[DRAFT-RFD] New Newsgroup Charter v1.1

[Zenin]

Ok, I've finally got a first draft of this beast done. I'm sure it's
incomplete and will raise some feathers with a few people, but that's why
it's a draft. Please POST all comments about this draft under this thread.
Any emailed comments I get I'll consider an mistake by the poster and post
here for them. I want a full and open discussion about this document.

The CharterBot will not be put in place until this document is finalized.

If there is anything you'd like to see added, removed, or modified from this
document, now is the time to speak up!!!

And now, without further ado...

----CUT HERE----

Charter for the newsgroup, "alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror"
Written by Zenin <ze...@archive.rhps.org>
$Id: charter.txt,v 1.1 1998/05/30 14:44:07 byron Exp $

Table Of Contents

I Introduction

II About the newsgroup

III Posting guidelines
1. Appropriate posts
2. Inappropriate posts
3. -Use clear subject headers.
4. -Make clear followups.
5. -Always read all other responses before giving your own.

IV Message format
1. Intro
2. -Plain ASCII text ONLY.
3. -No encoding of ANY kind.
4. -Word wrapping at 70-75 columns, and never over 80 columns.
5. -Standard Usenet/Mail message quoting style ONLY.
6. -Forbidden quoting styles.
7. -Trim needless extra quoting.
8. -Use the standard signature delimiter of "-- \n"
9. -Keep your signature as short as possible.

V. References

I. INTRODUCTION

References marked in [number] notation and listed at the end of this
document, or hyper linked in the HTML version.

As this charter is written for a group that is already in existence, there
are a few sections left out such as the rational that one would normally
find in a newsgroup charter.

This charter is also a bit long, I admit, but it needs to be. For the
most part it's Usenet common sense, so if you've already read the
standard Usenet message and posting guild lines available on
news.newusers.answers (you HAVE read them, haven't you???) you can probably
skip this document. But when in doubt, please consult this document as the
final reference.

If you do violate it, expect to be visited by the CharterBot[0], which will
point out exactly what part of this document you violated so you can
remember to not do it again. Anyone that has a problem with the CharterBot
can Eat A Dick[tm].

This is a living document. Expect it to change over time as the needs and
concerns of the group change.

II. ABOUT THE NEWSGROUP

To provide a discussion forum for issues and topics related to
the movies, The Rocky Horror Picture Show (RHPS) and Shock Treatment (ST),
as well as related topics such as Tim Curry's latest TV show.

Discussion is open to anyone with an interest in RHPS and/or ST. This
group is not moderated, however it's users are expected to follow the
guidelines spelled out by this charter. Enforcement is first done through
the CharterBot[0], and secondarily through more, umm...personal methods.

III. POSTING GUIDELINES

III-1. Appropriate posts

Appropriate posts include, but are not limited to, the following:
-Announcements of RHPS, ST, and related events.
-How-to's for costumes, props, etc.
-Cast information.
-Auction notices and followup/status information. -But please keep
it all under one thread and use the "[AUCTION]" subject tag as described
below.
-Rocky Horror and Shock Treatment items for sale.
-The FAQ.
-Discussions about any of the above.
-Quad's nice ass

III-2. Inappropriate posts

Inappropriate posts include, but not be limited to, the following:
-Advertisements not related to RHPS or ST.
-Spam of ANY kind.
-Binary posts of ANY kind (regardless of any encoding used)
Find a web/ftp server to host them, it's not that hard.
-Personal attacks. Everyone, please try to play nice with the other boys,
girls, etc.
-Chain letters of ANY kind, including any MAKE.PENIS.FAST posts.
-ANY message cross-posted to more then 5 groups. -No vaild messages for
this group should EVER need to be cross-posted to more then 5 groups.
-ANY multi-posted message. That is, a message that is not cross-posted,
but instead posted independently to a number of groups. It's a waste
of resources and has no point. Cross-post if you need too, but don't
ever multi-post.
-Test messages. Use alt.test, that's what it's for. There is NO reason
for test messages in this group.
-Any talk about Rob's sex life or the C35 theatre.

III-3. -Use clear subject headers.

Don't just put, "I have a question" as the subject of your post. Give
some idea what you're writing about. Put "ROTOQ question", or "New
cast memebers needed". If possible, try to prepend a topic label to
your subject line. Some common labels to use are:
[AUCTION] - self explanatory
[FS] - for sale
[WTB] - Wanted to Buy
[ISO] - In search of
[OFF TOPIC] - self explanatory
[LONG] - Lengthy posting
[ANNC] or [ANNOUNCE] - Announcements, Proclamations
[RFD] - Request for Disscussion

[CAST] - Cast relations
[THEATRE] - Theatre relations
[FAN CLUB] - Fan club news and business
[DIRECT] - Cast direction
[TECH] - Technical discussions
[PROPS] - Discussions about props
[CHARACTER] - Character discussions (specify character)
[COSTUME] - Costume discussions
[CON] - Convention news and discussion
[QUAD] - Discussion about Quad and her Nice Ass
[San Jose] - Local to that city/state/country/planet.

If your subject does not fit within one of the above, feel free to create
a new one or leave it off. An example of a labeled subject header
would be:

Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New FAQ available

Thanks to Mike Bennett <m...@efn.org> for the subject label suggestion.

III-4. Make clear followups.
Do not post a followup with only, "I agree" or "I think your all wacked"
without any context provided. This makes it hard to know what you're
makeing the comment in reference to.

III-5. Always read all other responses before giving your own.
All to oftin, a question is answered over and over again because
respondents are quick to fire off there answer without checking to see if
others have done so already.

IV. MESSAGE FORMAT

IV-1. Intro

These are a number of message format rules to help keep the group from
becomming a total, unreadable, mess.

All messages are expected to conform to RFC 1036[1] AND the unofficial draft,
Son Of 1036[2]. Most importantly the issues of body format, word wrapping
at 70-75 columns, message quoting style, "trimming" of quoted text,
signatures and it's delimiter. Detail for each of these is given below, so
you don't need to dig through the above RFCs for this information.

Furthermore, use of "MIME[3]" attachments for the message body, or a copy of
the body in another format (eg, HTML[4]) is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. The use of
HTML for any part of the message body, with or without MIME encoding is
also STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. The use of any and all "VCard"[5] attachments is
also STRICTLY FORBIDDEN, as is the use of HTML for the signature.

The message body must conform to not only RFC 1036[1], son of 1036[2], and
any later revisions of RFC 1036[1], but also the following guidelines as well
even if not mentioned in the above documents.

IV-2. -Plain ASCII text ONLY.
No message body is to EVER contain non-printable ASCII text or control
characters with the exception of space, tab, and newline. Alternate
text formats based on ASCII such as HTML[4] are STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.
THIS MEENS NO "ANSI-COLOR" signatures, PERIOD. The use of "Rich text"
is also STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. When I say "plain text", I meen PLAIN TEXT.

IV-3. -No encoding of ANY kind.
The message body must not contain ANY encoding such as MIME, rot13,
uuencoding, BASE64, or non-ASCII character sets.

IV-4. -Word wrapping at 70-75 columns, and never over 80 columns.
Text lines must be wrapped at 70-75 columns to allow for quoting.
If quoting a message causes it's lines to exceed 80 columns, the
quoted lines should be them selfs word wrapped with the new lines
quoted as well.

IV-5. -Standard Usenet/Mail message quoting style ONLY.
ALL quoted text must be done per the standard convention of prepending
a string such as '> ' to the beginning of every quoted line (the exact
string is up to the user, so '# ', 'user> ', etc is valid) INCLUDING
any quoted lines that have been wrapped.

Proper quoting examples:

Joe User <joe...@foo.com> wrote:
> some quoted text
> from another message

Your response goes here.

OR

Joe User <joe...@foo.com> wrote:
Joe> some quoted text
Joe> from another message

Your response goes here.

Just make sure if you use the second quoting style that it doesn't
cause the line length to exceed 80 columns, and if it does to wrap
them as well with another "Joe> " prepended on them as well.

IV-6. -Forbidden quoting styles.

The use of the quoting style, ">>>>> quoted message <<<<<" such as
this example:

>>>>> some quoted text
from another message
with no starting line quote marks <<<<<<

is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. This style is very common from posts made
by users of American Online. I'm not sure why this is (I also see
properly quoted text from AOL members, so there is a way to do it), but
I also don't care. It's not my problem or the problem of the readers
of Usenet why AOL's software is brain dead, it's AOL's and more directly
the users of said brain dead software. This isn't even my idea, it's
per the RFCs. I'm just in *strong* agreement with the RFCs on
this issue.

IV-7. -Trim needless extra quoting.
DO NOT quote the entire body of a message. Trim it down as much as
possible, threading your replies within it whenever possible. NEVER
quote the signature unless you are writting a response directly about
the signature.

IV-8. -Use the standard signature delimiter of "-- \n"
Example:

--
-Zenin
ze...@archive.rhps.org
"I am dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated."

IV-9. -Keep your signature as short as possible.

The signature should be 4 lines or less if you can. For use in this
newsgroup, the addition of a Rocky Horror Freak Code (RHFC)[6] is not
considered part of these 4 lines, nore is the delimiter mentioned above.
Thus, a signature of:

--
-Zenin
ze...@archive.rhps.org
"I am dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated."
RHFC1.1 V!M!P1S2RBL24Y1980 P*B-R+20@H-D+100@W+200@T+5@P?L15@Y1990&1@(7@)!1
C8@W3@P@& IF&-W&&-N+M1C-! MA2{RO,PQ}M{PQ}C3B15@R15@V1O+++ D?-K1S@C0!O{IS}T5@
QNA+&+!K+!PW>&H1+! YA25+>16G{m}H{5'7"}L{CA,USA}S{f>ba12^H7k}W=

Is valid as the non-RHFC part is still under 4 lines.

V. REFERENCES

0: Zenin's CharterBot group monitor program.
1: ftp://nic.merit.edu/documents/rfc/rfc1036.txt
2: http://www.chemie.fu-berlin.de/outerspace/netnews/son-of-1036.html
3: http://www.oac.uci.edu/indiv/ehood/MIME/2045/rfc2045.html
4: http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/htbin/rfc/rfc1866.html
5: http://www.imc.org/draft-ietf-asid-mime-vcard
6: http://www.archive.rhps.org/freakcode/

-----CUT HERE-----

--
-Zenin (ze...@archive.rhps.org)
The Bawdy Caste (San Jose, CA) http://www.bawdycaste.org/
Barely Legal (Berzerkly, CA) http://www.barelylegal.org/
Zenin's Rocky Horror Archive http://www.archive.rhps.org/
RHFC1.1 V!M!P1S2RBL24Y1980 P*B-R+20@H-D+100@W+200@T+5@P?L15@Y1990&1@(7@)!1
C8@W3@P@& IF&-W&&-N+M1C-! MA2{RO,PQ}M{PQ}C3B15@R15@V1O+++ D?-K1S@C0!O{IS}T5@
QNA+&+!K+!PW>&H1+! YA25+>16G{m}H{5'7"}L{CA,USA}S{f>ba12^H7k}W=

[MrsTrotsky]

First of all, thanks for being the one to actually put this together.

Initial reactions & a couple spelling nitpicks.

>This
>group is not moderated, however it's users

~~
<nit> No apostrophe... </nit>

>Cross-post if you need too,

"to" </nit>

>III-2. Inappropriate posts
>
>Inappropriate posts include, but not be limited to, the following:
> -Advertisements not related to RHPS or ST.
> -Spam of ANY kind.

I've seen Spam defined in more than one way (off-topic advertising, general
stuff posted everywhere with no regard to relevancy, off-topic posting
altogether...). An "official" definition in the charter would help avoid
confusion.

> -Personal attacks. Everyone, please try to play nice with the other boys,
> girls, etc.

Amen. It's not that hard to be *nice,* people.

>Put "ROTOQ question", or "New cast memebers

"members"

> [OFF TOPIC] - self explanatory

Yes. We need this. (Most every other group I read already accepts OTPs as a
normal segment of the posts [as long as they're labelled as such], which made
me especially surprised to find the vehement resistance that popped up here...
not a judgement, just an observation.)

>III-5. Always read all other responses before giving your own.
> All to oftin,

"often"

>Furthermore, use of "MIME[3]" attachments for the message body, or a copy of
>the body in another format (eg, HTML[4]) is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.

Once again *amen.*

Mrs. Trotsky the Misery Bitch
"I want to go away some place nice. But no, not me. I have to stay here and get
weirder and weirder and sicker and sicker. And then I'll lose all my teeth."
-some girl named Marsha
RHFC1.2 V11A+!MSRY1997L2 P>F+>O{MC} >C IFW+N MR1V1 D1-
YA15+G{f}H{5'5"}L{SFBayArea}S?{b}

[Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell]

A lot of this is spelling nitpicks. I apologize; I specialize in that.

> This charter is also a bit long, I admit, but it needs to be. For the
> most part it's Usenet common sense, so if you've already read the
> standard Usenet message and posting guild lines available on

"guidelines"

> Discussion is open to anyone with an interest in RHPS and/or ST. This
> group is not moderated, however it's users are expected to follow the

"its users"

> III-1. Appropriate posts
>
> Appropriate posts include, but are not limited to, the following:
> -Announcements of RHPS, ST, and related events.
> -How-to's for costumes, props, etc.
> -Cast information.
> -Auction notices and followup/status information. -But please keep
> it all under one thread and use the "[AUCTION]" subject tag as described
> below.
> -Rocky Horror and Shock Treatment items for sale.
> -The FAQ.
> -Discussions about any of the above.
> -Quad's nice ass

Looks pretty good. I would add the request that multiple notices of
items for sale not be posted more than once every couple of weeks or so.

>
> III-2. Inappropriate posts
>
> Inappropriate posts include, but not be limited to, the following:
> -Advertisements not related to RHPS or ST.
> -Spam of ANY kind.
> -Binary posts of ANY kind (regardless of any encoding used)
> Find a web/ftp server to host them, it's not that hard.

I would note that posting "Hey, I have a binary--can someone post it for
me on their web page" or posting it to some binaries group and telling
people where (you might want to note which groups would be appropriate)
*is* appropriate.

-ANY message cross-posted to more then 5 groups. -No vaild messages for
this group should EVER need to be cross-posted to more then 5 groups.

"valid"

> -Test messages. Use alt.test, that's what it's for. There is NO reason
> for test messages in this group.

Thank you.

> -Any talk about Rob's sex life or the C35 theatre.

Err, I think the C35 theatre might be relevant. Talking about Rocky
politics is unpleasant, but sometimes necessary and helpful. But please
do leave "Rob's sex life" in there. :-)

I do think that it should be mentioned that personal chitchat of the
"Hi, Joe Blow!" "Hi Jenny, loved the show last night!" sort should be
kept to email. (Please note that I'm not including "I went to go see
the show at [Theater] last night and it was great. They did this, and
that, and some other thing" here.)

>
> III-3. -Use clear subject headers.
>
> Don't just put, "I have a question" as the subject of your post. Give
> some idea what you're writing about. Put "ROTOQ question", or "New
> cast memebers needed". If possible, try to prepend a topic label to

"members"

"prepend"? This isn't in my dictionary. How about "preface" or
"attach" or "include a topic label with"?

> your subject line. Some common labels to use are:
> [AUCTION] - self explanatory
> [FS] - for sale
> [WTB] - Wanted to Buy
> [ISO] - In search of
> [OFF TOPIC] - self explanatory

Please do include an "obRHPS" if at all possible in off-topic posts (a
small nugget that is on-topic)

> [LONG] - Lengthy posting
> [ANNC] or [ANNOUNCE] - Announcements, Proclamations

This would be where to put "hey, check out my URL," right?
{snip}

> [San Jose] - Local to that city/state/country/planet.

Please note also that some newsreaders allow you to post items to a
specific [usually local] geographical area and that people should use
this feature when available. This way you aren't posting items about
Lincoln, NE to every newsfeed everywhere on the planet.

I really like these abbreviations, but I know I'll never remember them
all...still, please keep 'em in!

> III-4. Make clear followups.
> Do not post a followup with only, "I agree" or "I think your all wacked"

"you're"

> without any context provided. This makes it hard to know what you're
> makeing the comment in reference to.

"making"

And please don't post "me toos" even if you do include the context! If
you want to say "me too" include some supporting info or just don't
bother.

>
> III-5. Always read all other responses before giving your own.
> All to oftin, a question is answered over and over again because

"too often"

> respondents are quick to fire off there answer without checking to

"their answer"

see if
> others have done so already.

Very good point. I know I've been guilty of this. Glad you included
it.

>
> IV. MESSAGE FORMAT
>
> IV-1. Intro
>
> These are a number of message format rules to help keep the group from
> becomming a total, unreadable, mess.
>
> All messages are expected to conform to RFC 1036[1] AND the unofficial draft,
> Son Of 1036[2].

Am I the only person who doesn't know what the hell this means?

Most importantly the issues of body format, word wrapping
> at 70-75 columns, message quoting style, "trimming" of quoted text,
> signatures and it's delimiter.

"its"

I'd say "Most important are"--right now this sentence has no verb. (OK,
I'm being anal. My mother is an English teacher--so sue me.)

> IV-2. -Plain ASCII text ONLY.
> No message body is to EVER contain non-printable ASCII text or control
> characters with the exception of space, tab, and newline. Alternate
> text formats based on ASCII such as HTML[4] are STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.
> THIS MEENS NO "ANSI-COLOR" signatures, PERIOD.

"MEANS"

> The use of "Rich text"
> is also STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. When I say "plain text", I meen PLAIN TEXT.

"mean"

> IV-4. -Word wrapping at 70-75 columns, and never over 80 columns.
> Text lines must be wrapped at 70-75 columns to allow for quoting.
> If quoting a message causes it's lines to exceed 80 columns, the

"its"

> quoted lines should be them selfs word wrapped with the new lines
> quoted as well.

"themselves"

> Just make sure if you use the second quoting style that it doesn't
> cause the line length to exceed 80 columns, and if it does to wrap
> them as well with another "Joe> " prepended on them as well.

There's that "prepended" word again..."prefacing"? "in front of"?

> is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. This style is very common from posts made
> by users of American Online.

"America Online"

I'm not sure why this is (I also see
> properly quoted text from AOL members, so there is a way to do it), but
> I also don't care. It's not my problem or the problem of the readers
> of Usenet why AOL's software is brain dead, it's AOL's and more directly
> the users of said brain dead software. This isn't even my idea, it's
> per the RFCs. I'm just in *strong* agreement with the RFCs on
> this issue.

You might want to make this bit a little less personal. I'd cut this
off after "so there is a way to do it)."

> IV-8. -Use the standard signature delimiter of "-- \n"
> Example:

\n? My ignorance is showing again.

> IV-9. -Keep your signature as short as possible.
>
> The signature should be 4 lines or less if you can. For use in this
> newsgroup, the addition of a Rocky Horror Freak Code (RHFC)[6] is not
> considered part of these 4 lines, nore is the delimiter mentioned

"nor"

> Thus, a signature of:
>
> --
> -Zenin
> ze...@archive.rhps.org
> "I am dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated."
> RHFC1.1 V!M!P1S2RBL24Y1980 P*B-R+20@H-D+100@W+200@T+5@P?L15@Y1990&1@(7@)!1
> C8@W3@P@& IF&-W&&-N+M1C-! MA2{RO,PQ}M{PQ}C3B15@R15@V1O+++ D?-K1S@C0!O{IS}T5@
> QNA+&+!K+!PW>&H1+! YA25+>16G{m}H{5'7"}L{CA,USA}S{f>ba12^H7k}W=
>
> Is valid as the non-RHFC part is still under 4 lines.

"is" should not be capitalized.

I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less, period.
Anyone else have an opinion on this?

Regards,

Ruth Fink-Winter
--

The Completely Crazy Rocky Horror cast--Des Plaines, IL
wbar...@NOSPAMwwa.com (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)
http://www.wwa.com/~wbarsell

[Duncan Campbell]

Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell <wbar...@wwa.com> wrote:
>Zenin proposed:

>>
>> Don't just put, "I have a question" as the subject of your post. Give
>> some idea what you're writing about. Put "ROTOQ question", or "New
>> cast memebers needed". If possible, try to prepend a topic label to
>

>"prepend"? This isn't in my dictionary. How about "preface" or
>"attach" or "include a topic label with"?
>

prepend: to add new text to the beginning of existing text
(see also)
append: to add new text to the end of existing text.

>
>Please note also that some newsreaders allow you to post items to a
>specific [usually local] geographical area and that people should use
>this feature when available. This way you aren't posting items about
>Lincoln, NE to every newsfeed everywhere on the planet.
>

this feature is implemented in most newsreaders but, in
general, does not work. for example, in this area, posts
with Distrubution set to "local" are rejected as unwanted
by the news server, while posts with Distribution set to
"slo" are distributed worldwide. "slo" is the city name...

>>
>> All messages are expected to conform to RFC 1036[1] AND the unofficial draft,
>> Son Of 1036[2].
>
>Am I the only person who doesn't know what the hell this means?
>

I read Son Of RFC1036 (via the link in the references section)
this afternoon.

