U.U. Language

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 21, 2002, 1:54:35 AM11/21/02
to
I logged onto this newsgroup this evening, hopeful to see the seven
principals manifested and followed in written word. What I saw surprised and
dissapointed me; hateful words, inappropriate ads, social prejudice. So I
offer my own olive branch of topics for discussion:

How should U.U.'s go about reaching those who are most opposed to us and our
belief system?
What would say to someone who is interested in becoming a U.U. and wants to
learn more?
Why should U.U.'s have a newsgroup?

pax, Troy


BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 21, 2002, 10:15:55 AM11/21/02
to
Troy Scott wrote in message:

> I logged onto this newsgroup this evening, hopeful to see the seven
> principals manifested and followed in written word. What I saw surprised and
> dissapointed me; hateful words, inappropriate ads, social prejudice. So I
> offer my own olive branch of topics for discussion:

(cough cough cough)
It sounds to me you are awfully green to UUism. ;-) UUism is not
perfect, Troy, and neither are people. UUs do slip now and then,
dearie. Please take off your rose-colored glasses. ;-)

Besides, I have my own PeePees (my affectionate word for the
Principles and Purposes), to which I posted again here....of course,
they are STOLEN(!!) from the UUA's PeePees. ;-) :-) (Gasp!) Oh the
atrocities! ;-)


> How should U.U.'s go about reaching those who are most opposed to us and our
> belief system?
> What would say to someone who is interested in becoming a U.U. and wants to
> learn more?

Go to UUA.org, do a little search and learn. We cannot teach newbie
UUs. They have to do the research themselves cuz they need to
*interpret* the PeePees in their own way. That way, they get to the
Golden Grail, rather than someone else's story of what the Golden
Grail looks like. ;-)


> Why should U.U.'s have a newsgroup?

You said "Pax". I take it you are pagan, or similar? :-) If
so....here are my flesh bites: ;-)

Why should....
..pagans have a newsgroup?
..christians have a NG?
..jews have a NG?
..wiccans have a NG? (are we having fun yet?? ;-)
..gnostics have a NG?
..panentheists have a NG?
..pantheists have a NG?
..agnostics have a NG? (I am agnostic! ;-)
..humanists have a NG?
..ad inifintum have a NG?. ;-)

Troy, I don't mean to be hard on you, but I do speak my mind. I
sincerely hope you will stick around. If you don't like this UU
newsgroup, you can go to soc.religion.unitarian-univ which is
moderated and has no ads or whatcrap there. :-) Mind you....I also
post there too. ;-)

Nikki
(see below for my PeePees, feel free to rip it apart and take what you
like)

The Principles of MY Unitarian Universalist SPIRITUALITY

I, a UU, MOVE to affirm and promote..................
~~The inner dignity of MOST people;
~~ Justice, equity and compassion in human relations TO THE BEST OF MY
ABILITY;
~~ Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth;
~~ A free and responsible search for truth and meaning according to my
own conscience AND INITUTIONS;
~~ Expending some energies towards a goal of "world community" TO THE
BEST OF MY ABILITY;
~~Respect for the interdependent web of existence of which I am part.
~~The living spirituality which I share draws from many sources, TO
which I will partake and drop as I see fit for my own private
spirituality
~~ Direct experience of that inner mystery and wonder which moves me
to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the inner forces which
creates, upholds and NATURALLY DESTROYS life; (naturally destroys as
in death of old age, deaths from earthquakes, epidemics, etc)
~~ Words and deeds of HUMANITY which challenges me to confront powers
and structures of human "evils" with justice, compassion if
needed/possible, and the transforming power of love if possible;
~~ Wisdom from the world's religions and SPIRITUALITIES which inspires
me in my ethical ("conscience") and spiritual life;
~~ Humanist teachings which counsels me to heed the guidance of reason
and the results of science, and GUIDE me towards a BETTER
UNDERSTANDING the mind and spirit.
~~ Spiritual teachings of RELIGIOUS and SPIRITUAL traditions which
celebrate the sacred circle of life and instructs me to live in
harmony with the rhythms of nature to the best of my ability
~~ Grateful for the religious pluralism which enriches and ennobles my
faith, I am inspired to deepen my understanding and expand my
HORIZONS.


The Purposes of MY Unitarian Universalist SPIRITUALITY
~~ The Unitarian Universalist SPIRITUALITY shall devote my resources
to and exercise my skills for religious, educational and humanitarian
purposes

~~ Nothing herein MY SPIRITUALITY shall be deemed to infringe upon the
individual freedom of belief which is inherent in the Universalist and
Unitarian heritages or to conflict with any statement of purpose or
bond of union used by any society

Steven Botts

unread,
Nov 21, 2002, 11:38:43 AM11/21/02
to

--
to reply by e-mail insert a "t" between the first two letters of my address.
"Troy Scott" <f...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Lq%C9.12297$Gc.3...@twister.austin.rr.com...

Perhaps you're refering to the anti-gay stuff posted by our visiting troll.
He doesn't represent UUism in any way. He shows up here once in a while,
spews his garbage while changing his address faster than you can killfile
him, then goes off to infest some other group when he gets bored from lack
of response.

Steve


Robin Edgar

unread,
Nov 21, 2002, 11:51:09 AM11/21/02
to
"Troy Scott" <f...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Lq%C9.12297$Gc.3...@twister.austin.rr.com>...

Hi Troy,

If you think the behavior of some UU's is quite appalling here you
should check out the UU sections of Beliefnet and various other UU
internet forums...

http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/boards_main.AllCategories.asp?Category=96

Read this and weep...

http://www.cfuu.org/CFUUForum/messages/422.html

Check out this UU newsgroup...

http://groups.google.ca/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&group=alt.recovery.unitarian-univ

"So you're disillusioned, Big deal. All that means is that were
illusioned in the first place."

The Rev. William Sloane Coffin

Allah prochaine,

Robin Edgar

Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 21, 2002, 2:03:08 PM11/21/02
to

"BluueNikki" <bluue...@1st.net> wrote in message
news:3a8bf7d4.02112...@posting.google.com...

> Troy Scott wrote in message:
> > I logged onto this newsgroup this evening, hopeful to see the seven
> > principals manifested and followed in written word. What I saw surprised
and
> > dissapointed me; hateful words, inappropriate ads, social prejudice. So
I
> > offer my own olive branch of topics for discussion:
>
> (cough cough cough)
> It sounds to me you are awfully green to UUism. ;-) UUism is not
> perfect, Troy, and neither are people. UUs do slip now and then,
> dearie. Please take off your rose-colored glasses. ;-)
I have been a UU for 30 years. I am neither green to UUism, nor do I have
expectations of perfection.

>
> Besides, I have my own PeePees (my affectionate word for the
> Principles and Purposes), to which I posted again here....of course,
> they are STOLEN(!!) from the UUA's PeePees. ;-) :-) (Gasp!) Oh the
> atrocities! ;-)
>
> > How should U.U.'s go about reaching those who are most opposed to us and
our
> > belief system?
> > What would say to someone who is interested in becoming a U.U. and wants
to
> > learn more?
>
> Go to UUA.org, do a little search and learn. We cannot teach newbie
> UUs. They have to do the research themselves cuz they need to
> *interpret* the PeePees in their own way. That way, they get to the
> Golden Grail, rather than someone else's story of what the Golden
> Grail looks like. ;-)

I've gone to UUA's site many times and done many little searches over
the years. While I strongly agree with the concept of allowing others to
make their own discoveries, I think you are over-looking an important issue:
Just because you SAY you cannot teach, does not mean you aren't influencing
others. Words and actions of kindness go a long way. It is my belief that
those who are most strongly opposed to UUism, understand it least. I'm not
saying we all have to live perfect lives and say perfect things. I'm saying
that a newsgroup with the label "alt.religion.unitarian-univ" implies that
UUism is represented here. Visitors may not know when that representation
doesn't really reflect UU principles.

> > Why should U.U.'s have a newsgroup?
>
> You said "Pax". I take it you are pagan, or similar? :-) If
> so....here are my flesh bites: ;-)

I think maybe you misunderstood the term. "Pax" is a latin word meaning
peace.

> Why should....
> ..pagans have a newsgroup?
> ..christians have a NG?
> ..jews have a NG?
> ..wiccans have a NG? (are we having fun yet?? ;-)
> ..gnostics have a NG?
> ..panentheists have a NG?
> ..pantheists have a NG?
> ..agnostics have a NG? (I am agnostic! ;-)
> ..humanists have a NG?
> ..ad inifintum have a NG?. ;-)

I'm not saying that this newsgroup shouldn't exist. I'm asking for it's
intended purpose.

