RESULT: soc.men.moderated will be created
The Big-8 Management Board
soc.men.moderated will be created
The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day period
for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8 Management
Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group soc.men.moderated.
The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not vote.
This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
NEWSGROUPS LINE: soc.men.moderated
soc.men.moderated Men's interests, roles, rights, relationships, etc. (Moderated)
CHARTER:
The newsgroup soc.men.moderated is for discussion of various men's issues.
This charter is meant to encompass a wide variety of topics, including
but not limited to: men's health, fitness, relationships, rights,
responsibilities, education, sports, and more. Posters are expected
to maintain a basic tone of civility.
In general, crossposting to soc.men.moderated is prohibited. Infrequent
administrative crossposts (eg. RFDs, FAQs) may occasionally be
allowed at the sole discretion of the moderators.
Appropriate topics for discussion might include (but are not limited to):
* Men's medical issues.
* Education of men and boys.
* Men's fitness.
* The roles, rights and responsibilities of fathers.
* Perceptions of men in the media.
* Men's roles in dating and marriage.
* Divorce and child custody issues.
* The roles of nature and nurture in sex differences.
* Gender discrepancies in law and society.
* All aspects of professional and amateur sports in which men
participate.
This newsgroup is moderated.
The following are prohibited and could lead to having such prohibited
posts rejected by the moderator and/or banning of the poster:
* Personal advertisements.
* Commercial advertisements and money-making schemes.
* Chain letters.
* Posts in HTML.
* EMP spam.
* Binaries, apart from PGP signatures, X-Face headers, and other
ancillary article meta-data.
* Personally identifying information (residential addresses, telephone
numbers, government/vehicle identification numbers, etc.) that
is associated with anyone other than the poster.
* Forgery of valid e-mail addresses.
* Unauthorized approval headers.
* Excessive morphing/nym-shifting.
* Posts advocating violence or containing physical threats.
* Content advocating acts which would intrinsically be illegal in
most places, with the exception of legitimate civil disobedience.
* Insulting or making personal attacks on another poster of the
newsgroup.
* Gender-based, race-based, or sexual-orientation-based bashing of
groups and/or individuals.
* Copyright violations. Pointers to news articles, blogs, etc. on
this topic are welcome but are required to comply with fair use
standards.
The moderators reserve the right to edit or reject submissions as they
deem necessary to minimize their legal liability.
MODERATION POLICY: soc.men.moderated
The moderation software may (now or possibly in the future) enforce the
following policies:
* Postings must be in plain text. In particular no HTML or mixed text
and HTML posts will be allowed.
* Postings should be formatted within 80 characters in width (limiting
your lines to 72 characters is recommended), and also should not
exhibit the long/short/long/short/etc misformatting that some posting
agents can produce when misconfigured.
* No binary postings of any sort will be accepted. Exceptions will be
made for cryptographic signatures and such. S/MIME signatures are
usually far too bulky and will probably not be accepted.
* Crossposting is generally not allowed. Infrequent administrative
crossposts may occasionally be allowed at the sole discretion of the
moderator.
* Signature files will be limited to no more than four 80-character lines.
* Mail address blacklisting and whitelisting may be implemented as
deemed necessary by the moderators. In addition a number of anti-spam
filters are in place, and will be expanded as needed.
* Posting with a non-replyable/munged address is discouraged. Posters who
feel that they must use a munged address are encouraged to append
".invalid" to the end of the email address, to indicate that the address
is not deliverable.
Moderation Mechanics:
A moderation robot script will scan all submitted posts. Each post will
be either automatically approved, rejected, or sent to the moderators
for manual review. The moderators will act as a team to handle these
posts - a held submission will be accepted with one 'yes' vote, or
rejected with three 'no' votes. If no decision is made within 48 hours,
the message will be automatically rejected. Rejected submissions will
be returned to the poster by email (if possible), with a message stating
the reason for rejection.
If posters wish to appeal the rejection of an article, they may do so by
contacting the moderation team. The appeal can be accepted with one
yes vote.
Posters may be banned by unanimous vote of the moderators.
These thresholds may be changed by the unanimous consent of all moderators.
Moderation policies and mechanics may be changed by unanimous decision
of the moderators, including the technical moderator.
A moderator's term ends upon voluntary resignation or unanimous agreement
of the remaining moderators. An outgoing moderator may choose his
replacement, unless all remaining moderators, including the technical
moderator, object. Moderators may be added by unanimous agreement of the
moderators.
The technical moderator has the authority to declare the newsgroup
non-functional and shut it down. In this case he will set the
robomod to reject all posts submitted, add an explanatory message to
the rejection notice, and send a request for removal to the B8
Management Board or its successor.
Note on Robomoderation:
The robomoderation software (robomod) enforces various anti-spam and text
formatting requirements. In order for posters to receive rejection notices
or other information from the robomod it must have a valid email address
for posters.
MODERATOR INFO: soc.men.moderated
Technical Moderator: Graham Drabble <usen...@drabble.me.uk>
Moderator: Mark Borgerson <mborg...@comcast.net>
Moderator: Grizzlie Antagonist <lloydso...@yahoo.com>
Moderator: Mark Sobolewski <mark_so...@yahoo.com>
Moderator: Peter J Ross <s...@pjr.britishlibrary.net>
Article Submissions: soc-men-...@drabble.me.uk
Administrative Contact: soc-men-mode...@drabble.me.uk
END MODERATOR INFO
DISTRIBUTION:
This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:
news.announce.newgroups
news.groups
soc.men
PROPONENT:
Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com>
CHANGE HISTORY:
2006-08-26 Group Passes
2006-08-18 Last Call for Comments
2006-08-09 3rd RFD submitted
2006-07-27 2nd RFD submitted
2006-06-05 1st RFD submitted
Chairman Cow
Board says...
> RESULT
> soc.men.moderated will be created
>
> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day period
> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8 Management
> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group soc.men.moderated.
>
> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not vote.
>
> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
--
"I never knew there were corners in time
until I was told to go stand in one"
....Grace Slick
dave hillstrom
<cowtse...@notbex.edu> wrote:
>In article <11566227...@isc.org>, The Big-8 Management
>Board says...