It specifies very carefully what may or may not be in the headers
of a message. In general is you screw this up, the server will
reject your message and you'll know it right away. It specifies
that the body of the message is up to the user's discression, and
may include MIME and its various headers.

As far as newsgroup content, it is not particularly relevant.

>
>> IV-8. -Use the standard signature delimiter of "-- \n"
>> Example:
>
>\n? My ignorance is showing again.
>

standard printable representation for "newline". used in
C programming. useable as input to many programs written
in C.

in this context,
a line consisting of only "-- " (note the trailing space)
would be more clear.

>> IV-9. -Keep your signature as short as possible.
>>

>> --
>> -Zenin
>> ze...@archive.rhps.org
>> "I am dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated."
>> RHFC1.1 V!M!P1S2RBL24Y1980 P*B-R+20@H-D+100@W+200@T+5@P?L15@Y1990&1@(7@)!1
>> C8@W3@P@& IF&-W&&-N+M1C-! MA2{RO,PQ}M{PQ}C3B15@R15@V1O+++ D?-K1S@C0!O{IS}T5@
>> QNA+&+!K+!PW>&H1+! YA25+>16G{m}H{5'7"}L{CA,USA}S{f>ba12^H7k}W=
>>
>> Is valid as the non-RHFC part is still under 4 lines.
>

>I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less, period.
>Anyone else have an opinion on this?
>

>> --

>> ze...@archive.rhps.org "I am dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated."
>> RHFC1.1 V!M!P1S2RBL24Y1980 P*B-R+20@H-D+100@W+200@T+5@P?L15@Y1990&1@(7@)!1
>> C8@W3@P@& IF&-W&&-N+M1C-! MA2{RO,PQ}M{PQ}C3B15@R15@V1O+++ D?-K1S@C0!O{IS}T5@
>> QNA+&+!K+!PW>&H1+! YA25+>16G{m}H{5'7"}L{CA,USA}S{f>ba12^H7k}W=

(same info, four lines)

Personally I don't take the time to parse each RHFC signature
i see, so it's wasted space to me. In a .sig I dislike mostly
blank lines (ie "-Zenin" above) and really dislike cutsie ascii
graphics.

>Regards,
>
>Ruth Fink-Winter ( this lass sure is animated )

duncan
--
touch me

[Brady Ferguson]

Zenin wrote:
> Charter for the newsgroup, "alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror"
> Written by Zenin <ze...@archive.rhps.org>
> $Id: charter.txt,v 1.1 1998/05/30 14:44:07 byron Exp $

After reading the whole thing.... (at 5am after rocky..... why AM I
awake?).... I have NO disagreements.

I didn't see (correct me if I'm wrong... I AM tired) anything regarding
taking things out of the NG to email. Maybe something about.... XXX
number of posts/requests to take "it"(flaming, inappropriate, nobody
cares postings....) to email is a good indication that you should. OK,
that didn't make much sense... but I'm sure you get my drift.

I'm still wearing a bra. Things that make you go hmmmm.
--
"More Drunk" Brady Ferguson
Asst Director/Webmaster/Crim/Brad
Barely Legal-Berkeley CA
http://www.barelylegal.org

RHFC1.02 V200@P1SY3 PB80+C1E1-D5W90+S2+L13Y2&& C3B1W1S2
IW&+N+C-M1 MM1C3B4R10@V5@O+ D+T0500

[Ronald Maxwell]

Brady Ferguson wrote:

>
> Zenin wrote:
> > Charter for the newsgroup, "alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror"
> > Written by Zenin <ze...@archive.rhps.org>

Snipped for brevity.....

Failure to comply with the above mentioned "sanctioned" charter
means.... ? What?

This is all common sense! However, this will not stop the continuing
anti-rob, other cast bashing, 14 year old "I love Tim Curry did he ever
do another movie?", how do I become Richard's love slave, I have the
original Brad/Riff scene cut out of the movie, posters that frequent the
net. The charter doesn't mean anything unless it is enforceable. Also
by stating "Not Limited To" means anything goes. O.k. my
anti-north-of-west-podunk-cast flame falls under the "Not limited to"
category.

Congrats. You have just re-invented the wheel. It looks great, has a
good beat, I might even be able to dance to it but it is basically
useless.

The fastest way to kill this sort of crap posting is to not post
replies and just ignore it!!! Period. I once got caught up in the whole
thing and learned a valuable lesson. But some people just don't learn.
It just shows the overall maturity level of the individuals who are
repeat offenders.

Besides...

ALL OF THE MAIN OFFENDERS OF THE CHARTER ARE NOT NEWBIES!! 80% PERCENT
OF ALL HE SAID/SHE SAID POSTS and FLAMES ARE FROM LONG TIME PERFORMERS
WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER! YET CHOOSE NOT TO SET GOOD EXAMPLES.

Hello! Wake up and smell the coffee!

As for too many people replying to the same post. News readers propagate
postings at different times some may be behind a day, a week, or skiip
your reply all together. Just because 6 people replied the same way to
the same question doesn't mean they saw the other responses. You don't
have to read every response just skip them.

Here is the problem..... RHPS/RHS/ST/star news is a very, extrememly
limited subject. The movies never change and the stars are in other
movies once in a while. By throwing a charter like this out on the net
you may "scare" off newbies who would love to get involved.

IMHO - My US$.02

Ron Maxwell

[Thumper43]

Ello

<<Any talk about Rob's sex life or the C35 theatre>>

Thank the GODS you put that in there..
but if ya did your research you'd have learned that
C35 closed down about 1 1/2 years ago.

Just a perfect example of someone posting about someone/something they know
nothing about.

love and later,
**HAPPY NOODLE BOY**
Keeper of the *Book of Happy*
"Seems like everybody's got, something
I have not, a reason not to DIE!
So I say DEATH to Mr. Right,
'Cause thats not ME!"

[Arthur Levesque]

Zenin (ze...@bawdycaste.org) wrote:
Z> -Any talk about Rob's sex life or the C35 theatre.

We really shouldn't (as a general rule, there may be exceptions) be
discussing other people's sex lives at all... No offense, but I really
don't need to know what you people are doing; and I'm sure you wouldn't
want to know what I was doing if I were in fact doing anything... I've
known many people to get upset by the overwhelming amount of gossip that
travels through the average cast; especially when a sizable percentage of
it is inaccurate.
--
/\ Arthur Levesque 2A4W <*> b...@boog.orgASM =/\= http://boog.org __
\B\ack King of the Potato People =/\= "I hate rainbows!" [fnord] (oO)
\S\lash Member of a vast right-wing conspiracy (-O-) Urban Spaceman /||\
\/ (Looks like Lloyd picked the wrong week to stop sniffing oxygen)

[RiFF4711]

><<Any talk about Rob's sex life or the C35 theatre>>
>
>Thank the GODS you put that in there.

>but if ya did your research you'd have learned that
>C35 closed down about 1 1/2 years ago.
>Just a perfect example of someone posting about someone/something they
>know nothing about.

Actually, I believe that was put in there because it was one of the main things
I wrote that I feel doesn't belong on the NG. I know the C35 has been closed
for some time now, and I know stories of the hell that went on there and in
cast bickering etc etc etc. That stuff really doesn't belong on the NG, so to
best include all of that in an example, I sited the C35. Then Byron included it
in the new charter proposal (to pacify me I assume)... But rest assured, I knew
what I was talking about when I mentioned it, and again, the talk of that stuff
really has no place here IMNSHO.

Mark B. --- The Roaming RiFF RaFF

-The preceeding announcement has been paid for by the [nWo] New World Order-
"Respect My Authoritaaaaiii" - Eric Cartman

[K-]

Plan9 wrote:

> > Is valid as the non-RHFC part is still under 4 lines.

> My .sig is a valad way of sharing information about myself. It is 7
> lines I think, howevet, I don't feel that it is redundant. Must I cut
> it down in order to continue to post on the ng?

Ditto. I had no idea people didn't like long sig files. I suppose there's a lot I could cut down.

--
____
/ __ \ ___ -----
| /OO\ | <------<<< ___-----
\____/ -----

_.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._
= ini...@slip.net =
= Oh my god, they killed Inikini! =
^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^
____
On the Internet, / __ \
nobody can tell that | /XX\ |
I'm God. \____/

[jno...@gci-net.com]

I

> After reading the whole thing.... (at 5am after rocky..... why AM I
> awake?).... I have NO disagreements.

I do, that's just what we need in this newsgroup rules to remember. I
personally vote for common sense in titles rather than the elaborate system
Zenin has proposed. I had one ot two other disagreements, but I'll get to
those next weekend when I can re-read them and actually think about htem.

> I'm still wearing a bra. Things that make you go hmmmm.

Brady, seek professional help. Now! Before it's too late and you get that
surgery (it's irrevocable, or at least that's what I hear from the Swedish
doctors.)

;)

James

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

[Plan9]

On 30 May 1998 14:45:48 GMT, Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
>
>III-3. -Use clear subject headers.
>
> Don't just put, "I have a question" as the subject of your post. Give
> some idea what you're writing about. Put "ROTOQ question", or "New
> cast memebers needed". If possible, try to prepend a topic label to
> your subject line. Some common labels to use are:
> [AUCTION] - self explanatory
> [FS] - for sale
> [WTB] - Wanted to Buy
> [ISO] - In search of
> [OFF TOPIC] - self explanatory
> [LONG] - Lengthy posting
> [ANNC] or [ANNOUNCE] - Announcements, Proclamations
> [RFD] - Request for Disscussion
>

OK, isn't this a little redundant? As long as the posts headers are
clear in the posts content, I don't see why we need a system to
indicate what the posts are about. I for one can usually tell what
the posts are about from the headers and we have never used this
system. I don't want to have to have a copy of the charter next to me
whenever I want to post to use the proper topic label, lest have the
wrath of the bot uppon me!

>
>IV-9. -Keep your signature as short as possible.
>
> The signature should be 4 lines or less if you can. For use in this
> newsgroup, the addition of a Rocky Horror Freak Code (RHFC)[6] is not
> considered part of these 4 lines, nore is the delimiter mentioned above.
> Thus, a signature of:
>
>--
>-Zenin
>ze...@archive.rhps.org
>"I am dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated."
>RHFC1.1 V!M!P1S2RBL24Y1980 P*B-R+20@H-D+100@W+200@T+5@P?L15@Y1990&1@(7@)!1
>C8@W3@P@& IF&-W&&-N+M1C-! MA2{RO,PQ}M{PQ}C3B15@R15@V1O+++ D?-K1S@C0!O{IS}T5@
>QNA+&+!K+!PW>&H1+! YA25+>16G{m}H{5'7"}L{CA,USA}S{f>ba12^H7k}W=
>
> Is valid as the non-RHFC part is still under 4 lines.

My .sig is a valad way of sharing information about myself. It is 7
lines I think, howevet, I don't feel that it is redundant. Must I cut
it down in order to continue to post on the ng?

Louie "Plan9" P! (remove the "nospam" to reply by E-Mail!)
RHFC1.2 V4A+SRY1995L2 P?>R WNC&7{#RHPS EFNET}M0(2) C1B2R16V3O- Q?NA YA17G{m}H{5'4}L{Calgary,AB,CAN}S?m>bA15-18W115
Loyal Ed Wood worshipper!
Handy STS Prefect!
Fab Buck's Rock Video JC!
"Jason Vorhees was an Elm Street kid..."-FREDDY VS JASON (by Peter Briggs)
C U round like a record! (Nell)

[Allanah Myles]

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
[ ... snip ... ]

As Gene Spafford once said, (paraphrasing):
Trying to organize (ab)usenet is like trying to herd cats.

Good luck with your efforts, but as an alt.* hierarchy newsgroup,
we're all free to ignore your charter. Now, if this is an RFD for
something like rec.arts.rocky-horror or something... basically, if
you want to be able to exercise any control over the content
what-so-ever, you'll need to make a moderated newsgroup. Good luck.

: $Id: charter.txt,v 1.1 1998/05/30 14:44:07 byron Exp $

Wow, revision control. You're a stud.

: [QUAD] - Discussion about Quad and her Nice Ass

And why can't we have:
[ROB] - Discussion of Rob K. and his Nice Ass

Fine, we play favorites here. Am I reading the a.c-m.r-h charter
proposal or the Communist Manifesto?

: IV-2. -Plain ASCII text ONLY.

: No message body is to EVER contain non-printable ASCII text or control
: characters with the exception of space, tab, and newline. Alternate
: text formats based on ASCII such as HTML[4] are STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.
: THIS MEENS NO "ANSI-COLOR" signatures, PERIOD. The use of "Rich text"
: is also STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. When I say "plain text", I meen PLAIN TEXT.

How about "meaning" too? Or do we just "meen"[sic] here?

: IV-3. -No encoding of ANY kind.

: The message body must not contain ANY encoding such as MIME, rot13,
: uuencoding, BASE64, or non-ASCII character sets.

So, you're saying that non-US readers aren't welcome to post here?
I guess you assume no one outside the US knows about RHPS, or has an
ongoing show..

Basically, I think all you've outlined in the charter is "good (ab)usenet
ettiquette," but as an alt.* hierarchy newsgroup, your charter will be
essentially unenforcable. So, why bother?

-Dossy

--
URL: http://www.panoptic.com/~dossy -< BORK BORK! >- E-MAIL: do...@panoptic.com
Now I'm who I want to be, where I want to be, doing what I've always said I
would and yet I feel I haven't won at all... (Aug 9, 95: Goodbye, JG.)
"You should change your .sig; not that the world revolves around me." -s. sadie

[Mike Bennett]

K- wrote:

>
> Plan9 wrote:
>
> > > Is valid as the non-RHFC part is still under 4 lines.

> > My .sig is a valad way of sharing information about myself. It is 7
> > lines I think, howevet, I don't feel that it is redundant. Must I cut
> > it down in order to continue to post on the ng?
>

> Ditto. I had no idea people didn't like long sig files. I suppose there's a lot I could cut down.

I also have a rather large .sig file. (see below) However, I delete
specific lines depending on who I'm writing to, or which NG I'm posting
to. Give it a try....

Also, some of you will notice I've cut the legal crap off the end. It
was just way too long and didn't really work anyway.
(And there is much rejoicing!!!)
--
Mike Bennett
aka Brenainn MacCuUladh (Barony of Adiantum, AnTir)
aka Crimmy (Forbidden Fruit, Eugene OR)
http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Stage/3480
m...@efn.org

RHFC1.2 V400@M75@A+P4SRBY16L20s7
P350@W+280@E35@D35@BtJtRtH-tO{MC125@}XtP125@Y15L12&&(6) C I
MC3+B25@R22T6V4O+++ D{Lyons}35@K7 Q?NA YA33B0GmH{70}Sfa>18

....Give a man a beer, he'll waste an hour.
Teach a man to brew and he'll waste a lifetime....

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
: Good luck with your efforts, but as an alt.* hierarchy newsgroup,

: we're all free to ignore your charter.

The charter explains to some degree how it's going to be
enforced. Are people free to ignore the charter? Sure, just
as the are in any other non-moderated group. Are there
penalties for continued posts in disregard of a group's
charter? Hell yes, even under alt.*.

: Now, if this is an RFD for

: something like rec.arts.rocky-horror or something...

I'd like to see something under rec.* myself, but this
isn't likely to happen easily. Besides, there's something
about Rocky that it belongs in a renegade alt.* group.

: basically, if

: you want to be able to exercise any control over the content
: what-so-ever, you'll need to make a moderated newsgroup. Good luck.

Moderated groups can be made under alt.* as well, but would be
hard to do. This is not an announcement or information only
group. If all messages have to go through a moderated there would
be needless delays. An auto-moderator might be an option, but
only if the charter and CharterBot fail to curb the current problems
enough.

: : $Id: charter.txt,v 1.1 1998/05/30 14:44:07 byron Exp $
: Wow, revision control. You're a stud.

Grin.

: : [QUAD] - Discussion about Quad and her Nice Ass
: And why can't we have:

: [ROB] - Discussion of Rob K. and his Nice Ass

Nope. These posts are explicitly disallowed earlier in the
charter. :-)

: Fine, we play favorites here. Am I reading the a.c-m.r-h charter

: proposal or the Communist Manifesto?

A bit of both, I'd say. <grin>

: : IV-3. -No encoding of ANY kind.

: : The message body must not contain ANY encoding such as MIME, rot13,
: : uuencoding, BASE64, or non-ASCII character sets.

: So, you're saying that non-US readers aren't welcome to post here?

: I guess you assume no one outside the US knows about RHPS, or has an
: ongoing show..

Unity of information begins with unity of language.

No problem. I'll do as many other groups have, and name English
as the official group language. Anyone can post, from anywere,
about anything having to do with RHPS, happening in any part of
the globe or for that matter the known and unknown universe, as
long as they do it in English.

Like it or not, English is the standard language for international
communications in close to every country on the planet. Closer to
home, if someone posts in Japanize (guesstimate) only about 1 in a
100 readers could read it, and thus it's likely to be deemed unfit
for the group based solely on lack of interest by the majority of
the group's readers.

: Basically, I think all you've outlined in the charter is "good (ab)usenet

: ettiquette," but as an alt.* hierarchy newsgroup, your charter will be
: essentially unenforcable. So, why bother?

You're mistaken. One can (as many have) lose your account for
simple continued disregard of a group's charter (as per most ISP's
terms of usage disclaimer). Despite what you might like to belive,
the Internet isn't free by any stretch. It never has been and if
we're lucky it never will. The Internet is (at this point in
history) a self governing community with standard practices on
exactly when and how that governing will take place.

Yes, very much in alt.* as everywhere else.

[Zenin]

K- <ini...@slip.net> wrote:
: Ditto. I had no idea people didn't like long sig files. I suppose there's a lot I could cut down.

Probably because your newsread/ISP didn't auto-subscribe to the
standard new user groups like they should have.

There is a standard Usenet FAQ that defines sigs longer then 4
lines as being a Bad Thing[tm] (I'll find the URI if anyone can't
find it themself). In the charter, I've tried to make this a little
more flexible by defining RHFC as excluded from this line count.

[Zenin]

Plan9 <pear...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>snip<
: OK, isn't this a little redundant?

Yes, but that's the point, kinda...

: As long as the posts headers are

: clear in the posts content, I don't see why we need a system to
: indicate what the posts are about.

It lets people scan the list *much* faster. If you're looking
for Shock Treatment posts, "[SHOCK] Who's playing in the next con?"
or "[SHOCK] How to make Janet's dress?" would help a lot and is
almost no extra effort. Many other groups have adopted this
system, and even if only a 1/3 of the posts use it it helps a lot.

: I for one can usually tell what

: the posts are about from the headers and we have never used this
: system. I don't want to have to have a copy of the charter next to me
: whenever I want to post to use the proper topic label, lest have the
: wrath of the bot uppon me!

The labels are pretty self-explanatory and based of standard
convention. A copy of the charter shouldn't be needed to understand
or use them. The list isn't official (as was/is the case in the soap
groups), and is optional in use. The charter doesn't demand there
use, it only suggests it and a few of the standard tags used
already if you chose to use them.

>snip<
: My .sig is a valad way of sharing information about myself. It is 7

: lines I think, howevet, I don't feel that it is redundant.

Maybe not, but from looking at it could be cut down quite a bit
without losing any content. BTW, the charter does exclude the
RHFC from the line count, so you'd only be at 6. It also says, "if
possible" so if anyone does have a legitimate reason for using
a few more lines it's ok. -A 20 line sig however, would never
have a legitimate reason, but 6 or 7 lines isn't going to
kill anyone.

: Must I cut it down in order to continue to post on the ng?

Nope, but it's considered rude to have a sig longer then 4 lines,
as there really isn't a valid case for anything longer. The CharterBot
may also visit you, but at the most this would be once every 30 days (it
tracks who it has sent what message in what amount of time).

: Louie "Plan9" P! (remove the "nospam" to reply by E-Mail!)

: RHFC1.2 V4A+SRY1995L2 P?>R WNC&7{#RHPS EFNET}M0(2) C1B2R16V3O- Q?NA YA17G{m}H{5'4}L{Calgary,AB,CAN}S?m>bA15-18W115
: Loyal Ed Wood worshipper!
: Handy STS Prefect!
: Fab Buck's Rock Video JC!
: "Jason Vorhees was an Elm Street kid..."-FREDDY VS JASON (by Peter Briggs)
: C U round like a record! (Nell)

Let's take a look at this. Number one, you have no sig delimiter.
This is just a matter of adding "-- \n" (dash, dash, space, newline)
before it (see my sig for an example). If your newsreader is the
one attaching the sig, it should already be doing this for you.
-It's also not considered as one of the lines of your sig.

Second, your quotes are pretty short. Need they be on multiple
lines? How about this format:

--

Louie "Plan9" P! (remove the "nospam" to reply by E-Mail!)
RHFC1.2 V4A+SRY1995L2 P?>R WNC&7{#RHPS EFNET}M0(2) C1B2R16V3O- Q?NA YA17G{m}H{5'4}L{Calgary,AB,CAN}S?m>bA15-18W115

Loyal Ed Wood worshipper! - Handy STS Prefect! - Fab Buck's Rock Video JC!

