RFD: rec.knives
dennis ellingsen
umoderated group rec.knives
Summary: Discussions relating to anything that goes cut.
Proposed by: Dennis Ellingsen <aug...@teleport.com>
Group-Mentor Richard H. Miller <ri...@bcm.tmc.edu>
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) on the subject of creating
an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup, rec.knives.
This message begins a discussion period considering the creation of
rec.knives. Discussion should take place in news.groups. All follow-up
posts should be made to news.groups.
This is NOT a call for votes. A Call For Votes (CFV) will be posted 21 to
30 days from the date of this posting and will be conducted by an
independent third party.
RATIONALE
=========
The current discussions on cutlery and knives are usually found in
rec.guns. Basically this is because there is no other group that lends
itself to this area of interest. Knife shows have come into their own and
compete with gun shows in attendance and interest. Currently there are
five monthly publications that deal solely with cutlery and knives.
Commercial knife making and custom knife making have reached a high degree
of interest these days and the customer base for these products is quite
large.
A newsgroup concerning cutlery would be of value to those who are learning
to make knives, those wanting to purchase knives, historical exchanges of
information, and general discussions about knives. In rec.guns there have
recently been questions and comments on custom made knives, knife
materials, legality of knives, recommended knives, software for knife
collections, military knives, knives for sale and information on a knife
auction. A newsgroup that is focused on cutlery will certainly draw
knowledgeable answers to these questions.
I know of one commercial cutlery manufacturer that is planning a Home Page
on the WWW and I anticipate many more to follow suit. There is currently
a discussion group on another privately held information system thus
giving credibility to this group being well used. The interest in cutlery
is a global interest and the Internet vehicle is a natural for rec.knives.
CHARTER
=======
The proposed unmoderated newsgroup rec.knives will be open to discussions
on all topics related to knives, cutlery or any device that goes cut. No
USENET groups are devoted exclusively to any aspect of cutlery at this
time. The scope of this group could encompass any and all of the
following:
- Custom made knives
- Techniques and materials used for making knives
- Knife design
- Art and the hand made knife
- Collecting knives
- Collecting tools that go cut
- Collecting razors
- Collector values of knives
- Knife history
- Cutlery manufacturing history
- Commercial knives
- Tool Knives
- Use of knives
- Recommended knives as tools
- Buying knives
- Knife books and magazines
- Knife Clubs around the world
- Laws concerning knives
- Knives used in the military
- Knives used in personal defense
- Swords
- Camping knives
- Hunting knives
- Knife & Cutlery Shows
- Announcements of new concepts and products in cutlery
- Discussions on pros and cons to various cutlery items
Individuals who make their living by selling cutlery or those employed in
the industry are welcome to participate. It is suggested that those so
employed should NOT post advertisements for their services.
A FAQ should be developed affected by the areas of interest in the group.
DISTRIBUTION:
Groups where the RFD and CFV announcements should take place are:
- rec.guns
- rec.hunting
- info.firearms
- rec.outdoors.fishing
- alt.rec.camping
- rec.sport.archery
- news.announce.newgroups
- news.groups
--
email to: aug...@teleport.com (dennis ellingsen)
email to: thep...@ix.netcom.com (Richard Hamilton)
R lindberg + E Winnie
dennis ellingsen <aug...@teleport.com> wrote:
> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> umoderated group rec.knives
>
>Summary: Discussions relating to anything that goes cut.
>Proposed by: Dennis Ellingsen <aug...@teleport.com>
>Group-Mentor Richard H. Miller <ri...@bcm.tmc.edu>
>
>This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) on the subject of creating
>an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup, rec.knives.
>
>=========
>
>The current discussions on cutlery and knives are usually found in
>rec.guns. Basically this is because there is no other group that lends
>itself to this area of interest.
rec.crafts.metalworking that you have never followed the many knife,
sword, etc discussions that go on there?
<SNIP>
>A newsgroup concerning cutlery would be of value to those who are learning
>to make knives, those wanting to purchase knives, historical exchanges of
>information, and general discussions about knives. In rec.guns there have
Sounds like of topic posts, what is wrong with rec.crafts.metalworking?
<SNIP>
>CHARTER
>=======
<SNIP>
This part looks good.
>
>Individuals who make their living by selling cutlery or those employed in
>the industry are welcome to participate. It is suggested that those so
>employed should NOT post advertisements for their services.
>
Sounds good to me
>Groups where the RFD and CFV announcements should take place are:
>- rec.guns
>- rec.hunting
>- info.firearms
>- rec.outdoors.fishing
>- alt.rec.camping
>- rec.sport.archery
>- news.announce.newgroups
>- news.groups
I get the feeling you are ignoring rec.crafts.metalworking. A lot of
discussion goes on there, is on topic, and the group is not over crowded.
I don't think you've proved your point.
Ralph
--
Ralph Lindberg N7BSN Ellen Winnie N7PYK
e-mail => drag...@scn.org (best address, read daily, forwards to find us)
rlin...@kpt.nuwc.navy.mil (last resort only)
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
(hopefully constructive :-) proposals for refinement.
In article <3vj4do$5...@rodan.UU.NET>
aug...@teleport.com (dennis ellingsen) writes:
>The current discussions on cutlery and knives are usually found in
>rec.guns. Basically this is because there is no other group that lends
>itself to this area of interest.
knife-related subjects have no real home on Usenet yet. However, you are
overlooking rec.hunting (discussion about all sorts of hunting-related
cutlery), rec.sports.fencing (has always had articles about historical
swordsmanship and fencing) and the two (?) SCA newsgroups, one of which
I think is located in the rec.* hierarchy. In all these group you might
find readers interested in the creation of a rec.knives newsgroup, as
well as in the *.outdoors.* newsgroup *(rec ?), so you might wish to
include them in the RFD or CFV.
>A newsgroup that is focused on cutlery will certainly draw
>knowledgeable answers to these questions.
and all sorts of edged weapons are also to be covered by the proposed group,
what about choosing a wider name, e.g. "rec.cutlery" ?
>giving credibility to this group being well used. The interest in cutlery
>is a global interest and the Internet vehicle is a natural for rec.knives.
have not given meaningful information about actual size of interest
and why it should be a Usenet group rather than a list.
And, second: the Internet isn't a "natural vehicle" for anything except
Internet related topics themselves. Avoid such meaningless empty phrases
in a RFD that wants to be taken seriously.
>DISTRIBUTION:
>
>Groups where the RFD and CFV announcements should take place are:
>- rec.guns
>- rec.hunting
>- info.firearms
>- rec.outdoors.fishing
>- alt.rec.camping
>- rec.sport.archery
>- news.announce.newgroups
>- news.groups
The choice seems quite okay and invalidates my previously
written proposal (except rec.sports.fencing).
Good luck and best regards,
Alexander Eichener c...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
Ellen Keyne Seebacher
>You seem too focussed on the narrow term "knife/knives". Since swords, daggers
>and all sorts of edged weapons are also to be covered by the proposed group,
>what about choosing a wider name, e.g. "rec.cutlery" ?
And earlier:
>While this statement is not 100 % correct, I agree with the proponent that
>knife-related subjects have no real home on Usenet yet. However, you are
>overlooking...
... rec.food.cooking, which is the first group I think of when I see the
word "cutlery".