> Troy, I don't mean to be hard on you, but I do speak my mind. I
> sincerely hope you will stick around. If you don't like this UU
> newsgroup, you can go to soc.religion.unitarian-univ which is
> moderated and has no ads or whatcrap there. :-) Mind you....I also
> post there too. ;-)

Like you, I am an advocate of challenging conventional thought and voicing
opinion. It has, however been my experience that abrasive or bitter language
often do more damage than intended. If you want to "be hard on me" and
challenge my ideas you are welcome.

> Nikki
> (see below for my PeePees, feel free to rip it apart and take what you
> like)
>
> The Principles of MY Unitarian Universalist SPIRITUALITY
>
> I, a UU, MOVE to affirm and promote..................
> ~~The inner dignity of MOST people;

Who do you exclude?

> ~~ Justice, equity and compassion in human relations TO THE BEST OF MY
> ABILITY;

Then you are better than me.

> ~~ Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth;
> ~~ A free and responsible search for truth and meaning according to my
> own conscience AND INITUTIONS;

Could you give an example?

> ~~ Expending some energies towards a goal of "world community" TO THE
> BEST OF MY ABILITY;

Again, if this is true, you are better at it than I am.

> ~~Respect for the interdependent web of existence of which I am part.
> ~~The living spirituality which I share draws from many sources, TO
> which I will partake and drop as I see fit for my own private
> spirituality

All choose their own path.

> ~~ Direct experience of that inner mystery and wonder which moves me
> to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the inner forces which
> creates, upholds and NATURALLY DESTROYS life; (naturally destroys as
> in death of old age, deaths from earthquakes, epidemics, etc)

To everything there is a season.

> ~~ Words and deeds of HUMANITY which challenges me to confront powers
> and structures of human "evils" with justice, compassion if
> needed/possible, and the transforming power of love if possible;

When is compassion not needed?

> ~~ Wisdom from the world's religions and SPIRITUALITIES which inspires
> me in my ethical ("conscience") and spiritual life;

If only more people actively did this.

> ~~ Humanist teachings which counsels me to heed the guidance of reason
> and the results of science, and GUIDE me towards a BETTER
> UNDERSTANDING the mind and spirit.
> ~~ Spiritual teachings of RELIGIOUS and SPIRITUAL traditions which
> celebrate the sacred circle of life and instructs me to live in
> harmony with the rhythms of nature to the best of my ability

The rhythms of nature do not stop at the door. We too are a part of that
harmony in our lives with each other, Even when using tools.

> ~~ Grateful for the religious pluralism which enriches and ennobles my
> faith, I am inspired to deepen my understanding and expand my
> HORIZONS.
>
> The Purposes of MY Unitarian Universalist SPIRITUALITY
> ~~ The Unitarian Universalist SPIRITUALITY shall devote my resources
> to and exercise my skills for religious, educational and humanitarian
> purposes
>
> ~~ Nothing herein MY SPIRITUALITY shall be deemed to infringe upon the
> individual freedom of belief which is inherent in the Universalist and
> Unitarian heritages or to conflict with any statement of purpose or
> bond of union used by any society

Our differences strengthen us. Our compassion protects that strength.

-Pax, Shalom, Peace, -Troy

It is said that when UU's die, they go to discussion groups.


Ed B

unread,
Nov 21, 2002, 1:34:32 PM11/21/02
to

Mostly true except that those messages are cross-posted to multiple
groups. If we don't respond the thread dies immediately, not from
boredom but because the troll never comes back to read the responses. He
or she only reads them and responds on one of those other groups.

That is part of the price we pay for having an unmoderated NewsGroup.

--
~)< Love & Peace Ed B.

What you are thunders so that I cannot hear what you say to the
contrary.
-Ralph Waldo Emerson, writer and philosopher (1803-1882)

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 21, 2002, 8:00:55 PM11/21/02
to
Troy Scott wrote in message news:

> I have been a UU for 30 years. I am neither green to UUism, nor do I have
> expectations of perfection.

Hmm. At first glance, your original post had the tones of an overly
excitable teenybopper who is acting like he found a pot of gold. ;-)
Been online message boards and chats for over 6 years so I kind of
know it when I see it. ;-) My deepest apologies, Troy, for thinking
you were yet another excitable teenybopper. :-) I have less and less
patience with teenyboppers those days.

And....I take it you are in your 40's or 50's? :-) The notion that
"we have been ____ all of our lives but never knew what to call it" I
find a bit ridiculous. If we actually knew our spiritualities from
the moment we were born, then we all would be prodigies! ;-) :-)
Again, it is JMHO. I don't claim that I was agnostic or UU "all my 29
years" (I am 29, btw). I used to be atheist. Tried the cloaks of
christianity and wicca as well. :-) But I didn't know shit when I was
born, just like 99.999% of the human population. :-)


> Just because you SAY you cannot teach, does not mean you aren't influencing

> others. Words and actions of kindness go a long way. I'm saying


> that a newsgroup with the label "alt.religion.unitarian-univ" implies that
> UUism is represented here. Visitors may not know when that representation
> doesn't really reflect UU principles.

Agreed up to a point. But I also say it is the visitors'
responsibility to find out more if s/he REALLY cares about learning
what UUism is REALLY about-- by asking questions, rather than blindly
assuming things, like only those who don't really care do. ;-) We
regulars here simply cannot "do everything" for others. We regulars
are NOT mindreaders.

And......we cannot act like those stupid fluffy bunnies that IME, so
many pagans want other pagans to act like at their newsgroup(s)....I
have been there for a few years, so been there. I don't expect other
UUs to be fluffybunnies. Hey WS, can you just imagine yourself acting
like a fluffy bunny?? 8-o GACK, I would think you have flipped and
lost yer marbles!!! :-o

I say....we are going to be who we are here. And we won't act like
fluffybunnies in "fear that we would misrepresent our precious and
perfect religion" to the newbies. ;-) We are all adults here. :-)


> I think maybe you misunderstood the term. "Pax" is a latin word meaning
> peace.

Oh sweetie. I knew what pax meant. I was wiccan for about 3 or 4
years.


> I'm not saying that this newsgroup shouldn't exist. I'm asking for it's
> intended purpose.

To chat, to discuss everything and anything under the sun and yes, to
occasionally call each other names as some of us have done in our
discussions! ;-) If you want to be around for the newbies and only
discuss UUism and UU spirituality and the PeePees and nothing
else....then I humbly suggest you either go to the Newcomer Corner at
UUA.org and stick around there or bring up topics of interest to you.
:-) This newsgroup and SRUU is sorta for "grownups", so to speak, who
have grown beyond the fluffybunnism of learning about UUism. ;-)

Obtw, there are mixed alky and soft drinks at the bar if you want any.
ID required for the alky drinks! ;-)


> > ~~The inner dignity of MOST people;
>
> Who do you exclude?

Now, a little background: daddy is a lawyer, and when I was growing
up, I watched "Law and Order" with him. He somewhat instilled some
ethics that has a lot to do with the law and such. That said....

I exclude....the criminally insane, sadly most criminals (but not all
of them, ok?), and those who do know right from wrong but go ahead and
do those atrocities...like Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer. I actually
pity Dahmer. I think they knew right/wrong, but didn't respect the
boundaries set by our society. Hitler and Stalin will not recieve any
respect from me cuz I cannot find it in my good conscience to do so.


> > ~~ Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth;
> > ~~ A free and responsible search for truth and meaning according to my
> > own conscience AND INITUTIONS;
>
> Could you give an example?

To both of the above or the latter? Example for latter: I will search
for whatever truths that can add to my own spirituality and make me a
better person, as according to my conscience and how I feel about it
(initution). If a truth does not jibe well with me (conscience and
initution) then I don't add it to my path.


> > ~~ Words and deeds of HUMANITY which challenges me to confront powers
> > and structures of human "evils" with justice, compassion if
> > needed/possible, and the transforming power of love if possible;
>
> When is compassion not needed?

For some, Troy, sadly....compassion is wasted on them. Like some of
the criminally insane or some of the criminals? Some of them don't
even respond to human contact or physical manifestations of love! :-(
And what of the victims and the vics' families? I rather my
compassion, love and healing thoughts go to them rather than the
asshole who destroyed their lives utterly and mindlessly. So
compassion IS wasted on some, unfortunately. Troy, I do wish it so
that compassion is NEVER wasted on ANYONE, period...I wish it is
possible soooo badly, but my version of reality must intercede....