"Jason Vorhees was an Elm Street kid..." -FREDDY VS JASON (by Peter Briggs)
"C U round like a record!" (Nell)

That cuts it down to 3 lines if you don't count the RHFC.

BTW, it's also against RFC 1036 to knowingly use an invalid email
address in your headers, spam or no spam. Please learn to use
mail filters (ala procmail). They make life in general much better
for all.

[Zenin]

jno...@gci-net.com wrote:
>snip<
: I do, that's just what we need in this newsgroup rules to remember. I

: personally vote for common sense in titles rather than the elaborate system
: Zenin has proposed.

The tags are only there as a suggested form, not a strict
requirement. Maybe I should make that point clearer. Would you or
anyone else still be against them in the charter for optional use?

[Zenin]

Thumper43 <thum...@aol.com> wrote:
: <<Any talk about Rob's sex life or the C35 theatre>>
: Thank the GODS you put that in there..
: but if ya did your research you'd have learned that

: C35 closed down about 1 1/2 years ago.
:
: Just a perfect example of someone posting about someone/something they know
: nothing about.

The reference was to the small flood of articles about C35 gossip
that occurred a year or more ago, most of which should probably
not have ever seen the newsgroup or at best been done with better
subject headers.

--
-Zenin (ze...@archive.rhps.org)
The Bawdy Caste (San Jose, CA) http://www.bawdycaste.org/
Barely Legal (Berzerkly, CA) http://www.barelylegal.org/
Zenin's Rocky Horror Archive http://www.archive.rhps.org/

[Zenin]

Ronald Maxwell <rmax...@nyct.com> wrote:
: Failure to comply with the above mentioned "sanctioned" charter
: means.... ? What?

As mentioned in the charter, the CharterBot will likely pay
you a visit. Failing that, and repeated disregard for the
charter and/or basic rules of Usenet, anyone is free to
contact the user's ISP/NSP and issue a complaint. Such
violations of Usenet are in direct violation of most ISP's
terms of use agreements, as well as the ISP's NSP's terms
of use. This is the "more personal means" eluded to in the
charter.

: This is all common sense!

Mostly, yes. Most charters are. This charter even points that
out in the intro.

As someone quite correctly said once, "Common sense isn't very
common". Spelling it out often does wonders.

: However, this will not stop the continuing

: anti-rob, other cast bashing, 14 year old "I love Tim Curry did he ever
: do another movie?", how do I become Richard's love slave, I have the
: original Brad/Riff scene cut out of the movie, posters that frequent the
: net.

I never said it will, nothing is perfect after all. But it might
slow them down a bit, which is all that's really needed.

: The charter doesn't mean anything unless it is enforceable.

And it is. That is one of the reasons groups have charters,
even in alt.*. -You can't create any group, alt included, without
a charter.

: Also

: by stating "Not Limited To" means anything goes. O.k. my
: anti-north-of-west-podunk-cast flame falls under the "Not limited to"
: category.

True, but it's meant to serve as a list of examples, not a
definitive list (which would be impossible in any group). The
requirement to stay on topic (in general) curbs the extra slack.

Like most charters, this one is not meant to be enforced with an
iron fist either. Everything has a gray area, and this group
is no exception.

: Congrats. You have just re-invented the wheel.

We had no charter, therefor we had no wheel. This wheel is
built from the blue plans of many other wheels, but it is still
it's own wheel.

: It looks great, has a
: good beat, I might even be able to dance to it but it is basically
: useless.

We'll see. It's only as good as the users it represents. If the
group is behind it, it will stand. If not, it will fail. It's
that simple. Constructive comments will help it, negative comments
won't.

: The fastest way to kill this sort of crap posting is to not post

: replies and just ignore it!!! Period.

Yes. However every gun we can get a hold of will help.

>snip<
: Besides...

: ALL OF THE MAIN OFFENDERS OF THE CHARTER ARE NOT NEWBIES!! 80% PERCENT

Yep, which is the first part of CharterBot's job. That is, to
email a copy of the charter (with other basic info) to *everyone*
that posts there first message to the group. This is done in
other groups and works great. We don't need a moderated group,
just a little bit of self control and information. As mentioned
elsewhere in this thread, many people don't even know they shouldn't
use > 4 line sigs even though this is a basic part of Usenet
rules.

: As for too many people replying to the same post. News readers propagate

: postings at different times some may be behind a day, a week, or skiip
: your reply all together. Just because 6 people replied the same way to
: the same question doesn't mean they saw the other responses. You don't
: have to read every response just skip them.

It's a best effort guildline, not a hard rule. I'm the news
admin at my company, and very much aware of the inter-workings
of the Usenet news systems. Once again, it's meant to reduce
the noise, not eliminate it.

: Here is the problem..... RHPS/RHS/ST/star news is a very, extrememly

: limited subject. The movies never change and the stars are in other
: movies once in a while. By throwing a charter like this out on the net
: you may "scare" off newbies who would love to get involved.

How does it "scare" them off? IMHO, if Rocky was so limited of
a subject, we'd still be posting in alt.cult-movies if at all.

[Zenin]

Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell <wbar...@wwa.com> wrote:

: A lot of this is spelling nitpicks. I apologize; I specialize in that.

It's ok, I need all the spelling help I can get. :-)

>snip<
: Looks pretty good. I would add the request that multiple notices of

: items for sale not be posted more than once every couple of weeks or so.

Hmm, auction notices, or just plain FS stuff? I agree that FS
stuff should have limited reposts. Auction stuff (if they
don't want to use ebay, which is there choice), may need more
frequent posts. If it's kept in the same thread, it shouldn't
be a problem IMHO, but I'm open to comments.

: I would note that posting "Hey, I have a binary--can someone post it for

: me on their web page" or posting it to some binaries group and telling
: people where (you might want to note which groups would be appropriate)
: *is* appropriate.

I like this.

: I do think that it should be mentioned that personal chitchat of the

: "Hi, Joe Blow!" "Hi Jenny, loved the show last night!" sort should be
: kept to email. (Please note that I'm not including "I went to go see
: the show at [Theater] last night and it was great. They did this, and
: that, and some other thing" here.)

Ok.

: "prepend"? This isn't in my dictionary. How about "preface" or

: "attach" or "include a topic label with"?

Opposite of "append". Maybe it's out of computer use, but it's
in my /etc/words database.

: Please do include an "obRHPS" if at all possible in off-topic posts (a

: small nugget that is on-topic)

Er, ok... What's "ob" mean? I seem to remember something like
this long, long ago, but never cared enough before to figure
it out.

: > [ANNC] or [ANNOUNCE] - Announcements, Proclamations

: This would be where to put "hey, check out my URL," right?

Yep, but I'd hope a better subject line be used like, "[ANNOUNCE] VI
updates web page".

: > [San Jose] - Local to that city/state/country/planet.

: Please note also that some newsreaders allow you to post items to a
: specific [usually local] geographical area and that people should use
: this feature when available. This way you aren't posting items about
: Lincoln, NE to every newsfeed everywhere on the planet.

Useless at this point in time. Even local area newsgroups (ba.* for
SF Bay Area, etc) are propregated(sp?) everywhere. It's not
a newsreader issue, it's a news server issue. Once upon a time
the Distribution header meant something, but not anymore. Since
the main feed of Usenet is no longer UUCP, cutting down bandwidth
in this manner isn't as useful or needed as it once was.

: > All messages are expected to conform to RFC 1036[1] AND the unofficial draft,

: > Son Of 1036[2].
:
: Am I the only person who doesn't know what the hell this means?

Very unlikely, which is why I spell out the more meaningful parts
as they relate to this group. RFC (Request For Comments) 1036 is
the current Usenet message format standard. Son Of 1036 is a
living draft soon to be turned into an official draft with any
luck as 1036 is pretty out of date.

The important parts are the details which follow it, modified
and added to in some cases.

: There's that "prepended" word again..."prefacing"? "in front of"?

It's valid if ispell says it's valid. <smirk>

>snip<
: You might want to make this bit a little less personal. I'd cut this

: off after "so there is a way to do it)."

Hmm, maybe. :-)

: > IV-8. -Use the standard signature delimiter of "-- \n"

: > Example:
: \n? My ignorance is showing again.

Newline. I should spell that out for the non-programmers:
"-- \n" (dash, dash, space, newline). This is something the
newsreader should really handle if it's adding the sig, but
for those that add the sig manually, they should know to add it.

>snip<
: I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less, period.

: Anyone else have an opinion on this?

I thought about this a bit, but the problem comes in with sigs like
mine (yes, I'm a little biased) where the RHFC is a full three
lines by itself. Yes, I could stick it all on one line, but that
would be cheating and still wouldn't help the problem as the reader
will still see it as multiple lines.

--
-Zenin (ze...@archive.rhps.org)
The Bawdy Caste (San Jose, CA) http://www.bawdycaste.org/
Barely Legal (Berzerkly, CA) http://www.barelylegal.org/
Zenin's Rocky Horror Archive http://www.archive.rhps.org/

[Zenin]

Duncan Campbell <dun...@punk.net> wrote:
>snip<
: I read Son Of RFC1036 (via the link in the references section)
: this afternoon.
>snip<
: As far as newsgroup content, it is not particularly relevant.

Reread section 4.3.2 (Body Conventions), which is my main concern
area. Covered therein are line wrap lengths, all uppercase
messages, the "smiley face", quoting style, trimming quoted text,
quote attribution, signature length, signature delimiter. Other
sections deal with non-ASCII characters, ASCII control characters,
From header requirements, etc.

The document is huge, I admit, which is one of the reasons I listed
important details in the charter. It also doesn't cover Usenet
rules and guildlines, which is why I wrote the charter.

: in this context,

: a line consisting of only "-- " (note the trailing space)
: would be more clear.

But would be inaccurate, and is the reason I've seen many people
use a signature of:

-- Zenin
some more stuff

This of course, doesn't work.

: >I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less, period.

: >Anyone else have an opinion on this?

Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an
vote/comment?

: >> --
: >> ze...@archive.rhps.org "I am dyslexic of Borg. Your ass will be laminated."

: >> RHFC1.1 V!M!P1S2RBL24Y1980 P*B-R+20@H-D+100@W+200@T+5@P?L15@Y1990&1@(7@)!1
: >> C8@W3@P@& IF&-W&&-N+M1C-! MA2{RO,PQ}M{PQ}C3B15@R15@V1O+++ D?-K1S@C0!O{IS}T5@
: >> QNA+&+!K+!PW>&H1+! YA25+>16G{m}H{5'7"}L{CA,USA}S{f>ba12^H7k}W=

:
: (same info, four lines)

True, but this was only an example. I'd have a hard time getting my
real sig below under 4 lines without losing the RHFC, as would many
others that might want to use a RHFC.

: Personally I don't take the time to parse each RHFC signature

: i see, so it's wasted space to me. In a .sig I dislike mostly
: blank lines (ie "-Zenin" above) and really dislike cutsie ascii
: graphics.

Mostly blank lines, such as "touch me"? <grin>

--
-Zenin (ze...@archive.rhps.org)
The Bawdy Caste (San Jose, CA) http://www.bawdycaste.org/
Barely Legal (Berzerkly, CA) http://www.barelylegal.org/
Zenin's Rocky Horror Archive http://www.archive.rhps.org/

[Larry Viezel]

Enormous .sig files are most annoyiing indeed. Especially for those of us
reading the newsgroup digest zenin mails out. I remember back in the day
when the smiley emoticons came out and every other post on Usenet was a
smiley and a 20 line sig. The university standards for .sig files from
when i first got my first internet account was 8 lines maximum. Which is
pleanty.

Larry.

On 1 Jun 1998, Zenin wrote:

> K- <ini...@slip.net> wrote:
> : Ditto. I had no idea people didn't like long sig files. I suppose there's a lot I could cut down.
>

*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&
& Larry Viezel - King Of the Bitter People * Equal ------- *
* Check me out at (get ready its long) & to | &
& http://www2.cybernex.net/~larryv * The ---+--- *
* Or visit http://www.nominex.com/rarerhps & Stars | &
& for rare photos from Rocky Horror * Endurance ---+ *
*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&

[iluvgib...@hotmail.com]

In article <89671767...@thrush.omix.com>,
Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:

>
> : >I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less, period.

> : >Anyone else have an opinion on this?
>

> Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an
> vote/comment?

I vote against..

Quad
Bermuda Bound this week, No. Cal next!! Let the travelling begin!! :)
RHFC 1.01 v300@!MS10R P*R+@F+90+W-D-SPL10Y3@& C4M1H2S1P3& IW2410N+C
MC4B+R+V-0+ D5C2T5 Q&NA-P{lifelong}R[Quad Princess, Ms. Ass]
F(HQNA)(ITLIAG)(EAD) YA20G[f]H[5’11]S[m]A21+

[Thumper43]

Ello

<<Actually, I believe that was put in there because it was one of the main
things I wrote that I feel doesn't belong on the NG. I know the C35 has been
closed for some time now, and I know stories of the hell that went on there and
in cast bickering etc etc etc. That stuff really doesn't belong on the NG, so
to best include all of that in an example, I sited the C35. Then Byron included
it
in the new charter proposal (to pacify me I assume)... But rest assured, I knew
what I was talking about when I mentioned it, and again, the talk of that stuff
really has no place here IMNSHO.>>

oohhhhhh.....i see.
my bad...sorry

Love and Clarification(sp),

[Art Laurie (Quality)]

Zenin wrote in message <89671498...@thrush.omix.com>...

>Ronald Maxwell <rmax...@nyct.com> wrote:
>: Failure to comply with the above mentioned "sanctioned" charter
>: means.... ? What?
>
> As mentioned in the charter, the CharterBot will likely pay
> you a visit. Failing that, and repeated disregard for the
> charter and/or basic rules of Usenet, anyone is free to
> contact the user's ISP/NSP and issue a complaint. Such
> violations of Usenet are in direct violation of most ISP's
> terms of use agreements, as well as the ISP's NSP's terms
> of use. This is the "more personal means" eluded to in the
> charter.

I think this is what cuts to the heart of what most people with concerns
have about this charter. Who will decide who is in violation of the charter?
If I decide I don't agree with the charter, are you going to tell my ISP to
shut me off? Do I get a warning? What if I consider mail from the BOT as
harrassment, can I call your ISP and have you shut down? Does this mean
that, since you are authoring the charter, you decide who stays and who
goes?

I have a 6 line.sig, never label my subject lines, and if I fell someone is
being a bone head, I jump in and speak my mind. Who decides when I cross the
line and need to be santioned? Is it you, or someone who I just pissed off?
Do you really think my ISP is seriously going to shut me down because on one
news group someone has a problem with my messages (not all of us are living
under the big brother of the AOL PC Police)?

Again, your intention and the work involved should be applauded, but in this
NG this is a pandora's box that should not be opened. I see in-fighting, I
see hurt feelings over nothing, and the sense that we are being monitored
takes away one of the special 'feels' of this particular NG. Out of the
thousands and thousands of NG's out there, with all the perverse and down
right sick topics there are, it is unreasonable that we here need to be
reined in because some can't control their emotions or their keyboards. And
even when it does happen, is it so much of an irritation that we need to
charter the NG to keep us in check? Whats to stop someone from starting up
alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror.bot-less or the like and dividing us all?

One can still comply with the spirit of the charter regarding fromat and
posting, and still need to be killfile'd. Let's stop this before we all get
carried away monitoring each other. I personally feel that a charter and a
bot will serve no good purpose and should be abandoned.
--
Art Laurie Means Quality! Ask for him by name!
Quality Brad and associated services since 1979!
The Teseracte Players of Boston! R.H.A.N.E. charter members!
ICQ# 12588739! Badge# 4660! What, no gravy?1?

[RiFF4711]

>Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an<BR>
>vote/comment?

Make that one more vote for 4-line only SIG files...Period.

--

[Zenin]

[warning LONG!]

Art Laurie (Quality) <qua...@datablast.net> wrote:
: I think this is what cuts to the heart of what most people with concerns

: have about this charter. Who will decide who is in violation of the charter?

At this point, me. I can promise to be extremely lenient, but in
the end it's a matter of trust and balances.

: If I decide I don't agree with the charter, are you going to tell my ISP to
: shut me off?

Depends. If your idea of not agreeing with the charter is posting
spam or binaries to the group and not responding to requests to
stop, yes. But I'd do that anyway, as would others. And we'd be
fully within our rights, charter or no charter.

The presence of a charter doesn't change this, however it does give
slightly bigger teeth to complaints by the readers of the group.

: Do I get a warning?

Yes. That's what the CharterBot is for. Actually calling a user's
ISP is an extreme example for extreme cases. Such cases would give
valid reasons to complain to the user's IPS regardless of any
charter. We're talking net-abuse at this point, which is extreme
and very uncommon.

: What if I consider mail from the BOT as

: harrassment, can I call your ISP and have you shut down?

Not easily. The CharterBot is built to never a message about the
same subject to the same user twice within a given time period (30
days right now, but that could change). What this means is that
if someone 10 posts messages with a 40 line sig and I send the
CharterBot to visit them with a polite message about it for each
of those 10 posts, the person will only get one email, unless they
are still posting with a 40 line sig more then a month later. This
isn't harassment, not by a long shot.

That said, this is where the "balances" part comes in. If I'm using
the bot to actively harass people, then yes you'd have full right
to contact my admin and issue a complaint or worse. This again
isn't any different with or without a charter.

: Does this mean

: that, since you are authoring the charter, you decide who stays and who
: goes?

No. I'll be running the bot, but the bot isn't to kick anyone off.
It's a gentle reminder and information system at most.

It works in two parts. First, it sends a copy of the charter to
all new posters so they are aware of the agreed standards and
conventions of the group they are entering. Second, if I (or
anyone else really, the CharterBot will be public domain) see a
message that is violating the charter (and likely then Usenet
guidelines in general, as that's the bulk of the charter) I or
whoever would pipe the message through the CharterBot with the
particular part cut out and used in the body of the message. For
all intents and purposes, it's just a way of streamlining replys to
people about common problems. I could hand write every message,
but it gets old quick. Since I'm a programmer, I can easily
automate the process.

With a charter in place, it gives the users of the group a common
place to know if what they are doing is within accepted guildlines
or not.

I have a friend that is scared to death of posting anything simply
because she is afraid of getting flamed for posting something
inappropriate (charter or no charter). She doesn't know what is
and is not appropriate and often askes me if she will get flamed
for this or that message. She shouldn't have to worry like that.
If she can quickly read a short document that clearly defineds what
is appropriate and what is not, she can deside on her own if what
she wants to post is ok or not. Yes, there is still "gray" area,
but at least for her it would clear up the gray a great deal.

: I have a 6 line.sig, never label my subject lines, and if I fell someone is

: being a bone head, I jump in and speak my mind.

A 6 line sig is negligible, and the current draft is clear about
saying "if possible". Thus, it is not a hard rule, but instead
a remember of common respect for other readers. As in the Son Of
1036, it's a "SHOULD" not a "MUST". Hmm, maybe I should recode
it in the RFC conventions of SHOULD and MUST definitions...

If you post a bunch of stuff without subject lines (in violation of
RFC 1036), and don't respond to email requests to stop it, then yes
I'd probably contact your ISP. I'd do this anyway, as would others.
Again, charter or no charter.

: Who decides when I cross the line and need to be santioned?

A one time email reminder message is hardly what I'd call being
"sanctioned". I think you think this is all lot bigger then it
is. It's not. It's really quite mild.

: Is it you, or someone who I just pissed off?

: Do you really think my ISP is seriously going to shut me down because on one
: news group someone has a problem with my messages (not all of us are living
: under the big brother of the AOL PC Police)?

No. But again we are talking about extreme cases. In such cases,
you'd have to be enough of an ass hole to piss off enough people
so that a large group contacts your ISP. Again, this is with
or without a charter, although an "official" charter gives sharper
teeth to the mob that you've pissed off.

Keep in mind though, that pissing people off and violating a Terms
of Usage contract are two very, very different things. I could call
Tim Curry an ass wipe and piss people off, but I wouldn't be in
any violation. We still have freedom of speech. I could not
however, post SPAM and expect to hide under freedom of speech.

The key thing to note is that Usenet freedom is the same as real
life freedom. I forget where the quote comes from, but it says,
"One man's freedom ends where the next begins".

: Again, your intention and the work involved should be applauded, but in this

: NG this is a pandora's box that should not be opened. I see in-fighting, I
: see hurt feelings over nothing, and the sense that we are being monitored
: takes away one of the special 'feels' of this particular NG. Out of the
: thousands and thousands of NG's out there, with all the perverse and down
: right sick topics there are, it is unreasonable that we here need to be
: reined in because some can't control their emotions or their keyboards. And
: even when it does happen, is it so much of an irritation that we need to
: charter the NG to keep us in check? Whats to stop someone from starting up
: alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror.bot-less or the like and dividing us all?