--
Ellen Keyne Seebacher el...@midway.uchicago.edu
frank
>You seem too focussed on the narrow term "knife/knives". Since swords, daggers
>and all sorts of edged weapons are also to be covered by the proposed group,
>what about choosing a wider name, e.g. "rec.cutlery" ?
It seems to me that more folks would associate with the term knives
then cutlery. 4 National magazines use this in their title and the
combined subscription level is in the hundreds of thousands.
>I ask the usual question: "Why would a mailing list not suffice?". You
>have not given meaningful information about actual size of interest
>and why it should be a Usenet group rather than a list.
See above
Knives have come into their own in the last few years and this seems
to be a natural extension. I have subscribed to many news groups just
to see if any knife related topics ever came up. In many cases the
topic was off track and others grew weary of these conversations.
Knives have a huge following, this is a great idea.
kb...@ix.netcom.com (frank)
=^.^=
el...@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Ellen Keyne Seebacher) wrote:
_<C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
_
_>You seem too focussed on the narrow term "knife/knives". Since
swords, daggers
_>and all sorts of edged weapons are also to be covered by the
proposed group,
_>what about choosing a wider name, e.g. "rec.cutlery" ?
_
_And earlier:
_
_>While this statement is not 100 % correct, I agree with the
proponent that
_>knife-related subjects have no real home on Usenet yet. However, you
are
_>overlooking...
_
_.... rec.food.cooking, which is the first group I think of when I see
the
_word "cutlery".
_
I'm with Ellen. "Cutlery" makes me think of cooking knives only.
There's always "blades." But I still think "knives" is the clearest,
most straight-forward name.
Beverly Parks =^.^= bpa...@primenet.com
Bruce T. Brodnax
dennis ellingsen <aug...@teleport.com> wrote:
> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> umoderated group rec.knives
I approve! This group sounds like one I'll be reading regularly, once it
is created. Thanx for making the proposal...
Bruce Brodnax
dennis ellingsen
The question of what to call a newsgroup on "cut" was a difficult one. In
looking through my library of books the word knife came up over and over.
Pocket knives, fighting knives, kitchen knives, knifemakers and on and on.
The common ground was the word knife. Likewise, a Knife Show could sport
swords, corkscrews, tools, rapiers, daggers, and hat pins (is that a
surprise?) And in the same analogy what do you find at a Gun Show?
The world of "cut" seems very broad minded and tolerant of all aspects of
"edged tools". Therefore a common title was what was being aimed at.
More so was the concept of giving a description that would find "World
Wide" commonality. I should think that anywhere in the world and in
most language translations if someone were to want an edged tool, their
first line of "look" might be "knife" or "knives". Therefore for the ease
of finding and for commonality rec.knives.
-----
The search for related newsgroups was a busy one. Flat our missed
rec.crafts.metalworking. Pleeze to beat the drum in this group those that
know it. I guess this leads supports to the commonality of names.
-----
Also missed rec.sports.fencing.
Seems like some of the postings are a bit slow.
i be dennis
dennis ellingsen
>Why a second level newsgroup? Would not
>rec.tools.knives
>rec.weapons.knives
>be a better option? I favor the rec.tools.knives of those
>two options.
I hate good questions. This one evokes a book. If there was a group
rec.tools then this would have been easy (easier). Attempting to start a
group on "anything that goes cut" was a major undertaking in my life
anyway. The scratches in my head are only now beginning to heal (I
thought).
The term weapons is one that could be a subdirectory of anything including
knives. Rolling pins have often been used as a weapon in my house(the
cooking group will now want my hide). I would not want to brand knives as
weapons, as this in the history of the world is but a small role of the
edged tool. It may have major fascination today but historically not.
The idea of rec.tools ----- could create a dilution effect. Just for
starters it could lead to -- rec.tools; planes; pocket-knives; swords,
cork-screws; hat pins; sheath-knives; tractors; art; pencils;razors; and
on and on. That may be O.K. but......
For the last twenty years I have been very active in the formation of a
knife club and an annual "Knife Show". I started it; I watched it grow;
and in the last five years have assumed again the implementation of
orchestrating the event.. I bring this up only because even tho it is
called a Knife Show we encourage and promote any and all variations of
things that go "cut". Even in the diversity of these edged devices we
thrive and share and enjoy the commonality. With this thought process it
was felt that the rec.knives might actually be the best answer to this
question.
I guess I don't have an answer exactly, however I am exploring the
alternatives at this point. This was a good and interesting exercise.
Thank you.
i be dennis
James J. Boley
>>rec.guns. Basically this is because there is no other group that lends
>>itself to this area of interest.
There is no group solely dedicated to blades, though there is
often disussion in rec.crafts.metalworking about making them. One point
that was brought up on rcw before, was what about the non-metal aspects
of bladesmithing. They felt uncomfortable asking questions about
stabilization of wood, for instance.
>>A newsgroup that is focused on cutlery will certainly draw
>>knowledgeable answers to these questions.
I think cutlery would be an improper word. Knives doesn't
completely cover it either. I always use the term blades when referring
to anything that cuts or has a cutting edge on it.
I think that a newsgroup dedicated to bladesmithing would be
excellent. Though there are a couple of mailing lists, a newgroup would
probably offer more.
Stiletto
(Jamie Boley)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
stil...@iastate.edu stil...@cs.iastate.edu
URL: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~stiletto/homepage.html
Bladesmith. Check out my bladesmithing homepage too.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~stiletto/blade.html
Bowmaker. Ringmaker. Computer user. Tae Kwon Do.
All opinions are my own, and I will gladly share any of them with
anyone.
____________________________________________________________________
frank williams
IMO, rec.blades would be better to include things that
go cut. But I could care less. I'll vote yes for any knife
group anywhere.
The RFD should have also been posted to rec.food.cooking
as knife questions are a daily thing there.
I hope this group won't be flooded by the masses of
Cutco salesmen with AOL accounts.
Wesley Dane Scott
rec.tools.knives
rec.weapons.knives
be a better option? I favor the rec.tools.knives of those
two options.
--
wesley scott
wds...@tam2000.tamu.edu
wsc...@tam2000.tamu.edu [comp.robotics.research related]
Blau Zahl
I think of r.f.cooking too... Don't know about "blades" (It sounds
cool, will can people find it?). BTW, r.f.cooking has had discussion
of knives on it recently. One person in particular was looking for a
knife FAQ.
Als
________________________________________
In article <DCnBH...@midway.uchicago.edu>,
Ellen Keyne Seebacher <el...@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote:
><C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>>You seem too focussed on the narrow term "knife/knives". Since
swords, daggers >>and all sorts of edged weapons are also to be
covered by the proposed group, >>what about choosing a wider name,
e.g. "rec.cutlery" ?
>... rec.food.cooking, which is the first group I think of when I see the
>word "cutlery".
James J. Boley
Wesley Dane Scott <wsc...@tam2000.tamu.edu> wrote:
>Why a second level newsgroup? Would not
>rec.tools.knives
>rec.weapons.knives
>be a better option? I favor the rec.tools.knives of those
>two options.
>
These are both good suggestions for newsgroups, but they aren't
complete. Blades can be used as tools and as weapons. There are also
art knives. Where would they end up falling? I still like the
rec.knives or rec.blades. Something that is more general to ALL blades.