> It is said that when UU's die, they go to discussion groups.

It is said that when newbie UUs grow beyond the Newcomer Forum at
UUA.org, they go to the discussion groups. ;-)

I hope you understand where I am coming from. I think I understand
where you are coming from.
Nikki

Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 1:56:29 AM11/22/02
to

"BluueNikki" <bluue...@1st.net> wrote in message
news:3a8bf7d4.02112...@posting.google.com...
> Troy Scott wrote in message news:
> > I have been a UU for 30 years. I am neither green to UUism, nor do I
have
> > expectations of perfection.
>
> Hmm. At first glance, your original post had the tones of an overly
> excitable teenybopper who is acting like he found a pot of gold. ;-)

To save others time, here's my original message:

"I logged onto this newsgroup this evening, hopeful to see the seven
principals manifested and followed in written word. What I saw surprised
and
dissapointed me; hateful words, inappropriate ads, social prejudice. So
I
offer my own olive branch of topics for discussion:

How should U.U.'s go about reaching those who are most opposed to us and


our
belief system?
What would say to someone who is interested in becoming a U.U. and wants
to
learn more?

Why should U.U.'s have a newsgroup?

pax, Troy"

Did that REALLY sound like "an overly excitable teenybopper who is acting
like he found a pot of gold"?
You do have a flare for colorful writing.

> Been online message boards and chats for over 6 years so I kind of
> know it when I see it.

You seem to think that chatting online for six years gives you the uncanny
ability to put labels on people after just one post. Clearly your intuition
is less than perfect.
I've been messaging online for nineteen years. From my own experience, I see
it as highly likely that you will become more tolerant and less judgemental
within the next thirteen years or so.

;-) My deepest apologies, Troy, for thinking
> you were yet another excitable teenybopper. :-) I have less and less
> patience with teenyboppers those days.

Just how did you get to your age without going through your own exciteable
teenybopper years?

> And....I take it you are in your 40's or 50's? :-) The notion that
> "we have been ____ all of our lives but never knew what to call it" I
> find a bit ridiculous. If we actually knew our spiritualities from
> the moment we were born, then we all would be prodigies! ;-) :-)
> Again, it is JMHO. I don't claim that I was agnostic or UU "all my 29
> years" (I am 29, btw). I used to be atheist. Tried the cloaks of
> christianity and wicca as well. :-) But I didn't know shit when I was
> born, just like 99.999% of the human population. :-)

I began my awareness of spiritual self at about age five. That's when I
began reading, playing chess, discussing religion with my dad, and asking
more and more challenging questions.

> > Just because you SAY you cannot teach, does not mean you aren't
influencing
> > others. Words and actions of kindness go a long way. I'm saying
> > that a newsgroup with the label "alt.religion.unitarian-univ" implies
that
> > UUism is represented here. Visitors may not know when that
representation
> > doesn't really reflect UU principles.
>
> Agreed up to a point. But I also say it is the visitors'
> responsibility to find out more if s/he REALLY cares about learning
> what UUism is REALLY about-- by asking questions, rather than blindly
> assuming things, like only those who don't really care do. ;-) We
> regulars here simply cannot "do everything" for others. We regulars
> are NOT mindreaders.

My apologies here, but this response doesn't seem to be to my comment, but
rather some unrelated past experience or discussion.

> And......we cannot act like those stupid fluffy bunnies that IME, so
> many pagans want other pagans to act like at their newsgroup(s)....I
> have been there for a few years, so been there. I don't expect other
> UUs to be fluffybunnies. Hey WS, can you just imagine yourself acting
> like a fluffy bunny?? 8-o GACK, I would think you have flipped and
> lost yer marbles!!! :-o

Consider any implied request that you act like a "stupid fluffy bunny"
officially withdrawn.

> I say....we are going to be who we are here. And we won't act like
> fluffybunnies in "fear that we would misrepresent our precious and
> perfect religion" to the newbies. ;-) We are all adults here. :-)

You seem to define who you are by who you aren't.

In an ealier message you wrote;

You said "Pax". I take it you are pagan, or similar? :-) If

so....here are my flesh bites: ;-)...

I responded thusly...

> > I think maybe you misunderstood the term. "Pax" is a latin word meaning
> > peace.

you...

> Oh sweetie. I knew what pax meant. I was wiccan for about 3 or 4
> years.

I still don't understand the assumption that since I used a latin word, that
somehow links me, to Paganism.

> > I'm not saying that this newsgroup shouldn't exist. I'm asking for it's
> > intended purpose.
>
> To chat, to discuss everything and anything under the sun and yes, to
> occasionally call each other names as some of us have done in our
> discussions! ;-) If you want to be around for the newbies and only
> discuss UUism and UU spirituality and the PeePees and nothing
> else....then I humbly suggest you either go to the Newcomer Corner at
> UUA.org and stick around there or bring up topics of interest to you.
> :-) This newsgroup and SRUU is sorta for "grownups", so to speak, who
> have grown beyond the fluffybunnism of learning about UUism. ;-)

I take it that the "grownup" stage is a work in progress.

> Obtw, there are mixed alky and soft drinks at the bar if you want any.
> ID required for the alky drinks! ;-)
>
>
> > > ~~The inner dignity of MOST people;
> >
> > Who do you exclude?
>
> Now, a little background: daddy is a lawyer, and when I was growing
> up, I watched "Law and Order" with him. He somewhat instilled some
> ethics that has a lot to do with the law and such. That said....
>
> I exclude....the criminally insane, sadly most criminals (but not all
> of them, ok?), and those who do know right from wrong but go ahead and
> do those atrocities...like Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer. I actually
> pity Dahmer. I think they knew right/wrong, but didn't respect the
> boundaries set by our society. Hitler and Stalin will not recieve any
> respect from me cuz I cannot find it in my good conscience to do so.

This is a topic which I also have personal experience in. I've suffered
catastrophic loss more than once. Family members and friends have been taken
from me by murderous criminals. I have felt the rage and the sadness of
these losses, but I truly believe that if those criminals had the same
inspirational figures I had, who were there for me when I needed them all
through my life, theirs would be a different story.

> > > ~~ Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth;
> > > ~~ A free and responsible search for truth and meaning according to my
> > > own conscience AND INITUTIONS;

If this thread is any indication, maybe you should question your intuitions.

> > Could you give an example?
>
> To both of the above or the latter? Example for latter: I will search
> for whatever truths that can add to my own spirituality and make me a
> better person, as according to my conscience and how I feel about it
> (initution). If a truth does not jibe well with me (conscience and
> initution) then I don't add it to my path.

This is the true fine line between conservative and liberal religion. An
ideal conservatively religious person has well-defined spiritual and moral
boundaries, but sacrifices a degree of exploration. An ideal liberally
religious person has true freedom of religious exploration, but lacks true
spiritual and moral boundaries.
Both sides have their merit, although I think most UU's will declare their
religious freedom as the most prized of the two.

> > > ~~ Words and deeds of HUMANITY which challenges me to confront powers
> > > and structures of human "evils" with justice, compassion if
> > > needed/possible, and the transforming power of love if possible;
> >
> > When is compassion not needed?
>
> For some, Troy, sadly....compassion is wasted on them. Like some of
> the criminally insane or some of the criminals? Some of them don't
> even respond to human contact or physical manifestations of love! :-(
> And what of the victims and the vics' families? I rather my
> compassion, love and healing thoughts go to them rather than the
> asshole who destroyed their lives utterly and mindlessly. So
> compassion IS wasted on some, unfortunately. Troy, I do wish it so
> that compassion is NEVER wasted on ANYONE, period...I wish it is
> possible soooo badly, but my version of reality must intercede....

Eventually, I did let go of the anger. The pain never dies away, but the
hatred can. They finally weren't even assholes any more, just pitiful people
who had pitiful lives. In pity, there is compassion.