Again I think a few people are taking this for more then it is. In
it's purest form there are three simple parts.

A charter. This is an agreed base reference to be standard reading
for all new posters. It helps current posters know what is and what
is not accepted. This I think will actually help bring out more
people into the group. As I mentioned above, I have a friend that
is scared to death of posting *anything* simply because there isn't
such a reference to consult. She is afraid of getting flamed for
an inappropriate post. Not because she is afraid of violating some
know standard such as a charter, but because she doesn't know what
the standard is and has no easy way to find out. This allows her
peace of mind when posting that she won't be likely flamed for
mis-posting. Yes, most of this is in the FAQs and readmes of the
newuser groups. Most users though don't know where to get to such
information or that it exists at all (the bot will give pointers
however, as part of it's job, since most current news readers no
longer do this for some lame reason...). There is almost nothing
in the charter that isn't part of the standard Usenet guildlines
already in place. In fact, I and anyone else is fully within
there rights to email complaints on those guildlines alone. The
RH charter is actually much more relaxed then the standard
guild lines and RFCs on most issues.

A front line "CharterBot", or better named, "WelcomeBot". This is
for new posters. The first time someone posts (and *only* the
first time), it sends the new user a "Welcome to the news group!
Here are some things you might like to know." message. This would
include a copy of the charter so they know the general idea about
what the current conventions and guidelines are for this particular
group. It would include pointers to various standard pieces of
Rocky information, such as the FAQ, the fan club mailing list, etc.
It would include basic Usenet pointers such as the Newusers FAQ,
Usenet message guidelines, etc (stuff they really should have read
anyway, but no one ever told them about because newsreaders of today
are simply lame).

The third part is a more manual usage. It basically just would
automate what I do now anyway, email people with a polite message
saying what they are doing that is rude and why. The main
difference would be that it would always be polite (not all my
personal messages are, as Rachel can attest:-), and it would
send the info pointer info in the section above.

That's it. That's all. Anything more then this is up to the
readers of the group just as it is now.

: One can still comply with the spirit of the charter regarding fromat and

: posting, and still need to be killfile'd. Let's stop this before we all get
: carried away monitoring each other. I personally feel that a charter and a
: bot will serve no good purpose and should be abandoned.

The only automated monitor would be the "WelcomeBot" (I think I'll
start calling it that, because that's really what the first half
of it's job is). I'm going to be implementing the WelcomeBot
charter or no charter, it just would be better with a charter.
It's sorely needed, and completely incapable of harassing anyone
because it can never send a message twice to the same address,
ever.

[Zenin]

RiFF4711 <riff...@aol.com> wrote:
: >Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an<BR>

: >vote/comment?
: Make that one more vote for 4-line only SIG files...Period.

Three for, 2 against. I think I'll set up the web poll with this
as the first one.

Would it make any difference if I auto-cut all sigs from the
news gateway digest?

[Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell]

Plan9 wrote:
[citing Zenin's charter proposal]

> >IV-9. -Keep your signature as short as possible.
> >
> > The signature should be 4 lines or less if you can. For use in this
> > newsgroup, the addition of a Rocky Horror Freak Code (RHFC)[6] is not
> > considered part of these 4 lines, nore is the delimiter mentioned above.

{snip}

> > Is valid as the non-RHFC part is still under 4 lines.

> My .sig is a valad way of sharing information about myself. It is 7

> lines I think, howevet, I don't feel that it is redundant. Must I cut

> it down in order to continue to post on the ng?

Well, personally, I think it's long enough so as to be obnoxious. I'd
at least put some of the one-liners on one line...your .sig is longer
than many of your posts.

Ruth Fink-Winter

>
> Louie "Plan9" P! (remove the "nospam" to reply by E-Mail!)
> RHFC1.2 V4A+SRY1995L2 P?>R WNC&7{#RHPS EFNET}M0(2) C1B2R16V3O- Q?NA YA17G{m}H{5'4}L{Calgary,AB,CAN}S?m>bA15-18W115
> Loyal Ed Wood worshipper!
> Handy STS Prefect!
> Fab Buck's Rock Video JC!
> "Jason Vorhees was an Elm Street kid..."-FREDDY VS JASON (by Peter Briggs)
> C U round like a record! (Nell)

--

The Completely Crazy Rocky Horror cast--Des Plaines, IL
wbar...@NOSPAMwwa.com (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)
http://www.wwa.com/~wbarsell

[Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell]

Zenin wrote:
>
> Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell <wbar...@wwa.com> wrote:

> >snip<
> : Looks pretty good. I would add the request that multiple notices of
> : items for sale not be posted more than once every couple of weeks or so.
>
> Hmm, auction notices, or just plain FS stuff? I agree that FS
> stuff should have limited reposts. Auction stuff (if they
> don't want to use ebay, which is there choice), may need more
> frequent posts. If it's kept in the same thread, it shouldn't
> be a problem IMHO, but I'm open to comments.

I don't mind periodic auction updates in the same thread either.

> : Please do include an "obRHPS" if at all possible in off-topic posts (a
> : small nugget that is on-topic)
>
> Er, ok... What's "ob" mean? I seem to remember something like
> this long, long ago, but never cared enough before to figure
> it out.

It stands for "obligatory." Fewer people seem to use it nowadays...I'd
love to see it get wider use.

Use:
[some off-topic post--it's my birthday or something]
obRHPS: Finally finished my spacesuit--I used 1/4" foam blah blah
blah...

>
> : > [ANNC] or [ANNOUNCE] - Announcements, Proclamations
> : This would be where to put "hey, check out my URL," right?
>
> Yep, but I'd hope a better subject line be used like, "[ANNOUNCE] VI
> updates web page".

I do support these. I think making them optional but pointing them out
is a good idea. They do make life a lot easier...I appreciate them a
lot when I read newsgroups that use them.

>
> >snip<

> : I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less, period.
> : Anyone else have an opinion on this?
>

> I thought about this a bit, but the problem comes in with sigs like
> mine (yes, I'm a little biased) where the RHFC is a full three
> lines by itself.

Well, I think the RHFC is kind of fun, but though I may read it once
when someone I find interesting posts, for everyone else (and for that
person after that one time) it just looks like line noise to me...

But I can't suggest a good alternative. Used to be we just all went to
Cosmo's Who's Who in Rocky Horror, but that is just too big to be
practical now, and it's badly in need of an update (and the removal of
multiple entries).

Just my thoughts...

Ruth Fink-Winter

[Kate Pitroff]

In article <89671319...@thrush.omix.com> Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> writes:
>From: Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org>
>Subject: Re: [DRAFT-RFD] New Newsgroup Charter v1.1
>Date: 1 Jun 1998 14:52:53 GMT

>jno...@gci-net.com wrote:
> >snip<
>: I do, that's just what we need in this newsgroup rules to remember. I
>: personally vote for common sense in titles rather than the elaborate system
>: Zenin has proposed.

> The tags are only there as a suggested form, not a strict
> requirement. Maybe I should make that point clearer. Would you or
> anyone else still be against them in the charter for optional use?
>--

I think tags are a Good Thing. One of the mailing lists I subscribe to
started using them about a year ago and they are a godsend...you don't realize
just how much ambiguity there is in a subject line until, well, until you stop
using them. Plus, it's not like they're obligatory. They seem mostly
harmless and I think the suggestion should be left in.

--kate
tucson, az

[Kirsten M. Berry]

Didja hear what Larry Viezel <lar...@cybernex.net> said?

}
}Enormous .sig files are most annoyiing indeed. Especially for those of us
}reading the newsgroup digest zenin mails out. I remember back in the day
}when the smiley emoticons came out and every other post on Usenet was a
}smiley and a 20 line sig.

*snort* Having had a reputation for a while on another mailing list as
a "Sig Pariah" (being one of the only people on the list who actually
paid *attention* to anything like how many lines you were wasting),
the listadmin once sent me a message from one of the other lists from
his server. Said post consisted of three, maybe four lines of
content....

And a 106-line signature file. I take that back. It wasn't a .sig -
it was a 6th grader's PeeChee folder, disguised as an ASCII file.
(No, really! Constant repetitions of actors' and characters' names,
an at-the-time COMPLETE listing of episode titles for the series in
question [it was an XF list]...and here's the kicker: THE KID'S NAME
AND EMAIL ADDRESS WERE NOWHERE TO BE FOUND! What, I ask you, are you
doing with a signature file if you don't bother telling people *who
you are?*)

*twitch* I'm doing MUCH better now....

}The university standards for .sig files from
}when i first got my first internet account was 8 lines maximum. Which is
}pleanty.

*nodnod* It's REALLY difficult to express one's creativity in four
lines of ASCII; eight allows room to play, without becoming
excessively cluttered. The key things, of course, are to remember
width (no more than 70 characters to prevent word-wrap, even if your
.sig gets quoted for whatever reason) and spacing. Not all type-faces
are created equal! Most, if not all, ASCII art is designed to be
viewed in a fixed-pitched font. 10-point Courier New is ideal, as it
most closely fits the 80-character-line standard used by most
news/mail readers. The best test to see if you're using a fixed-pitch
font:

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <- These two lines should
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm <- be the same length.

Play around until you come up with something that works.

I could very easily go on, but then this would be a much more
appropriate post for alt.ascii-art than for a.c-m.r-h ;-) Anyone with
more questions, feel free to mail me privately, and/or check out
alt.ascii-art for more .sig-sized critters than you could EVER know
what to do with....

-- ___ _______________________________________________ ___
/ _ \/ _____________________________________________ \/ _ \
/ / \/ / __ Kirsten M. Berry - ki...@hooked.net __ \/ / \ \
/ / / /\/ \ http://www.hooked.net/~kirib/ / \/ /\ \ \
| | / /\ \/\ \ / /\ \/\ \ | |
\ \ \ \/\ \/ /"Forgive me, Father. For I do not \ \/\ \/ / / /
\ \ \/ /\/ / believe in sin." -Pamela Des Barres \/ /\/ / / /
\ \/ /\/ /\_____________________________________/ /\/ /\/ /
\__/\__/\_______________________________________/\__/\__/-NS

[Brady Ferguson]

Kirsten M. Berry wrote:

> *nodnod* It's REALLY difficult to express one's creativity in four
> lines of ASCII; eight allows room to play, without becoming
> excessively cluttered.

creativity??? I thought a sig was just to identify yourself..... hmmm.

--
"More Drunk" Brady Ferguson
Asst Director/Webmaster/Crim/Brad
Barely Legal-Berkeley CA
http://www.barelylegal.org

RHFC1.02 V200@P1SY3 PB80+C1E1-D5W90+S2+L13Y2&& C3B1W1S2
IW&+N+C-M1 MM1C3B4R10@V5@O+ D+T0500

[Diezel Monkey]

against... scrolling's pretty easy to do.

-"Long Signature" Monkey

iluvgib...@hotmail.com wrote:

> In article <89671767...@thrush.omix.com>,
> Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
>
> >

> > : >I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less, period.
> > : >Anyone else have an opinion on this?
> >

> > Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an

> > vote/comment?
>
> I vote against..
>
> Quad
> Bermuda Bound this week, No. Cal next!! Let the travelling begin!! :)
> RHFC 1.01 v300@!MS10R P*R+@F+90+W-D-SPL10Y3@& C4M1H2S1P3& IW2410N+C
> MC4B+R+V-0+ D5C2T5 Q&NA-P{lifelong}R[Quad Princess, Ms. Ass]
> F(HQNA)(ITLIAG)(EAD) YA20G[f]H[5’11]S[m]A21+
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

--

Careful! I know Karate... and 6 other Japanese words...
--------------------------------------------
The views expressed in this letter do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of THE-WALL... but it would be funny if they did
--------------------------------------------
-Reverend Adam Weinberger
-mon...@the-wall.net
-http://www.the-wall.net/~monkey for lotsa cool pictures and other shit

[Brady Ferguson]

Fnordian wrote:
>
> >against... scrolling's pretty easy to do.
> >
> >-"Long Signature" Monkey
>

> Agreed. I'm also against.
>
> --
> "You can take me home to your mother. And I'll fuck you like an animal."
> Fnord.
> RHFC1.2 V10A+!M>PSRBY1997L2 P>M+>J>O{T+}{MC} >C IFW&&N+!C MC1B1R5T1V1O
> YA13+++Bp5G{f}H{5'5"}L{SFArea,CA}S{b&f}{a15-25}{k}

I'm for a four line RECOMMENDED limit. Remember, this isn't LAW. AND
it doesn't include your RHFC.

[Diezel Monkey]

the charterbot isn't going to truncate .sig files... (correct me if i'm wrong,
z-man)... it just alerts people who have really long .sig files. it can't
"require" anything, or have anything be "optional." either it says ".sig file
over 4 lines... send message" or it says ".sig file over 8 lines... send
message" or the bot does nothing and it's just in the intro saying "please keep
.sif files under 4 lines so you don't get flamed."

not that there's anything wrong with flamers...

-Monkey

jno...@gci-net.com wrote:

> Optional I have ZERO problem with. Required, I have a big problem with. I
> guess that sums up my feelings.
>
> In article <89671319...@thrush.omix.com>,

> Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
> >
> > jno...@gci-net.com wrote:
> > >snip<
> > : I do, that's just what we need in this newsgroup rules to remember. I
> > : personally vote for common sense in titles rather than the elaborate
> system
> > : Zenin has proposed.
> >
> > The tags are only there as a suggested form, not a strict
> > requirement. Maybe I should make that point clearer. Would you or
> > anyone else still be against them in the charter for optional use?
> > --
>

[Kirsten M. Berry]

Didja hear what Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> said?

} Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an
} vote/comment?

As I stated elsewhere in the newsgroup (and changed the subject line
as I did so, since it had *really* ceased having to do directly with
the charter), a four-line limit can make it *exceedingly* difficult to
properly convey one's personality, which is what .sig files are all
about IMHO. If they weren't, why even bother putting a "reply-to" key
in your news/mail reader if you're going to have to look at the bottom
of every post and type the address in every time? ;-) (Yes, I know,
this contradicts at least some of what I said in that other post about
"why bother having a .sig if you don't tell us what your address is?"
- I'm allowed to be capricious; I'm a Gemini. *smirk*)

At any rate, put me down in the 8-line-limit category. Room enough to
play with that cutsie ASCII art Duncan so abhors (*grin*) without
really going overboard.

--
Kirsten M. Berry ki...@hooked.net
http://www.hooked.net/~kirib/
<*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*>
"Sometimes I marvel at the fact that I have yet to go
to work not realizing that I forgot my pants...."
-Kris Panchyk

[Kirsten M. Berry]

Didja hear what Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> said?

}Plan9 <pear...@cadvision.com> wrote:
} >snip<

}: As long as the posts headers are
}: clear in the posts content, I don't see why we need a system to
}: indicate what the posts are about.
}
} It lets people scan the list *much* faster. If you're looking
} for Shock Treatment posts, "[SHOCK] Who's playing in the next con?"
} or "[SHOCK] How to make Janet's dress?" would help a lot and is
} almost no extra effort.

Moreover, if someone has NO interest in ST, ROTOQ, or whatever, they
can much more easily set their killfiles so that they *never* have to
see anything with that in the subject line. (Which, in turn, is why
it's important to change the subject line if a post has deviated
sufficiently from the original topic; I remember a situation on a
mailing list I read where I missed a week-long discussion on something
I REALLY would've enjoyed, simply because nobody ever thought to
change the subject line....)

[Fnordian]

[jno...@gci-net.com]

[Allanah Myles]

Kirsten M. Berry <ki...@hooked.net> wrote:
: Didja hear what Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> said?

: } Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an
: } vote/comment?

: As I stated elsewhere in the newsgroup (and changed the subject line
: as I did so, since it had *really* ceased having to do directly with
: the charter), a four-line limit can make it *exceedingly* difficult to
: properly convey one's personality, which is what .sig files are all
: about IMHO.

IMNSHO, .sig's are for indicating alternative contact methods (such
as website, phone number, fax numbers) that aren't conveyed in the
header of the message (typically, the From: header).

Your personality should come across in the message. If a .sig is
sufficient to convey your personality, you're pretty shallow, IMNSHO.

: If they weren't, why even bother putting a "reply-to" key

: in your news/mail reader if you're going to have to look at the bottom
: of every post and type the address in every time? ;-) (Yes, I know,
: this contradicts at least some of what I said in that other post about
: "why bother having a .sig if you don't tell us what your address is?"
: - I'm allowed to be capricious; I'm a Gemini. *smirk*)

Wanna have loud and crazy sex? (I'm allowed - I'm a Scorpio... *grin*)

: At any rate, put me down in the 8-line-limit category. Room enough to

: play with that cutsie ASCII art Duncan so abhors (*grin*) without
: really going overboard.

I think a 4 line limit is very appropriate. Have a cancelbot automatically
cancel messages that aren't. *evil grin*

: --

: Kirsten M. Berry ki...@hooked.net
: http://www.hooked.net/~kirib/
: <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*>
: "Sometimes I marvel at the fact that I have yet to go
: to work not realizing that I forgot my pants...."
: -Kris Panchyk

Lets look at your sig. Here's a suggested 4-line sig:

--*snip*--
Kirsten M. Berry http://www.hooked.net/~kirib/ ki...@hooked.net

<*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*> <*>
"Sometimes I marvel at the fact that I have yet to go to work not
realizing that I forgot my pants...." -Kris Panchyk

--*snip*--

Same message, slightly different look--- *4* lines. Now, that wasn't so
hard, was it?

-Dossy

--
URL: http://www.panoptic.com/~dossy -< BORK BORK! >- E-MAIL: do...@panoptic.com
Now I'm who I want to be, where I want to be, doing what I've always said I
would and yet I feel I haven't won at all... (Aug 9, 95: Goodbye, JG.)
"You should change your .sig; not that the world revolves around me." -s. sadie

[PriscellaQ]

>> : >I really would prefer to see signatures of 4 lines or less,
>> : >period. Anyone else have an opinion on this?
>>

>> Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with

>> an vote/comment?<BR>
>

The fewer the better!

Jaimie

[Zenin]

Diezel Monkey <mon...@the-wall.net> wrote:
>snip<
: and it's just in the intro saying "please keep .sif files under 4 lines so

: you don't get flamed."

It's a little more manual then that (it has no AI code), but that's
the idea.

It's kind of funny that everyone is taking such offense to sig
standards. I added it in as an after thought really, as it's really
not that big of a deal to me. Shows how much I know. <grin>

[K-]

Zenin wrote:

> Probably because your newsread/ISP didn't auto-subscribe to the
> standard new user groups like they should have.
>
> There is a standard Usenet FAQ that defines sigs longer then 4
> lines as being a Bad Thing[tm] (I'll find the URI if anyone can't
> find it themself). In the charter, I've tried to make this a little
> more flexible by defining RHFC as excluded from this line count.

Actually, it did. I just didn't read them because I've been a long time BBSer. I know the etiquite from
way back when. I was used to (but never had) big ansi animations in sigs. Keep in mind that I was
running at 2400 to 14.4 at that time. Oh well. I was getting a little tired of it anyways.

--
____
/ __ \ ___ -----
| /OO\ | <------<<< ___-----
\____/ -----
_.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._
= ini...@slip.net =
= Oh my god, they killed Inikini! =
^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^
On the Internet, / __ \
nobody can tell that | /XX\ |
I'm God. \____/

[Arthur Levesque]

Mr. Sexy Hair (ze...@bawdycaste.org) wrote:
Zenin>Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with
Zenin>an vote/comment?

Ms. Nice Ass (iluvgib...@hotmail.com) wrote:
Quad>I vote against..

I vote against as well. You can recommend it in the charter, and
strip them out of the gateway digest; but the 4-line .sig (like most
netiquette and etiquette) is/should be optional. I comply with the
standard BY CHOICE; and if some charterbot starts telling me what size my
.sig ought to be, I'm likely to make my .sig bigger out of sheer stubborn
assholiness.
--
/\ Arthur Levesque 2A4W <*> b...@boog.orgASM =/\= http://boog.org __
\B\ack King of the Potato People <fnord> "Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!" (oO)
\S\lash Member of a vast right-wing conspiracy (-O-) Urban Spaceman /||\
\/ I was a lesbian before it was fashionable "I hate rainbows!"-EC

[Duncan Campbell]

>Zenin wrote:
>
>> Probably because your newsread/ISP didn't auto-subscribe to the
>> standard new user groups like they should have.
>>

K- <ini...@slip.net> wrote:
>
>Actually, it did. I just didn't read them because I've been a long time BBSer. I know the etiquite from
>way back when. I was used to (but never had) big ansi animations in sigs. Keep in mind that I was
>running at 2400 to 14.4 at that time. Oh well. I was getting a little tired of it anyways.
>
>--
> ____
> / __ \ ___ -----
>| /OO\ | <------<<< ___-----
> \____/ -----
>_.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._
>= ini...@slip.net =
>= Oh my god, they killed Inikini! =
>^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^`-,._.,-'^
> On the Internet, / __ \
> nobody can tell that | /XX\ |
> I'm God. \____/
>
>

Er, Kenny, if "I know the ettiquette from way back when" is an
accurate statement, why do you have lines of 105 characters and
a thirteen line ascii graphic signature?

duncan ( life is a funny, funny place... )

--

touch me

[Unsinkable Molly Brown]

I can't believe yall are arguing over SIG files!

christ, is it that big of deal?