Stiletto
Les de Asis
>C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de wrote:
>
>
>>You seem too focussed on the narrow term "knife/knives". Since swords, daggers
>>and all sorts of edged weapons are also to be covered by the proposed group,
>>what about choosing a wider name, e.g. "rec.cutlery" ?
>
>
>then cutlery. 4 National magazines use this in their title and the
>combined subscription level is in the hundreds of thousands.
>
rec.knives would be much more meaningful to people looking for a standardized forum.
I understand that many of the other newgroups have some merit, but for the most
part, knives is a very general term that now covers a very broad subject.
>
>>I ask the usual question: "Why would a mailing list not suffice?". You
>>have not given meaningful information about actual size of interest
>>and why it should be a Usenet group rather than a list.
>
>See above
>
>
>Knives have come into their own in the last few years and this seems
>to be a natural extension. I have subscribed to many news groups just
>to see if any knife related topics ever came up. In many cases the
>topic was off track and others grew weary of these conversations.
>Knives have a huge following, this is a great idea.
Being an avid newcomer, I must say from my limited experience, that I would
find a generic newsgroup name much easier and less frustrating to find and access.
In my professional experience, knife folks are a VERY diverse and interesting group
of people and I look forward to the wonderful breadth of communication and exchange
of info and ideas that I had hoped this medium would present!
Thanks!
Les de Asis
Benchmade Knife Co., Inc.
>
Les de Asis
>aug...@teleport.com (dennis ellingsen) wrote:
>
>
>
The world of "cut" seems very broad minded and tolerant of all aspects of
>"edged tools". Therefore a common title was what was being aimed at.
>More so was the concept of giving a description that would find "World
>
>
Dennis,
I agree with you. Our industry is so broad with interests so varied, that I feel a
"KISS" approach will work for both ease of access and shared sense of community!
Les
Larry D. Burton
>Why a second level newsgroup? Would not
>rec.tools.knives
>rec.weapons.knives
>be a better option? I favor the rec.tools.knives of those
>two options.
Most people that have an interest in knives don't care if it is a tool
or a weapon. It is the craftsmanship involved in creating the knife
that draws their interest. To me rec.knives would be the starting
point. Should interest in the group get to the point that their is a
problem with it not being divided it could then be divided into third
level groups.
Personally I can see it dividing into rec.knives.bladesmiths and
rec.knives.collectors. Before it could ever do that it would need the
second level group to get the traffic up.
burt...@chattanooga.net
http://www.chattanooga.net/~burtonld/knife.html
Les de Asis
I agree with your thoughts. rec.knives is a great starting point and this simple
name is recognizable worldwide. As more and more knife folks access the net, I'm
sure that this group will become very active and naturally evolve.
I'm betting on it and am in the process of creating a homepage for Benchmade Knife
Co.
Are you the curator of the National Knife Museum's web page? It was one of the very
first sites I visited.
Take care.
Rgds,
Les
Robert A. Hayden
Not knowing this RFD was posted, I posted an RFD for alt.collecting.blades.
However, after reading the RFD, I feel there are some problems with it.
1) It creates a top-level hierarchy which probably it could more
properly be placed under one that already exists.
2) There appears to be an obvious bias against people that collect show
pieces, especially larger blades such as swords. As a person that
collects pieces for no purpose than to hang on the wall, there is no
forum for me to participate in and this one certainly seems to be filled
with enough other traffic to make discussion by heavy-duty collectors and
historians difficult
Perhaps it would be better to have a couple of groups:
rec.collecting.blades
rec.crafts.blades
The collecting group serves as a discussion and marketplace forum for
people that buy, trade, sell, and collect various blades.
The crafts group is for production and historical discussion.
The term "blades" is used as it more obviously covers all types of pointy
metal things without the obvious limitation that "knives" implies.
Collecting is a seperate animal and discussion of that nature will be
difficult in a single catch-all group.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: PGP Signed with TinSign 1.1
iQCVAwUBMCUMFDokqlyVGmCFAQHGzAP+PeeqLMbw+t17d3eK1wA/h2FD1ra8g6mJ
S14AwcMDRWYVzuTv/unfVY3l7LnR5peul5K6MIlpSJcmvukvGCGU0tIBgyTOQpUS
6PrGTugkgqqI3a4bElbgiFrF8eT9VK6k9jHyyNTuq2WbXq4y5a4FUaFvuwrCWeUy
SLCNsaHxxNE=
=t0JY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hay...@krypton.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Finger for PGP Public Key
\/ / -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-
\/ http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.0
GED/J d-- s:++>: a-- C++(++++) ULU++ P+! L++ E---- W+(-) N++++ K+++ w---
O- M+ V-- PS++>$ PE++>$ Y++ PGP++ t- 5+++ X++ R+++>$ tv+ b+ DI+++ D+++
G++++>$ e++ h r-- y++**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Larry D. Burton
>However, after reading the RFD, I feel there are some problems with it.
>1) It creates a top-level hierarchy which probably it could more
>properly be placed under one that already exists.
For the very reason that you state below I believe that a top-level
hierarchy should exist for this group. The Internet and, therefore,
newsgroups are opening up to the masses. Interests in all aspects of
knives and blades is a lot higher than most people would imagine. Most
of the collectors that I know, and I belong to two knife clubs, are
not only interested in the posession of a collectable knife but also
the history of the knife and the manufacturing methods used in
constructing it. I've met very few knife collectors that would throw
up their nose at any type of well constructed blade whether it is a
pen-knife, a sword or a chef's knife. As the group grows a top-level
hierachy would allow the group to grow underneath it into the
different groups it could possibly split into.
>2) There appears to be an obvious bias against people that collect show
>pieces, especially larger blades such as swords. As a person that
>collects pieces for no purpose than to hang on the wall, there is no
>forum for me to participate in and this one certainly seems to be filled
>with enough other traffic to make discussion by heavy-duty collectors and
>historians difficult
>Perhaps it would be better to have a couple of groups:
> rec.collecting.blades
> rec.crafts.blades
I've not seen this bias and I've attended numerous shows and been
around all types of collectors and bladesmiths. Yes, there are
numerous aspects to things that go cut. Right now there is no specific
newsgroup for things that go cut. I see no reason why we should start
this off by splintering a currently non-existant news into several
newsgroups under non-related second-level groups.
>The term "blades" is used as it more obviously covers all types of pointy
>metal things without the obvious limitation that "knives" implies.
I've no problem with the group starting out as "rec.blades" or
"rec.knives" either one denotes the same thing to me.
>Collecting is a seperate animal and discussion of that nature will be
>difficult in a single catch-all group.
It might be as the group matures but I don't think it will in the
beginning. I think the noise in the beginning will come from people
that aren't knife/blade afficionados but have a some type of cutting
instrument that they believe is worth a lot of money and are looking
for a free appraisal.
burt...@chattanooga.net
http://www.chattanooga.net/~burtonld/knife.html
William Lanides
Having been on the Internet for the past 6-7 years and having an interest
in knives for just as long, I was going to make a similar RFD in the near
future. Thankfully, Mr. Ellingsen saved me the trouble. :)
In my search to find a group with knife related topics, the only thing I
found was rec.guns. I have no interest in guns and yet as part of my
daily news-reading, I search rec.guns for the word knife or knives. A
group with the name "rec.knives" would fit in nicely and should be easy
to find for anyone interested in any aspect of knives.