>
>> RESULT
>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>
>> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day period
>> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8 Management
>> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group soc.men.moderated.
>>
>> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not vote.
>>
>> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>
>Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
im assuming GA is the initial target?
--
Dave Hillstrom mhm15x4 zrbj
"Quotes can't be forced. They just come to you, like diarrhea."
-Dave Hillstrom mhm15x4
[krp]
"The Big-8 Management Board" <bo...@big-8.org> wrote in message
news:11566227...@isc.org...
THERE IT IS!! SIEG HEIL!!!!!!!
[krp]
"Chairman Cow" <cowtse...@notbex.edu> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f5a4b971...@notbxpats.edu...
> In article <11566227...@isc.org>, The Big-8 Management
> Board says...
>
>> RESULT
>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>
>> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day
>> period
>> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8 Management
>> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group
>> soc.men.moderated.
>>
>> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not vote.
>>
>> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>
> Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
To the HUGE 8 - SEE I TOLD YA!!!!
[krp]
"dave hillstrom" <dA...@MeOw.oRg> wrote in message
news:ecqa9q$bjl$5...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:14:51 -0700, Chairman Cow
> <cowtse...@notbex.edu> wrote:
>
>>In article <11566227...@isc.org>, The Big-8 Management
>>Board says...
>>
>>> RESULT
>>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>>
>>> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day
>>> period
>>> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8 Management
>>> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group
>>> soc.men.moderated.
>>>
>>> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not vote.
>>>
>>> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>>
>>Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
>
> im assuming GA is the initial target?
Where did they find 4 BRAIN DEAD??
Heidi Graw
> soc.men.moderated will be created
> PROPONENT:
>
> Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com>
Congratulations, Jayne! Your hard work, dedication and perserverance paid
off. ;-)
Thanks, also to those who contributed to this project. Hopefully, this new
newsgroup will allow for more meaningful and high quality discussions about
men's issues to occur.
Good luck! ;-)
Heidi
dave hillstrom
<gbur...@databasix.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:06:20 -0700, bo...@big-8.org (The Big-8
>Management Board) wrote:
>
>
>>This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>
>Another proof of the non-integrity of Team Calvin.
and the incredible slowness that is The New Process.
Chairman Cow
hillstrom says...
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:14:51 -0700, Chairman Cow
> <cowtse...@notbex.edu> wrote:
>
> >In article <11566227...@isc.org>, The Big-8 Management
> >Board says...
> >
> >> RESULT
> >> soc.men.moderated will be created
> >>
> >> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day period
> >> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8 Management
> >> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group soc.men.moderated.
> >>
> >> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not vote.
> >>
> >> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
> >
> >Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
>
> im assuming GA is the initial target?
The initial (and on-going) target is anyone who submits their
poasts to the moderation team rather than poasting directly
Chairman Cow
Burnore says...
> Tim, Timmy, Timmay and Timothy.
>
> What an amazing bunch of bullshit.
Hey, it might just cause more folks to come and knock on your
door...
Chairman Cow
Told them what, jerkoff?
You're already posting there (see the froups line, stupid)
*before* they 'create' it.
Do you really think we (tinw) of the NotB care what teh B8MBis
do?
Signal Is Dead - Long Live Noise!
You're wasting your time trying to suck-up, Heidi.
Timmy only accepts blowjobs from teh mens.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Chairman Cow
Burnore says...
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 20:35:35 GMT, "Heidi Graw" <heid...@shaw.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >...men's issues...
>
> >Heidi
>
> Congratulations to the pussies of soc.men for letting the girls
> control you.
Heidi's not a girl. At best it's a dyke, more likely the result
of a failed sex-change operation.
2Rowdy
by the entity known as Bob Officer, that requests spam to be sent to
<bobof...@127.0.0.7> and I became inspired,
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:06:20 -0700, in news.groups, bo...@big-8.org
> (The Big-8 Management Board) wrote:
>
>> RESULT
>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>
>> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a
>> five-day period for final comments. Following this comment
>> period, the Big-8 Management Board has decided by a vote to create
>> the moderated group soc.men.moderated.
>>
>> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not
>> vote.
>
> Really.. This means the internal process is working correctly...?
That's a secret so don't ask.
--
d:J0han; Certifiable me
http://2rowdy.aacity.net
IHUMFA
Jayne Kulikauskas
> RESULT
> soc.men.moderated will be created
My thanks to the Board, to Tim for acting as our mentor, to our new
moderators and to all the people who offered support and suggestions.
As I said earlier, I think that a proposal with so much drama and passion
needs a musical grand finale. The following words are sung to the tune of
Gilbert and Sullivan's "Poor Wandering One" from _Pirates of Penzance_.
You can hear the tune and read the real words here:
http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/pirates/web_op/pirates08.html
You can see the song performed here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfHPtJq9pqQ&mode=related&search=
I dedicate it to the hundreds of lurkers who supported me in email. <g>
Poor lurking ones
With no place to discuss men’s issues
Though soc.men should be
It’s too flamey
For poor lurking ones
Poor lurking ones
I bring ye gladsome tidings
Soc.men.moderated
Has been created
You can take part, subscribe
Men’s relationships, roles, and rights
Discussed civilly – no flamey fights
No violence, respect copyright
You can take part, subscribe
Debate with logic and facts
No bashing or personal attacks
No flames, we’ll all be polite
You can take part, subscribe
Ah, ah, ah, ah
Poor lurking ones
I bring ye gladsome tidings
Soc.men.moderated
Has been created
You can take part, subscribe
Ah, ah, etc.
TAKE PART!
--
Jayne
Signal Is Dead - Long Live Noise!
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:06:20 -0700, The Big-8 Management Board wrote:
>
>
>> RESULT
>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>
>
> My thanks to the Board, to Tim for acting as our mentor, to our new
> moderators and to all the people who offered support and suggestions.
>
> As I said earlier, I think that a proposal with so much drama and passion
> needs a musical grand finale. The following words are sung to the tune of
> Gilbert and Sullivan's "Poor Wandering One" from _Pirates of Penzance_.