Mel.

On 1 Jun 1998, Zenin wrote:

> RiFF4711 <riff...@aol.com> wrote:
> : >Two votes for 4-lines only, one (me) against. Anyone else with an<BR>
> : >vote/comment?
> : Make that one more vote for 4-line only SIG files...Period.
>
> Three for, 2 against. I think I'll set up the web poll with this
> as the first one.
>
> Would it make any difference if I auto-cut all sigs from the
> news gateway digest?
>

[The Fixxer]

And they said "EYE" was too corporate for the world of Rocky Horror....too
business like.

I think we should cancel messages that are selling life insurance..or multi
level and stuff like that....

Who here has not been able to sort the rest out for themselves?

Mark Tomaino
midnight insantity
Purveyor of chaos

[Art Laurie (Quality)]

Zenin wrote in message <89673820...@thrush.omix.com>...
>[warning LONG!]
>
[snip]

>: Who decides when I cross the line and need to be santioned?
>
> A one time email reminder message is hardly what I'd call being
> "sanctioned". I think you think this is all lot bigger then it
> is. It's not. It's really quite mild.

But I still think the response to whatever problem we seem to be having is
bigger than the problem itself.

>: Is it you, or someone who I just pissed off?
>: Do you really think my ISP is seriously going to shut me down because on
one
>: news group someone has a problem with my messages (not all of us are
living
>: under the big brother of the AOL PC Police)?
>
> No. But again we are talking about extreme cases. In such cases,
> you'd have to be enough of an ass hole to piss off enough people
> so that a large group contacts your ISP. Again, this is with
> or without a charter, although an "official" charter gives sharper
> teeth to the mob that you've pissed off.

Compared to many other news groups, we here still are far better off in
terms of outside flamers and people we can't control. It just seems to me
that we are creating a solution to a problem that only a few perceive to
exist. There are some other ways to filter through the crap, one way that
has been successful is for people in the NG to preface their messages with
the NG's acronym [Subject: (acmrh) Does Rob love Quad's ass?]. That in
conjunction with a InfoBot (maybe?) would I think go a long way in easing
the reability of the group.

Call me paranoid, I just feel that we should try less intrusive methods of
control before jumping up the force continium with a charter. I do
appreciate your eloquent response, though.

--
Art Laurie Means Quality! Ask for him by name!
Quality Brad and associated services since 1979!
The Teseracte Players of Boston! R.H.A.N.E. charter members!

ICQ# 12588739! Badge# 4660! What, no gravy?!?

[Thumper43]

Ello

<<There are some other ways to filter through the crap, one way that has been
successful is for people in the NG to preface their messages with the NG's
acronym [Subject: (acmrh) Does Rob love Quad's ass?]. >>

heheheehehehehehehhahahahahahahAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAH
A!!!!!!!

welp..having never seen her ass nor have i met her...
i'd have to say, i don't think so.

hehehehehehe.....

**HAPPY NOODLE BOY**
Keeper of the *Book of Happy*
"Seems like everybody's got, something
I have not, a reason not to DIE!
So I say DEATH to Mr. Right,
'Cause thats not ME!"

[Plan9]

On Mon, 01 Jun 1998 17:45:33 -0700, "Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S.
Barsell" <wbar...@wwa.com> wrote about my .sig:

>
>Well, personally, I think it's long enough so as to be obnoxious. I'd
>at least put some of the one-liners on one line...your .sig is longer
>than many of your posts.

OK, I guess my .sig was a little too long. As for my .sig being
longer than many of my posts, this is also a common fault of mine. I
aplologise to anyone in the group that was getting annoyed by my long
.sig.

As for the charter, it seems resonable. I also understand the
rational behind having subject headers. This would be a more
efficient way of posting to the group.

Louie "Plan9" P! (remove the "nospam" to reply by E-Mail!)
RHFC1.2 V4A+SRY1995L2 P?>R WNC&7{#RHPS EFNET}M0(2) C1B2R16V3O- Q?NA YA17G{m}H{5'4}L{Calgary,AB,CAN}S?m>bA15-18W115

Loyal Ed Wood worshipper!-Handy STS Prefect!-Fab Buck's Rock Video JC!

[Diezel Monkey]

Plan9 wrote:

> OK, I guess my .sig was a little too long. As for my .sig being
> longer than many of my posts, this is also a common fault of mine. I
> aplologise to anyone in the group that was getting annoyed by my long
> .sig.

actually, i'm pissed about your short posts... i possess the ability to scroll downwards using just one finger and a
minimal amount of energy!

-Monkey

[PriscellaQ]

>actually, i'm pissed about your short posts... i possess the ability to
>scroll downwards using just one finger and a
>minimal amount of energy!
>
>-Monkey

...but do you have an opposable thumb, being aa "monkey" and all... =)

[Diezel Monkey]

no im more like the far side cartoon with the cows when the phone rings
"there that thing goes again... damn these non-opposable thumbs!"

-Monkey

PriscellaQ wrote:

--

[Allanah Myles]

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
: Unity of information begins with unity of language.

Wow, you _ARE_ a communist.

: No problem. I'll do as many other groups have, and name English
: as the official group language. Anyone can post, from anywere,
: about anything having to do with RHPS, happening in any part of
: the globe or for that matter the known and unknown universe, as
: long as they do it in English.

Bah. Just for the sake of creating friction (ooooh, baby, you just
KNOW how much I *love* friction... *moan*) I'm going to propose
that Esperanto be the official language of a.c-m.r-h!

Not that anyone here can actually speak it...

: Like it or not, English is the standard language for international
: communications in close to every country on the planet. Closer to
: home, if someone posts in Japanize (guesstimate) only about 1 in a
: 100 readers could read it, and thus it's likely to be deemed unfit
: for the group based solely on lack of interest by the majority of
: the group's readers.

If that's your grounds, then more than 50% of the newsgroup should
get axed for "lack of interest" =).

: You're mistaken. One can (as many have) lose your account for
: simple continued disregard of a group's charter (as per most ISP's
: terms of usage disclaimer).

And if a user disagrees with the charter? Sure, if you want to tote
around "majority rules," then WE wouldn't be here. The major majority
in this world thinks RHPS is something lewd and obscene. As big
as our numbers might seem, in the grand scheme of thigns, we're still
quite a minority.

If this charter is going to be enforced in any way, I think it's
time for me to newgroup alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror.non-fascist.

: Despite what you might like to belive,
: the Internet isn't free by any stretch. It never has been and if
: we're lucky it never will. The Internet is (at this point in
: history) a self governing community with standard practices on
: exactly when and how that governing will take place.

And since no one really agrees on any one set of governing practices,
what may work against one won't work against another.

Sadly, as hard as you may try, there will always be a way for someone
to post news in a newsgroup. It unavoidable. You _may_ manage to
get someone's account yanked at one place, but not at another.
Many ISPs don't even want to bother with Usenet anymore, and they
provide it as a "fire and forget" service to their customers, or
point them onwards to DejaNews or SuperNews or another one of the
free-news providers.

I personally think that the charter should be created, and maintained
as a "point of fact" or "reference guide" to newsgroup guidelines and
ettiquette, but _shouldn't_ be enforced. I just have a bad feeling
that if they are to be enforced, that my "minority voice" in this
newsgroup will get squashed by the Less Clued(tm) majority and we'll
have the age old ".sig + quote > new message" syndrome, or worse
the ".sig > message" syndrome. Or the "you shouldn't have posted that
here" thread-flamewar. Or the "if you don't post the way I want you
to, I'll pursue your ISP with this Offical Newsgroup Charter(tm) and
threaten them with litigation!" Frankly, I won't stand for that kinda
crap---leave the charter as it should be, a _strong_ suggestion to
readers and that they're sincerely urged to follow them. Otherwise,
you'll end up with net.cops who feel it has become _their_ (undelegated)
authority and responsibility to "uphold" the newsgroup charter.

[Allanah Myles]

Plan9 <pear...@cadvision.com> wrote:
: On 30 May 1998 14:45:48 GMT, Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
:>III-3. -Use clear subject headers.

: OK, isn't this a little redundant? As long as the posts headers are

: clear in the posts content, I don't see why we need a system to

: indicate what the posts are about. I for one can usually tell what
: the posts are about from the headers and we have never used this
: system. I don't want to have to have a copy of the charter next to me
: whenever I want to post to use the proper topic label, lest have the
: wrath of the bot uppon me!

Simple solution: just put your entire subject within square brackets.
E.g.: Subject: [Hopefully, this message will be RHPS related, somehow.]

Generally, you want a more specific subject line, but if people
will become Subject:-Nazi's, this is one way around it. Otherwise,
you'll end up with [YMMVWTCTIP] which may stand for something like
"Your Mileage May Vary With The Cast That Is Performing" which is
the category your particular message falls under. And that totally
obfuscates the purpose of your message, and just takes up space.

Subjects should not need "metadata" to describe the message - if you
can't come up with a Subject: (and perhaps some Keywords:) that
describe your message properly, YOU PROBABLY SHOULDN'T BE POSTING
IN THE FIRST PLACE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!

: My .sig is a valad way of sharing information about myself. It is 7
: lines I think, howevet, I don't feel that it is redundant. Must I cut
: it down in order to continue to post on the ng?

If I wanted to know information about you, I'll send you e-mail, or
visit your web page if you have one. I don't need to see lines and
lines of senseless scroll after every single one of your posts (or
anyone else's for that matter). Advertise other methods which
people can use to further learn about you/get in contact with
you.

Like I said to someone else: if your entire personality can be fully
conveyed in a .sig, you're pathetic. My entire personality would
fill reams of books, not a cute 8-9 line .sig.

[Allanah Myles]

Art Laurie (Quality) <qua...@datablast.net> wrote:
: Call me paranoid, I just feel that we should try less intrusive methods of

: control before jumping up the force continium with a charter. I do
: appreciate your eloquent response, though.

Thank you! Now I don't feel so quite alone. I mean, it's just me, and
my other personalities here keeping me company...

Granted, _they_ all agree with me too. Lucky for them, otherwise I'd
have to kill them...

[Brad Smith]

Geez,

Why does everyone think this new charter is straight out of Hitler's
back pocket. The charter is simply gonna be a list of general protocols
to use while posting to this newsgroup which MOST people obey anyway. I
think this is a good idea. I personally hate incidents when I check the
newsgroup and download 29 messages that's all "text garbled" because
some idiot posted a .wav file.....And this is after there was a HUGE
thread about stuff like that...I don't mind seeing your off-topic posts
every once in a while...As long as it's somewhat Rocky related, it's
cool. Worst case scenario for almost 99% of the people is that you'll
get an email every once in a great while reminding you that you "broke"
charter rules. And as far as using the charter to boot people off the
newsgroup...if he abuses this...there won't be a newsgroup to
monitor...and I don't think he's about to do that...

Anyway, that's my thoughts on the subject....

Brad

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
: Wow, you _ARE_ a communist.

Green Party of California, with a bit of Socialist thrown in for
good measure. :-)

>snip<
: If that's your grounds, then more than 50% of the newsgroup should

: get axed for "lack of interest" =).

For this group, it would be much less then 50% I'd say. But for
the bulk of Usenet, 2/3 is noise. -Remember, 1/3 of news bandwidth
is SPAM. After that, at least 1/2 of the messages posted now to
Usenet shouldn't be. This isn't an old problem. It's only in
recent years it's been this bad. Many, many great people have
left Usenet simply because it's not useful anymore... Thanks
AOL, Prodigy, MSN, Netcom, et al...

: And if a user disagrees with the charter?

They get a kindly written message, once in a great, great while,
that asks them not to do that and why.

: Sure, if you want to tote

: around "majority rules," then WE wouldn't be here. The major majority
: in this world thinks RHPS is something lewd and obscene.

Thus, we have our own group.

: If this charter is going to be enforced in any way, I think it's

: time for me to newgroup alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror.non-fascist.

Ugh...guys, please stop making more of this then it is. We aren't
talking moderation (yet...), we are talking about a single Welcome
message, and kindly reminder messages once in a great, great while.

IMHO, this is all that's needed at this point. Just an easy way to
let people know what's up around here. It's bad now, and it's just
going to get worse as time goes on. We *need* this, now, before we
are *forced* to create a moderated group just to keep the
sound/noise ratios in check...

: And since no one really agrees on any one set of governing practices,

: what may work against one won't work against another.

There are general guidelines that most network/service providers
adhere by and pass on to there uses via terms of useage agreements.
This is why posting SPAM will get your accound deleted at most ISPs,
and if they don't stop the problem, the Internet at large will shut
them down. -See the Netcom UDP (Usenet Death Penality) about 2 or 3
months ago.

BUT WE ARE **NOT** TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING CLOSE TO THAT HERE!!!

: Sadly, as hard as you may try, there will always be a way for someone

: to post news in a newsgroup. It unavoidable.

Again....WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT MAKING A MODERATED GROUP!

At least, not at this time. That may come later, but that's
entirely another subject for another day. This is an effort
to avert such a need at all.

: You _may_ manage to

: get someone's account yanked at one place, but not at another.

Again...we are **NOT** talking about this except in *extreme*
cases (SPAM, etc), which is the same as the case now.

: Many ISPs don't even want to bother with Usenet anymore, and they

: provide it as a "fire and forget" service to their customers,

Such as Netcom, until they were issued a UDP.

: I personally think that the charter should be created, and maintained

: as a "point of fact" or "reference guide" to newsgroup guidelines and
: ettiquette, but _shouldn't_ be enforced.

Which is pretty much what we are talking about. The only
"enforcement" is by welcome and reminder messages, which is
negligible at best.

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
: Plan9 <pear...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>snip<
: : My .sig is a valad way of sharing information about myself. It is 7

: : lines I think, howevet, I don't feel that it is redundant. Must I cut
: : it down in order to continue to post on the ng?
:
: If I wanted to know information about you, I'll send you e-mail, or
: visit your web page if you have one. I don't need to see lines and
: lines of senseless scroll after every single one of your posts (or
: anyone else's for that matter). Advertise other methods which
: people can use to further learn about you/get in contact with
: you.

Once, a long, long time ago, this was most commonly done by
finger(1)ing them... Too bad most ISPs have turned this off,
or only allow looking up other customers if you are there
costumer (ala AOL...).

: Like I said to someone else: if your entire personality can be fully

: conveyed in a .sig, you're pathetic.

Hey, what do you think the RHFC is for? :-)

[Kate Pitroff]

In article <6lb127$l7r$1...@ecwav.panoptic.com> Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> writes:
>From: Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com>
>Subject: Re: [DRAFT-RFD] New Newsgroup Charter v1.1
>Date: 6 Jun 1998 09:10:31 GMT

(snip)
>That sounds ridiculous to me. People should feel free to post just as
>they feel is appropriate. Whether you, or anyone else disagrees, is
>your own problem. If you don't like someone's posting, you are
>surely clueful enough to work a killfile. So is everyone else, we
>would hope...
(snip)
>My basic gripe over this whole issue is it feels like this charter
>has basically sprung up in order to give certain members of this
>newsgroup some kind of reassurance that it will be OKAY for them
>to persecute OTHER members of this newsgroup. THIS DOES NOT FLOAT
>WITH ME. I could care less what people have to say, and in most
>cases, I probably disagree with most everything they say---but
>I'm a firm believer that they have every right to say it no matter
>HOW MANY lily-livered girl-men they upset.

Lawd, Dossy.

Look. Free speech is all fine and dandy. There are, however, rules in our
society that govern that free speech to make it work more effectively. It's
that whole yelling-fire-in-a-theatre thing....just because you have the
_ability_ to say something does not mean you have the _right_. Usenet, as far
is I know, is a privilege, not a right, and there are rules (although widely
unknown) that govern its use in place already. This charter, basically,
reiterates those rules...that no one _should_ be breaking in the first place.

I've never kill-filed anyone because I'd like to think that, even though
someone repeatedly pisses me off, they might eventually pull their head out of
their ass to make a good point sometime down the road. I think it would make
things a little more genteel around here, though, if everyone kept their posts
within certain parameters....like they should be doing already.

BUT....if you detest the charter, go ahead and violate it. You'll get an
automated messg once a month. Big deal. Folks could be sending you messgs
on their own, without the 'bot, telling you to "cut it out," and it would
have the same pull, but you'd have a flooded mailbox. And, if someone chooses
to go to your server over something you said or did, they would probably be
able to do it without the charter, with a little record-keeping on their part.

Calm down, Doss. You're really not being repressed. You're just being
reminded -- metaphorically -- that nice people don't throw handfuls of their
own feces at other people. You might know that already....great. Then you
won't get a mssg from the charterbot telling you not to do it; the people who
_don't_ know that will, and will hopefully stop doing it.

If it would make you feel better, take a vote. Do something besides
yell your head off.

--kate
tucson, az

[Allanah Myles]

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
: : And if a user disagrees with the charter?

: They get a kindly written message, once in a great, great while,
: that asks them not to do that and why.

No, no, I'm saying, say for example I want to have a horrendously long
33 line .sig with cute ASCII art and all sorts of personal information
and terribly lame or mundane quotes. I disagree with the charter's
restriction. Is my opinion totally worthless, and I'm just to submit
to the Newsgroup Gestapo who will send me "quiet gentle reminders that
my actions displease them"?

That sounds ridiculous to me. People should feel free to post just as
they feel is appropriate. Whether you, or anyone else disagrees, is
your own problem. If you don't like someone's posting, you are
surely clueful enough to work a killfile. So is everyone else, we
would hope...

: : If this charter is going to be enforced in any way, I think it's

: : time for me to newgroup alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror.non-fascist.

: Ugh...guys, please stop making more of this then it is. We aren't
: talking moderation (yet...), we are talking about a single Welcome

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: message, and kindly reminder messages once in a great, great while.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In other words, you mean unsolicited e-mail, or *spam* mail?

If you want to post, say, on a monthly basis, the charter to the
newsgroup for newbies to read, that's one thing. To send new posters
an e-mail with the charter and an e-mail to people who "violate" this
charter... that's another.

If people wish to ignore the charter, or failed to read it, then
by all means feel free to _personally_ send them e-mail and tell
them how much of a witless fucknut they are. Getting an automated
e-mail is almost as cold and impersonal as the gynecologist who
doesn't care to warm up his/her tools before using them...

: IMHO, this is all that's needed at this point. Just an easy way to

: let people know what's up around here. It's bad now, and it's just
: going to get worse as time goes on. We *need* this, now, before we
: are *forced* to create a moderated group just to keep the
: sound/noise ratios in check...

"We *need* this"? Uh, before we take votes on the items ON the charter,
shouldn't we take a vote on who actually *wants* a charter, and if they
want it *enforced*? And who decides who gets to *enforce* it?

A self-named dictator and omnipotent enforcer, doesn't seem like a bad
job position. Maybe *I'll* choose to take that position... or have
*you* done that already?

My basic gripe over this whole issue is it feels like this charter
has basically sprung up in order to give certain members of this
newsgroup some kind of reassurance that it will be OKAY for them
to persecute OTHER members of this newsgroup. THIS DOES NOT FLOAT
WITH ME. I could care less what people have to say, and in most
cases, I probably disagree with most everything they say---but
I'm a firm believer that they have every right to say it no matter
HOW MANY lily-livered girl-men they upset.

I don't go to RHPS shows to listen to people thump bibles and tell
me how I'm a condemned sinner and how I'll go to hell for
DISAGREEING WITH THEIR MORALS AND STANDARDS. I certainly don't
read this newsgroup to be subjected to that kind of treatment
either. And this *charter* seems like exactly that - a vehicle
for a group of people (or more typically, an angry mob) to
persecute individuals who do NOT conform to THEIR "ideal" of what
"newsgroup traffic" should consist of.

-Dossy
And dat's da tr'oof.

[Allanah Myles]

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
: Once, a long, long time ago, this was most commonly done by

: finger(1)ing them... Too bad most ISPs have turned this off,
: or only allow looking up other customers if you are there
: costumer (ala AOL...).

Yes, I do think the lack of finger(1) is a sad, sad shame. Actually,
my .plan is still quite big...

: : Like I said to someone else: if your entire personality can be fully

: : conveyed in a .sig, you're pathetic.

: Hey, what do you think the RHFC is for? :-)

I always figured it was for stroking your own ego, and hoping that
no one else will be bored enough to try and decode it to say "hey,
you *really* haven't done that!" =)

-Dossy

[Allanah Myles]

Brad Smith <ard...@nni.com> wrote:
: Geez,

Louise!

: Why does everyone think this new charter is straight out of Hitler's
: back pocket.

Zenin never told you his last name is Hitler? Yeah, he's really
Adolph Zenin Hitler, III. Who would have ever guessed?