I have not heard any better suggestions then "rec.knives". There are
"Knife" shows, most magazines on the subject have Knife or Knives in the
title with the exception of one (Blade). And most people generally refer
to the subject as knives, not blades.
Rec.blades (or any use of "blade") has the added problem of being
confused with Rollerblading. In-line skates are generally referred to as
blades and the sport as blading.
Needless to say, I fully support the idea of a rec.knives newsgroup and
feel the demand is definitely present and growing. I could clearly see
groups such as rec.knives.custom, rec.knives.fighting,
rec.knives.bladesmith, rec.knives.marketplace, etc.. etc.. if the demand
arouse. Rec.knives should be very sufficient for now.
Also I very much encourage commercial postings as long as advertisements
don't dominate the group. Commercial postings are often the most
informative and useful of any on a group. The community surrounding
making and collecting knives is a very friendly one and I don't
anticipate a problem with commercial postings.
Rec.knives is a groups which is, IMHO, long overdue.
Good luck.
Bill
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
made, and I have been convinced that my own idea of rec.cutlery may
not have been that good after all :-). Obviously, American use of
English employs the term "cutlery" more narrowly.
So, I agree with the proponent of rec.blades.
I think this name is better because it encompasses all kind of
edged tools and weapons, including larger ones (think of SCA etc.).
"Knives" seems a bit narrow, especially since the content charter of
the group is intended to be a large one.
In article <403965$3...@nitrogen.mankato.msus.edu>
hay...@krypton.mankato.msus.edu (Robert A. Hayden) writes:
>Perhaps it would be better to have a couple of groups:
> rec.collecting.blades
> rec.crafts.blades
(rec.blades.*something*)
b) I do not think it is time for a group split already. My idea
is that the traffic does not warrant a split, and that the two scopes
are connected to closely with each other to warrant a separation.
A further splitting up may take place in future, in due time, when
the need is being seen. It would be premature now.
>The term "blades" is used as it more obviously covers all types of pointy
>metal things without the obvious limitation that "knives" implies.
Regards, Alexander Eichener
c...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
CALVIN CHUE
dennis ellingsen <aug...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> umoderated group rec.knives
Excellent choice! A newgroup to discuss knives is just what is needed
for this field. I think it would be a good way to educate the Internet
public about this field. I don't remember if you included the discussion
of automatic opening knives, but if not, this is a field that deserves
discussion too.
Calvin
David Post
>CHARTER
>=======
Open the charter to sharpening edges.
I think the need for such a group has matured and I could live with either
rec.knives or rec.blades.
David Post po...@fc.hp.com
Frank Trzaska
>Being an avid newcomer, I must say from my limited experience, that I
would
>find a generic newsgroup name much easier and less frustrating to find
and access.
>
>In my professional experience, knife folks are a VERY diverse and
interesting group
>of people and I look forward to the wonderful breadth of communication
and exchange
>of info and ideas that I had hoped this medium would present!
>
>Thanks!
>
>Les de Asis
>Benchmade Knife Co., Inc.
>
>>
>
>
yours friends this is a group we need and can all benefit from. Don't
sweat the small stuff now. Let's get it done!!!
Frank Trzaska
>> rec.collecting.blades
>> rec.crafts.blades
>
>
>around all types of collectors and bladesmiths. Yes, there are
>numerous aspects to things that go cut. Right now there is no specific
>newsgroup for things that go cut. I see no reason why we should start
>this off by splintering a currently non-existant news into several
>newsgroups under non-related second-level groups.
>
pointy
>>metal things without the obvious limitation that "knives" implies.
>
>"rec.knives" either one denotes the same thing to me.
>
>>Collecting is a seperate animal and discussion of that nature will be
>>difficult in a single catch-all group.
>
>It might be as the group matures but I don't think it will in the
>beginning. I think the noise in the beginning will come from people
>that aren't knife/blade afficionados but have a some type of cutting
>instrument that they believe is worth a lot of money and are looking
>for a free appraisal.
>
>
>
>burt...@chattanooga.net
>http://www.chattanooga.net/~burtonld/knife.html
>
Couldn't have said it better myself if indeed half as good. I know
this is a request for discussion by why all the talk about what to call
it? rec.knives is the proposal, who cares if you like swords, kitchen
knives, or sharpened screwdrivers, they all fit!! Let's get all we know
to vote this thing in as a place to start then split to the next area.
I will vote for them all as I am a "knife buff" and am certainly
interested in anything that goes cut, slash, stab or stick. As the
great Statesman said: Let's all hang together for separtely we shall
all hang. Tough it out guy's and we all win
kb...@ix.netcom.com (frank)
R Lindberg + E Winnie
WMcquiggan <wmcqu...@aol.com> wrote:
>Yes to rec.knives. I think it time to move knives out of the firearms
>group
No one has yet answered my question as to what's wrong with using
rec.crafts.metalworking? That newsgroup currently gets lots of posts on
this subject and it's on topic (very few knives are not made ot metal).
The orginator of the RFD showed his lack of research in this area by not
even posting his RFD to that newsgroup (I did, which brings another
question, why didn't the Group Mentors fail on this one).
I'm also not convinced that knives need an entire sub-catagory, whats
wrong with rec.crafts.knives?
Sorry guys, you will have to work harder then that to convince people.
Ralph (amased to find himself against a new newsgroup)
--
Ralph Lindberg N7BSN Ellen Winnie N7PYK
e-mail => drag...@scn.org (best address, read daily, forwards to find us)
rlin...@kpt.nuwc.navy.mil (last resort only)
frank williams
>From: po...@fc.hp.com (David Post)
>Subject: Re: RFD: rec.knives
>Date: 10 Aug 1995 04:49:36 GMT
>I think the need for such a group has matured and I could live with either
>rec.knives or rec.blades.
>David Post po...@fc.hp.com
I agree, it's needed. And I also could live with either rec.knives or
rec.blades. Knife folks are friendly and any and all things with an
edge would be welcome. Lets skip a 2nd RFD and go for CFV.
WMcquiggan
group
Frank Trzaska
Lindberg + E Winnie) writes:
>
No one has yet answered my question as to what's wrong with using
>rec.crafts.metalworking? That newsgroup currently gets lots of posts
on
>this subject and it's on topic (very few knives are not made ot
metal).
Very few indeed but not all are metal. Also why rule out the other 90%
that are not makers? This new group will handle ALL things that cut,
stab or slash etc. not just limit ourselves to hand mades.
>
> I'm also not convinced that knives need an entire sub-catagory,
whats
>wrong with rec.crafts.knives?
>
What's wrong with finishing what we started? Then we can sub-divide and
build an empire to take over the internet!! Just kidding, but why would
you want to limit yourself?
> Sorry guys, you will have to work harder then that to convince
people.
>
I'm running as fast as I can! Let's just do it!
=^.^=
kb...@ix.netcom.com (Frank Trzaska ) wrote:
_In <40docp$o...@news.telebyte.com> rlin...@kendaco.telebyte.com (R
_Lindberg + E Winnie) writes:
_>
_No one has yet answered my question as to what's wrong with using
_>rec.crafts.metalworking? That newsgroup currently gets lots of posts
_on
_>this subject and it's on topic (very few knives are not made ot
_metal).
_
_ Very few indeed but not all are metal. Also why rule out the other
90%
_that are not makers? This new group will handle ALL things that cut,
_stab or slash etc. not just limit ourselves to hand mades.
=============
If the topic of knives has become large enough and frequent enough to
warrant separating it from the firearms group, why would you want to
drag all that traffic into metalworking? We'd only be going through
this again six months down the line...
If it needs a separate group, it needs a separate group. As for where
in the hierarchy--rec.knives or rec.crafts.knives--I don't
particularly care. However, though *making* knives may be a craft,
collecting and using wouldn't fall into that category.
rec.knives ... Just do it!
Beverly Parks =^.^= bpa...@primenet.com
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
bpa...@primenet.com (=^.^=) writes:
>If it needs a separate group, it needs a separate group. As for where
>in the hierarchy--rec.knives or rec.crafts.knives--I don't
of edged weaponry/tools which are not knives.
Alexander Eichener c...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
=^.^=
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de wrote:
_In article <40gbaa$s...@nnrp2.primenet.com>
_bpa...@primenet.com (=^.^=) writes:
_
_>If it needs a separate group, it needs a separate group. As for
where
_>in the hierarchy--rec.knives or rec.crafts.knives--I don't
_
_Why not rec.blades ? That is wider and encompasses the _many_ kinds
_of edged weaponry/tools which are not knives.
_
_Alexander Eichener c...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
============
I said in that same post (which you quoted only a portion of) that it
didn't really matter to me--rec.blades or rec.knives. I agree with
the person who said that rec.blades could be confused with
rollerblading. Rec.knives is clearer.
Okay, how about rec.cutting-edge.
:)
Beverly Parks =^.^= bpa...@primenet.com
dennis ellingsen
> No one has yet answered my question as to what's wrong with using
>this subject and it's on topic (very few knives are not made ot metal).
>The orginator of the RFD showed his lack of research in this area by not
>even posting his RFD to that newsgroup (I did, which brings another
>question, why didn't the Group Mentors fail on this one).
> I'm also not convinced that knives need an entire sub-catagory, whats
>wrong with rec.crafts.knives?
> Sorry guys, you will have to work harder then that to convince people.
> Ralph (amased to find himself against a new newsgroup)
>--
With your suggestion of placing the RFD in rec.crafts.metalworking I
attempted to post the RFD to this group. You had already posted this and
I felt had I done it again the word spamming might be used. Between my
brother and me we know everything in the world. To not be savy that
rec.crafts.metalworking existed was something my brother knew and he
certainly will get a piece of my mind when I see him.
At this time there have been numerous responses as to why the rec.crafts
metalworking might not be the right answer. If these can't be recognized
then we must fall back on, we can't pleeze em all but it was sure fun
trying. BTW I have several obsidian knives in my collection. The makers
are known as flint knappers.
Please review several of my responses as to the reasoning of why the
rec.knives was selected. It certainly is the term that has world wide
recognition not only in Germany but also Japan and lots of countries in
betwixt.
hope this helps
i be dennis
John D. Brennan IV
Yes to rec.knives, although maybe rec.cutlery might me more
appropriate and include all cutting blades (swords, axes, knives,
razors, etc.)?
John Y. Liu
specialty magazines, clubs, conventions, books, etc., then I think the
subject likely has enough interest to support a Usenet group. "Knives"
fits this bill -- there are a number of magazines on the subject, and clubs,
conventions, many books, etc.
As to whether "knives" is already included in other Usenet groups, I
can't say except to comment that I wouldn't normally think of
"metalworking" as including the knife hobby. Most knife
users, collectors, and hobbyists don't make their own knives, after all.
Nor do I think of knife-collecting, using, etc as being a "craft".
As to whether the group is called "knives" or "blades", it doesn't seem
too important. How many "axe" or "razor" or "saw" devotees are out
there, anyway? (Oops, I guess if there are any they might be bad people
to offend. Err, I was just kidding, guys . . . )
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
John.D.B...@dartmouth.edu (John D. Brennan IV) writes:
> Yes to rec.knives, although maybe rec.cutlery might me more
>appropriate and include all cutting blades (swords, axes, knives,
>razors, etc.)?
to have a narrower understanding of the term. I think both rec.cutlery
or - alternatively - rec.blades are wider and therefore preferable
to rec.knives. The "rollerblade" argument I cannot take serious,
sorry.
Regards, Alexander Eichener
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
joh...@earthlink.net (John Y. Liu) writes:
>As to whether the group is called "knives" or "blades", it doesn't seem
>too important. How many "axe" or "razor" or "saw" devotees are out
>there, anyway?
wider term (encompassing all kind of edged weaponry) might be preferable.
Neither a sword nor a dagger is a knife.
Regards, Alexander Eichener c...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
Kim A Taylor
@mars.earthlink.net> <173FAB...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>
Distribution:
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de wrote:
There's two email lists (iaido-l and nihonto) out there full of folks who
would support the group, but I think on the whole they'd find rec.blades
faster than rec.knives, being Japanese long-sharp-pointy-things fans.
Some of my blades are made of wood.
--
============================================================================
Kim Taylor
kata...@uoguelph.ca
alt email kta...@aps.uoguelph.ca
Dept. Animal Science Join iai...@uoguelph.ca
U. of Guelph, Guelph Ontario Send to: LIST...@UOGUELPH.CA
Canada N1G 2W1 Command: SUBSCRIBE IAIDO-L yourname
============================================================================
Redbeard
Frank Trzaska <kb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>>Being an avid newcomer, I must say from my limited experience, that I
>would
>>find a generic newsgroup name much easier and less frustrating to find
>and access.
>
maker here in Virginia and think the idea is long overdue. Keep the
group name rec.knives - this would make it easy to find and not get
confused with any other sport/hobbie.
Thanks,
Bob
--
Bob Schmidt | "It takes money to make money because you have to
redb...@virginia.edu | copy the design EXACTLY"
University of Virginia| "What's another word for thesaurus?"
ITC-USD | Steven Wright
Mike Buckley
A new group seems appropriate, but I dislike the idea of creating a
new top level group.
Unfortunately, rec.guns is there for historic reasons, as is a group
like rec.climbing, but the current norm is broad categories like
rec.arts. or rec.sport. It seems obvious to me that knife (or other
cutlery) discussion belongs in a lower level group (or groups).
Suggestions? I'd say rec.arts.knives, or rec.crafts.knives are poor,
but better, choices.
There is no great need for all knife discussion to take place under
one branch of the hierarchy. Tree structures never fit broad
categories well. Consider rec.guns vs. talk.politics.guns.
Perhaps you might consider a new top level rec structure:
e.g. rec.weapons.knives. Then you could throw in guns, swords, tanks,
and anything else that suits your fancy. For those who find the craft
or artistry central to their knife enjoyment, I'd suggest going over
to rec.arts.knives or rec.crafts.knives.
I'd like to avoid having rec.staves, and rec.hammers showing up two
years down the line. The heirarchy is useful.
Personally, I don't care if the group name is "knives" or "blades".
Blades seems slightly more inclusive.
--
-- Mike Buckley
R Lindberg + E Winnie
Mike Buckley <mabu...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
>Perhaps you might consider a new top level rec structure:
>e.g. rec.weapons.knives. Then you could throw in guns, swords, tanks,
>and anything else that suits your fancy. For those who find the craft
>or artistry central to their knife enjoyment, I'd suggest going over
>to rec.arts.knives or rec.crafts.knives.
rec.weapons.knives would be the best, but either of the other two would
work also.
I'd vote no on the current name alone, but moving it down one level, and
creating a level for other items of a similar type I could really go for.
BTW I am surprized the RFD made it past the Group Name Mentors with the
name rec.knives, they didn't like rec.camping, wanting rec.outdoor.camping
instead.
Karl Barndt
subject of interest under rec.crafts.metalworking, rec.arts.knives, or
rec.crafts.knives. And to me, rec.blades suggests rollerblading. Putting
under something like rec.collecting.knives would ignore all the
knifemakers on the net. If we must compromise on the name to accommodate
fans of other edged implements, then I say we call it rec.cutlery, tho I
thinks it's a poor compromise.
Frank Trzaska
Lindberg + E Winnie) writes:
>
>In article <DDBIq...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>,
>Mike Buckley <mabu...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>
>>Perhaps you might consider a new top level rec structure:
>>e.g. rec.weapons.knives. Then you could throw in guns, swords,
tanks,
>>and anything else that suits your fancy. For those who find the
craft
>>or artistry central to their knife enjoyment, I'd suggest going over
>>to rec.arts.knives or rec.crafts.knives.
> This I like, it removes my biggest objection to this RFD. I think
the
>rec.weapons.knives would be the best, but either of the other two
would
>work also.
> I'd vote no on the current name alone, but moving it down one level,
and
>creating a level for other items of a similar type I could really go
for.
> BTW I am surprized the RFD made it past the Group Name Mentors with
the
>name rec.knives, they didn't like rec.camping, wanting
rec.outdoor.camping
>instead.
>
>
>
is the U.S. Congress. There's nothing more basic then rec.knives. Who
among you wouldn't know what that group is about ? Damn the torpedos,
Full speed ahead !! rec.knives.
dennis ellingsen
In the last week I took a few days off and behaved as a tourist. I
couldn't help but notice that there was a sign on one of the stores that
read "Blades not allowed". My curiosity was high due to the discussions
on this RFD and I inquired of the owner the meaning of the sign. The
reply suggested I was very out of touch with the latest craze. "Roller
blades" sezs the owner, like I was from a different planet. With that I
was told the damage created and was told that the owner never had anyone
ask what the sign meant before me. I reinforced my ignorance factor by
asking what a Pog was.
I suggest that "Blade" has taken on different meanings these days.
In trying to understand the "blade" reference, I know what the term "gay
blade" is and that blades are parts of knives but can't quite comprehend
what the part knife is of a blade. Are the semantics giving way to
purpose?
i be dennis
Richard E. Byer
>>Perhaps you might consider a new top level rec structure:
>>e.g. rec.weapons.knives. Then you could throw in guns, swords, tanks,
>>and anything else that suits your fancy. For those who find the craft
>>or artistry central to their knife enjoyment, I'd suggest going over
>>to rec.arts.knives or rec.crafts.knives.
> This I like, it removes my biggest objection to this RFD. I think the
>rec.weapons.knives would be the best, but either of the other two would
>work also.
The problem I have with this hierarchy is that many knives are not
weapons. rec.weapons.knives would exclude hunting knives, for example.
Knife collectors often collect many different types of knives.
--
Rick Byer <rb...@netcom.com>
Larry D. Burton
>The only other group that debates trivial issues like this name thing
>is the U.S. Congress. There's nothing more basic then rec.knives. Who
>among you wouldn't know what that group is about ? Damn the torpedos,
>Full speed ahead !! rec.knives.
And people wonder why the ALT groups exist. I was talking to my ISP
the other day about this and he wanted to know if I wanted him to go
ahead and make the group under the ALT hierarchy.
People, I don't want to discuss what to call a newsgroup. I want to
discuss sharp objects that are used to cut things. Why do we have to
beat this thing to death?
Regards,
Larry
====
burt...@chattanooga.net
http://www.chattanooga.net/~burtonld/knife.html
James J. Boley
I agree that most knife collectors would not look under
rec.crafts.metalworking, though I disagree somewhat with the
rec.arts.knives and rec.crafts.knives. I think people would look for
those if they were collectors just because knives is part of the name.
But in my opinion, those are still bad choices. Rec.blades may suggest
rollerblading to some people, but it still is the most encompassing.
Rec.knives would be the best choice, in my opinion. If traffic on the
newsgroup on the subject of collecting got incredibly busy, a new group
could always be created, something like rec.knives.collecting.
Rec.cutlery would be a confusing to some, in my area, cutlery refers to
the knives you use in the kitchen.
Stiletto
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
stil...@iastate.edu stil...@cs.iastate.edu
URL: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~stiletto/homepage.html
Bladesmith. Check out my bladesmithing homepage too.
http://www.public.iastate.edu/~stiletto/blade.html
Bowmaker. Ringmaker. Computer user. Tae Kwon Do.
All opinions are my own, and I will gladly share any of them with
anyone.
____________________________________________________________________
Les de Asis
Bravo! This group is about things that go cut. That's real basic and simple. We
named our company Benchmade KNIFE Company. We don't think that the word knife
limits us at all within our industry.
It's real simple for people in their sincere intentions to make things better to
often make them over complicated. Fortunately for me...I'm a real simple kind of
guy! <G>
Let's at least get this thing started...I'm sure that our particpants have more
interesting things to discuss about this wonderful subject than what to call it,
what to limit it to, what to committee it to death for...
In that spirit...Let's cut to the chase..
Let's at least share some fun! Get the point...
We're talking about some cutting edge stuff here.
Let's just do it!
Thanks!
Les
Conrad Drake
mabu...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca (Mike Buckley) wrote:
>
>A new group seems appropriate, but I dislike the idea of creating a
>new top level group.
>There is no great need for all knife discussion to take place under
>one branch of the hierarchy. Tree structures never fit broad
>categories well. Consider rec.guns vs. talk.politics.guns.
Ack! As a rec.guns & t.p.g lurker rec.guns _is_ rec.guns precisely to avoid
splintering. It is about (mainly) the _objects_, their history, use,
crafting and maintainence. The moderator does an extremely good job of keep
the politics (except where it, as regulation, directly affects the
possesion or use of firearms). It is one of the best mannered newsgroups
I've read.
t.p.g is purely about the politics of the means of gaining or maintaining
power. It is also unmoderated (many failed rec.gun posts end up there). It is
an uncontrolled flame fest.
>Perhaps you might consider a new top level rec structure:
>e.g. rec.weapons.knives. Then you could throw in guns, swords, tanks,
>and anything else that suits your fancy.
With respect, a rec.weapons.* heirarchy has to be the least clearly
thought out suggestion I've heard in quite some time. The political (& media)
implications alone rule it out. Never mind that it would _duplicate_ the
services of a whole pile of existing newsgroups: rec.aviation.military,
soc.history.*, sci.military.*, rec.guns etc, etc.
>I'd like to avoid having rec.staves, and rec.hammers showing up two
>years down the line. The heirarchy is useful.
But should it be all encompassing? It doesn't even pretend to be "scientific"
now. (Ah, objects.machinery.motorcycles.* perhaps?!) It is more "flavourful".
And rec.knives (as the charter notes) is intended to be all-encompassing, in
the fashion of rec.guns.
Further, if hammers achieve the same level of discussion as guns or knives
(both on and off the net) then rec.hammers is a natural and entirely
appropriate name. Knives are general - unlike, for example, sextants which
are primarily a nautical object. (And hence, are usually discussed only in
rec.boats). Contrapositively, discussions in rec.boats on the selection of
smallarms for boat security is redirected to rec.guns. All quite naturally.
>Personally, I don't care if the group name is "knives" or "blades".
>Blades seems slightly more inclusive.
Perhaps, but this semantic quibble would not stop me voting for rec.knives.
Yours,
Conrad Drake
--
"For every problem there is a solution that is neat, simple and wrong."
Email: con...@jtec.com.au
Snail: Jtec Perth R&D Centre, Locked Bag No.6, West Perth 6872, Australia.
Numb's:(ph)+61 9 262 2100 (fx)+61 9 321 5216 (dod) 0604 (sohc)
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
con...@jtec.com.au (Conrad Drake) writes:
>>Personally, I don't care if the group name is "knives" or "blades".
>>Blades seems slightly more inclusive.
>
>Perhaps, but this semantic quibble would not stop me voting for rec.knives.
name, _before_ a CFV will make up its mind about which name should
best be proposed for a CFV.
Regards, Alexander Eichener
c...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
Frank Trzaska
This news group is busy.
The lines are a buzz.
It’s a shame that some heads,
are all full of fuzz.
The people are talking
all adding two pence.
Too bad their lacking,
some good common sense.
The name is “rec.knives”
and what’s wrong with that.
It’s the hand we were dealt
I think I’ll stand pat.
Yes, some folks are fighting
and acting like apes.
Could it be their lonely,
or is it just sour grapes ?
As I stated before
“rec.knives” is the one.
Let’s “cut” all this chatter
and get to the FUN !
Robert A. Hayden
After readign all the comments over and over, the only thing that has
consistently been put forth is:
1) the group is a good idea
2) nobody cares whether it's blades or knives
3) knives is too limiting a name
Therefore, I'd recommend that the proposed group be called rec.blades
instead of rec.knives. That would fully cover knives, swords, axes,
spears, and whatever else is a pokey sharp thing.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: PGP Signed with TinSign 1.1
iQCVAwUBMDKhVzokqlyVGmCFAQEWnAP/WBODqZDMhz2dxphrZgP6/U6Ltfl76m06
KkQYlCXwaPqIm+/86Q7dAjsjGtSaFLR2NW9q7GEFtTEAB6EsfaNjtxlNekhi3COk
ceIGWC3Vew6VEQ4yzqrhti5QQeg6WrrJmux13k/E/PE/IWZzlwhlDBKags7sOHoj
DLVKZsfB8Ik=
=Lu4L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hay...@krypton.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Finger for PGP Public Key
\/ / -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=-
\/ http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GED/J d-- s:++>: a-- C++(++++) ULU++ P+ L++ E---- W+(-) N++++ o+ K+++ w---
O- M+ V-- PS++>$ PE++>$ Y++ PGP++ t- 5+++ X++ R+++>$ tv+ b+ DI+++ D+++
G+++++ e++ h r-- y++**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
=^.^=
But some people don't think it should have its own top level, and
suggest rec.weapons.knives (but not all knives are weapons);
rec.collecting.knives (but not all knife enthusiasts are collectors);
rec.metalworking.knives (but not all enthusaists are makers);
rec.crafts.knives; etc.
Is there a rec.hobbies category? How about rec.hobbies.knives.
It seems that all the subcategories previously mentioned could easily
be considered a hobby (collecting, crafting, using).
Okay, I know some people make knives for a living...that's not
technically a hobby. So I haven't thought of everything...
Back to the drawing board.
Beverly Parks =^.^= bpa...@primenet.com
B Wills Esq
>Bravo! This group is about things that go cut. That's real basic and simple. We
>named our company Benchmade KNIFE Company. We don't think that the word knife
>limits us at all within our industry.
>Let's just do it!
If Les is for it, I'm for it.
rec.knives gets my vote. Maybe the spear, axe and Garden Weasel (TM)
people won't feel too uncomfortable with this name.
Benson
---
Benson Wills, north central NC, USA.
Stogies: Breakfast of Champions.
Tom Schneider ~
knives!
Les de Asis
Thanks for the support for rec.knives! Caught your signature: Stogies: Breakfast of
Champions. I got a box of Romeo Y Julieta, No. 4 Cabinet Seleccion (Cubano) in
Orlando...Wheeww, what a way to start the day!
Wayne Goddard
>>Blades seems slightly more inclusive.
>
>Perhaps, but this semantic quibble would not stop me voting for
rec.knives.
>
>Conrad Drake
>
>--
> "For every problem there is a solution that is neat, simple and
wrong."
>Email: con...@jtec.com.au
>Snail: Jtec Perth R&D Centre, Locked Bag No.6, West Perth 6872,
Australia.
>Numb's:(ph)+61 9 262 2100 (fx)+61 9 321 5216 (dod) 0604 (sohc)
Ilike the proposal as it stands. The name Knives is adequate and most
interested parties would relate to it. Like most everything in life
the new newsgroup will go the way that the users take it. The knife
has been made in more places, in more forms and for a longer period of
time than any other tool. The highest percentage of knives are using
or collecting knives, not weapons. Weapons, including swords, is a
small part of what the modern knife area of interest includes. Let's
get together on "Knives", and have some fun changing ideas.
Wayne Goddard 73454,22...@conpuserve.com
Barry Trindle
>small part of what the modern knife area of interest includes. Let's
>get together on "Knives", and have some fun changing ideas.
>
>Wayne Goddard 73454,22...@conpuserve.com
>
>
the right word for me. Blades are knife parts. Or razor parts. Or propeller
parts. Or lawn parts. Gay blades I will leave to others.
Knives as weapons? Not a very good historical record for them, the majority
of bayonet wounds reported in the civil war were "self inflicted while
preparing food".
A knife is a tool, a work of art, a friend, a companion. If you must use it
as a weapon, don't bother me with it, carry someone else's knife to your
gunfight.
Barry
Richard A Schultz
status to date (i.e., .knives, or .blades, or rec.benchmade.folders - just
kidding)?
B Wills Esq
hasn't even been FORMED yet, the rec.knives newsgroup promises to be
FANTASTIC!!!!!
How long before the voting?
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
aug...@teleport.com (dennis ellingsen) writes:
>Voting should start right at September 01, 1995. The vote taker has bee n
>assigned. Details on voting will be presented at that time.
Fine. There seems to be overwhelming support for the proposal as such.
What about the name ? People will vote "yes" for either name, so it's
just a question which would be best fitting.
Alexander Eichener
dennis ellingsen
>With the likes of deAsis, Goddard, and Trindle here, and the group
>hasn't even been FORMED yet, the rec.knives newsgroup promises to be
>FANTASTIC!!!!!
>How long before the voting?
Voting should start right at September 01, 1995. The vote taker has been
assigned. Details on voting will be presented at that time.
i be dennis
dennis ellingsen
>>Voting should start right at September 01, 1995. The vote taker has been
>>assigned. Details on voting will be presented at that time.
>
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de wrote:
>Fine. There seems to be overwhelming support for the proposal as such.
>What about the name ? People will vote "yes" for either name, so it's
>just a question which would be best fitting.
