need to learn
>a whole set of rules on how rec.* or the Big 8 works to find
>something then it is not intuitive. Which said, I'm not really sure
>why the group has to move at all and I don't really care if it ends up
>in rec.books.* or rec.arts.* so long as the group keeps the same
>character and doesn't lose any of the regular posters.
>For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
welcomewelcomewelcome!!!!
This maybe wasn't the friendliest topic to delurk on, but we're
still glad to have you! Here, have a bigwarmfuzzly
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...........HUGHUGHUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...........HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUGHUG...............HUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG............................HUGHUG
HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG............................HUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG............................HUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG...HUGHUGHUG.......................HUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...........HUGHUGHUGHUGHUG...................HUGHUGHUGHUGHUGHUG
HUGHUGHUG........HUGHUGHUG...........HUGHUGHUGHUGHUG...................HUGHUGHUGHUGHUG
!!!!!
As for the rec.* discussion, I have been on use net for around 6
months, and until this discussion, I had never even HEARD of the Big
8. When I read through all (and I do mean *all*) of the newsgroups
available, I didn't give the rec.arts.sf.* a second glance because I
automatically thought "science fiction". So in my opinion, raswm-l is
the less intuitive of our choices, though I am willing to go with it.
I would actually prefer to remain an alt. group, mostly because
this whole naming thing is causing more than a little hostility.
Coming out of rant mode,
))
@====|%} ShadowBlade
))
Bethany Jo Weber
: mort...@ufcp.com appears to have submitted
: message <4jem71$j9r@ns2> to news.groups:
: >I doubt that you will receive any comment from vicki on this subject,
: >as she is so disgusted by the flaming on this thread (due, in large
: >part, to the news.groups members) that she has chosen to state her
: >decision and have nothing more to do with the big-8 hierarchy. She
: >has indicated that she will not participate in a rec. newgroup for
: >mercedes lackey. I do not know how she plans to vote, or if she plans
: >to abstain on this vote, and I do not think it appropriate to ask.
I have to admit, I don't understand this decision at all. The
majority of the group seems to have agreed that they want to go to a rec.*
group. Vicki is such an integral part of this group that if she doesn't
move the group may not. I think if she's going to make a decision that
may (in effect) prevent us from having the rec.* group , an explanation
may be in order. I'm sorry, that's just how I feel.
**********Begin reply to silly post *************
: "Flaming"?
: Ye gods, people. Grow a skin!
: (Uh oh. I guess this may qualifiy as a flame to these poor shrinking
: violets...)
<rest of silly insults snip-snip-snipped>
: Gym "Torn between disgust and amusement" Quirk
Me, too. Maybe this doesn't quailfy as a flame, but it's insulting. At
the same time, it's kind of funny to see a grown man name-calling...
If you feel that being polite to the people you're talking to, (or have
you forgotten there's a *person* on the other end of the the post?) is
tanamount to being a "shrinking violet," then I can't say your bad opinion
of our group moves me.
******End reply to silly post****************
If this same group of people decide to move to a rec.*
group, then there's no reason to believe that the amount of flames will
increase. I mean, you really think that being in a hierarcy containing
rec.arts.sf.written will lead to more weird, annoying, or indecent posts
than one containinf alt.binaries.erotica.hamsters.duct-tape? The
"flames" on this thread, if such exist, haven't been very hot, and since
they ARE from news.group members, they won't persist into the new
newgroup. So I really don't see that "disgust with flames" that won't
exist in a new rec.* group is a reason not to post to the new group.
Bethany
------------------Offical Weredragon of Rice University-------------------
"The truth is usually just an excuse for lack of imagination."
-Garak, DS9, "Improbable Cause."
But reality is *always* an excuse for lack of imagination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote of the week, month, whatever:
"A clean and neat dwelling place is the sign of a disturbed mind."
-Skandranon, Mercedes Lackey, "The Black Gryphon"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patricia A. Swan
>Hello mort...@ufcp.com!
>Thursday March 28 1996 11:35, mort...@ufcp.com wrote to All:
> m> 2. The RFD posted was for rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey. This has not
> m> changed. There has not been enough support for
> m> rec.arts.books.m-lackey to warrant changing the RFD.
>I had not heard anything about this until the rasfml thing came about. If I had
>seen discussions about using rabml, I would have been in here supporting it.
> Personally, I think a non specific genre classification woild be better to
>place an author, as authors do tend to sometimes write books that do NOT fall
>under the specific classification. Do the members in that group then declare
>that the non-genre book is persona non grata. I do no think this will happen,
>but the roadwork is layed out for this to happen.
>I can go either way on the issue. Even though I would prefer rabml, I can
>handle it if I am voted down, and will still continue to post in the Mercedes
>Lackey newsgroup, whichever newsgroup name is used.
>Kevin
The catch is that rec.books.* is actually for serious literature.
(as if books aren't a serious topic anyway *grin*) Where Misty is
a genre author. And I'm not using a *bad* word. This is how she
is technically classed as a writer (I should know, my stuff is in
the same classification in the field, and over the years we've
submitted to some of the same Marion Zimmer Bradley anthologies.)
This is how *publishers* classify her, and how *bookstores*
classify her. That's why sf.written is the proper place, because
it is *speculative fiction* not *science fiction* and Misty uses
the *same* rigorous standards for world creation as the writer of
the hardest science fiction. Misty writes on the fantasy side of
the *speculative* field, others--such as Forward and Hogan--are
on the pure, hard Science Fiction side of the field, while
others--such as Gordon Dickenson (SPACE SWIMMERS as opposed to
THE DRAGON AND THE GEORGE)and C. J. Cherryh (INHERITOR or CYTEEN
or THE KIF STRIKE BACK as opposed to THE TREE OF SWORDS AND
JEWELS or THE GOBLIN MIRROR)--swing both ways from a position in
the middle.