: The charter is simply gonna be a list of general protocols

: to use while posting to this newsgroup which MOST people obey anyway.

And what will happen to the unfortuntate sods who *don't obey*?

: I think this is a good idea.

You think eating three-day-old head cheese on multi-grain bread is
a good idea. What *don't* you think is a good idea? =)

: I personally hate incidents when I check the

: newsgroup and download 29 messages that's all "text garbled" because
: some idiot posted a .wav file.....

And I personally hate reading about some idiot who can't figure out
how to *decode* posted .wav files. =)

: And this is after there was a HUGE

: thread about stuff like that...I don't mind seeing your off-topic posts
: every once in a while...As long as it's somewhat Rocky related, it's
: cool.

As long as it's posted in this newsgroup, it's Rocky-related in my book.
If you don't think "non-sequiteur" and "Rocky Horror" are nearly
synonymous, you haven't been doing RHPS long enough.

: And as far as using the charter to boot people off the

: newsgroup...if he abuses this...there won't be a newsgroup to
: monitor...and I don't think he's about to do that...

You'd be surprised at how often throughout history people have believed
this, and have been burned by exactly this.

The big fear is if there will just be a newsgroup that consists only
of the enforcer, and the enforcer's friends.

All of the dictator-types in history have been generally supported by
the people who put them into power, and in the end, everyone ends up
getting fucked in the ass. Now, however much I might poke fun at
Zenin, I won't make any claims about his tendency towards dictatorship.
Things might very well work out. But it tends to be a trend on
(ab)usenet that when someone can feel righteous in saying that someone
*else* has violated one of their newsgroup's precious rules, they
feel the "need" to become a net.cop. That would be a real damned
shame to see happen to a.c-m.r-h. We RHPS fanatics should be trying
to *evade* the Thought Police, not create our own.

[Geno 3rd]

Dossy said:>We RHPS fanatics should be trying<BR>
>to *evade* the Thought Police, not create our own.<BR>

Sing it sister!
NO TO THE CHARTER!!

Geno "Biscuitboy" Engles
http://members.aol.com/geno3rd/index.html

[Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell]

Allanah Myles wrote:
{snip}
> [S]ay for example I want to have a horrendously long

> 33 line .sig with cute ASCII art and all sorts of personal information
> and terribly lame or mundane quotes. I disagree with the charter's

> restriction. Is my opinion totally worthless[?]

Netiquette has always been very clear on long .sigs and reminding people
of this is very reasonable.

{snip}

> People should feel free to post just as they feel is appropriate.
> Whether you, or anyone else disagrees, is your own problem. If you
> don't like someone's posting, you are surely clueful enough to work a
> killfile.

Many people don't follow Netiquette because they don't know about it.
Usenet is no longer populated solely by techies; I have been mailed a
couple of times by people who didn't know there *was* a newusers group
and wanted to know where it was. Many people nowadays don't know how to
use killfiles--newsreaders like Netscape don't make it easy to figure
out. Asking people to be polite and follow basic Netiquette is not
impinging on their free speech.

>>> If this charter is going to be enforced in any way, I think it's
>>> time for me to newgroup alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror.non-fascist.

>> Ugh...guys, please stop making more of this then it is.

Hear, hear. Please chill.
{snip}

>> we are talking about a single Welcome message, and kindly reminder

>> messages once in a great, great while.

{snip}

> In other words, you mean unsolicited e-mail, or *spam* mail?

Oh, puh-leeze.

>
> If you want to post, say, on a monthly basis, the charter to the
> newsgroup for newbies to read, that's one thing. To send new posters
> an e-mail with the charter and an e-mail to people who "violate" this
> charter... that's another.

In many newsgroups, people email the charter to newbies, who end up with
multiple copies since several people are helpful enough to send it. I
think it's a good ideato automatically send it. Posting the charter (or
the URL of a website where people can see it) periodically is also a
good idea. Sending it the second time someone's posted might be better,
but would be much trickier to figure out.

{snip}

> My basic gripe over this whole issue is it feels like this charter
> has basically sprung up in order to give certain members of this
> newsgroup some kind of reassurance that it will be OKAY for them
> to persecute OTHER members of this newsgroup.

It's set up to create a group that is easier to use with a high ratio of
content to noise.

{snip}

> I'm a firm believer that they have every right to say it no matter
> HOW MANY lily-livered girl-men they upset.

Most of what the charter says is "please stay on topic and follow basic
Netiquette." I like that--guess I'm a lily-livered girl-man (won't my
husband be surprised?).

{snip}

> And this *charter* seems like exactly that - a vehicle
> for a group of people (or more typically, an angry mob) to
> persecute individuals who do NOT conform to THEIR "ideal" of what
> "newsgroup traffic" should consist of.

By requesting that they post on-topic articles and follow Netiquette--
one of the basic expectations of all of Usenet. Not doing so is more an
indication of cluelessness than courageous free speech.

I think this has been pretty well beaten into the ground. If we vote on
accepting the charter, Alannah will vote "no." OK. Now can the rest of
us get on with this and vote on the darn thing?

Ruth Fink-Winter
--
Wally's Warped Archives and the Competely Crazy cast page
wbar...@NOSPAMwwa.com (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)
http://www.wwa.com/~wbarsell

[The Fixxer]

Well who is going to administer it?

And what of off topic articles? How bad do they hurt?

If Kate in Arizona is having trouble with final exams (which she never would)
then I think as her friends we would want to know about it......and offer
support and kind word ....but that would be off topic.

If someone wants me to try their new vitamin miracle.....and they are a Rocky
Person...I would not mind one or two innocuous posts...heck..lets support each
other...I try to support Nabisco because nice guy aj works there...i eat as
many oreos as I can..

But I can see a non rocky person posting for the first time.....a commercial
ad....that would bite.

besides...if we cut the traffic too much will we risk losing the group?

Mark

[Plan9]

On 6 Jun 1998 09:24:41 GMT, Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
>
>All of the dictator-types in history have been generally supported by
>the people who put them into power, and in the end, everyone ends up
>getting fucked in the ass. Now, however much I might poke fun at
>Zenin, I won't make any claims about his tendency towards dictatorship.
>Things might very well work out. But it tends to be a trend on
>(ab)usenet that when someone can feel righteous in saying that someone
>*else* has violated one of their newsgroup's precious rules, they
>feel the "need" to become a net.cop. That would be a real damned

>shame to see happen to a.c-m.r-h. We RHPS fanatics should be trying

>to *evade* the Thought Police, not create our own.

I wouldn't go so far to call Zenin a dictator. He's trying to work
with us in order to form a charter that everyone wants! He's not open
to suggestions, you know. Stop being so alarmist and try to work with
us for a change to make this ng something that we all want to read.

Louie "Plan9" P!

RHFC1.2 V4A+SRY1995L2 P?>R WNC&7{#RHPS EFNET}M0(2) C1B2R16V3O- Q?NA YA17G{m}H{5'4}L{Calgary,AB,CAN}S?m>bA15-18W115

Loyal Ed Wood worshipper! -Handy STS Prefect! - Fab Buck's Rock Video JC!

[Allanah Myles]

Kate Pitroff <kei...@goodnet.com> wrote:
: Look. Free speech is all fine and dandy. There are, however, rules in our

: society that govern that free speech to make it work more effectively. It's
: that whole yelling-fire-in-a-theatre thing....just because you have the
: _ability_ to say something does not mean you have the _right_.

Actually, I certainly *do* have the right. By exercising my right, I
may not end up a very *popular* person, but my popularity has nothing
to do with my ability or right to voice my own opinions in the fashion
I choose to.

: Usenet, as far is I know, is a privilege, not a right, and there are

: rules (although widely unknown) that govern its use in place already.
: This charter, basically, reiterates those rules...that no one _should_
: be breaking in the first place.

Uh, as far as I know, (ab)usenet HAS no rules. Well, except for those
newsgroups which are moderated, policy is left up to the news admin on
a server-by-server basis. This is why there is a proposal for Usenet II
which *will* have net-wide rules and guidelines. Feel free to correct me
if you have any real proof that I'm wrong.

People *have* time and time again tried to *suggest* some "standard rules"
for (ab)usenet ettiquette, but that's all they are---suggestions.

: I've never kill-filed anyone [...]

That's your own fault. If you don't like to hear/read what someone
else has to say, it certainly isn't your place to tell them to shut
up. You can *selectively* choose not to listen (or, in this case,
read) what they have to say. If you *have* chosen to read/hear
what they have to say, then don't complain if you don't like the
way they've said it. You voluntarily made that choice.

: BUT....if you detest the charter, go ahead and violate it. You'll get an

: automated messg once a month. Big deal.

Yep. That's exactly what procmail is good for, sending those charterbot
messages to /dev/null.

[Allanah Myles]

Plan9 <pear...@cadvision.com> wrote:
: I wouldn't go so far to call Zenin a dictator. He's trying to work

: with us in order to form a charter that everyone wants! He's not open
: to suggestions, you know. Stop being so alarmist and try to work with
: us for a change to make this ng something that we all want to read.

I personally have no gripes about having an informal charter. I think
suggested guidelines are a "good thing". But the concept of having
something send you e-mail telling you that you don't think the way
"the rest" of the people want you to think/act/do, that's just obnoxious.

You want my suggestion? Create the charter, lets all agree on a happy
medium, and LEAVE it as a *strongly suggested* document for all posters
to the newsgroup to read and obey. Post a monthly reminder to the newsgroup
for all newcomers to check the charter out, place it on a website, set
it up so people can email cha...@rhps.org or whatever and have it mail
back a copy to them... but leave the enforcement of it to each and every
individual.

Personally, the only thing I would actually keep from the charter posted
is probably: (1) 80-character line maximums, (2) .sigs <= 4 lines, and
no RHFC [if you want their RHFC, check their website or e-mail them],
(3) quoted lines of text MUST be less than original lines of text,
(4) remove people's .sigs from responses, unless your response
specifically addresses the .sig in question [I *hate* people who are
either too lazy or too stupid to remove people's .sig's].

My personal pet peeve is when people respond to a 10 line message,
quote the ENTIRE damned thing + original person's .sig, write a
3 or 4 word response *somewhere* buried in the response, may or
may not really be responding to the quoted text AT ALL, has an
8-line .sig themselves.... it is *these* people I want to eliminate
from our gene pool. They shouldn't be allowed to reproduce.

But hey, that's *my* personal pet peeve, and I just ignore those
people's posts. I don't go asking to have them prevented from
posting, or any of that silliness. I might flame them a bit, and
let them know how much of a twit they're really being---but, hey,
I'm free to say what I please, as I please, right? If not, they
shouldn't be able to, either.

[Kate Pitroff]

In article <6lcomo$r23$1...@ecwav.panoptic.com> Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> writes:
>From: Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com>
>Subject: Re: [DRAFT-RFD] New Newsgroup Charter v1.1

>Date: 7 Jun 1998 01:00:08 GMT

>Kate Pitroff <kei...@goodnet.com> wrote:
>: Look. Free speech is all fine and dandy. There are, however, rules in our
>: society that govern that free speech to make it work more effectively. It's
>: that whole yelling-fire-in-a-theatre thing....just because you have the
>: _ability_ to say something does not mean you have the _right_.

>Actually, I certainly *do* have the right. By exercising my right, I
>may not end up a very *popular* person, but my popularity has nothing
>to do with my ability or right to voice my own opinions in the fashion
>I choose to.

All right, let me correct myself. Just because you have the right does not
mean you should exercise it at every possible opportunity...you should have
some self-restraint and respect for others around you. Many folks on this ng
don't have that, and need to be reminded how to behave in the presence of
other humans.

>: Usenet, as far is I know, is a privilege, not a right, and
there are >: rules (although widely unknown) that govern its use in place
already. >: This charter, basically, reiterates those rules...that no one
_should_ >: be breaking in the first place.

>Uh, as far as I know, (ab)usenet HAS no rules.

(snip)

> Feel free to correct me
>if you have any real proof that I'm wrong.

Perhaps you should refer to Zenin and Ruth's references on the
subject...unless you've kill-filed them.

>: I've never kill-filed anyone [...]

>That's your own fault. If you don't like to hear/read what someone
>else has to say, it certainly isn't your place to tell them to shut
>up. You can *selectively* choose not to listen (or, in this case,
>read) what they have to say. If you *have* chosen to read/hear
>what they have to say, then don't complain if you don't like the
>way they've said it. You voluntarily made that choice.

Right. Read the rest of that paragraph again, the bit that you snipped. I'm
all for giving someone a chance to be heard. I'm also, under your view of
things _and_ mine, completely free to tell them I think they're a dink ...
note this is different from complaining, I hate complainers; or simply telling
them to "shut up" ... when they've said it.

Let me get this straight. You're okay with a "charter", per se, that everyone
knows about and purports to abide by. And we are all free to "violate" this
charter if we choose....but your problem is with the automated reminder that
you will get when you choose to violate it? (This is what I've gleaned from
your posts....if this isn't the case please state your position
more clearly. Try to avoid using words like "fascism" and "Nazi" as they're
merely inflammatory and too easy.) Why should this bother you? You already,
supposedly, knew you were doing it if you had knowledge about the charter in
the first place. Do you just hate having someone call you on
unacceptable behavior? You'd still be getting mail without the 'bot from
people telling you they didn't appreciate your taking liberties.

Again, if you'd like to be constructive, how about organizing a vote?

--kate
tucson, az

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:

: Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
: : : And if a user disagrees with the charter?

: : They get a kindly written message, once in a great, great while,

: : that asks them not to do that and why.
:

: No, no, I'm saying, say for example I want to have a horrendously long

: 33 line .sig with cute ASCII art and all sorts of personal information
: and terribly lame or mundane quotes.

For well over a decade old, sigs over 4 lines are considered quite
rude and completely useless (as stated elsewhere, there are a
vast number of other protocols designed explicitly for passing the
type of info you're talking about).

As of this point in time, such grossly large sigs are not covered
by any official RFCs, although many .edu feeds disallow them by
there own rules. However, the next revision to RFC 1036 (the
current Usenet message format RFC) is likely to address this topic
at the least on a "SHOULD" priority. Similarly, this current
revision of the charter also addresses this issue as a "SHOULD".

However, as with the rest of the charter, no one is or could ever
prosecuted for being rude in such a manner. No one will ever
get "kicked off the group". No one will ever have there posts
canceled. No one will ever have there account deleted. It's
not going to happen for just being rude. The ONLY times when
such action could ever be taken are spam and denial of service
attacks, and violations of conditions of use agreements,
which are far outside the scope of this charter.

: I disagree with the charter's restriction.

Fine. If this particular issue makes it to the final draft, you
might get an email asking you to please not use > 4 line sigs
without reason. That's it. That's all. You can still use them
if you disagree with this restriction. The message is just to
let you know that your fellow readers at large would prefer you
to do otherwise. If you feel you must shit on there feelings,
great. That's your right. But with or without a charter, don't
expect that we have to shutup and take it without letting you
know how we feel.

: Is my opinion totally worthless, and I'm just to submit

: to the Newsgroup Gestapo who will send me "quiet gentle reminders that
: my actions displease them"?

Again, charter or no charter you are subject to public scrutiny
anyway. There is no gestapo, just your fellow readers making you
aware of issues that you may not be. If you are already aware
of the issues and still want to post in a manner generally held
to be rude, so be it. Be as rude as you like. Just don't expect
anyone, charter or no charter, not to let you know you're being
rude.

: That sounds ridiculous to me.

So fine, make use of your left hand middle finger to press the D
key once a month and ignore it, or kill file it's from address
alias.

: People should feel free to post just as they feel is appropriate.

Reality check; Very few people nowadays know what is and is not
appropriate to do in Usenet in general. This is simply because
very few people know that the Usenet posting FAQs and guidelines
even exist or bother to read them if they do know.

This is an effort to make people more aware of the issues,
guidelines, and concerns in general. It's not in ANY way an
effort to remove those who choose, after being made aware of
said issues, to disregard them. If I or anyone else wanted
a "gestapo", we'd be talking about moving to a moderated
group, which isn't the case at all.

: Whether you, or anyone else disagrees, is your own problem.
: If you don't like someone's posting, you are
: surely clueful enough to work a killfile. So is everyone else, we
: would hope...

Why punish others for actions they MAY NOT BE AWARE are adversely
affecting others without first letting them know it is causing
such conditions? Now who is the "gestapo"...???

Yes, that's ALL we are talking about here. Letting people know
that what they are doing is having adverse affects on others. No,
it's not always that obvious, especially with people not reading
the standard documents anymore.

: In other words, you mean unsolicited e-mail, or *spam* mail?
^^^^
Please, do NOT use terms you obviously know absolutely nothing
about. Such reminder messages are in absolutely no way spam,
harassment, or otherwise. Stop lying now.

The term "unsolicited email" is also being exploited here. I'm
sorry to have to break this to you, but ALL EMAIL is "unsolicited"
unless you explicitly post a message saying "Please email me".

: If people wish to ignore the charter, or failed to read it, then

: by all means feel free to _personally_ send them e-mail and tell
: them how much of a witless fucknut they are. Getting an automated
: e-mail is almost as cold and impersonal as the gynecologist who
: doesn't care to warm up his/her tools before using them...

I'm sorry if I just don't have the time to waste by sending
personalized messages that say THE EXACT SAME THING to many
different people.

Sending such "personal" messages is a very repetitive and
needlessly time consuming task. It is a task well suited to
automation. With such automation comes other features that PREVENT
the user I'm sending the message to from being harassed by
PREVENTING REPETITIVE MESSAGES from being sent to the same person.

It's very, very easy to forget who I've sent a particular message
to about a particular subject. Thus, if I see someone doing
something I think they should be aware of three days in a row, I'm
likely to send them three messages about it. By using a bot this
NEEDLESS DUPLICATION OF MESSAGES IS COMPLETELY PREVENTED and both
my time and the users time is saved directly because of it.

: "We *need* this"?

Yes "need". This group has become arguably increasingly less
useful over the past few years (as has Usenet at large, but that's
another subject). This is an effort to try and help return the
group to it's former useful through VERY passive meens.

How am I qualified to speek on the decline of this group and
Usenet at large? Simple. I've been an highly active user of
Usenet since 1990, the maintainer of the Rocky group to email
gateway and archive since about '93, and a news server admin
since Jan '97.

: Uh, before we take votes on the items ON the charter,

: shouldn't we take a vote on who actually *wants* a charter, and if they
: want it *enforced*? And who decides who gets to *enforce* it?

Every group needs a charter, this isn't debatable. -This is so
universally agreed upon that YOU CAN NOT EVEN CREATE A NEW
GROUP WITHOUT A CHARTER. You can't even create an alt group
without a charter. This aspect is controlled by respected members
of the Internet issuing rmgroup control messages for any groups
that people try to create without a charter. Are they "appointed"
by anyone? No, they are just known well enough that when an
rmgroup (or other control message) is received that came from them
it's considered valid.

The Internet at large is a self governing group, made up of smaller
self governing groups. It is, IN NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM, anarchy,
whatever else you'd like to belive. Sorry to break this to you,
but like the rest of society, there are generally accepted standards
and guidelines for human interactions. Break them if you wish, most
of them are not illegal, but don't expect that no one is going to
complain about it.

: A self-named dictator and omnipotent enforcer, doesn't seem like a bad

: job position. Maybe *I'll* choose to take that position... or have
: *you* done that already?

If you want to complain to people about rude actions, be my
guest. Just as no one is "appointing" me this position, no
one is stopping you or anyone else either.

But do know this isn't a glamorous position by ANY extent. We
are talking about a position that (as your own replys so clearly
prove) is controversial and likely to inspire negative feedback by
some people, no matter how friendly and personal a message is
worded. I'm willing to take being shit on by a few to help the
group at large. Are you also willing to take people's shit for the
betterment of the group?

: My basic gripe over this whole issue is it feels like this charter

: has basically sprung up in order to give certain members of this
: newsgroup some kind of reassurance that it will be OKAY for them

: to persecute OTHER members of this newsgroup. THIS DOES NOT FLOAT
: WITH ME.

Nore should it "float with you", as it wouldn't with me either.
But this is not the intention, purpose, wording, or implementation
that is being carried out. Please don't twist this into something
that it's clearly not.

: I could care less what people have to say, and in most

: cases, I probably disagree with most everything they say---but

: I'm a firm believer that they have every right to say it no matter

: HOW MANY lily-livered girl-men they upset.

We are not talking about what you or anyone else says, or how
they say it. We are ONLY talking about letting people know (who
are likely to not be aware of it) that a particular method or
format they are using is generally rude and inappropriate. We
are talking about posting in HTML format (which *many* newsreaders
can not read at all), bad message quoting styles (which make
decoding what is quoted from what is not *very* hard on *any*
newsreader), and other general issues. We are NOT talking about
the ideas, just the layout that they are presented in.

: I don't go to RHPS shows to listen to people thump bibles and tell

: me how I'm a condemned sinner and how I'll go to hell for
: DISAGREEING WITH THEIR MORALS AND STANDARDS. I certainly don't
: read this newsgroup to be subjected to that kind of treatment
: either.