>
>Alexander Eichener
rec.knives
i be dennis
C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
rj...@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (Redbeard) writes:
>I think the people that vote should decide. Give us the option of
>rec.knives or rec.blades and let us cast our votes (I would go with
>rec.knives by the way ;-)
If this is technically feasible (and yes, I think it is - much more
varied choices have been cast into a vote by the UVV), then I
daresay this proposal is the best and most democratic solution.
Regards, ALexander Eichener
c...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de
dennis ellingsen
> <C...@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
>>Fine. There seems to be overwhelming support for the proposal as such.
>>What about the name ? People will vote "yes" for either name, so it's
>>just a question which would be best fitting.
>>
>>Alexander Eichener
rj...@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (Redbeard) wrote:
>I think the people that vote should decide. Give us the option of
>rec.knives or rec.blades and let us cast our votes (I would go with
>rec.knives by the way ;-)
>Just my $.02,
>Bob
In reply to the above:
---Fine. There seems to be overwhelming support for the proposal as such.
-- I think the people that vote should decide.
The people have decided by way of this RFD and it was with this input that
the final draft of the CFV was drawn. As we danced all around the
mulberry bush we all seemed to be saying that the purpose and reason for
being seems to over ride the "what's in a name concept".
i be dennis
Greg Neely
second the idea.
Greg Neely
Houston
Jason Mcmunn
> >With the likes of deAsis, Goddard, and Trindle here, and the group
> >hasn't even been FORMED yet, the rec.knives newsgroup promises to be
> >FANTASTIC!!!!!
> >How long before the voting?
> Voting should start right at September 01, 1995. The vote taker has been
> assigned. Details on voting will be presented at that time.
> i be dennis
> >---
> >Benson Wills, north central NC, USA.
> > Stogies: Breakfast of Champions.
I shall inform Scott Sawby and Steve Mullin, both guild members, my
neighbors and lets get it going.
Richard A Schultz
<7527...@CompuServe.COM> wrote:
The only questions that I have are
1) What is the next step, and
2) When can we get this newsgroup started?
--
-- Rick Schultz --
rsch...@beach.net
Les de Asis
The call for vote is article 15866 according to Wayne Goddard's post in CI$. Look
for the CFV:rec.knives posted earlier on in this group. Quote the document, follow
the instructions and vote YES!!!
Thanks,
Les
Ellen Keyne Seebacher
>The only questions that I have are
>1) What is the next step...
I'll tell you what the next step *isn't*: sending form letters (as
another proponent has done) to everyone who's ever posted in a vaguely
related thread in news.groups.
I feel a lot more inclined to vote against the group now than I did
before receiving the form letter.
--
Ellen Keyne Seebacher ne...@uchinews.uchicago.edu
Russ Allbery
> el...@midway.uchicago.edu wrote:
>> I'll tell you what the next step *isn't*: sending form letters (as
>> another proponent has done) to everyone who's ever posted in a vaguely
>> related thread in news.groups.
>> I feel a lot more inclined to vote against the group now than I did
>> before receiving the form letter.
> 1) If one does not send form letters to related (interested) groups, then
> how is one to get the message out that a new group is forming - telephone
> calls?
The key word in that sentence is *groups*. As in, you post. You don't send
e-mail (except possibly to mailing lists). You *never* send mass e-mail to
individuals. Period. That's a quick way to get a mass no vote against your
group.
Mass e-mailings (unlike mass postal mailings) are something that are not at
all common. Most Usenet readers like to keep it that way by reporting any
and all mass e-mailings to the person's service provider, who will usually
take action.
> 2) The idea here is to cast a vote for whether or not a certain newsgroup
> sounds like a good idea. Why would you want to cast your vote on the issue
> of who sent a form letter to who?
The only effective check against proponents who intentionally violate the
rules is to vote against their group. While I can't say I'd advocate doing
that (with one possible exception), I'm not at all sorry to see it happen
because it makes people think twice about what they're doing.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@cs.stanford.edu) http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~rra/
Richard A Schultz
> Richard A Schultz <rsch...@beach.net> wrote:
>
> >The only questions that I have are
> >1) What is the next step...
>
> I'll tell you what the next step *isn't*: sending form letters (as
> another proponent has done) to everyone who's ever posted in a vaguely
> related thread in news.groups.
>
> I feel a lot more inclined to vote against the group now than I did
> before receiving the form letter.
>
> --
> Ellen Keyne Seebacher ne...@uchinews.uchicago.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen Keyne Seebacher (ne...@uchinews.uchicago.edu) wrote:
> I feel a lot more inclined to vote against the group now than I did
> before receiving the form letter.
Ellen Ellen Ellen, my my ,my,
Two questions for you ---
1) If one does not send form letters to related (interested) groups, then
how is one to get the message out that a new group is forming - telephone
calls?
2) The idea here is to cast a vote for whether or not a certain newsgroup
sounds like a good idea. Why would you want to cast your vote on the issue
of who sent a form letter to who?
Please cast your vote on the merit of whether or not you believe that
there should be a newsgroup relating to the cutlery industry, and not
because you are upset that you got a form letter asking you to vote.
Can't we all just get along - Rodney King
--
Rick Schultz
mis...@beach.net
Les de Asis
I'm new to the net and don't want to be guilty of improper netiquette. I think I
was reprimanded by someone for something I did reqarding posting. I erased the
email msg by mistake! Unfortunately, I'm a bit of a bonehead and didn't understand
the reason for the reprimand. I would appreciate a repost from the person who sent
it so I can learn to avoid this situation.
I do understand that someone with your experience can often loose patience with us
beginners, but what the heck, we all have to learn.
Unfortunately, I have a problem with you threatened vote against our newgroup
because some of us aren't familiar with your rules. In our world, knife people are
some of the most friendly people you'd meet and many (thank goodness) still have a
fundamental understanding of courtesy and manners. I don't think that it is
appropriate for our newgroup to suffer because some of us are ignorant of the
usenet's culture. In many ways that would be similar to banning you from skiing
because we didn't like the fact that you fell off the chair lift your first few
times. Give us a break and don't close the slopes.
The net is a wonderful place and I don't want to contribute to its becoming negative
but I think that sometimes a lighter hand will go much further than an undeserved
insult. This is not to say that any of us should mistake kindness for weakness, but
in this case, it would certainly be appreciated.
I might be all wrong about this, but so what, I've been wrong before! (VBG)
I look to hear from you with suggestions for educating our new arrivals. There will
be many! Thanks.
Les de Asis
more fully explain this type of indiscretion.
That way, we can also help patrol our group. Looking forward to seeing our
newsgroup available for our exploration and enjoyment! Not to mention education and
the exchange of ideas and thoughts on things that go cut.
Les de Asis
Jon Bell
>Ellen Keyne Seebacher (ne...@uchinews.uchicago.edu) wrote:
>
>> I feel a lot more inclined to vote against the group now than I did
>> before receiving the form letter.
>
>Ellen Ellen Ellen, my my ,my,
>
>Two questions for you ---
>
>1) If one does not send form letters to related (interested) groups, then
>how is one to get the message out that a new group is forming - telephone
>calls?
*Posting* to related *newsgroups* is one thing. Sending unsolicited
*e-mail* to a large group of *individual*people* is another matter
entirely. Most people become very annoyed when they receive junk e-mail.
--
Jon Bell <jtb...@presby.edu> | "The Internet grows hyper-
Dept. of Physics and Computer Science | bolically, but is usually
Presbyterian College | described elliptically."
Clinton, South Carolina USA | -- Dr. Internet