> You can hear the tune and read the real words here:
> http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/pirates/web_op/pirates08.html
>
> You can see the song performed here:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfHPtJq9pqQ&mode=related&search=
>
> I dedicate it to the hundreds of lurkers who supported me in email. <g>
>
> Poor lurking ones
> With no place to discuss men’s issues
> Though soc.men should be
> It’s too flamey
> For poor lurking ones
Cowards!
> Poor lurking ones
> I bring ye gladsome tidings
> Soc.men.moderated
> Has been created
> You can take part, subscribe
Yes, subscribe!!
> Men’s relationships, roles, and rights
> Discussed with all flamey fights
Yes, flame!!!
> More violence, no respect for copyright
Just like soc.men!!!!
> You can take part, subscribe
Yes, subscribe!
> Debate without logic and facts
> More bashing and personal attacks
Attack, attack!!
> All flames, we’re never polite
> You can take part, subscribe
Yes, subscribe, subscribe!!
> Ah, ah, ah, ah
> Poor lurking ones
Cowards!
> I bring ye gruesome tidings
> Soc.men.moderated
> Has been created
> You can take part, subscribe
Yes, subscribe, subscribe!
We are lurking forward to it!!!!1!
Tim Skirvin
>> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
> Another proof of the non-integrity of Team Calvin.
Why, is that Labor Day?
- Tim Skirvin (sk...@big-8.org)
Chair, Big-8 Management Board
--
http://www.big-8.org/ Big-8 Management Board
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage <FISH>< <*>
Tim Skirvin
>> RESULT
>> soc.men.moderated will be created
> My thanks to the Board, to Tim for acting as our mentor, to our new
> moderators and to all the people who offered support and suggestions.
Speaking for myself, I'm glad that I could help. Good luck with
your group, Jayne, and thank you for being an excellent and *patient*
proponent.
For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
> As I said earlier, I think that a proposal with so much drama and passion
> needs a musical grand finale. The following words are sung to the tune of
> Gilbert and Sullivan's "Poor Wandering One" from _Pirates of Penzance_.
> You can hear the tune and read the real words here:
> http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/pirates/web_op/pirates08.html
*smile* I grew up with G&S playing in the background through most
of my childhood. It's definitely an excellent choice to finish a proposal.
Maybe we should make that policy.
Sharon B
Skirvin) wrote in <tskirvin.20060827015504$5c...@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu>:
>Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> RESULT
>>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>
>> My thanks to the Board, to Tim for acting as our mentor, to our new
>> moderators and to all the people who offered support and suggestions.
>
> Speaking for myself, I'm glad that I could help. Good luck with
>your group, Jayne, and thank you for being an excellent and *patient*
>proponent.
>
> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
>intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
>that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
>
>> As I said earlier, I think that a proposal with so much drama and passion
>> needs a musical grand finale. The following words are sung to the tune of
>> Gilbert and Sullivan's "Poor Wandering One" from _Pirates of Penzance_.
>> You can hear the tune and read the real words here:
>> http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/pirates/web_op/pirates08.html
>
> *smile* I grew up with G&S playing in the background through most
>of my childhood. It's definitely an excellent choice to finish a proposal.
>
> Maybe we should make that policy.
I think I'm gonna hurl if I see very much more of this public
slurping.
Deborah Terreson
----------
In article <3b22f213n3guqo1oa...@4ax.com>, Sharon B
<sha...@lart.com> wrote:
Wassamatter Sharon?
Your kook proclivities yielding too bitter a fruit fer ya?
>
>
M. Sadé-Cyrénaïque
I would find your discomfort quite entertaining.
Brian Mailman
> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs.
Thanks for coming forward.
> I don't necessarily
> intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
> that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
It's appropriate for any of you that mento or propose a proposal.
Same reason I as I said before, and what that other person who said it
in lanugage you understand said.
Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
B/
Brian Mailman
> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
> intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
> that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
Message-ID: <12e943i...@news.supernews.com>
B/
Tim Skirvin
> Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
It would be inappropriate of me to talk about how anybody else
voted, sorry. I probably won't talk about how I personally voted very
often.
M. Sadé-Cyrénaïque
<bmai...@sfo.invalid> wrote:
>Tim Skirvin wrote:
>
>> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs.
>
>Thanks for coming forward.
>
>> I don't necessarily
>> intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
>> that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
>
>It's appropriate for any of you that mento or propose a proposal.
>
>Same reason I as I said before, and what that other person who said it
>in lanugage you understand said.
Could you translate that into proper English?
Adam H. Kerman
>Brian Mailman <bmai...@sfo.invalid> writes:
>> Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
> It would be inappropriate of me to talk about how anybody else
>voted, sorry. I probably won't talk about how I personally voted very
>often.
'Tis a curious thing that it's none of our business. When we voted, we were
on the record. I once was criticized for one of my votes, and lived.
James Farrar
<gbur...@databasix.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 20:55:02 -0500, tski...@killfile.org (Tim
>Skirvin) wrote:
>
>> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
>>intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
>>that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
>
>So you already knew four others of team Calvin would vote yes so you
>took the cowards way out and abstained.
>
>Frankly, I think anyone who abstains or doesn't vote on EVERY group
>should be replaced.
Are you aware of what an explicit abstention means?
--
James Farrar
. @gmail.com
[krp]
"Gary L. Burnore" <gbur...@databasix.com> wrote in message
news:ecqbfa$1sq$2...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
>>>>> RESULT
>>>>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>>>>
>>>>> period
>>>>> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8
>>>>> Management
>>>>> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group
>>>>> soc.men.moderated.
>>>>>
>>>>> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not
>>>>> vote.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> im assuming GA is the initial target?
>>
>>
>>Where did they find 4 BRAIN DEAD??
>
> Tim, Timmy, Timmay and Timothy.
Tim the BIG GIANT HEAD!!! Or Mork from Ork? Just ONE small question.
When one or more "moderators" are driven off, WHO will get to pick their
replacements? As we have seen NOT the soc.men users? Who then? Any BETS
HERE!