Welcome to the concepts of not-so-common curtesy and respect
of your fellow humans.

: And this *charter* seems like exactly that - a vehicle

: for a group of people (or more typically, an angry mob) to
: persecute individuals who do NOT conform to THEIR "ideal" of what
: "newsgroup traffic" should consist of.

It's not. Never has been. Never will be. 99% of it is a
reiteration of standard Usenet protocols and guidelines ALREADY
IN PLACE. It's a single document people can refer to when they
have doubt as to weather something they want to do will be
generally condemned or not. However, it DOES NOT condemn anyone
for anything more then the current documents do (which they don't).
It doens't force anything. At *most* it makes people aware of
issues they may not be aware of. If they are already aware of
them, great, delete the message. If not, they can read it and
become aware, or delete it and say ignorant of the fact that there
actions are considered rude and selfish.

Again people, please don't make more of this then it is, which is
next to nothing. We aren't talking about a moderated group. We
aren't talking about "prosecuting" anyone for anything. At MOST
we are talking about a way to automate a needlessly repetitive task
of letting people become aware of issues they may not be aware of,
FOR THE GOOD OF BOTH THE GROUP **AND THEM SELFS***.

NO ACTION BEYOND THIS is being described here, in ANY way shape or
form. Any action beyond such a common curtesy message is far beyond
the scope of this charter.

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
>snip<
: Yes, I do think the lack of finger(1) is a sad, sad shame. Actually,

: my .plan is still quite big...

Which is fine. There is no restriction on the size of a .plan, only
it's content (no control characters, binary data, etc). If anyone
wants to ignore the .plan, they can request the server send the
short version (headers only), normally by using the -p option of
finger(1).

>snip<
I wrote:
: : Hey, what do you think the RHFC is for? :-)

:
: I always figured it was for stroking your own ego, and hoping that
: no one else will be bored enough to try and decode it to say "hey,
: you *really* haven't done that!" =)

Ya, ya...I'm still working on the decoder, which should help
this quite a bit and make it actually useful and interesting.

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
: Brad Smith <ard...@nni.com> wrote:
>snip<
: Zenin never told you his last name is Hitler? Yeah, he's really

: Adolph Zenin Hitler, III. Who would have ever guessed?

Hmm, more inaccurate and outright disrespectful references
to issues of no relevance...great... Please stop the
personal attacks and say on topic.

: : The charter is simply gonna be a list of general protocols

: : to use while posting to this newsgroup which MOST people obey anyway.
:
: And what will happen to the unfortuntate sods who *don't obey*?

They receive a SINGLE, ONE TIME, POLITE message just letting
them know that they are posting outside the bounds of the
common protocols.

That's it. That's all. No tar and feathers, no stretcher, no
hot spikes up the butt, no burring on the stake, no dipping in
the water. Just a single, polite, one time message asking that
they please not do that and why it's in both there best interest
and the interest of the group at large that they don't.

: : I think this is a good idea.

:
: You think eating three-day-old head cheese on multi-grain bread is
: a good idea. What *don't* you think is a good idea? =)

Err...huh?

: As long as it's posted in this newsgroup, it's Rocky-related in my book.

Even ads for MAKE.MONEY.FAST et al?

: If you don't think "non-sequiteur" and "Rocky Horror" are nearly

: synonymous, you haven't been doing RHPS long enough.

"Sequiteur"? Do you meen non sequitur? In the words of Inigo
Montia, "I do not think that word means what you think it means".

Just because something does not directly follow something else, does
not mean it's not related on a larger scale.

: : And as far as using the charter to boot people off the

: : newsgroup...if he abuses this...there won't be a newsgroup to
: : monitor...and I don't think he's about to do that...
:
: You'd be surprised at how often throughout history people have believed
: this, and have been burned by exactly this.
: The big fear is if there will just be a newsgroup that consists only
: of the enforcer, and the enforcer's friends.

WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT "BOOTING" ANYONE!!! You just don't
get it do you. This power does not exist! Charter or no
charter! The ONLY way this power could be created is to create a
new moderated group, which is NOT what we are talking about...!

: All of the dictator-types in history have been generally supported by

: the people who put them into power, and in the end, everyone ends up
: getting fucked in the ass.

The wall is down, the USSR as fallen, China is slowly opening
there eyes to reality, so you must be out of causes to fight
against, is that it? You're so desperate for a cause you need
to create one out of thin air...?

I consider myself a bit of a radical at heart, but this is even
beyond me. Please take control of the false daemons in your
head and come back to reality so we can talk about real issues
and stop the pointless name calling.

: But it tends to be a trend on

: (ab)usenet that when someone can feel righteous in saying that someone
: *else* has violated one of their newsgroup's precious rules, they
: feel the "need" to become a net.cop.

Ugh...this is getting old. We are NOT talking about net.cops. We
are talking about short, extremely infrequent, and polite messages
that are fully valid to be sent charter or no charter. We are not
talking about ANYTHING ELSE....

: That would be a real damned

: shame to see happen to a.c-m.r-h. We RHPS fanatics should be trying
: to *evade* the Thought Police, not create our own.

We are NOT talking about thought police. We are not talking about
curbing ideas IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM.

[Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell]

I think we've argued about this enough, too.

Zenin, can you please also stick the revised charter on a website
(perhaps add the URL to your .sig for a while?) and let's vote on this
puppy.

Ruth Fink-Winter

obRHPS: Auditioned last night with the hubby for the Merrillville, IN
cast. Wally is going to go back to being schizo, as he was accepted for
Brad but will be Franking once a month.

This is the first cast I've been in that actually had audtions (other
than a "probationary period"). Seems like a good idea, though I think I
could do without doing it after the show (my makeup had congealed, and
it was 5:30 when we got out).

Mike Bennett wrote:
{snip}
> I don't know about you, but I'm getting pretty sick up and fed with all
> the name calling and petty bickering that is surrounding this charter.
>
> So I'm calling for a Vote.
{details snipped}
> Thanks. Do I hear a second?

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:

: Kate Pitroff <kei...@goodnet.com> wrote:
: : Look. Free speech is all fine and dandy. There are, however, rules in our
: : society that govern that free speech to make it work more effectively. It's
: : that whole yelling-fire-in-a-theatre thing....just because you have the
: : _ability_ to say something does not mean you have the _right_.
:
: Actually, I certainly *do* have the right.

You're wrong. You do not have the right to yell fire in a theatre
without cause. It's a federal offense and depending on the outcome
of the resulting stampede and reasons for yelling fire, can also
bring on charges of murder.

Sorry to break the bad news to you that your speech isn't as "free"
as you seem to think, thank god. Remember, your rights *end* where
the next person's begin. Even an inch more then this denies the
next person there rights.

: By exercising my right, I

: may not end up a very *popular* person, but my popularity has nothing
: to do with my ability or right to voice my own opinions in the fashion
: I choose to.

Just as I have the right to inform you that I don't like how
you're saying something, to which you can then take or leave at
your wim. This is all we are talking about.

: Uh, as far as I know, (ab)usenet HAS no rules.

Think again. You are so mistaken it isn't even funny. Do a little
more research before you make such claims. I could feed you to
quite a few THOUSAND pages of rules that govern Usenet traffic at
every level, with penalties raging from "unpopularity" through
UDP, and all the way up to lawsuits.

But I digress, as we aren't talking about nearly any of this.

: Well, except for those

: newsgroups which are moderated, policy is left up to the news admin on
: a server-by-server basis.

You're wrong.

: This is why there is a proposal for Usenet II which *will* have net-wide
: rules and guidelines.

You're still wrong. The main reason for Usenet II is not that the
rules do not exist, but that the current low level news protocols
can no longer handle enforcement of the rules effectively. Because
such rules and guildlines are not only broken, but in many cases
simply not known by most users Usenet at large suffers and becomes
less useful.

This charter is an effort to address and advert the ignorance in
an effert to keep the group from degrading with the rest of Usenet.

The logic is that if the people are aware of the expect guidelines
in place to HELP Usenet, they will *voluntarily choose* to abide
by them. If they don't however, there is NO prevision for further
action of ANY kind with respect to normal postings. The next draft
will dumb the wording down even more to drive this point home. We
are looking to "INFORM", nothing else.

: Feel free to correct me if you have any real proof that I'm wrong.

Do you really want me to list off a few dozen RFCs and other
documents that you're not going to read anyway? Fine...

Nearly everything in news.announce.newusers, plus:

RFC 1036 Standard for interchange of USENET messages
RFC 977 Network News Transfer Protocol
RFC 822 Format of ARPA Internet Text Messages
RFC 2045-9 Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME)

Plus the charters and guildlines layed out on a group by group
basis, as we are trying to do here. Yes, each group has rules
that govern it's use on a localized level.

No to mention all the lower level protocol RFCs concerning IP
name space allocation, DNS, the TCP/IP stack, routing protocals,
ethernet, et al. The news protocols sit upon a huge stack of
other protocols, each with it's own rules and guildlines.

: People *have* time and time again tried to *suggest* some "standard rules"

: for (ab)usenet ettiquette, but that's all they are---suggestions.

Yes, and they are well documented and respected. This charter is
nothing more then that, a suggestion. The addition of a feature
to help point out such suggestions is the only extra piece, which
is very mild compared to full moderation.

: : I've never kill-filed anyone [...]
: That's your own fault. If you don't like to hear/read what someone

: else has to say, it certainly isn't your place to tell them to shut
: up. You can *selectively* choose not to listen (or, in this case,
: read) what they have to say. If you *have* chosen to read/hear
: what they have to say, then don't complain if you don't like the
: way they've said it. You voluntarily made that choice.

Ugh...once again, for the hard of hearing, WE ARE **NOT** TALKING
ABOUT CENSORSHIP OR ANYTHING EVEN *REMOTELY* CLOSE TO IT! Please
stop blowing this into something that it's CLEARLY not.

: : BUT....if you detest the charter, go ahead and violate it. You'll get an

: : automated messg once a month. Big deal.
:
: Yep. That's exactly what procmail is good for, sending those charterbot
: messages to /dev/null.

So then your problem is what, exactly? If it's so easy for you to
completely advert the bot and shit on everyone at your will without
having to hear anyone complain, what's your problem?

Again, it *really* looks like you're just looking for a cause, and
issue of any kind to attack for any reason. The problem is, the
issues you're attacking here simply don't exist, never have, and
probably never will.

[Mike Bennett]

Hey folks,

I don't know about you, but I'm getting pretty sick up and fed with all
the name calling and petty bickering that is surrounding this charter.

So I'm calling for a Vote.

***ZENIN***
Please revise the draft charter if needed, to include any reflect any
popular changes proposed since the last posting. Please post the
Charter as a Request For Vote (RFV).

I volunteer to tally the votes and report them to the newsgroup. I
request that the vote be a simple yes/no vote for the Charter **AS A
WHOLE**. Any further revisions should then be done by amendment.

I'm not real familiar with normal newsgroup voting procedures, but I
suppose a 10 day time limit would be more than sufficient for everyone
to make up their minds and report their vote to me by PRIVATE E-MAIL.
Also, I feel that you should post it daily for the first 5 days of the
voting period, to minimize any news server errors that may occur.

Thanks. Do I hear a second?

--
Mike Bennett
aka Crimmy (Forbidden Fruit, Eugene OR)
http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Stage/3480
m...@efn.org

RHFC1.2 V400@M75@A+P4SRBY16L20s7
P350@W+280@E35@D35@BtJtRtH-tO{MC125@}XtP125@Y15L12&&(6) C I
MC3+B25@R22T6V4O+++ D{Lyons}35@K7 Q?NA YA33B0GmH{70}Sfa>18

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
: I personally have no gripes about having an informal charter.

?????...could have fooled me. :-/

: I think suggested guidelines are a "good thing".

WTF???

<Zenin does a double take to see if he read that correctly>

: But the concept of having something send you e-mail telling you

: that you don't think the way "the rest" of the people want you to
: think/act/do, that's just obnoxious.

You've already stated that you have no problem with someone
taking the time to type up a "personal" message to a person
that states the exact same information. Why are you against
the EXACT SAME THING only because it doesn't take the same
amount use useless time consuming work to generate?

The "bot" might be a bad term as it mildly implies that it
somehow decides what messages it should reply to based on
some programmable set of rules. Infact it's nothing like
this. The process YOU APPROVE OF is as such:

1> person posts something that "breaks" standard rules
and/or guidelines.
2> Someone (eg, me) sees this and takes the time out of
there (my) life to tailor a friendly message to let them
know that such actions are considered rude and should
probably not be continued.

The "CharterBot" only changes this to be:

1> person posts something that "breaks" standard rules
and/or guidelines.
2> Someone (eg, me) sees this, pipes the message into a program
with the particular section of the charter noted. The program
sends a message pretty much the same as what I'd manually type
in the above version, but _only_ if it hasn't already sent this
person a message concerning this particular problem.

How is the second sequence of events that much different from what
you approve of???

: You want my suggestion?

Yes, please. But not your name calling, meaningless and disgusting
Hitler references, and pages of talk about issues that do not exist.

: Create the charter, lets all agree on a happy

: medium, and LEAVE it as a *strongly suggested* document for all posters
: to the newsgroup to read and obey. Post a monthly reminder to the newsgroup
: for all newcomers to check the charter out, place it on a website, set
: it up so people can email cha...@rhps.org or whatever and have it mail
: back a copy to them...

All of this will be done, however it's not enough. The FAQ was done
this way for awhile, but message expiration times of a day or two at
most news sites for alt groups would meen the need for a posting
every day or two. Very few read charters posted to the groups in
question. It's been tried in many, many other groups and has
*never* worked. In SHARP contrast, sending a copy of the charter
and list of standard references to people the first time they post
has helped, and continues to help, many other groups quite a bit.
In this case, we are talking about a SINGLE piece of mail, which
would ONLY be sent ONCE, EVER, in the life of any single email
address.

I can understand opposition and arguments to the interactive use
(not your arguments, because you aren't talking about any subjects
that actually exist, but others have made valid arguments), but
you make absolutely to case for not sending a single welcome
message.

How could this *possibly* do any harm of *any* kind?!?!?!

: but leave the enforcement of it to each and every individual.

Define this. What to you mean by "individual"? Meaning you, I,
and anyone else that feels like it can reply to said person and
state there opposition to the methods they are taking? If so, then
yes, I'm in full agreement. 100%.

Now, assuming (danger!) this is what you mean by "enforcement by
each and every individual", why is it so wrong if I automate this
process if only for myself? I don't understand why you wish me
or anyone else to work more then they have to for the exact same
effect... Please explain this...

: Personally, the only thing I would actually keep from the charter posted

: is probably: (1) 80-character line maximums, (2) .sigs <= 4 lines, and
: no RHFC [if you want their RHFC, check their website or e-mail them],
: (3) quoted lines of text MUST be less than original lines of text,
: (4) remove people's .sigs from responses, unless your response
: specifically addresses the .sig in question [I *hate* people who are
: either too lazy or too stupid to remove people's .sig's].

I see, so you want the rules, you just want to be able to break
them without anyone ever emailing you about it, ever? Is that
it?

: My personal pet peeve is when people respond to a 10 line message,

: quote the ENTIRE damned thing + original person's .sig, write a
: 3 or 4 word response *somewhere* buried in the response, may or
: may not really be responding to the quoted text AT ALL, has an
: 8-line .sig themselves.... it is *these* people I want to eliminate
: from our gene pool. They shouldn't be allowed to reproduce.

Ahh, how the faces turn. The *real* point here, which we
have been dancing around is that many people DON'T KNOW
that many of these practices annoy others. What is so wrong
with sending them a friendly message that explains it?

: But hey, that's *my* personal pet peeve, and I just ignore those

: people's posts. I don't go asking to have them prevented from
: posting, or any of that silliness.

ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

FOR THE FUCKING LAST TIME, WE ARE *****NOT***** TALKING ABOUT
FUCKING CENSORSHIP!!!!! DROP IT ALREADY!

: I might flame them a bit, and

: let them know how much of a twit they're really being---but, hey,

: I'm free to say what I please, as I please, right? If not, they

: shouldn't be able to, either.

EXACTLY! The ONLY difference, WHAT SO EVER, is that I wish to
automate this for myself. Why are you so against me saving time???

Maybe you have no life and can personally script each flame to fit
the particular person and event, but I don't. I also don't want
to flame people. Yes, I've done it before, but I'd like to avoid
doing it. It doesn't help anything. But if I can send a friendly
message, even a prepackaged one, it's going to be FAR more
productive then any flame could ever be. By automating the process,
it gives me MUCH less reason to write up a personal flame.

We seem to be on the same side of the fence. Now if you could just
take off your blind fold you'd not only see that, but also see that
you're swinging punches against a target that does not exist.

[Plan9]

On 7 Jun 1998 22:00:42 GMT, Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:

>Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
<I don't even want to quote any of this garbage>

Zenin,
I don't understand what this woman's problem is. She needs to get a
clue. I personally think that the charter is an excellent idea.
There is no reason why you should not be doing this. In fact, thank
you for doing this! Making this charter official will make the ng
easier to read. Thank you for taking the time in order to clean up
this ng a little. It's time to vote, and I'm almost certian the
charter will go through. Thanks again, you've got my vote.

[Zenin]

Ruth Fink-Winter or Walter S. Barsell <wbar...@wwa.com> wrote:
>snip<
: Sending it the second time someone's posted might be better,

: but would be much trickier to figure out.

send() if (++$Addresses{$email} == 2);

This wouldn't be hard at all actually. What's other people's
thoughts on this? Mail the welcome message after the first
post, or the second (or Nth time)? I'm for first post myself,
but it really doesn't matter to me.

[MrsTrotsky]

Also sprach Mike Bennett <m...@efn.org>:

>So I'm calling for a Vote.

<call to long-overdue action snipped>

>Thanks. Do I hear a second?

You certainly do. This thread is, for all purposes ot reasonable discussion,
bleedin' demised. It's passed on. It's gone to meet its maker and joined the
choir invisible. This... is an *ex-thread.* Let it rest in smegging peace.

obRHPS: Can anyone tell me what's supposedly wrong with wearing stripes to
Rocky? Is it just something dreamed up by bored RHPS veterans to dupe the
newbies?

--
Mrs. Trotsky the Misery Bitch
(who should be studying for finals right now. ask me if I care.)
RHFC1.2 V13A+!MSRY1997L2 P>F+>O{MC} >C IFW+N MR1V1
YA15+G{f}H{5'5"}L{SFBayArea}S?{b}

[Mike Bennett]

MrsTrotsky wrote:

> Can anyone tell me what's supposedly wrong with wearing stripes to
> Rocky? Is it just something dreamed up by bored RHPS veterans to dupe > the newbies?

Well my tuxedo has had them for the past 14 years or so. Whoever says
that wearing stripes is wrong can't see the big picture. The stripes
can foster comeraderie amongst the audience. And when given out in a
ceremony acts as a goal for those looking for a place to fit into the
Rocky scene. They were NEVER meant to be symbols of power, only symbols
of honor.

I'm pretty sure if I'm not totally responsible for the phenomenon, but I
can tell you that when I was on cast in Orlando back in '83, I was also
in the US Navy. About a half dozen of cast members and freaks always
dressed for the occasion in tuxedo jackets. We were constantly being
asked by audience members how many times we had seen the movie.

As a response we thought we would put stripes on our sleeves (known as
service stripes in the military) to denote the number of times. Each
gold stripe denoted 100 shows. There was also a red stripe for when
someone reached their 69th show. They got to "wear the rag."

Originally they were just a thing between us, but we soon were giving
them out to anyone we knew was reaching a milestone. To add to the
prestige, these stripes were given out in a quick ceremony during the
pre-show.

Being in the military, I then travelled extensively throughout the
country and everywhere I went I took my tuxedo in case I found a theatre
that showed Rocky. Invariably, I'd be asked what the stripes meant, and
I'd tell them this story. I can only assume that in my travels and the
travels of others that have received their stripes, this story and the
use of stripes has grown.

[Allanah Myles]

Mike Bennett <m...@efn.org> wrote:
: ***ZENIN***

: Please revise the draft charter if needed, to include any reflect any
: popular changes proposed since the last posting. Please post the
: Charter as a Request For Vote (RFV).

Hell, at least post v1.2 of the charter first.

[Snapdragon]

Plan9 wrote:
>
> On 7 Jun 1998 22:00:42 GMT, Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
>
> >Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
> <I don't even want to quote any of this garbage>
>
> Zenin,
> I don't understand what this woman's problem is. She needs to get a
> clue. I personally think that the charter is an excellent idea.
> There is no reason why you should not be doing this. In fact, thank
> you for doing this! Making this charter official will make the ng
> easier to read. Thank you for taking the time in order to clean up
> this ng a little. It's time to vote, and I'm almost certian the
> charter will go through. Thanks again, you've got my vote.
>
> Louie "Plan9" P!

AMEN! well spoken.
snapdragon

[Allanah Myles]

Snapdragon <v...@ricochet.net> wrote:
[ ... 18 lines of quoting snipped ... ]
: AMEN! well spoken.
: snapdragon

You know, it's EXACTLY this kind of idiot who the charter should
punish. Quoting 18 lines of a message, just to add a stupid
"yeah! right on!"