> > It is said that when UU's die, they go to discussion groups.
>
> It is said that when newbie UUs grow beyond the Newcomer Forum at
> UUA.org, they go to the discussion groups. ;-)
>
> I hope you understand where I am coming from. I think I understand
> where you are coming from.
> Nikki

I don't claim to understand everything about you, but I do recognize some
prejudice and bitterness. I also see kindness and compassion.
As for where I'm coming from, I'm just a person who would like to be a
better person. I think others come here not actively thinking, but feeling
the same way. I want them to feel encouraged and supported for their quest,
even if others might just write them off as "teenyboppers" or
"fluffybunnies" or whatever other terms might be used to make them seem like
someone less important than the rest of us. You have the power to inspire.
The tiniest bit of sincere support from someone like you can make a world of
difference in someone else's life. I've seen it happen again and again. It
might have even happened for someone just now.

On the never-ending road to who-knows-where, Troy


BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 10:30:05 AM11/22/02
to
Troy Scott:

> You do have a flare for colorful writing.

Awww, thanks, Troy! HUGGLIES! :-) I will take that as a compliment!
The others here know me thusly well that I do that occasionally. ;-)


> You seem to think that chatting online for six years gives you the uncanny
> ability to put labels on people after just one post. Clearly your intuition
> is less than perfect.

That is ok, I respect your opinion....my iniutuion is ever in
progress. ;-) I just think my initution is starting to be fine-tuned
recently....especially concerning my safety, mental balance and
health. :-)

Good point on the stupid teenyboppers, but still, I don't have much
patience for them anyhow. :-( Perhaps it is that I didn't have a
good childhood and was forced to "grow up" sooner than expected.
That's just me, no worries! :-)


> My apologies here, but this response doesn't seem to be to my comment, but
> rather some unrelated past experience or discussion.

Well, nonetheless, Troy, that is my response to your comment. Its ok
if you interpret it as unrelated. As you might say, "Pax"....and I
sincerely mean it. :-)


> You seem to define who you are by who you aren't.

That is a problem that most UUs have, Troy, that we need to work on. I
am usually pointing that out in other UUs. ;-) Do you have that
problem too? Sometimes we see our own problems in other people. ;-)
I admit I have that problem as well.


> I still don't understand the assumption that since I used a latin word, that
> somehow links me, to Paganism.

I guess I have seen waaaay too many pagans use "pax" and not enough of
nonpagans use that word, so apologies for my assumptions.

In RE to the NG:

> I take it that the "grownup" stage is a work in progress.

Of course! For all of us. :-)


> ..(polite snip) but I truly believe that if those criminals had the same


> inspirational figures I had, who were there for me when I needed them all
> through my life, theirs would be a different story.

MARGARITAS to that, Troy. But the reality is...they haven't. :-(
That is a damn pity, actually. However, we cannot focus on "What
Ifs". We, imho, must focus on the realities. :-( Tho, yes, I do
agree with you on the above.


> > > > ~~ Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth;
> > > > ~~ A free and responsible search for truth and meaning according to my
> > > > own conscience AND INITUTIONS;
>
> If this thread is any indication, maybe you should question your intuitions.

I will do so. I guess I took your original post to be kinda
judgemental and overly-assuming on some points, and I apologize for
that. "Pax"? :-)


> Eventually, I did let go of the anger. The pain never dies away, but the
> hatred can. They finally weren't even assholes any more, just pitiful people
> who had pitiful lives. In pity, there is compassion.

Good point. Then I have pity that they have not good lives like I
have.


> I don't claim to understand everything about you, but I do recognize some
> prejudice and bitterness.

Oh my, yes. I admit to my own prejudices. We all have them, Troy,
even you. It is up to us to acknowledge them, own them, and work
through those prejudices that can do the most damage to ourselves.
However, I think it is a human given that we have prejudices all of
our lives. It just takes responsibility and understanding ourselves.
I do admit I am prejudiced against criminals, criminally insane and
most big city people. Big city people?? Oh yeah, btw, I am a
small-town girl....(shrugs)

I guess I like peering in the darkness more than you do, Troy. ;-)

Troy.....I pretty much let you have the last word...what say we say
"Pax" and get onto other topics, yes? :-)
Nikki

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 10:42:11 AM11/22/02
to
Ed B wrote in message:


> That is part of the price we pay for having an unmoderated NewsGroup.


Margaritas. That is why I do like moderation up to a point, loves.

(cough cough)....a UU liking moderation??? Er, stranger things have
happened! ;-) *snorting laughter*

Tho, I do remember that a alt.religion.wicca had a couple of trolls--
Felix and that mean-spirited one who claims to know
everything....anyhoo, a bunch of wiccans got together and formed
alt.religion.wicca.moderated. I left both groups soon
afterwards....one was full of trolling and the other was too
"fluffybunny" for me to handle...(smirking giggle in good natured
humor).

;-)
Nikki

Steven Botts

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 11:35:09 AM11/22/02
to

--
to reply by e-mail insert a "t" between the first two letters of my address.

"BluueNikki" <bluue...@1st.net> wrote in message

news:3a8bf7d4.0211...@posting.google.com...

There's nothing wrong with defining yourself by who you aren't. We need and
use negative as well as positive role models. As UUs we are pretty accepting
of religious beliefs, but people like Fred Phelps and Jerry Falwell
illustrate for us very clearly what we don't want to accept or even respect.

As a nation, we use Hitler and the Third Reich as an example of what we
never want to become. Any move by government that seems that it might lead
in that direction is treated with deep suspicion.

Perhaps as a child you have known people who you perceived as mean,
ineffectual, unhappy, or just plain dull, who you decided early on that you
never wanted to become.

Steve

Robin Edgar

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 12:26:21 PM11/22/02
to
"Troy Scott" <f...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Lq%C9.12297$Gc.3...@twister.austin.rr.com>...
> I logged onto this newsgroup this evening, hopeful to see the seven
> principals manifested and followed in written word.

Evidently this is not the case. Nor is it the case in many other UU
internet forums. Quite frankly it isn't the case in terms of the
spoken word of many UUs including UU clergy and even top UUA
officials. If you browse through the archives of this UU newsgroup and
I encourage you to do so you will see many examples of how UUs
flagrantly disregard and wantonly violate the purported "covents" of
the purported "Principles" of UUism. You are obviously an intelligent
and well spoken person I would appreciate your principled response to
some of my posts that "challenge and critique" such failings.

>What I saw surprised and dissapointed me; hateful words,
inappropriate ads, >social prejudice.

A lot of that has nothing to do with UUs. This newsgroup in subject to
a lot of SPAM from non-UUs. Still there are indeed UUs who spew
hateful words arising from their own social prejudices including
religious prejudice.

> So I offer my own olive branch of topics for discussion:
>
> How should U.U.'s go about reaching those who are most opposed to us and our
> belief system?

As you may know UUs are not famed for outreach. A lot of UUs feel that
UUs should not "proselytize" at all. As far as reaching those who are
"most opposed" to UUs/UUism I think that there are a variety of things
UUs may do but if UUs fail to practice what they preach they will get
nowhere with those who oppose them.

> What would say to someone who is interested in becoming a U.U. and wants to
> learn more?

Regrettably, knowing what I know about UUism I would have to inform
that person that many if not most UUs do a very poor job of living up
to the empty rhetoric of UU propaganda.

> Why should U.U.'s have a newsgroup?

To publicly expose just how remarkably hypocritical many UUs are? ;-)

> pax, Troy

What's Latin for 'war' Troy? As you can see I am engaged in a "war of
words" with unprincipled and hypocritical UUs. I will accept your
offer of 'pax' however and ask you once again to add your intelligent
commentary ti some of my recent posts here. I would also invite you to
visit the other UU forums that I have already provided links to.

Pax (to you personally at least),

Robin Edgar

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 1:59:41 PM11/22/02
to
Hi ya Troy,

I decided to emulate a good friend here and allow you can have the
last word if you want it. :-)

Margaritas to you (my type of blessing),
Nikki

Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 2:02:05 PM11/22/02
to

I agree with you here, Robin. My own church has actually etched our
philosophy in stone outside our sanctuary doors; "Service is our sacrament."
and we are expected to live up to that. Outreach means much more than just
telling others what it means to be a UU. We must show our true nature by our
actions.

> > What would (you) say to someone who is interested in becoming a U.U. and


wants to
> > learn more?
>
> Regrettably, knowing what I know about UUism I would have to inform
> that person that many if not most UUs do a very poor job of living up
> to the empty rhetoric of UU propaganda.


First, let me say that in my present congregation and my previous one (I
moved out of state) our principals were never treated as empty rhetoric or
propaganda, nor is this a new and sudden awakening of UU's. We have a real
and rich history of activism which traces back to Boston and beyond. If
individuals decide they just want to use a UU nametag as an excuse to
criticize other religions and claim to be better, then they have much more
to learn than their biggot counterparts who try to take refuge in
conservative religion.