Timmy didn't get it that within MINUTES of his "ANNOUNCEMENT" came the
word from the AUK types personified by the call form them; "LET THE GAMES
BEGIN!" No matter how you bitch slap some people with the problem they will
NEVER grasp it...
Tim refuses to believe that is an elephant standing on his foot. He
thinks he's standing next to a hairy wall!
[krp]
> In article <ecqa9q$bjl$5...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>, dave
> hillstrom says...
>> >> soc.men.moderated will be created
>> >>
>> >> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day
>> >> period
>> >> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8
>> >> Management
>> >> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group
>> >> soc.men.moderated.
>> >>
>> >> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not
>> >> vote.
>> >>
>> >> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>> >
>> >Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
>>
>> im assuming GA is the initial target?
>
> poasts to the moderation team rather than poasting directly
The HUGE EIGHT think they have the problem fixed!!!
Say BIG GIANT HEAD - how is alt.dads-rights.moderated
doing????????????????????/ HUH?? HUH BIG GIANT HEAD?
[krp]
Hate to tell you it does NOT exist yet..
[krp]
"Tim Skirvin" <tski...@killfile.org> wrote in message
news:tskirvin.20060827015411$49...@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu...
> Gary L. Burnore <gbur...@databasix.com> writes:
>
>>> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>> Another proof of the non-integrity of Team Calvin.
>
> Why, is that Labor Day?
So Tim you think you have FIXED things??????
<snicker> Learn to read.
Tim Skirvin
>> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
>> intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
>> that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
> So you already knew four others of team Calvin would vote yes so you
> took the cowards way out and abstained.
That's not actually how it went, no.
> Frankly, I think anyone who abstains or doesn't vote on EVERY group
> should be replaced. You are, after all, claiming to speak for
> everyone rather than letting them speak for themselves by voting. You
> should, then, at least fucking SPEAK.
Conversely, I think that anyone that failed to speak up during the
LCC period, when they knew it was coming, has as little right to complain
about the decision as somebody that complains about the actions of their
elected officials but didn't vote.
Tim Skirvin
> Just ONE small question. When one or more "moderators" are driven off,
> WHO will get to pick their replacements?
As described in the moderation policy (part of the document you're
responding to), the departing moderator chooses her replacement.
Phoebee Caulfield
Skirvin says...
> " [krp]" <web2...@verizon.net> writes:
>
> > Just ONE small question. When one or more "moderators" are driven off,
> > WHO will get to pick their replacements?
>
> As described in the moderation policy (part of the document you're
> responding to), the departing moderator chooses her replacement.
And IIRC, PJR promised to name SharonB as his replacement, just
in case anyone was thinking about trying to run him off...
--
"Meanwhile, somewhere in the twenty-first century, a young
girl named Phoebee Caulfield plops herself down on the sofa,
pops open a soda, and watches ... YOU!"
...PK
Phoebee Caulfield
Hate to tell you that Google shows a total of 415 posts to
soc.men.moderated, starting on June 16. 10 of which are yours.
Funny how you can post to a group that doesn't exist...
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=&num=10
&scoring=r&hl=en&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_ugroup=soc.men.moderat
ed&as_usubject=&as_uauthors=&lr=&as_qdr=&as_drrb=b&as_mind=1
&as_minm=6&as_miny=2006&as_maxd=27&as_maxm=8&as_maxy=2006
&safe=off
Jayne Kulikauskas
> Brian Mailman <bmai...@sfo.invalid> writes:
>
>> Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
>
> It would be inappropriate of me to talk about how anybody else
> voted, sorry. I probably won't talk about how I personally voted very
> often.
I don't see much to be gained from knowing who voted how. Something that
might be useful, however, is information about why the Board members voted
as they did. As a proponent, trying to figure out what you were looking
for in a proposal, I would have appreciated more such comments about your
other votes. I found Jonathan's statement about why he voted as he did on
SRA very helpful.
Even if Board members did not feel it appropropriate to discuss specific
proposals, general comments could help too. If each of you wrote in
general terms about why you have voted yes, no, abstained or not voted, it
would give more transparency to the process and help future proponents. I
would like to see something like this with the newsgroup creation
information on the Board's web site.
Jayne
Brian Mailman
> Brian Mailman <bmai...@sfo.invalid> writes:
>
>> Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
>
> It would be inappropriate of me to talk about how anybody else
> voted, sorry. I probably won't talk about how I personally voted very
> often.
Oh... but I didn't ask for names and "how anybody else voted."
And you certainly have spoken about people "not pulling their weight"
and named names.
B/
Brian Mailman
> Conversely, I think that anyone that failed to speak up during the
> LCC period, when they knew it was coming, has as little right to complain
> about the decision as somebody that complains about the actions of their
> elected officials but didn't vote.
Must you be reminded.... AGAIN... that none of you are elected officials?
B/
Masculist
Heidi Graw wrote:
> >"The Big-8 Management Board" <bo...@big-8.org> wrote in message
> >news:11566227...@isc.org...
> > RESULT
> > soc.men.moderated will be created
>
> > PROPONENT:
> >
> > Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com>
>
> Congratulations, Jayne! Your hard work, dedication and perserverance paid
> off. ;-)
>
> Thanks, also to those who contributed to this project. Hopefully, this new
> newsgroup will allow for more meaningful and high quality discussions about
> men's issues to occur.
>
> Good luck! ;-)
Can I still call Heidi a "feminist whore" on this new moderated group?
I won't participate in any group that I can't say "feminist whore".
Smitty
> Heidi
MCP
"Masculist" <MASC...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156699734.7...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
lol! of course you can, Masculist...be my guest.
>
> Smitty
>
>> Heidi
>
Phoebee Caulfield
Kulikauskas says...
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:48:39 -0500, Tim Skirvin wrote:
>
> > Brian Mailman <bmai...@sfo.invalid> writes:
> >
> >> Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
> >
> > It would be inappropriate of me to talk about how anybody else
> > voted, sorry. I probably won't talk about how I personally voted very
> > often.