Of course, since the charter is being created with the desires
of the "majority" here, rules against this kind of idiocy won't
make it into the charter...

Snapdragon, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, learn to use your editor to
remove unnecessary lines. Either that, or disable quoting of
replies in your newsreader.

-Dossy
(Ab)usenet Gestapo, Firing Squad Commandant-in-Chief.

[Snapdragon]

Allanah Myles wrote:
>
> You know, it's EXACTLY this kind of idiot who the charter should
> punish. Quoting 18 lines of a message, just to add a stupid
> "yeah! right on!"
>

> Snapdragon, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, learn to use your editor to
> remove unnecessary lines. Either that, or disable quoting of
> replies in your newsreader.

if you must be so rude as to call me an idiot, was it necessary to take
20 lines to do it? is this really about how much "unnecessary" space a
message takes up, or content, or the fact that someone disagreed with
you? i hope you're enjoying the role of Commandant, but don't be sure
there aren't people taking you seriously out there...

there was an exchange quoted, not just a message. it was neatly trimmed
and brief to begin with. zenin hasn't done anything so awful as you
rant about (at least not in this case), and it was about time someone
besides zenin said so and someone finally did. the clip kept me from
having to write original text, is all. the main point was to make
another show of support for what he's trying to do for this newsgroup, a
sometimes thankless job, which should be supported publicly.

in future dear, if you're going to address me personally, do it e-mail,
i'll do the same, and never fear, i know how to use my editor.

snapdragon
punish me, please!

[Zenin]

Snapdragon <v...@ricochet.net> wrote:

: Allanah Myles wrote:
: > You know, it's EXACTLY this kind of idiot who the charter should
: > punish. Quoting 18 lines of a message, just to add a stupid
: > "yeah! right on!"

>snip<
: if you must be so rude as to call me an idiot, was it necessary to take

: 20 lines to do it? is this really about how much "unnecessary" space a
: message takes up, or content, or the fact that someone disagreed with
: you?

>snip<

This points to the heart of what the CharterBot is designed to
avoid. True, there could have been a little more thought taken
to trim the quoted text, but a 20 line flame isn't going to do
much but piss people off. On the other hand, if the CharterBot
had sent a friendly (albeit a form letter) message about the
problem it probably would not only have been more effective
in curbing the problem in the future, but not raise any tempers
either.

[Allanah Myles]

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
: Reality check; Very few people nowadays know what is and is not

: appropriate to do in Usenet in general. This is simply because
: very few people know that the Usenet posting FAQs and guidelines
: even exist or bother to read them if they do know.

This is exactly the problem. All of these AOLamers who discover
(ab)usenet and start posting to it WITHOUT even KNOWING what
news.newusers is, what the FIRST THING about 'netiquette' is...
and then when they get FLAMED for their blatant disregard for
pre-established standards of (ab)usenet behavior, they wonder
why.

Fact of the matter is, it seems the majority of the people here
enjoy endulging themselves with large .sigs, quoting entire
30 line messages just to add a one-liner "yeah, me too" at
the bottom... and all the other posts in really poor taste, that
I think the charterbot will be overactive. And to try and get
these people to actually conform to a nice, normal standard of
posting ettiquette...as Gene Spafford put it, "is like trying
to herd cats."

Good luck. You might as well not bother, for *this* newsgroup.

: : In other words, you mean unsolicited e-mail, or *spam* mail?

: ^^^^
: Please, do NOT use terms you obviously know absolutely nothing
: about. Such reminder messages are in absolutely no way spam,
: harassment, or otherwise. Stop lying now.

: The term "unsolicited email" is also being exploited here. I'm
: sorry to have to break this to you, but ALL EMAIL is "unsolicited"
: unless you explicitly post a message saying "Please email me".

I don't want the charter mailed to me. Especially not by a bot.
When what *you* consider "spammers" go through (ab)usenet for
e-mail addresses and send those users e-mail, you call that spam.
When your charterbot does it, it's no longer spam? You are in
effect mass-mailing e-mail addresses that you gather from (ab)usenet
that match a certain criteria that you choose. Sounds just like
spam to me.

Just for the record - will you be adding an "ignore" list to the
charterbot? So that people can "unsubscribe" themselves from it,
preventing them from receiving a message again? If not, you'll
be violating some laws that make statements against sending
fax, phone, or electronic communications after specifically being
requested (particularly in writing) to be taken off the sender's
list.

If you are going to maintain a do-not-send list, add me to it.
If I want to see the charter, I'll visit the website that hosts
the charter. If it's sent to me, it's unsolicited e-mail trying
to get me to read the charter, or some other mail related to it.

: I'm sorry if I just don't have the time to waste by sending

: personalized messages that say THE EXACT SAME THING to many
: different people.

And this isn't "spam" or "mass-mailing"? =)

: Sending such "personal" messages is a very repetitive and
: needlessly time consuming task.

So, then leave it to the newsgroup readers to take it upon themselves
to jot out a quick message saying "hey, please don't do that, you'll
irritate all the other readers---it's impolite" to the newcomers who
do such stupid things. Yes, automating the process may mean more
people will receive a notice than before, but at what cost?

: It is a task well suited to

: automation. With such automation comes other features that PREVENT
: the user I'm sending the message to from being harassed by
: PREVENTING REPETITIVE MESSAGES from being sent to the same person.

Usually, it's been proven over time that lusers don't get the message
the first time they read it. When they do something stupid, and they
get 10-20 messages in their inbox all with a resounding "god, I don't
believe you're so stupid that you did XYZ," it starts to sink in, and
chances are they might not do it again, if they're a conscientious
soul.

: How am I qualified to speek on the decline of this group and

: Usenet at large? Simple. I've been an highly active user of
: Usenet since 1990, the maintainer of the Rocky group to email
: gateway and archive since about '93, and a news server admin
: since Jan '97.

My condolences. *grin* Yes, the newsgroup has declined in quality,
just as the rest of (ab)usenet. This is due to the rash of new users
who fail to read and understand the basic principles of net.interaction
and netiquette. Sure, having the charter available for people to
read (instead of expecting them to have read news.newusers) is
definitely a more likely way of people to acclimate themselves with
standard use and etiquette rules... but I think that should be
sufficent, just having it available to be read.

: You can't even create an alt group without a charter.

Wanna watch me? *grin* I dunno how long the newsgroup will last,
but who knows... =)

: This aspect is controlled by respected members

: of the Internet issuing rmgroup control messages for any groups
: that people try to create without a charter. Are they "appointed"
: by anyone? No, they are just known well enough that when an
: rmgroup (or other control message) is received that came from them
: it's considered valid.

True, and it seems that enough news servers still don't use pgpverify
or similar mechanisms that a spoofed rmgroup of
alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror could probably have a devastating
effect. Hopefully this will change, as more and more news admins
use pgpverify or other stronger authentication schemes.

: If you want to complain to people about rude actions, be my

: guest. Just as no one is "appointing" me this position, no
: one is stopping you or anyone else either.

Trust me, I'll be the first one to jump down people's throats
for violating the charter, once it's in place. I personally
can't stand most of the things the newbies do, and I think
if they *just* took out the few minutes to read and understand
general etiquette rules, there'd be much less aggravation for
the rest of us.

: NO ACTION BEYOND THIS is being described here, in ANY way shape or

: form. Any action beyond such a common curtesy message is far beyond
: the scope of this charter.

Yes, the purpose of the charter is to give YOU, the readers, an
opportunity to familiarize yourselves with what is typically
encouraged behavior when posting to (ab)usenet. If you feel
it necessary to deviate - feel free. If enough people find
your lack of regard to pre-established standards rude, they
will also feel free to let you know how much you've irritated
them. If everyone keeps the charter in mind when posting,
things will be better for everyone involved, and cause much
less discomfort.

Everyone, please take the time out to read the charter,
familiarize yourself with it, and so on. And, if you post
to other newsgroups, it's always a good idea to look for
the newsgroup charter or FAQ *before* posting to the
newsgroup.

-Dossy

[Allanah Myles]

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
: : Yes, I do think the lack of finger(1) is a sad, sad shame. Actually,

: : my .plan is still quite big...

: Which is fine. There is no restriction on the size of a .plan, only
: it's content (no control characters, binary data, etc). If anyone
: wants to ignore the .plan, they can request the server send the
: short version (headers only), normally by using the -p option of
: finger(1).

Aww, but sticking an arbitrarily large core file in as my .plan is
*so* much fun! *evil grin*

: Ya, ya...I'm still working on the decoder, which should help

: this quite a bit and make it actually useful and interesting.

Hey, Zenin - if you'd care to e-mail me the RHFC specification,
I'll whack out a decoder tonight. You can also catch me on
EFnet IRC as Dossy, in case you're so inclined.

[Allanah Myles]

Zenin <ze...@bawdycaste.org> wrote:
: : Zenin never told you his last name is Hitler? Yeah, he's really

: : Adolph Zenin Hitler, III. Who would have ever guessed?

: Hmm, more inaccurate and outright disrespectful references
: to issues of no relevance...great... Please stop the
: personal attacks and say on topic.

Chill, bitch, it was sarcasm. Do I need to put a "=)" smiley after
*EVERYTHING*? Sheesh... [sarcasm: off]

: That's it. That's all. No tar and feathers, no stretcher, no

: hot spikes up the butt, no burring on the stake, no dipping in
: the water.

Damn, and you know, that's the ONLY reason I even bother posting
to this newsgroup. Well, I guess I'll have to fulfill my desires
elsewhere...

: : As long as it's posted in this newsgroup, it's Rocky-related in my book.

: Even ads for MAKE.MONEY.FAST et al?

Well, if Dave Rhoads was an active cast member in an RHPS show... maybe.
*grin*

: : If you don't think "non-sequiteur" and "Rocky Horror" are nearly

: : synonymous, you haven't been doing RHPS long enough.

: "Sequiteur"? Do you meen non sequitur? In the words of Inigo
: Montia, "I do not think that word means what you think it means".

"meen"? Perhaps you mean "mean". =)

I can pick nits with the best of them, y'know.

: The wall is down, the USSR as fallen, China is slowly opening
: there eyes to reality, so you must be out of causes to fight

: against, is that it? You're so desperate for a cause you need
: to create one out of thin air...?

If I was desperately looking for a cause, I could always start
the "lets start a Shock Treatment show" crusade. We all know
how hopeless *that* cause turns out.

: I consider myself a bit of a radical at heart, but this is even
: [it's] beyond me.
..."help... me... Mommy..."

: Please take control of the false daemons in your

: head and come back to reality so we can talk about real issues
: and stop the pointless name calling.

If I were even this close --> " in touch with reality, you really
think I'd be involved with RHPS? =) <-- smiley, for the humor-impaired.

[Allanah Myles]

Snapdragon <v...@ricochet.net> wrote:
: if you must be so rude as to call me an idiot, was it necessary to take
: 20 lines to do it?

God, how will you feel when you get the 20+ line charter mailed to you.
I can't begin to imagine, if you think *my* personal response to your
idiocy was too much.

: there was an exchange quoted, not just a message.

Yes, and you only managed to produce *3* words as your follow-up.
18 lines of quoted text, just to add *3* words? Come on, you could
have done better than that.

: the clip kept me from having to write original text, is all.

If you can't bring yourself to write original text, why are you
bothering us with your posts? If all you can contribute to a
conversation is "yeah, me too!" then don't bother, save us all
the trouble of waiting for your message to load.

: the main point was to make

: another show of support for what he's trying to do for this newsgroup, a
: sometimes thankless job, which should be supported publicly.

It's not quite so thankless if people start publically thanking
the person, is it? If you feel the compulsion to thank someone,
why not send it in e-mail?

: in future dear, if you're going to address me personally, do it e-mail,

: i'll do the same, and never fear, i know how to use my editor.

Nah, it's much more fun to flame you in public. =)

[Zenin]

Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
: I don't want the charter mailed to me. Especially not by a bot.

But it's only one copy, ever... Why is this such a problem?

: When what *you* consider "spammers" go through (ab)usenet for

: e-mail addresses and send those users e-mail, you call that spam.

Non-targeted bulk email of ads, chain letters, etc I consider
spam.

: When your charterbot does it, it's no longer spam?

It's different. Why? Just because it is, dammit! :-)

: You are in

: effect mass-mailing e-mail addresses that you gather from (ab)usenet
: that match a certain criteria that you choose. Sounds just like
: spam to me.

Most spam has no sorting criteria whatsoever. Would it not
be spam if I noticed "manually" that a new user had entered
the newsgroup and "manually" sent them a friendly welcome
message? Me thinks not. The end effect is no different
if handled by a bot or manually.

: Just for the record - will you be adding an "ignore" list to the

: charterbot? So that people can "unsubscribe" themselves from it,
: preventing them from receiving a message again?

Maybe... It's already got an ingore list for the same person
on the same topic twice in a given amount of time.

: If not, you'll be violating some laws that make statements against

: sending fax, phone, or electronic communications after specifically
: being requested (particularly in writing) to be taken off the sender's
: list.

Doesn't apply as there is no list an no bulk sendings of any
kind, ever. It's basically personal email, *manually* sent
(the bot just formats it mostly) to a single address. If two
people get the same message it's because I manually pressed
send twice. There is *never* a time however, that a bulk
mailing would be done to any list or part of a list, ever.

: If you are going to maintain a do-not-send list, add me to it.

: If I want to see the charter, I'll visit the website that hosts
: the charter. If it's sent to me, it's unsolicited e-mail trying
: to get me to read the charter, or some other mail related to it.

Which is what 'n' keys are for. :-)

The full charter will only be sent to any particular
email address once, *ever*.

Like I said before, ALL email is "unsolicited" unless you
actually post some place, "please send me something". The
definition of "spam" is not simply it's being unsolicited.

: : I'm sorry if I just don't have the time to waste by sending

: : personalized messages that say THE EXACT SAME THING to many
: : different people.
: And this isn't "spam" or "mass-mailing"? =)

It's not in mass. If I send one message today, and one five
days from now to someone else, that's so far from being "mass"
it's almost funny, almost.

: So, then leave it to the newsgroup readers to take it upon themselves

: to jot out a quick message saying "hey, please don't do that, you'll
: irritate all the other readers---it's impolite" to the newcomers who
: do such stupid things.

30 million new users on the Internet, 10 million just last year
alone. The problem is simply too large now to even bother with
if done manually each and every time. Maybe you have such huge
amounts of free time to waste, but I don't. The lack of anyone
else sending many personal messages about this problem is pretty
good evidence that most other users have also given up on doing
this because it simply takes too much time nowadays.

: Yes, automating the process may mean more

: people will receive a notice than before,

Without wasting nearly the amount of time that "personal" messages
do.

: but at what cost?

None. Absolutely none.

>snip<
: Usually, it's been proven over time that lusers don't get the message

: the first time they read it. When they do something stupid, and they
: get 10-20 messages in their inbox all with a resounding "god, I don't
: believe you're so stupid that you did XYZ," it starts to sink in, and
: chances are they might not do it again, if they're a conscientious
: soul.

Thus the timeout on resend at 30 days. If it's still a problem
after 30 days, they might get another message about the problem,
with another 30 days to change there habits before getting another
message. This isn't spam (it isn't bulk or mass), and what you're
proposing is that a full mail-bomb is needed. Maybe I'm nieve, but
I give people just a little more credit in general.

>snip<
: My condolences. *grin* Yes, the newsgroup has declined in quality,

: just as the rest of (ab)usenet. This is due to the rash of new users
: who fail to read and understand the basic principles of net.interaction
: and netiquette.

Yep, oftin because they don't even know such documents/netiquette
even exist.

: Sure, having the charter available for people to

: read (instead of expecting them to have read news.newusers) is
: definitely a more likely way of people to acclimate themselves with
: standard use and etiquette rules... but I think that should be
: sufficent, just having it available to be read.

But the *CURRENT* documents that this charter is derived from
are "available to be read" now. Are they read? We both agre
they aren't, and thus the problem.

This passive method of distilling information is proven not
to work in the New Internet[tm]. A more preactive method
of information distillation is strongly needed. The CharterBot
is still pretty mild (moderation would be the strong method),
but if it works we won't have to use the stronger methods at
all.

: True, and it seems that enough news servers still don't use pgpverify

: or similar mechanisms that a spoofed rmgroup of
: alt.cult-movies.rocky-horror could probably have a devastating
: effect. Hopefully this will change, as more and more news admins
: use pgpverify or other stronger authentication schemes.

Most servers that don't verify either manually or via pgp sigs,
just ignore rmgroup messages completely, or que them for later
manual scaning when time permits. Very few honor rmgroup messages
outright anymore, and haven't for years.

[RiFF4711]

Hey all,

I have a proposal. Why don't we stop this useless arguing back and forth about
the charter between Dossy and Zenin. The only thing it is doing right now is
adding more mail to the NG. Dossy obviously isn't going to change the majority
of the users minds on the NG (I say this because she is the only person who has
spoken out against it in this forum). And obviously Zenin isn't going to change
Dossy's mind. So why don't we stop the arguing (I think Dossy enjoys being in
the public eye, and it would appear to me personally that she needs to be seen
at all costs... a sort of Dennis Rodman for the NG. Funny, Dossy reminds me of
Rob ALOT... very strange). Oh well... so how about this Byron. You put Dossy on
the list of people that the charter bot has already sent an email to, so that
she never receives one. Then, whenever we see her doing the things that are
recommended not to do on the NG, everyone who dislikes it can email her
personally. It's not harassment if she receives 20 emails from 20 different
people, now is it?

--
Mark B. --- The Roaming RiFF RaFF

-The preceeding announcement has been paid for by the [nWo] New World Order-
"Respect My Authoritaaaaiii" - Eric Cartman

[Plan9]

On 10 Jun 1998 05:34:26 GMT, Allanah Myles <do...@panoptic.com> wrote:
>If I was desperately looking for a cause, I could always start
>the "lets start a Shock Treatment show" crusade. We all know
>how hopeless *that* cause turns out.

AAARGH!! ST is more poular than EVER! There are more live ST shows
going on across the US than there ever have been. However, I guess
that this is just another attempt at humor. IT's too bad you didn't
put a fucking =) after that too.

[Thumper43]

Ello

grrr....

<<Funny, Dossy reminds me of
Rob ALOT... very strange).>>

ummm...WHAT DID I DO NOW!?!?!?!?!

I'm not even IN any of these Charter Arguements and somehow my name STILL
manages to be dragged through the mud again!!!

JESUS CHRIST PEOPLE!!!!!!!!

Please...if i may point something out to you before people start pointing
fingers... i DID NOT make the first move on this one folks. If you have a
problem ..then EMAIL IT TO ME!!!!

if you don't... then don't add my name into ANY arguements that i'm not
currently involved in. all it does is start more trouble for this NG.

Shit...get over it already.
And for the Record..i have NO IDEA who
"Mark Becknauld" for San Francisco (a.k.a Riff4711) is...
Nor does he know me. So how can i be compared to someone
when you know nothing about me?

If there is ANY argument or if anyone wants to post a response to this...EMAIL
IT TO ME PEOPLE...don't drag it out here.

Love and here we go again,
**HAPPY NOODLE BOY**
Keeper of the *Book of Happy*
"Seems like everybody's got, something
I have not, a reason not to DIE!
So I say DEATH to Mr. Right,
'Cause thats not ME!"

[RiFF4711]

><<Funny, Dossy reminds me of Rob ALOT... very strange).>>
>
>ummm...WHAT DID I DO NOW!?!?!?!?!

Well Rob, I haven't met Dossy either, and my comparison of the two of you was
simply based upon the personalities you portray on the NG. You have stated
previously that you are the same person online and off, so I would consider it
a fare comparison.

(Just wanted to explain before this thread gets out of hand). Rob, if you have
anything else to say, email me.

[Art Laurie (Quality)]

RiFF4711 wrote in message
<199806101820...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...

>Hey all,
>
>I have a proposal. Why don't we stop this useless arguing back and forth
about
>the charter between Dossy and Zenin. The only thing it is doing right now
is
>adding more mail to the NG.

Don't like it, then killfile them, or simply ignore this particular thread.
You are witnessing a rational, extended discussion about a subject that
affects us all, and that some people have very strong feelings about.
Something that rarely happens here. The thread will die when it dies.

And for the record, I also opposed the charter and voiced my opposition to
it here.

(I wonder what Rob is doing right now?)
--
Art Laurie Means Quality! Ask for him by name!
Quality Brad and associated services since 1979!
The Teseracte Players of Boston! R.H.A.N.E. charter members!
ICQ# 12588739! Badge# 4660! What, no gravy?!?
D431alpha...want some? Get Some!!!

[Thumper43]

Ello

<<(I wonder what Rob is doing right now?)>>

Welp, i'm sitting here, reading the NG, and being amused buy
you. hehehehehehe..this made me laugh.
thanks

Love and good humor,

[The Fixxer]

So when was there a vote?

Mark