> > Why should U.U.'s have a newsgroup?
>
> To publicly expose just how remarkably hypocritical many UUs are? ;-)

Maybe as well as discussion, we could also report outreach success stories.
(My own church has more all the time.)
I've heard many non-church-going UUs claim that religion is a private matter
and that they should not have to defend or justify their faith. My answer to
this is that if you truly live your life according to your faith you don't
have to defend it. The actions speak for themselves. Religion is exactly the
opposite of a private manner. It defines the way you interact with others
and for what you hold yourself responsible. The tremendous freedom of
liberal religion has a tremendous price. It demands that you take
responsibility upon yourself to have discipline and generocity and
compassion not because it was written by God, but because you know it is
right.

> > pax, Troy
>
> What's Latin for 'war' Troy? As you can see I am engaged in a "war of
> words" with unprincipled and hypocritical UUs. I will accept your
> offer of 'pax' however and ask you once again to add your intelligent
> commentary ti some of my recent posts here. I would also invite you to
> visit the other UU forums that I have already provided links to.


I think that word would be 'bellum'.
I look forward the the other forums and am quite happy with the way this
thread has gone also.

> Pax (to you personally at least),
>
> Robin Edgar

Pax venire contra populus
(peace come to all people)

-Troy


BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 6:13:26 PM11/22/02
to
Troy Scott wrote in message:

> I've heard many non-church-going UUs claim that religion is a private matter
> and that they should not have to defend or justify their faith.


Agreed. I don't have to defend why I feel no need to go to a church. :-)

Nikki

Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 9:00:39 PM11/22/02
to

"BluueNikki" <bluue...@1st.net> wrote in message
news:3a8bf7d4.02112...@posting.google.com...

And I agree with you totally, Nikki. I could have left out the
non-church-going part and it would still ring just as true. The real point
of that statement was in a fuller context:

Troy: Why should U.U.'s have a newsgroup?

Robin: To publicly expose just how remarkably hypocritical many UUs are? ;-)

Troy: Maybe as well as discussion, we could also report outreach success


stories.
(My own church has more all the time.)

I've heard many non-church-going UUs claim that religion is a private
matter

and that they should not have to defend or justify their faith. My
answer to
this is that if you truly live your life according to your faith you

don't


have to defend it. The actions speak for themselves. Religion is exactly
the
opposite of a private manner. It defines the way you interact with
others
and for what you hold yourself responsible. The tremendous freedom of
liberal religion has a tremendous price. It demands that you take
responsibility upon yourself to have discipline and generocity and
compassion not because it was written by God, but because you know it is
right.

I'm sure many non-church-going UU's can report their own numerous examples
of outreach and social action. The real point of this was not whether or not
a UU goes to church, but rather that they live by the ideals that define a
UU and take steps to help society and nature in signifigant and meaningful
ways.

Paxatcha

-Troy


Robin Edgar

unread,
Nov 22, 2002, 9:30:22 PM11/22/02
to
> I think that word would be 'bellum'.

As in "belligerent"? Thanks for the info. I am "belle et bien" (well
and good) in a "war of words" as a result of the belligerent words and
actions of intolerant and abusive fundamentalist atheist "humanist"
UUs.

> I look forward the the other forums and am quite happy with the way this
> thread has gone also.

> Pax venire contra populus
> (peace come to all people)

Usually peace requires justice, equity and compassion to precede it...
I think that there is a Catholic slogan "No justice - No Peace" I tend
to adhere to it and have a tendency to give as good as I get in this
war of words these days as you may determine from my various posts. As
of last night I now have the proud distinction of being the first
person ever banned from ALL UUA sponsored lists for a full month as a
result of posting my "challenge and critique" in various UUA forums...
;-) Needless to say I will wear this as a badge of honour.

Best Regards,

Robin Edgar

Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 1:24:57 AM11/24/02
to
> There's nothing wrong with defining yourself by who you aren't. We need
and
> use negative as well as positive role models. As UUs we are pretty
accepting
> of religious beliefs, but people like Fred Phelps and Jerry Falwell
> illustrate for us very clearly what we don't want to accept or even
respect.
>
> As a nation, we use Hitler and the Third Reich as an example of what we
> never want to become. Any move by government that seems that it might lead
> in that direction is treated with deep suspicion.
>
> Perhaps as a child you have known people who you perceived as mean,
> ineffectual, unhappy, or just plain dull, who you decided early on that
you
> never wanted to become.
>
> Steve

Defining ourselves by who we aren't only works as a partial solution.
Whereas Defining ourselves by our ideals enables us to build upon those
ideals and grow. Fred Phelps and Jerry Falwell are appropriate examples in
favor of my argument. Time and again they and others like them have
criticized and condemned others (we'll call the "others" blasphemers for the
sake of simplicity) and used those blasphemers as an example of what what
Fred & Jerry ('love their ice cream by the way!) hate in the world and what
they will never be.
Bragging that I'm not as bad as Hitler or that our government is better
than the Third Reich is just about the lowest standard we could possibly
hold. Moves in that direction are made all the time and embraced as much as
by our people now as they were by the poor and desperate Germans then. Just
look at how our "faith based initiative" sorts out religions to determine
who gets government funds.Look at how "Homeland Security" is used as a
rational for reducing freedoms.
As children we do learn from others and do decide who we want to
emulate. But without positive ideals & role models, the child won't know
there is even a choice to be made.

Pax,
Troy


Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 1:28:24 AM11/24/02
to

You make it all sound so final! There won't be a last word until there's
nothing left to be said. (& I know you and I will ALWAYS have something to
say!)

You challenge me, make me think and make me smile-who could want more?

Pax,
Troy


Steven Botts

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 12:15:20 AM11/24/02
to

--
to reply by e-mail insert a "t" between the first two letters of my address.

"Troy Scott" <f...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message

news:Zg_D9.37806$8D.11...@twister.austin.rr.com...

Please note that I said "negative AS WELL AS positive role models. I thought
the need for positive role models was too obvious to require comment.

Steve


Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 2:52:12 AM11/24/02
to

"Steven Botts" <sbo...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:6vedndsn27-...@texas.net...

Duly noted and respected. It's a shame more media coverage is given to the
bad guys.

Pax, Troy.


wandering star

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 2:06:41 AM11/24/02
to
On 21 Nov 2002 17:00:55 -0800, bluue...@1st.net (BluueNikki) wrote:

>And......we cannot act like those stupid fluffy bunnies that IME, so
>many pagans want other pagans to act like at their newsgroup(s)....I
>have been there for a few years, so been there. I don't expect other
>UUs to be fluffybunnies. Hey WS, can you just imagine yourself acting
>like a fluffy bunny?? 8-o GACK, I would think you have flipped and
>lost yer marbles!!! :-o

Heheh....

Is that fluffy bunnies thing a reference to Duckman?? In that show,
Duckman has two cute little blue and pink fluffy bunny assistants,
with cute high-pitched voices, who are always correcting him whenever
he says anything politically incorrect. They end up getting on his
nerves which cause him to heap all sorts of abuse on them, like
stuffing them in a blender and 'pureeing' them... hehe... it's pretty
funny...

ws

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 9:35:54 AM11/24/02
to
Troy Scott
> You make it all sound so final! There won't be a last word until there's
> nothing left to be said. (& I know you and I will ALWAYS have something to
> say!)

Hehe, just meant on this topic that we were discussing, cuz I could
see that it was not getting anywhere. I do that sometimes to avoid
getting angry or avoid angering others. That kinda thing just isn't
worth it for me.

I have done it in the past to others-- both told and not told them to
have the last word....sometimes they will challenge me on one of my
statements and I know I am already getting under their skin so I leave
the topic unanswered. Sometimes, Troy, that itself can piss them off
beyond measure.

Oh, what a delicious buffet sometimes the 'Net is!
Nikki ;-)

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 10:00:00 AM11/24/02
to
On "fluffy bunnies".......

wandering star wrote:

> Heheh....
> Is that fluffy bunnies thing a reference to Duckman?? In that show,
> Duckman has two cute little blue and pink fluffy bunny assistants,
> with cute high-pitched voices, who are always correcting him whenever
> he says anything politically incorrect. They end up getting on his
> nerves which cause him to heap all sorts of abuse on them, like
> stuffing them in a blender and 'pureeing' them... hehe... it's pretty
> funny...