>
> I don't see much to be gained from knowing who voted how. Something that
> might be useful, however, is information about why the Board members voted
> as they did.
You only gave four of them blow-jobs
Phoebee Caulfield
@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Masculist says...
You'll need to find a newsfeed that doesn't honor the B8MBis
moderation flag. Last time I looked, there were a couple dozen
of those...
Dr John Stockton
13:06:20 remote, seen in news:news.announce.newgroups, The Big-8
Management Board <bo...@big-8.org> posted :
>
> * Signature files will be limited to no more than four 80-character lines.
>
That is unreasonable; the length of a file on a user's computer is of no
importance to the rest of the world.
Turnpike, which I use, recognises that signature separators are not
mandatory. Therefore, they are not coded to be inserted when signatures
are attached, but are placed by default in the signature files.
Moreover, since a standard signature separator must be at the beginning
of its line, my signature file starts with a newline. It seems
desirable, even if not essential, that an article's body should finish
with a new line too.
Therefore, my signature files consist of six newlines separating five
non-blank lines.
Additionally, there's nothing I know of to prevent newsreader software
containing all pre-composed signatures in a single file, without
affecting the user interface - that would be more economical of disc
space too, FWIW.
The line should have read :
* Signatures will be limited to no more than four 80-character lines.
There is of course no point in overturning and replacing any current
charter; but ISTM that the new statement should be used in future
charters.
--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)
Phoebee Caulfield
Officer says...
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 11:38:15 -0700, in news.groups, Phoebee Caulfield
> <pcaul...@notbex.edu> wrote:
>
> >In article <1156699734.723193.105750
> >@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>, Masculist says...
> >
> >>
> >> Heidi Graw wrote:
> >> > >"The Big-8 Management Board" <bo...@big-8.org> wrote in message
> >> > >news:11566227...@isc.org...
> >> > > RESULT
> >> > > soc.men.moderated will be created
> >> > (snip)
> >> >
> >> > > PROPONENT:
> >> > >
> >> > > Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com>
> >> >
> >> > Congratulations, Jayne! Your hard work, dedication and perserverance paid
> >> > off. ;-)
> >> >
> >> > Thanks, also to those who contributed to this project. Hopefully, this new
> >> > newsgroup will allow for more meaningful and high quality discussions about
> >> > men's issues to occur.
> >> >
> >> > Good luck! ;-)
> >>
> >> Can I still call Heidi a "feminist whore" on this new moderated group?
> >> I won't participate in any group that I can't say "feminist whore".
> >>
> >> Smitty
> >
> >You'll need to find a newsfeed that doesn't honor the B8MBis
> >moderation flag. Last time I looked, there were a couple dozen
> >of those...
>
> I know of 23 that don't... three of them are considered major with
> lots of feeds.
Along with some of the largest ISPs. Not to mention dweeb-tv...
Tim Skirvin
>>> Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
>> It would be inappropriate of me to talk about how anybody else
>> voted, sorry. I probably won't talk about how I personally voted very
>> often.
> Oh... but I didn't ask for names and "how anybody else voted."
It would be inappropriate for me to talk about how anybody else
voted.
> And you certainly have spoken about people "not pulling their weight"
> and named names.
Oh, goodie, I... You know what? I don't think I'll take part in
this sub-thread. If you want to talk about this, you'll do it without me.
Dante Soch
> RESULT
> soc.men.moderated will be created
>
> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day period
> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8 Management
> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group soc.men.moderated.
>
> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not vote.
>
> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>
>
> NEWSGROUPS LINE: soc.men.moderated
>
> soc.men.moderated Men's interests, roles, rights, relationships, etc. (Moderated)
>
>
> CHARTER:
>
> The newsgroup soc.men.moderated is for discussion of various men's issues.
> This charter is meant to encompass a wide variety of topics, including
> but not limited to: men's health, fitness, relationships, rights,
> responsibilities, education, sports, and more. Posters are expected
> to maintain a basic tone of civility.
>
> In general, crossposting to soc.men.moderated is prohibited. Infrequent
> administrative crossposts (eg. RFDs, FAQs) may occasionally be
> allowed at the sole discretion of the moderators.
>
> Appropriate topics for discussion might include (but are not limited to):
>
> * Men's medical issues.
> * Education of men and boys.
> * Men's fitness.
> * The roles, rights and responsibilities of fathers.
> * Perceptions of men in the media.
> * Men's roles in dating and marriage.
> * Divorce and child custody issues.
> * The roles of nature and nurture in sex differences.
> * Gender discrepancies in law and society.
> * All aspects of professional and amateur sports in which men
> participate.
>
> This newsgroup is moderated.
>
> The following are prohibited and could lead to having such prohibited
> posts rejected by the moderator and/or banning of the poster:
>
> * Personal advertisements.
> * Commercial advertisements and money-making schemes.
> * Chain letters.
> * Posts in HTML.
> * EMP spam.
> * Binaries, apart from PGP signatures, X-Face headers, and other
> ancillary article meta-data.
> * Personally identifying information (residential addresses, telephone
> numbers, government/vehicle identification numbers, etc.) that
> is associated with anyone other than the poster.
> * Forgery of valid e-mail addresses.
> * Unauthorized approval headers.
> * Excessive morphing/nym-shifting.
> * Posts advocating violence or containing physical threats.
> * Content advocating acts which would intrinsically be illegal in
> most places, with the exception of legitimate civil disobedience.
> * Insulting or making personal attacks on another poster of the
> newsgroup.
> * Gender-based, race-based, or sexual-orientation-based bashing of
> groups and/or individuals.
> * Copyright violations. Pointers to news articles, blogs, etc. on
> this topic are welcome but are required to comply with fair use
> standards.
>
> The moderators reserve the right to edit or reject submissions as they
> deem necessary to minimize their legal liability.
>
>
> MODERATION POLICY: soc.men.moderated
>
> The moderation software may (now or possibly in the future) enforce the
> following policies:
>
> * Postings must be in plain text. In particular no HTML or mixed text
> and HTML posts will be allowed.
>
> * Postings should be formatted within 80 characters in width (limiting
> your lines to 72 characters is recommended), and also should not
> exhibit the long/short/long/short/etc misformatting that some posting
> agents can produce when misconfigured.
>
> * No binary postings of any sort will be accepted. Exceptions will be
> made for cryptographic signatures and such. S/MIME signatures are
> usually far too bulky and will probably not be accepted.
>
> * Crossposting is generally not allowed. Infrequent administrative
> crossposts may occasionally be allowed at the sole discretion of the
> moderator.
>
> * Signature files will be limited to no more than four 80-character lines.
>
> * Mail address blacklisting and whitelisting may be implemented as
> deemed necessary by the moderators. In addition a number of anti-spam
> filters are in place, and will be expanded as needed.
>
> * Posting with a non-replyable/munged address is discouraged. Posters who
> feel that they must use a munged address are encouraged to append
> ".invalid" to the end of the email address, to indicate that the address
> is not deliverable.
>
>
> Moderation Mechanics:
>
> A moderation robot script will scan all submitted posts. Each post will
> be either automatically approved, rejected, or sent to the moderators
> for manual review. The moderators will act as a team to handle these
> posts - a held submission will be accepted with one 'yes' vote, or
> rejected with three 'no' votes. If no decision is made within 48 hours,
> the message will be automatically rejected. Rejected submissions will
> be returned to the poster by email (if possible), with a message stating
> the reason for rejection.
>
> If posters wish to appeal the rejection of an article, they may do so by
> contacting the moderation team. The appeal can be accepted with one
> yes vote.
>
> Posters may be banned by unanimous vote of the moderators.
>
> These thresholds may be changed by the unanimous consent of all moderators.
>
> Moderation policies and mechanics may be changed by unanimous decision
> of the moderators, including the technical moderator.
>
> A moderator's term ends upon voluntary resignation or unanimous agreement
> of the remaining moderators. An outgoing moderator may choose his
> replacement, unless all remaining moderators, including the technical
> moderator, object. Moderators may be added by unanimous agreement of the
> moderators.
>
> The technical moderator has the authority to declare the newsgroup
> non-functional and shut it down. In this case he will set the
> robomod to reject all posts submitted, add an explanatory message to
> the rejection notice, and send a request for removal to the B8
> Management Board or its successor.
>
>
> Note on Robomoderation:
>
> The robomoderation software (robomod) enforces various anti-spam and text
> formatting requirements. In order for posters to receive rejection notices
> or other information from the robomod it must have a valid email address
> for posters.
>
>
> MODERATOR INFO: soc.men.moderated
>
> Technical Moderator: Graham Drabble <usen...@drabble.me.uk>
> Moderator: Mark Borgerson <mborg...@comcast.net>
> Moderator: Grizzlie Antagonist <lloydso...@yahoo.com>
> Moderator: Mark Sobolewski <mark_so...@yahoo.com>
> Moderator: Peter J Ross <s...@pjr.britishlibrary.net>
>
> Article Submissions: soc-men-...@drabble.me.uk
> Administrative Contact: soc-men-mode...@drabble.me.uk
>
>
>
> END MODERATOR INFO
>
>
>
> DISTRIBUTION:
>
> This document has been posted to the following newsgroups:
>
> news.announce.newgroups
> news.groups
> soc.men
>
>
> PROPONENT:
>
> Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com>
>
>
> CHANGE HISTORY:
>
> 2006-08-26 Group Passes
> 2006-08-18 Last Call for Comments
> 2006-08-09 3rd RFD submitted
> 2006-07-27 2nd RFD submitted
> 2006-06-05 1st RFD submitted
Woohoo!!!!!!!!! It looks like all my hard work has paid off in spades :-)
pandora
"Masculist" <MASC...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156699734.7...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
Only if I get to call YOU a masculist prick. :-)
Marg
> Smitty
>
> > Heidi
>
Vic Kulikauskas
Sharon B wrote:
> I think I'm gonna hurl if I see very much more of this public
> slurping.
I'm sure it coudn't happen to a nicer person. Enjoy your hurling,
Sharon.
[krp]
"Gary L. Burnore" <gbur...@databasix.com> wrote in message
news:ect7e1$mol$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com...
>>>> >
>>>> >> RESULT
>>>> >> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day
>>>> >> period
>>>> >> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8
>>>> >> Management
>>>> >> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group
>>>> >> soc.men.moderated.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not
>>>> >> vote.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>>>> >
>>>> > Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To the HUGE 8 - SEE I TOLD YA!!!!
>>>
>>> Told them what, jerkoff?
>>>
>>> You're already posting there (see the froups line, stupid)
>>> *before* they 'create' it.
>>>
>>> Do you really think we (tinw) of the NotB care what teh B8MBis
>>> do?
>>
>>
>>Hate to tell you it does NOT exist yet..
>>
> already posting to it, laughing at you.
I thought that wasn't allowed??? So much for moderation.
Phoebee Caulfield
As the light of a new day dawns...
James Farrar
<bobof...@127.0.0.7> wrote:
>On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 12:55:35 +0100, in news.groups, James Farrar
><james.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 01:12:35 -0400, Gary L. Burnore
>><gbur...@databasix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 20:55:02 -0500, tski...@killfile.org (Tim
>>>Skirvin) wrote:
>>>
>>>> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
>>>>intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
>>>>that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
>>>
>>>So you already knew four others of team Calvin would vote yes so you
>>>took the cowards way out and abstained.
>>>
>>>Frankly, I think anyone who abstains or doesn't vote on EVERY group
>>>should be replaced.
>>
>>Are you aware of what an explicit abstention means?
>
>It doesn't mean Recluse, which is what Tim should have done in this
>case.
[Assumung you mean "recuse"...]
>Recluse is a method of stating there may be a conflict of interest or
>the person may have preconceived bias, a condition which will not
>allow a fair hearing of the case, where an unbiased opinion is
>required. Any Board member, like Tim, acting as either Proponent or
>Mentor should be, by the boards internal rules forced, not abstain
>from vote, but required to recluse himself. That means not even be a
>part of the any internal board discussions or processes for the
>proposal.
That's an interesting proposition. I'd instinctively agree in the case
of a Proponent, but not necessarily in the case of a Mentor.
However, it's impossible (or as near as makes no difference) for such
a person to be unaward of Board discussions; they could not be removed
from the Board's mailing list for the duration of the proposal since
other business may well be being considered concurrently.
Irrespective, there are reasons for explicit abstentions; most
commonly that the voter considers there are flaws with the proposal
that mean that s/he considers s/he should not support the proposal,
but that they are not sufficient for him/her to oppose the proposal.
--
James Farrar
. @gmail.com
James Farrar
<james.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
>However, it's impossible (or as near as makes no difference) for such
>a person to be unaward of Board discussions; they could not be removed
>from the Board's mailing list for the duration of the proposal since
>other business may well be being considered concurrently.
s/unaward/unaware, obviously...
Phoebee Caulfield
Cannon says...
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:57:00 GMT, " [krp]" <web2...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >>>Hate to tell you it does NOT exist yet..
> >>>
> >> Sure it does. Just not on your server, apparently. Others are
> >> already posting to it, laughing at you.
> >
> >I thought that wasn't allowed??? So much for moderation.
>
> You thought?
> The very idea that a thought occurred to you preposterous.
> You are intellectual anti-matter.
> You're anti-smart. You're proto-stoopido.
> The very idea that some cognitive functions actually happened in that
> encephalitic cro-mag low fore headed thick skull of yours is
> inconceivable.
>
> No my friend...you might have thought you had a thought, but rest
> assured that is quite impossible. You are neither a sentient nor
> intelligent life form.
>
> HTH...
Its funny that he didn't even realize he /was/ posting to smm
Brian Mailman
> Brian Mailman <bmai...@sfo.invalid> writes:
>
>>>> Was it the same two who didn't vote on ssv-i?
>>> It would be inappropriate of me to talk about how anybody else
>>> voted, sorry. I probably won't talk about how I personally voted very
>>> often.
>
>> Oh... but I didn't ask for names and "how anybody else voted."
>
> It would be inappropriate for me to talk about how anybody else
> voted.
>
>> And you certainly have spoken about people "not pulling their weight"
>> and named names.
>
> Oh, goodie, I... You know what? I don't think I'll take part in
> this sub-thread. If you want to talk about this, you'll do it without me.
Yes. That was obvious you were going to pull that one again.
B/
Brian Mailman
> Woohoo!!!!!!!!! It looks like all my hard work has paid off in spades :-)
Oh?
[krp]
>>> Sure it does. Just not on your server, apparently. Others are
>>> already posting to it, laughing at you.
>>
>>I thought that wasn't allowed???
>
> They did not state that laughing at you wasn't allowed in the RFD so
> you're out of luck.
They specified personal attacks - so YOU are out of luck,
Dante Soch
It was almost entirely done behind the scenes. Bret, Big-V, and myself
decided that Jayne should be the "front person" since everyone was
distracted by the rest of us. We worked hours each day letting Jayne take
the credit, but now that soc.men.moderated has been commissioned (just as I
said it would) we can step forward and take a bow.
Soc.men.moderated lives. Woohoo!
Daedalus
wrote:
>
>"Chairman Cow" <cowtse...@notbex.edu> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1f5a57cc3...@notbxpats.edu...
>> In article <ecqa9q$bjl$5...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>, dave
>> hillstrom says...
>>
>>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:14:51 -0700, Chairman Cow
>>> <cowtse...@notbex.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In article <11566227...@isc.org>, The Big-8 Management
>>> >Board says...
>>> >
>>> >> RESULT
>>> >> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>> >>
>>> >> The Last Call for Comments (LCC) on 18 Aug 2006 initiated a five-day
>>> >> period
>>> >> for final comments. Following this comment period, the Big-8
>>> >> Management
>>> >> Board has decided by a vote to create the moderated group
>>> >> soc.men.moderated.
>>> >>
>>> >> The vote was 4 in favor, 0 opposed, 2 abstain. 2 members did not
>>> >> vote.
>>> >>
>>> >> This group will be created on 30 Aug 2006.
>>> >
>>> >Let the par-tee begin!!!1!
>>>
>>> im assuming GA is the initial target?
>>
>> The initial (and on-going) target is anyone who submits their
>> poasts to the moderation team rather than poasting directly
>
>
>The HUGE EIGHT think they have the problem fixed!!!
>
>Say BIG GIANT HEAD - how is alt.dads-rights.moderated
>doing????????????????????/ HUH?? HUH BIG GIANT HEAD?
*giggle*
Jade
--
Too Dangerous for Easynews.
VROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!!!!
David Bostwick
>
>>"The Big-8 Management Board" <bo...@big-8.org> wrote in message
>>news:11566227...@isc.org...
>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>
>> PROPONENT:
>>
>> Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com>
>
>Congratulations, Jayne! Your hard work, dedication and perserverance paid
>off. ;-)
>
>Thanks, also to those who contributed to this project. Hopefully, this new
>newsgroup will allow for more meaningful and high quality discussions about
>men's issues to occur.
>
And perhaps make things a lot quieter around here.
Aratzio
transparently proposed:
Umm, Kenny Kakes, what do you call all most each and every one of your
posts? Even the ones where people take the time to patiently explain
that you are incorrect or unnecessarily being paranoid you respond
with some sort of vitriolic name calling in response.
--
Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?
Aratzio
<bobof...@127.0.0.7> transparently proposed:
>or maybe not...
I'm comfy.
Jayne Kulikauskas
> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:06:20 -0700, The Big-8 Management Board wrote:
>
>> RESULT
>> soc.men.moderated will be created
[...]
> Woohoo!!!!!!!!! It looks like all my hard work has paid off in spades :-)
LOL. Seriously, Dante, if you could publicize smm in any appropriate
mailing lists that you know of, that would be a big help. I hope to see
you and my other former co-proponents on smm too.
--
Jayne
krp
QUESTION FOR THE BIG GIANT HEAD and the BIG 8 BOARD
Please answer a question:
Let's begin with a hypothetical. Say that two of the 3 moderators were to
leave for ANY reason.. WHO gets to pick the replacements?
As we have seen the USERS get absolutely NO say in the matter. So WHO
exactly would choose the replacements? Jayne? You? The remaining moderator?
Of course I have asked this before to have it ignored as I am certain it
will AGAIN.
Tim Skirvin
> Let's begin with a hypothetical. Say that two of the 3 moderators were to
> leave for ANY reason.. WHO gets to pick the replacements?
*sigh*
From <tskirvin.20060827151313$4c...@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu>:
As described in the moderation policy (part of the document you're
responding to), the departing moderator chooses her replacement.
- Tim Skirvin (sk...@big-8.org)
Chair, Big-8 Management Board
--
http://www.big-8.org/ Big-8 Management Board
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage <FISH>< <*>
Phoebee Caulfield
Officer says...
> On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:55:56 -0500, in news.groups, Jill
> <theterria...@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
> >Not if you continue cross posting to soc.men.
>
> Things can get fun, quickly!
I think that news.groups will need to see in exquisite detail
and loving close-up what is about to happen in smm, and would
suggest that it be included in all cross-poast lits.
Sharon B
<foodNOTS...@comcast.net> wrote in
<O--dnZ7qc-nTjWzZ...@comcast.com>:
>
>
>----------
>In article <3b22f213n3guqo1oa...@4ax.com>, Sharon B
><sha...@lart.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 20:55:02 -0500, tski...@killfile.org (Tim
>> Skirvin) wrote in <tskirvin.20060827015504$5c...@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu>:
>>
>>>Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> RESULT
>>>>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>>
>>>> My thanks to the Board, to Tim for acting as our mentor, to our new
>>>> moderators and to all the people who offered support and suggestions.
>>>
>>> Speaking for myself, I'm glad that I could help. Good luck with
>>>your group, Jayne, and thank you for being an excellent and *patient*
>>>proponent.
>>>
>>> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
>>>intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
>>>that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
>>>
>>>> As I said earlier, I think that a proposal with so much drama and passion
>>>> needs a musical grand finale. The following words are sung to the tune of
>>>> Gilbert and Sullivan's "Poor Wandering One" from _Pirates of Penzance_.
>>>> You can hear the tune and read the real words here:
>>>> http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/pirates/web_op/pirates08.html
>>>
>>> *smile* I grew up with G&S playing in the background through most
>>>of my childhood. It's definitely an excellent choice to finish a proposal.
>>>
>>> Maybe we should make that policy.
>>
>> I think I'm gonna hurl if I see very much more of this public
>> slurping.
>
>Wassamatter Sharon?
>
>Your kook proclivities yielding too bitter a fruit fer ya?
Once again, I do NONE of the work and get ALL of the credit.
Daedalus
Skirvin) wrote:
>" krp" <web2...@verizon.net> writes:
>
>> Let's begin with a hypothetical. Say that two of the 3 moderators were to
>> leave for ANY reason.. WHO gets to pick the replacements?
>
> *sigh*
>
> From <tskirvin.20060827151313$4c...@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu>:
>
> As described in the moderation policy (part of the document you're
> responding to), the departing moderator chooses her replacement.
I thought you killfiled people who annoyed you.
Does that not include insane, ranting k00ks who annoy you?
Daedalus
<bobof...@127.0.0.7> wrote:
>On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:55:56 -0500, in news.groups, Jill
><theterria...@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:32:09 GMT, david.b...@chemistry.gatech.edu
>>(David Bostwick) wrote:
>>
>>Not if you continue cross posting to soc.men.
>
>Things can get fun, quickly!
And we could help the needy in the process. It's really important that
we give back to the community.
Crossposting for dollars, anyone?
Sharon B
<jf...@trier.de.invalid> wrote in
<dh42f2hgd6spdsgps...@4ax.com>:
>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:55:26 -0400, Sharon B <sha...@lart.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 20:55:02 -0500, tski...@killfile.org (Tim
>>Skirvin) wrote in <tskirvin.20060827015504$5c...@cairo.ks.uiuc.edu>:
>>
>>>Jayne Kulikauskas <jayne.ku...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> RESULT
>>>>> soc.men.moderated will be created
>>>
>>>> My thanks to the Board, to Tim for acting as our mentor, to our new
>>>> moderators and to all the people who offered support and suggestions.
>>>
>>> Speaking for myself, I'm glad that I could help. Good luck with
>>>your group, Jayne, and thank you for being an excellent and *patient*
>>>proponent.
>>>
>>> For those curious, I was one of the ABSTAINs. I don't necessarily
>>>intend to make abstention a common practice in the future, but I decided
>>>that it was *appropriate enough* for this particular proposal.
>>>
>>>> As I said earlier, I think that a proposal with so much drama and passion
>>>> needs a musical grand finale. The following words are sung to the tune of
>>>> Gilbert and Sullivan's "Poor Wandering One" from _Pirates of Penzance_.
>>>> You can hear the tune and read the real words here:
>>>> http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/pirates/web_op/pirates08.html
>>>
>>> *smile* I grew up with G&S playing in the background through most
>>>of my childhood. It's definitely an excellent choice to finish a proposal.
>>>
>>> Maybe we should make that policy.
>>
>>I think I'm gonna hurl if I see very much more of this public
>>slurping.
>
>I would find your discomfort quite entertaining.
Mais oui, m'sier.
Sharon B
wrote in <pan.2006.08.27....@nntp.sun-meatplow.local>:
>On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 22:55:26 -0400, Sharon B Has Frothed:
>I just did.
Then for BOB'S sake, don't read any more. It only gets worse.
<shudder>
Sharon B
wrote in <1156714099.4...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>:
>
>Sharon B wrote:
>> I think I'm gonna hurl if I see very much more of this public
>> slurping.
>
>I'm sure it coudn't happen to a nicer person. Enjoy your hurling,
>Sharon.
It's so nice to see you encouraging Jayne to continue slurping Tim.