Puting the group in rec.books actually places her *out-of-field*
with respect to her peers and their work.
Take care,
Pat
proponent:rec.arts.sf.written.m-lackey
supporter/moderator:rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
--
Patricia A. Swan
moderator, rastb5.mod The Gray Council(sa...@deepthot.cary.nc.us)
zaf...@cygnus-wnc.com zaf...@aol.com zaf...@super.zippo.com
Carolina Word and Data Services, 213 Franklin St., Bryson City,NC
irl...@nando.net
>In article <4j7ecp$d...@lemon.easynet.co.uk>,
> pa...@easynet.co.uk (Paul Harris) wrote:
>Iain Sharp <fire...@firesong.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In article <4j4koo$c...@cegt201.bradley.edu>
>> j...@cegt201.bradley.edu "John Novak" writes:
>
>>> In <31559064....@news.primenet.com> fr...@primenet.com (William
>George
>>> Ferguson) writes:
>>>
>>> >rabm-l is clearly the more intuitive name of the 2.
>>>
>>> Only to people unfamiliar with the Big Eight naming conventions in
>>> general, and the rec.* hierarchy in particular.
>>>
>>> John S. Novak, III j...@cegt201.bradley.edu
>>> http://cegt201.bradley.edu/~jsn/index.html
>>> The Humblest Man on the Net
>>>
>
>
>someone who likes reading books, that alt.books.* (and rec.books.* )
>an obvious place to look ; that was intuitive. If you need to learn
>a whole set of rules on how rec.* or the Big 8 works to find
>something then it is not intuitive. Which said, I'm not really sure
>why the group has to move at all and I don't really care if it ends up
>in rec.books.* or rec.arts.* so long as the group keeps the same
>character and doesn't lose any of the regular posters.
>
>For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>
>Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
>
>
>
> Welcome, welcome and welcome! I looked up this newsgroup on the advice
> and the encouragement of a good friend, so I can't say if I would have found
>it otherwise. I've been trying to stay about of this name debate. I have
>little to say on the matter except that if and when we move, I hope we don't
>lose the friendly atmosphere of this group of people. I also hope we don't
>lose it over this name debate. We can disagree, but let us do it with
>courtesy.
>
>
> Jennifer of White Shadow
>
>
stuff off my computer. But Welcome! Welcome!
I hope you aren't turned off by the hostility on this thread that I've been avoiding.
Just relax, read other posts and enjoy!
Calladona
Reading lists upside down gives me headaches.
irl...@nando.net
>> For abml addicts, I suppose this constitutes a de-lurk.
>>
>> Paul (the finally forced to delurk)
>
>
>what a place to delurk! You couldn't make it easy and state up front it
>was a delurk!
>
>Get ready for the virtual food. Pull up a chair comfy rock or tree to
>lean against. Have some fresh out of the oven chocolate chip cookies and
>asorted other goodies coming your way.
>
>Jezzerey What's life without a little magic!
>fi...@instanet.com
Just had to take this and repost it to something other than the RFD,
with all RFD-related comments deleted and simply as a Delurk. Perhaps
more welcomes will come that way.
Calladona
Reading lists upside down gives me headaches.
(Along with reading the RFD stuff)
Joe Bernstein
In article <4kd2c5$2...@castle.nando.net>, irl...@nando.net wrote:
>
> Just had to take this and repost it to something other than the RFD,
> with all RFD-related comments deleted and simply as a Delurk. Perhaps
> more welcomes will come that way.
Um, um...
You *do* realize you reposted it also to news.groups, don't you?
And surely you remember how delightful *our* welcomes were when the RFD
thread got underway?
Careful! Careful! Big bad flames a-coming!!
Joe Bernstein
(Who has taken to seeing the abml/rasfml thread as welcome comic relief
while reading news.groups)
--
Joe Bernstein, free-lance writer, bank clerk and bookstore worker
speaking for himself and nobody else j...@sfbooks.com
irl...@nando.net
>Followups set to alt.books.m-lackey only
>
>In article <4kd2c5$2...@castle.nando.net>, irl...@nando.net wrote:
>
>>
>> Just had to take this and repost it to something other than the RFD,
>> with all RFD-related comments deleted and simply as a Delurk. Perhaps
>> more welcomes will come that way.
>
>Um, um...
>
>You *do* realize you reposted it also to news.groups, don't you?
>
>And surely you remember how delightful *our* welcomes were when the RFD
>thread got underway?
>
Well, I was kinda not reading it at the time!
>Careful! Careful! Big bad flames a-coming!!
>
Gosh am I sorry! I didn't mean to make anyone angry.
Just thought some wouldn't respond to it if it was in the
RFD column. Oh well, didn't work . . . .
>Joe Bernstein
>
>(Who has taken to seeing the abml/rasfml thread as welcome comic relief
>while reading news.groups)
>--
>Joe Bernstein, free-lance writer, bank clerk and bookstore worker
>speaking for himself and nobody else j...@sfbooks.com
Keith J. Townsend
:Followups set to alt.books.m-lackey only
:Um, um...
:You *do* realize you reposted it also to news.groups, don't you?
:And surely you remember how delightful *our* welcomes were when the RFD
:thread got underway?
:Careful! Careful! Big bad flames a-coming!!
:Joe Bernstein
:(Who has taken to seeing the abml/rasfml thread as welcome comic relief
:while reading news.groups)
Well then, lurk here (or in what ever the rec.arts one will be)
and get your daily dose undeluted..
Izzie, God of Chaos, First Temple of Mindless Abandon.
(I've e-mailed this to you just incase you _don't_ lurk in
abm-l.)