I think I distinctly remember Duckman and those stupid bunnies....but
don't watch cartoons, excepting for toon movies! :-) Can't wait for
"Ice Age" to come out on video!

Is Duckman still running on the air? Obtw, WS, do you know Joe
Cartoon? It is very very twisted type of cartoons that I think you
might like. For adults only, then again, I know teenyboppers reading
this will go there anyway, they always do when it comes to "grown up
humor and grown up stuff". (has that knowing smile and eyerolls).....

http://www.joecartoon.com/pages/home/
Mind ya two things: 1) popups, but well worth it...just let 'em pop up
and deal with them later and 2) you need a good computer and JAVA
script to run the interactive ones. My favorite are the Frog in the
Blender and the Gerbil in the Microwave....microwave the gerbil!!
Have the gerbil call you names! Then make the gerbil BEG.....

As Joe Cartoon would say...Who's Your Daddy?? (points to privates)
Nikki

Arthur Meineke

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 10:10:35 AM11/24/02
to
Is Duckman still on some channel somewhere? I loved that show...it is so
gross. I can't find it here in Houston.

"wandering star" <wanderin...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9ut0uu8oqeqot4j5j...@4ax.com...

Troy Scott

unread,
Nov 24, 2002, 4:35:52 PM11/24/02
to
> Hehe, just meant on this topic that we were discussing, cuz I could
> see that it was not getting anywhere. I do that sometimes to avoid
> getting angry or avoid angering others. That kinda thing just isn't
> worth it for me.
>
> I have done it in the past to others-- both told and not told them to
> have the last word....sometimes they will challenge me on one of my
> statements and I know I am already getting under their skin so I leave
> the topic unanswered. Sometimes, Troy, that itself can piss them off
> beyond measure.
>
> Oh, what a delicious buffet sometimes the 'Net is!
> Nikki ;-)

Ah, yes, the UU discussion buffet! Plenty of hams, turkeys, cheeseballs,
divinity, whine, and spirits to go around. Featuring flavors of all sorts;
bitter-sweet, sour, totally bitter and totally sweet. Please take only what
you will consume, keep your elbows off the table, chew slowly so as to
facilitate proper digestion, and be sure to leave room for dessert.

Pax from someone who gives a fork,
-Troy


SARAH CLARK

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 8:23:44 AM11/28/02
to
Anyone know, can we as an alt. group do G-x moderation,
like what talk.origins does? It would bounce
all messages with more than x groups (t.o. uses 4)
That would bounce those messages and spam, but
it is not content moderation.

"Ed B" <huma...@nethere.com> wrote in message
news:3DDD2738...@nethere.com...


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.419 / Virus Database: 235 - Release Date: 11/13/2002


Gene Douglas

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 8:54:21 AM11/28/02
to
I don't know if it is technically possible, but this group was formed to
avoid moderation on "the other" group. (long story, but not now.) However,
if one could filter major cross-posting without being able to filter
content, that would seem attractive.

"SARAH CLARK" <s...@hal-pc.org> wrote in message
news:as55l4$cip$1...@news.hal-pc.org...

Steven Botts

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 10:51:02 AM11/28/02
to

--
to reply by e-mail insert a "t" between the first two letters of my address.

"SARAH CLARK" <s...@hal-pc.org> wrote in message
news:as55l4$cip$1...@news.hal-pc.org...

> Anyone know, can we as an alt. group do G-x moderation,
> like what talk.origins does? It would bounce
> all messages with more than x groups (t.o. uses 4)
> That would bounce those messages and spam, but
> it is not content moderation.

I have no idea, but I'm in favor of it. It wouldn't stop the trolls, but it
would at least make them work a little harder.

Steve


gksh...@ucdavis.edu

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 10:50:38 AM11/28/02
to
Gene Douglas <gene...@prodigy.net> wrote (Thu, 28 Nov 2002 13:54:21 GMT):
> I don't know if it is technically possible, but this group was formed to
> avoid moderation on "the other" group. (long story, but not now.) However,
> if one could filter major cross-posting without being able to filter
> content, that would seem attractive.

> "SARAH CLARK" <s...@hal-pc.org> wrote in message
> news:as55l4$cip$1...@news.hal-pc.org...
>> Anyone know, can we as an alt. group do G-x moderation,
>> like what talk.origins does? It would bounce
>> all messages with more than x groups (t.o. uses 4)
>> That would bounce those messages and spam, but
>> it is not content moderation.

Just ignore them and eventually they (or we) will go away. As Gene
points out, a.r.u-u's raison d'être is to be unmoderated, so we can
never impose moderation on this group.

However, one effective method that can be used *in place of*
moderation, if the problem persists too long, is to have all of
the regulars insert a "magic" string (such as ARUU) into the subject
field (as I have done above).

This does nothing to eliminate to cross-posting spammers, but it
does make it easier to delete the spam. (Perhaps some news browsers
can even use their kill-file mechanism to suppress messages not
bearing this string--I don't know.)

I propose that we give it a try for a while, at least until the
current crop of off-topic posters go away. Let's- nsert "ARUU"
into our subject headers.

(The other also quite effective thing you can do is to complain to
the off-topic poster's service provider, which in most cases will
cause their account to be lost until they explain and promise to
stop; however determining who to complain to can sometimes be
complicated.)

Greg Shenaut

Robin Edgar

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 11:43:20 AM11/28/02
to
Yo Ho And Up She Rises...

Ed B

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 12:11:31 PM11/28/02
to
It sounds like a good idea. How would we go about doing that?

SARAH CLARK wrote:
>
> Anyone know, can we as an alt. group do G-x moderation,
> like what talk.origins does? It would bounce
> all messages with more than x groups (t.o. uses 4)
> That would bounce those messages and spam, but
> it is not content moderation.
>

--

Ed B

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 12:17:29 PM11/28/02
to
gksh...@ucdavis.edu wrote:
>
> Gene Douglas <gene...@prodigy.net> wrote (Thu, 28 Nov 2002 13:54:21 GMT):
> > I don't know if it is technically possible, but this group was formed to
> > avoid moderation on "the other" group. (long story, but not now.) However,
> > if one could filter major cross-posting without being able to filter
> > content, that would seem attractive.
>
> > "SARAH CLARK" <s...@hal-pc.org> wrote in message
> > news:as55l4$cip$1...@news.hal-pc.org...
> >> Anyone know, can we as an alt. group do G-x moderation,
> >> like what talk.origins does? It would bounce
> >> all messages with more than x groups (t.o. uses 4)
> >> That would bounce those messages and spam, but
> >> it is not content moderation.
>
> Just ignore them and eventually they (or we) will go away. As Gene
> points out, a.r.u-u's raison d'être is to be unmoderated, so we can
> never impose moderation on this group.

Filtering out cross-posted messages is not the same as moderating
content.

> However, one effective method that can be used *in place of*
> moderation, if the problem persists too long, is to have all of
> the regulars insert a "magic" string (such as ARUU) into the subject
> field (as I have done above).
>
> This does nothing to eliminate to cross-posting spammers, but it
> does make it easier to delete the spam. (Perhaps some news browsers
> can even use their kill-file mechanism to suppress messages not
> bearing this string--I don't know.)

It also filters out newcomers. I am opposed to that! We were all new
at one time.

> I propose that we give it a try for a while, at least until the
> current crop of off-topic posters go away. Let's- nsert "ARUU"
> into our subject headers.

No, I won't participate in that.



> (The other also quite effective thing you can do is to complain to
> the off-topic poster's service provider, which in most cases will
> cause their account to be lost until they explain and promise to
> stop; however determining who to complain to can sometimes be
> complicated.)
>
> Greg Shenaut

--

gksh...@ucdavis.edu

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 1:01:48 PM11/28/02
to
Ed B <huma...@nethere.com> wrote (Thu, 28 Nov 2002 09:17:29 -0800):

> Filtering out cross-posted messages is not the same as moderating
> content.

In the technical sense it is: there has to be a moderator, which
is an email address that posted messages are sent to via smtp, and
someone/something at the moderator's address posts the messages on
Usenet via nntp. News servers reject articles that do not originate
at the registered moderator's address.

It is true that filtering out cross-posts is a fairly simple moderation
process, however, it is moderation. Furthermore, cross-posting in and
of itself is a useful, rather than harmful thing--it would be idiotic
in my view to suppress all cross-posting in a.r.u-u.

>> However, one effective method that can be used *in place of*
>> moderation, if the problem persists too long, is to have all of
>> the regulars insert a "magic" string (such as ARUU) into the subject
>> field (as I have done above).

> It also filters out newcomers. I am opposed to that! We were all new
> at one time.

>> I propose that we give it a try for a while, at least until the
>> current crop of off-topic posters go away. Let's- nsert "ARUU"
>> into our subject headers.

> No, I won't participate in that.

Well, there are at least two things you can do to circumvent any
possible problem with newbies. One way is to post (even auto-post)
a "How to post on a.r.u-u" article periodically; I'd be willing to
set this up on my computer; it would be very easy to do. A
side-benefit of this is that a small FAQ could also be included
if we wanted a small FAQ--for example, "Why are there two UU groups
on Usenet?" or "How can I find out more about UUism?".

The second thing is that some if not all "old members" would not
bother to set up automatic kill-filing of posts that do not bear
the magic string (for example, I wouldn't)--instead, they would
just use the string to make it easier to weed out bogus articles.
It should be fairly obvious to us when a new user stumbles across
the group--it's not like it happens all that often anyway; at that
point, we could either post a boiler-plate "how to post" article,
or just post a response with the string in the subject and a quick
mention of the convention.

Even if we did neither of these things, I have always found to
to be very obvious when I look at a group with which I am unfamiliar
that uses this method: there is a bunch of obvious spam and weird
stuff along with some articles with actual on-topic content, all
of which have the initials of the group in the subject header. I
don't think it would take too long for a newcomer to figure it out
even without any help from us.

That said, I actually don't think that a.r.u-u even has a significant
problem with off-topic posting. This recent flurry is very atypical,
and I'm sure it will soon be gone. I'm not finding it at all
difficult to zap the annoying articles, and I haven't even gotten
into any kill-filing yet.

I suggested the magic string thingy because (1) it is a standard,
tested method, (2) it doesn't take any work to set up, (3) it could
help us immediately during the current situation, and (4) afterwards
it could fade painlessly and effortlessly away until some day in the
future when it was needed again.

Setting up moderation, even a relatively simple filter, would be
a *lot* of hassle.

So, I strongly oppose any type of moderation, personally favor
doing nothing at all, but suggest that if you *must* do something,
try something with minimal set-up effort and no long-term commitment
such as tagging articles with "ARUU".

Greg Shenaut

Gene Douglas

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 1:44:42 PM11/28/02
to
Actually, they use names with the odd letters, making it easy to spot them.
And the addresses they use are even more wierd, so you can killfile them
without too much problem.

<gksh...@ucdavis.edu> wrote in message
news:as5e0e$ebv$1...@woodrow.ucdavis.edu...

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 2:24:20 PM11/28/02
to
"SARAH CLARK" <s...@hal-pc.org> wrote in message news:<as55l4$cip$1...@news.hal-pc.org>...
> Anyone know, can we as an alt. group do G-x moderation,
> like what talk.origins does? It would bounce
> all messages with more than x groups (t.o. uses 4)
> That would bounce those messages and spam, but
> it is not content moderation.

Hey, Saw-wah, I thought I ran you off??? ;-)

Actually, Saw-wah, it IS a form of moderation, like it or not. It is
just a softer form of moderation than other groups have, Saw-wah.

Cordially,
Nikki

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 2:39:25 PM11/28/02
to
(chainsawed Saw-wah's comments; politely snipped Gene's ;-)

Greg Shenaut:


> However, one effective method that can be used *in place of*
> moderation, if the problem persists too long, is to have all of
> the regulars insert a "magic" string (such as ARUU) into the subject
> field (as I have done above).

We can do that, Greg. :-) That way, we can actively seek each other
out. However, I maintain the spammers are smart while they are
socially idiotic. They may catch on eventually and we will have to
keep changing our magickal powers. ;-)


> I propose that we give it a try for a while, at least until the
> current crop of off-topic posters go away. Let's- nsert "ARUU"
> into our subject headers.

*Margaritas*.


> (The other also quite effective thing you can do is to complain to
> the off-topic poster's service provider, which in most cases will
> cause their account to be lost until they explain and promise to
> stop; however determining who to complain to can sometimes be
> complicated.)

Sadly, we cannot always find the socially-idiotic asshole's email
addys cuz they are smart to a degree. However, igorance CAN go a long
way, loves, for certain situations! :-) Let's tap into our darker
nature and IGNORE them. ;-)

Let's learn about ourselves and tap deeper into our Abyss....
Nikki

Sarah-Berel Harrop

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 5:51:44 PM11/28/02
to

<gksh...@ucdavis.edu> wrote in message
news:as5e0e$ebv$1...@woodrow.ucdavis.edu...

>


> Just ignore them and eventually they (or we) will go away. As Gene
> points out, a.r.u-u's raison d'être is to be unmoderated, so we can
> never impose moderation on this group.

I don't agree that G-4 moderation is anything like what happened on sruu.
It's never, never based on content
or the particular poster. On sruu, certain topics are/were
forbidden, certain people are forbidden, and bad behavior
will get you timed out. That is absolutely not the same
as what I had suggested.

Nevertheless, I take the point. Namely, I realize that
OE shows moderated groups as moderated in the upper
left hand corner, and I would not want that lable on our
group. So I retract the suggestion I also notice that
SRUU does not have that label. Why is that, anyone
know?


>
> However, one effective method that can be used *in place of*
> moderation, if the problem persists too long, is to have all of
> the regulars insert a "magic" string (such as ARUU) into the subject
> field (as I have done above).

I don't think it's necessary. There is not enough traffic.

>
> This does nothing to eliminate to cross-posting spammers, but it
> does make it easier to delete the spam. (Perhaps some news browsers
> can even use their kill-file mechanism to suppress messages not
> bearing this string--I don't know.)
>
> I propose that we give it a try for a while, at least until the
> current crop of off-topic posters go away. Let's- nsert "ARUU"
> into our subject headers.
>
> (The other also quite effective thing you can do is to complain to
> the off-topic poster's service provider, which in most cases will
> cause their account to be lost until they explain and promise to
> stop; however determining who to complain to can sometimes be
> complicated.)
>
> Greg Shenaut

Steven Botts

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 6:05:36 PM11/28/02
to

--
to reply by e-mail insert a "t" between the first two letters of my address.

"Gene Douglas" <gene...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:tutF9.6986$qi3....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...


> Actually, they use names with the odd letters, making it easy to spot
them.
> And the addresses they use are even more wierd, so you can killfile them
> without too much problem.

The trouble with that is that the worst of the trolls changes his name and
address just about every time he posts. I think he uses the accent marks
just to get out of killfiles.

Steve


Robin Edgar

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 9:44:40 PM11/28/02
to
bluue...@1st.net (BluueNikki) wrote in message news:<3a8bf7d4.02112...@posting.google.com>...

> Sadly, we cannot always find the socially-idiotic asshole's email
> addys cuz they are smart to a degree.

Well I had no trouble figuring out who bravenewwhirl was when I
finally decided to try unmasking that obnoxious fundie atheist UU...

> However, igorance CAN go a long way, loves, for certain situations! :-)

Yup I do recall picketing the Unitarian Church of Montreal with a sign
saying -

A "CHURCH" WHERE WILLFUL IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

The referrence George Orwell's 1984 was entirely appropriate in terms
of this Totalitarian Church.

> Let's tap into our darker nature and IGNORE them. ;-)

I think that is what I am now calling "pragmatic indifference". It may
be justified in certain situations but the "pragmatic indifference" of
UUs is often far from justified and is effectively complicit silence
in many cases.

> Let's learn about ourselves and tap deeper into our Abyss....
> Nikki

I do that every now and then.... but try to avoid falling into the
Abyss.
What few monsters I do have in my arsenal I try to put to good use....

BluueNikki

unread,
Nov 28, 2002, 10:37:45 PM11/28/02
to
"Steven Botts" wrote in message:

> The trouble with that is that the worst of the trolls changes his name and
> address just about every time he posts. I think he uses the accent marks
> just to get out of killfiles.


Loves,
I have seen this waaaay too many times so I have given up FreeForte
and doing the NGs at private email programs and stuck with Google, as
that is one reason I gave up the two options.

I pretty much can zone in who is the Twoll (a sour Lisa Hadler with a
straw, anyone? ;-) and who isn't. ;-) Once I know who are the twolls,
I don't even bother opening their posts at all, and only opening it if
I am curious about one of the *Regulars* has responded to that
socially-idiotic twoll, but most of the time, I don't bother reading
what the troll said in the first place. (eye roll). That is how I
deal with twolls. :-)

Respectfully to the regulars here and no so respectfully to the
twolls,
Nikki

wandering star

unread,
Dec 1, 2002, 5:37:15 AM12/1/02
to

hehehe...

That Joe Cartoon thing is some pretty strange stuff... but some of
it's funny too... ;)

I just watched "supahfly Santa" where Santa is playing with a supahfly
doll, and ends up beating on it because it says "who's your daddy?"
"I'm your daddy" and other things that annoy him. Then comes along a
real "supahfly" which lands on Santa's nose, and he ends up flicking
it away because it's saying all sorts of annoying things, and it ends
up crashing into the north pole and bending it. But then the real
supahfly some how manages to impale Santa with the north pole in a
very gory display and Santa's eyes pop out of his head and hang from
what would appear to be the optic nerves...

Like I said, some very strange stuff...

I also saw another cartoon of his before where this guy literally
spanks a monkey. And he keeps spanking it faster and faster and faster
and then in the end his eyes pop out of his head and the monkey gets
the last laugh... I take it it's some kind of masterbation makes you
go blind type of joke... But who knows... A lot of that stuff is just
plain warped... ;)

ws

wandering star

unread,
Dec 1, 2002, 5:48:19 AM12/1/02
to
On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 15:10:35 GMT, "Arthur Meineke"
<AMEI...@houston.rr.com> wrote:

>Is Duckman still on some channel somewhere? I loved that show...it is so
>gross. I can't find it here in Houston.

I think you'll only find it on a cable specialty channel, like an all
comedy or cartoon channel. (I believe it's still played on "Teletoon"
up here in Canada.) But it would appear that it's still being aired on
Comedy Central on Sundays at 2 am.

http://www.comedycentral.com/tv_shows/duckman/

Arthur Meineke

unread,
Dec 1, 2002, 1:27:26 PM12/1/02
to
I just checked the listings for a full week on both Comedy Central and the
Toon channel. There was no sign of Duckman or that Joe Cartoon show that was
mentioned. Oh well. Thanks anyway.

Peace...etc.

"wandering star" <wanderin...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:djpjuuge6p5diuv90...@4ax.com...

Steve Caldwell

unread,
Dec 2, 2002, 9:41:37 AM12/2/02
to
In article <M5aD9.20317$8D.7...@twister.austin.rr.com>, "Troy Scott"
<f...@satx.rr.com> wrote:

-snip-
> I've gone to UUA's site many times and done many little searches over
> the years. While I strongly agree with the concept of allowing others to
> make their own discoveries, I think you are over-looking an important issue:
> Just because you SAY you cannot teach, does not mean you aren't influencing
> others. Words and actions of kindness go a long way. It is my belief that
> those who are most strongly opposed to UUism, understand it least. I'm not
> saying we all have to live perfect lives and say perfect things. I'm saying
> that a newsgroup with the label "alt.religion.unitarian-univ" implies that
> UUism is represented here. Visitors may not know when that representation
> doesn't really reflect UU principles.

Troy,
There is another UU newsgroup ... soc.religion.unitarian-univ. Due
to existing USENET newsgroup "culture" surrounding the "soc.religion"
universe, the soc.religion.unitarian-univ newsgroup is moderated using
"auto-moderator" software. Most of the time the moderation is transparent
to the user. However, some folks objected to the concept of newsgroup
moderation. And some folks objected to the moderation because they
exceeded the published boundaries as set up by the
soc.religion.unitarian-univ moderation team. Hence, the creation of this
newsgroup ... totally unmoderated with spammers and trollers. The only
limit on what you post here is your conscience.

In addition to the two newsgroups mentioned above, the UUA has
listservs available for you to join. Some are limited membership (e.g.
professional organizations) and some are open to anyone. A complete
listing of these listservs can be found online at:

General Info
http://www.uua.org/lists/

UUA Sponsored Lists
http://www.uua.org/mailman/listinfo

Non-UUA Sponsored Lists
http://www.uua.org/lists/nonsponsored.html

Hope this helps,
Steve

--
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Steve Caldwell
srca...@iamerica.net http://members.aol.com/uuwebman/

"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare."

--Blair Houghton

Robin Edgar

unread,
Dec 2, 2002, 6:37:04 PM12/2/02
to
> The only limit on what you post here is your conscience.

Judging from some of the posts made by UUs here there is considerable
confusion between freedom *of* conscience and freedom *from*
conscience...

BluueNikki

unread,
Dec 2, 2002, 8:51:25 PM12/2/02
to
Troy,
Steve C. gave excellent pointers where you can go somewhere that is
more to your liking and needs....more to your visions of what a UU
newsgroup "should be". ;-) (friendly jab at your side)

Winks at you,
Nikki

> There is another UU newsgroup ... soc.religion.unitarian-univ.

(moderated)

and

wandering star

unread,
Dec 3, 2002, 6:07:26 AM12/3/02
to
On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 18:27:26 GMT, "Arthur Meineke"
<AMEI...@houston.rr.com> wrote:

>I just checked the listings for a full week on both Comedy Central and the
>Toon channel. There was no sign of Duckman or that Joe Cartoon show that was
>mentioned. Oh well. Thanks anyway.
>
>Peace...etc.

Hmmm... I guess the comedy central Duckman link is out of date...

But you can check out Joe Cartoon at www.joecartoon.com

But don't blame me if you find it gross and offensive... Blame Blue
Nikki... ;)

BluueNikki

unread,
Dec 3, 2002, 8:16:56 PM12/3/02
to
Arthur,
If you find Joe Cartoon to be offensive, you can always spank my butt....

with a candy cane...or Santa's reins...! :-p

Nikki
Just being onerous

Arthur Meineke

unread,
Dec 4, 2002, 5:10:13 PM12/4/02
to
I checked out the Joe Cartoon site. I know now that I saw his work back when
the things at Shockwave were free. I have Frog-in-a-blender on my
Shockmachine. My grandsons love it. I do too. I won't be going back to his
site. I don't use a popup killer and I avoid sites that take over my
machine.
Spanking your butt sounds fun, though.

"BluueNikki" <bluue...@1st.net> wrote in message
news:3a8bf7d4.0212...@posting.google.com...

wersh

unread,
Dec 4, 2002, 10:17:31 PM12/4/02
to
On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 07:23:44 -0600, "SARAH CLARK" <s...@hal-pc.org>
wrote:

>Anyone know, can we as an alt. group do G-x moderation,
>like what talk.origins does? It would bounce
>all messages with more than x groups (t.o. uses 4)
>That would bounce those messages and spam, but
>it is not content moderation.

<temporarily delurks>

On the alt.* heirarchy, you cannot change an unmoderated newsgroup into
a moderated newsgroup.

Unlike the Big-8 hierarchies (and many others), alt.* has no central
authority and no set rules. Anyone can issue a command to create any
group, and anyone can issue a command to remove any group. And, more
pertinent to your question, anyone can issue a booster message that
indicates an existing unmoderated group should be moderated.

The catch is, on the alt.* heirarchy, it's up to each individual Usenet
server's administrators to determine whether to honor such command
messages. There are various things you can do to make requests (such as
for a new group) more likely to be approved, but you cannot guarantee
that any given server's admin is going to follow the command. And you
certainly cannot ensure that every admin will.

In the case of changing an unmoderated group into a moderated group,
you'd end up in a situation where some servers honor the command and
others ignore it. Those people who try to post through the servers who
accepted the command will get forwarded to the moderators (or the
moderation bot). Those people who post through the servers who ignored
the command will bypass moderation and get sent straight to the group.

The result is that all the trollers will find the latter servers and
continue to spam the group. Meanwhile, a few of the non-trollers will
have to deal with essentially pointless moderation.

The general advice for this situation would be to create a separate
moderated newsgroup, such as alt.religion.unitarian-univ.d or
alt.religion.unitarian-univ.moderated. However, since there's already a
moderated group in the soc.* heirarchy, I doubt this would be a good
idea in this case.

--
print ('J'.# wersh { Z...@wersh.com && http://wersh.com }
'ust anot'.#
'her Perl'.# "If a man empties his purse into his head,
' hacker');# no one can take it from him." -- Benjamin Franklin

# PGP Fingerprint: 0B2B 92EE 4261 5A98 3A20 EFC1 63DD 41D0 45D9 46C0

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages