R.A.S.* NETIQUETTE LIST [November 7, 1994 version]
David Henderson
(net etiquette)
a semi-monthly posted list
NEW USER SPECIAL EDITION
Last updated November 7, 1994.
List maintained by David Henderson (dav...@camelot.bradley.edu)
========================================================================
PURPOSE: To introduce new readers of rec.arts.startrek.* to the
etiquette and conventions of this newsgroup. To give old readers a
bit of a reminder about how things work in rec.arts.startrek.*. New
readers are urged to read this post.
========================================================================
Changes from the previous version: None.
[David's notes: Welcome, new network users! Reading this document will
be very beneficial... it will help you understand the customs of the
Star Trek newsgroups, and will also help you avoid the mistakes most
commonly made here.
Standard heading: As continually mentioned, rec.arts.startrek.-
current is for discussion of current and upcoming episodes, whereas
r.a.s.misc is for discussion of previous episodes, broad ideas and
concepts related to Star Trek. alt.startrek.creative is for short
stories, poems, and other creative works relating to Star Trek.
r.a.s.tech is for technical discussions, and r.a.s.fandom is gen-
erally for announcing conventions and other fan-related activities.]
========================================================================
REC.ARTS.STARTREK[.misc,.current,.tech,.fandom] (r.a.s.*) are
unmoderated newsgroups. This means that you can basically post
whatever you want. However, many customs have evolved on r.a.s.*
since its conception. This posting is an attempt to list some of
those customs, and some r.a.s.* no-no's. To paraphrase Heinlein,
"Manners are the lubrication of society." If you respect the customs
of r.a.s.*, everyone can get the maximum enjoyment out of this unique
way to discuss "Star Trek," the "Star Trek" movies, "Star Trek: The
Next Generation," "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine," and "Star Trek:
Voyager" (all of which are collectively referred to as "Star Trek" in
this post).
This post discusses topics that, when posted, may launch a major
flamewar. (A flamewar is what happens when a conversation turns into
into two or more people calling each other names.)
DISCLAIMER:
The author of this posting does not presume to forbid or declare cer-
tain topics taboo (as if he could!). Such is *not* the purpose of
this list. Rather, this list was created to attempt to call your
attention to subjects which are likely to go nowhere, and subjects to
which you might respond, and then later regret having done so. The
opinions about net etiquette implied by this posting are not neces-
sarily those of the author of this list: topics for this list were
submitted by readers of r.a.s.* (acknowledged at the end of this
list). Those topics which were submitted with any degree of repe-
tition or frequency were then incorporated into this list by the
author.
If you are new to the net, and to r.a.s.* in particular, you are urged
to read this posting. It is also recommended that you read the post-
ings in news.announce.newusers and news.newusers.questions, which will
answer a lot of the questions that you have.
Great care will be taken to keep this posting updated. Your comments
are very much appreciated; it's not logical to pretend that this list
has the last and best word on net etiquette. Please send comments and
suggestions to:
The current plan calls for this netiquette article to be posted twice
a month.
========================================================================
Abbreviations used in this post, and abbreviations others use (in
order of most acceptance to least):
ST:TOS, TOS Star Trek (the original series)
ST:TNG, TNG Star Trek: The Next Generation
ST:DS9, DS9, DSN Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
ST:VOY, VOY, STV, VGR Star Trek: Voyager
ST:TAS, TAS Star Trek (the animated series)
ST:TFS, TFS, TMS Star Trek (the film series)
ST:TMP, STI, ST1 Star Trek: The Motion Picture
ST:TWOK, STII, ST2 Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
ST:TSFS, STIII, ST3 Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
ST:TVH, STIV, ST4 Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
ST:TFF, STV*, ST5 Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
ST:TUC, STVI, ST6 Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
ST:Gen, STVII, ST7* Star Trek: Generations
* - STV is also used as an abbreviation for Voyager, so be careful!
* - Generations is not "Star Trek 7", but many people will still call it that.
IMHO In My Honest/Humble Opinion
:-) or 8^) "Smiley faces" to indicate humor or sarcasm.
Control-L Character which causes some newsreader programs to
pause and wait for the reader to hit the spacebar
to continue. ASCII value 12 (014,0x0C).
r.a.s.* All of the newsgroups in the rec.arts.startrek list.
*************************************
Flame starters and other topics
*************************************
The following are some topics which are certain to get people irate. If
that's what you want to do, fine, but be forewarned. Also included
are self-defeating questions, which end up with no answers. (Certain
questions from the FAQL also appear here, due to their inflammatory
nature. In these cases, the reader is referred to the FAQL.) Finally,
there are some helpful hints about posting and replying which will
make your postings easier to read and reference.
DISCLAIMER:
Again, this is not to be interpreted as a "must/must not" list.
Rather, it just calls to your attention topics which tend to irk
people. The author of this list does not necessarily subscribe to
any of the ideas or opinions which might be implied by this fol-
lowing section, nor does he necessarily feel that any of the topics
listed before should be avoided.
FLAMING - Harsh criticism of a post, a person, or an opinion.
* Flaming new users
* Flaming episode reviewers
* Flaming about grammar, capitalization, etc.
* Other people flaming Trek fans
* Taking offense from flames.
* Flaming or comparing series
* A final note about flame wars
GENERAL NEWS-READER
* Others "reposting" your information
* Message numbers and Message IDs
* Replying to messages and editing irrelevant information
* Signature files
* Pictures of the cast, ships, etc.
* Subject lines
* What to use when you post
* What to use when you respond
* What NOT to use when posting/responding
* Choosing the correct newsgroup(s)
OUT-OF-PLACE TOPICS
* Other science fiction in the Star Trek groups
* Surveys
* Chain letters
REQUESTING INFORMATION
* Episode lists
* Miscellaneous lists
* Requesting answers to go to the group
* Other roles for actors
* "Me, too!" Syndrome
MISCELLANEOUS (for now)
* Religion
* Other controversial social issues
* Rumors
* Claiming to be an authority
* Confusing actors' and characters' points of view
* "Canon" and "non-Canon"
* Spoilers (Please protect them!)
* April Fools' Day posts
CREDITS
* Thanks to...
======= FLAMING =======
Flaming the new guy/gal on the block
New people will make netiquette mistakes. It's a fact of life. We
suggest that you don't flame them across the newsgroup; just e-mail
them a nice note welcoming them to r.a.s.* and explain what custom
they missed. Remember when *you* were new to the net...?
Flaming the review writers
Several r.a.s.*'ers put out a review or synopsis on every episode. It
does no good to flame them over "having the gall" to dictate what is
"good" and "bad." First of all, they wear asbestos underwear; sec-
ondly, the rest of us like 'em too much, and they know it. Flaming
the well-entrenched personalities because they post reviews will get
you nowhere. Disagreeing with all opinions *in* the reviews, though,
is an r.a.s.* favorite sport!
In a related topic, flaming people who appear (to you) to consider
themselves "king of r.a.s.*," "Nagus of Star Trek tech fandom," etc.,
will also get you nowhere. Such people are not insecure enough to be
bothered by such posts. If you *do* have a private beef with someone
on the net, there's always e-mail...
Flaming about grammar, spelling, CAPITALIZATION, gender-bias, etc.
It is easiest to read posts when they are spelled correctly, using
correct English. Misspelling character names can occasionally lead to
confusion (Yes, they have such weird names it's sometimes hard to know
how to spell them, but they're usually listed in the credits, though).
Right-justifying text often makes it harder to read, so we suggest
leaving it "as is." It is also suggested that you set your word wrap
to less than 80 characters (for instance, 72 is a good round number),
since many of us use 80-column screens to read the posts. This also
makes quotes look much nicer when your post is followed-up, since
otherwise line endings will have a tendency to wrap around or even go
off the screen.
On the other hand, flaming someone because of spelling mistakes or
grammar mistakes is generally considered very bad manners. Not
everyone is E.B. White, after all.
CAPITALIZING ALL OF YOUR LETTERS IS OFTEN INTERPRETED TO BE SHOUTING
BY MANY R.A.S.* FOLK. IT IS ALSO MORE DIFFICULT TO READ THAN NORMAL
TYPEFACE, SO WE SUGGEST THAT you use lower-case characters. And by
the way: asterisks around a word are generally considered to indicate
emphasis-italics:
I can't believe that Spock would do something like
*that* to McCoy!
whereas underscores usually indicate title-italics:
I just finished reading _Doctor's_Hors_D'oeuvres_ by
Diane Duane, and boy am I hungry!
| [Note to Diane: thanks for the response!]
Society is gradually changing to a more "gender-inclusive" language;
i.e., "Humanity" vs. "Mankind," "Where No One Has Gone Before" vs.
"Where No Man Has Gone Before," etc. Complaining about the way some-
one on r.a.s.* uses or doesn't use gender-inclusive language has been
the subject of major flamewars, so be forewarned. Additionally, allow
us to point out that there are appropriate newsgroups for arguing
about this subject, and of course there is e-mail. (On the other
hand, if a character on "Star Trek" uses terms which bother you, we
encourage you to opine! That's what we're here for!)
Other people flaming Trek fans
Every once in a while, a random bozo on the net (who has probably
never read these newsgroups in his($) life) posts a really obnoxious
comment about us onto r.a.s.*. The result is like stepping on an ant
hill: for weeks, people angrily respond to this message. This is
futile. The person who posted the original message won't see your
response, because he doesn't actually read the newsgroup (in all like-
lihood) -- he just though it would be "cool" to flame some Trekkies
(or he left himself logged on after leaving the terminal room and
someone else snuck in to use their account to produce this message of
eloquence). It's best to ignore folk like this. It's not their fault
that the doctor accidently dropped them on their head when they were
born. Feel sorry for them instead.
Taki Kogoma periodically posts a more detailed FAQ on this subject to
the r.a.s.* newsgroups, called "Get a Life (and how to respond)".
($) I am using a male example here to prevent "he/she" and "him/her"
constructions. Nothing else should be implied here.
Taking offense from flames
Send the poster an e-mail message first. Perhaps you just misunder-
stood the post. No sense in flaming the poster, then discovering you
missed a sentence, or didn't see the smiley face ":-)" or whatever.
In general, it's a bad idea to immediately flame back at a poster.
Save the message, read it again a couple hours later. Relax. Drink a
nice hot cup of herbal tea (*). Are you still angry? If not, let it
slide. If so, you are now at least in a more rational state of mind
to properly respond to the message and point out its (perceived) mis-
takes. Flaming right back at a message can often be embarrassing for
*you* if it turns out that you misunderstood it (or even if you
didn't). Give your blood a chance to cool down first.
Who was it who said that "more and deadlier wars have been fought over
a simple misunderstanding?" The writer of this post forgets...
(*) David's note: several people have suggested to the list over the
past three years that "tea, Earl Grey, hot" might be more appropriate
in this situation. I personally feel that a dose of caffeine is *not*
what a person would need at such a time... :-)
Use of ":-)", "IMHO", etc.
The character combination :-) (and variations thereof) is a smiley.
When correctly used, it indicates sarcasm or humor. It is also oc-
casionally (and incorrectly) used to make insecure posters flame-proof
when they post insults. Flaming a smileyed comment/insult is often
futile ("Hey, I was just joking.")
When you *are* just joking, it is suggested that you *do* use a
smiley. Humor doesn't carry well over the net.
"IMHO" stands for "In My Humble/Honest Opinion" and is used to indi-
cate such. If you want to *flame* someone's personal opinions, it is
suggested that the issue be taken to E-mail. r.a.s.* exists so that
people can *express* their opinions about Star Trek. As always,
however, *intelligent* discussion about opinions (insofar as they are
related to "Star Trek") is one of the best things about r.a.s.*
Flaming a series, comparing series, etc.
As a tongue-in-cheek swipe at any of the Star Trek series, this is a
fun topic on r.a.s.*. As a serious study of the pros and cons of ST
series, this can also be fun. However, when it becomes a flame war,
and when fans of one series start to question the mental state of the
fans of another series, it's not so much fun for everyone (except
those who like flame wars). Some of us like TOS better. Some prefer
TNG. Others enjoy DS9 more. Yet others will like Voyager, or have
mixed preferences about the whole lot. It's almost a guarantee that
*flaming* about it won't change anyone's opinion on the matter.
Trying to stop wild posts
Sometimes, a simple topic will run wild around the newsgroups. When
some people see these long lists of messages which have strayed from
the topic, they feel they must follow up to the posts with a message
such as "Please stop posting these messages here!!" The very nature
of this post simply serves to prolong a topic, not speed its demise.
The use of KILL files is suggested to remove subjects that you don't
wish to see. Use E-mail to point out more appropriate newsgroups for
topics which don't belong on r.a.s.*, and changing the Followup-To:
field in your posts to more appropriate newsgroups when the subject
starts leaving the realm of Star Trek.
A final note about flame wars
There is a net group dedicated to flamewars: alt.flame. Flamethrower
artists are respectfully directed there. As always, remember there
are real, live people on the other end of the net with feelings as
strong and as real as yours. If you don't get alt.flame (many people
don't), then we suggest confining flames to e-mail.
======= GENERAL NEWS =======
Others "reposting" your information
Because of the net lag time, posts don't show up at the same time
everywhere. If someone posts an article that is "old news" to you, it
may very well be because of the net lag, which that person can't con-
trol. Please be understanding about this. The previous writer of
this netiquette post has encountered a couple net lags which were
almost a month long, thanks to computer down-time.
Message numbers and Message IDs
Sometimes, in quoting from or referring to other posts, readers will
want to give references such as "Look at message 12051." This method
will fail, however, because your message number is unique to your
system, and is therefore useless to everyone else. It is suggested
that you give the Message-ID of the message instead, which will look
something like:
In message <1950...@romulus.romnet.org>, ...
If you are replying to a posting, your posting program will probably
do this automatically for you.
Replying to messages and editing irrelevant information
When replying to a message, it is good manners to edit out the parts
which aren't relevant to your response. Nothing is more frustrating
to a reader than to search through 120 lines of quoted text to find,
at the end, a one-line response. If someone actually wants to re-read
an entire post, they can use the Message-ID line to locate it, which
is its purpose for existence.
You should also make sure all quotes are attributed to the proper
writer. If you remove all of a writer's text, make sure you remove
the proper attribution as well. Otherwise, people get assigned to the
wrong opinions, and bad feelings result.
Finally, it is suggested that you either trim or delete the signatures
(see below) of those you are quoting. After four or five responses to
a message, the sigs at the end can get quite voluminous.
Signature files
Many posting programs look for a file called .signature to append to
all outgoing posts. People usually put in their names, e-mail add-
resses, and a quote or two that they really like. They are a lot of
fun to play with, but it is easy to get carried away. A one-line post
followed by a thirteen-line sig is an incredible waste of bandwidth.
On USENET, it is respectfully suggested that people try to keep it
down to reasonable lengths, usually 4 lines or less.
Pictures of the cast, ships, etc.
GIF files are files which, when used with the proper viewer, will
cause a picture to be shown on your screen. There are lots of Star
Trek GIFs. (See the FAQL for ftp addresses, and also check out alt.-
binaries.pictures.misc for new GIFs.) Certain r.a.s.* folk are lim-
ited in the size of the posts they can receive, so if your GIF file is
very large, it's a good idea to either put it on an FTP site, E-mail
it to people($), or post it to alt.binaries.pictures.misc, rather than
posting it on r.a.s.*. Furthermore, this will reduce the load on the
r.a.s.* net groups, something which pleases the system administrators
who graciously allow us access to r.a.s.*.
($) This will probably annoy your sysadmin, and so is not recommended.
There are several guidelines in selecting a subject line for a new
post, and others for following up to other people's posts. For
new posts, it is important to select a subject line which will get
your general topic across without being too specific:
What was the word right after "You will be" in the
second act of the new Deep Space Nine episode,
"Quark's Wacky Uncle Data"?
(the MESSAGE is the place for questions), or too general:
Deep Space Nine episode
(people won't have any idea which episode you're talking about or
whether you have information or a question or something else.)
Another point to keep in mind -- some folks' newsreaders truncate the
subject line to 25 characters when they reply to your post. Note that
this means that the subject line:
| Tell me all you know about Peter A. David's book _Q_Scared_!
| is transmuted to:
| Re: Tell me all you know abo
or something similarly misleading. It's best to keep subject lines as
short and as too the point as possible to avoid problems like these.
Another thing to keep in mind when referring to an episode whose title
you don't know is that people see episodes at different times through-
out a given time-period. Some people may see the episode on their
satellite dish on Saturday the first, while others may not see it
until next Sunday the ninth.
When choosing the subject line for an episode, don't use such titles
as "This week's show". If the article includes spoilers (see defini-
tion below), the word "spoilers" should be included in the subject
line. It should also include the name of the episode, or if you don't
know the name, a brief description that doesn't give anything away:
| Janeway's plan (Spoilers) is a good example
Sisko kills Garak! is a bad example
Subject lines - when you're responding
When Subject lines don't accurately relate to the matter of a post,
readers get bogged down in reading posts that they aren't particularly
interested in. Please, consider it to be YOUR responsibility to
change a subject line whenever you change the subject of a thread.
This includes adding/removing spoiler protection when appropriate.
Also, if the discussion has or likely will go in a different direction
that would be out of place in its original newsgroup, you should
change the header lines Newsgroups and Followup-To. The Newsgroups
line is which group you are posting to; the Followup-To is where
replies will be sent.
For example: A discussion is taking place on r.a.s.current which
involves a recent episode of Deep Space Nine and how it will affect
the show and a tangent develops discussing the how the technology
worked with whachamacallit shields or a thingamabob device. A person
replying to a message should change headers from:
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
to:
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current,rec.arts.startrek.tech
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject lines - what NOT to use
(Many thanks to Mark Brader for helping to tidy up the explanation.)
The character '*' -- called an ASTERISK -- is a special character in
rn (and other newsreaders), as well as the character '.'. Be par-
ticularly careful when using *'s in your Subject line. * is a star
wild card, while . is a one-character wild card. and will match any
letter or set of letters. For instance, the word "Mat*" would match
"Matt", "Mattttt", "Mattttttt", etc., while the word "Mat." would
match "Mat ", "Mate", "Matt", etc. If the two are combined, the term
"Mat.*" would match "Matterhorn", "Matopoly", etc. (The * causes the
. to be compared against every letter following the "t" in "Mat", and
since . can match any letter, "Matuplious" would match "Mat.*")
So what happens when you use just "*" or "Re: *" as your Subject
line? Well, if someone using rn is reading your article, and decides
that they want to "kill" this Subject (meaning that they want to skip
any further discussion on the Subject by marking all posts with that
subject as having been read), bad things would happen.
Why?
After they press 'k' to kill the Subject, rn first tranforms the
Subject line before performing the kill. It removes the "Re: " at the
beginning (if any), and then transforms all *'s to .'s (purportedly
because using * would be too dangerous). This means that rn will now
look for all Subject lines containing '.' to trash. However, '.'
matches any character, and therefore rn will trash any post with at
least one character in the Subject line -- therefore every remaining
post with any Subject will be trashed! This generally makes the person
doing the kill quite irate.
So why, for instance, does the author of this netiquette post have
asterisks in his Subject line? Assume that the Subject line is:
Subject: R.A.S.* NETIQUETTE LIST
Before doing a kill, rn will change the * to a ., and will try to kill
articles with the phrase "R.A.S.. NETIQUETTE LIST" in their Subject
line. Even with the wildcard .'s in the line, the chances of this
Subject matching an unintended Subject are pretty remote. The upshot
of all of this is that you should think about what using wildcards in
your Subject line will do before using them.
Posting to the correct group or groups
A while back, the group rec.arts.startrek was split into various sub-
groups to make reading news easier for readers looking for certain
types of material and avoiding other types. Currently, the groups
consist of:
rec.arts.startrek.current
for discussion of episodes/books/... from within the
last four months
rec.arts.startrek.fandom
for discussion of clubs, conventions, buying/selling
products, etc.
rec.arts.startrek.info *
for special information only.
rec.arts.startrek.misc
for discussion of episodes 4 months old or older,
general non-current topics, etc.
rec.arts.startrek.reviews *
for critical reviews of episodes/books/comics/etc.
rec.arts.startrek.tech
for general discussion of (TECH) -- cloaking, warp
drive, shields, subspace, etc.
alt.startrek.creative
for stories, poems, and other creative works. Not
all sites have a.s.c, though.
* - these are moderated groups -- you must have permission to post
to these groups.
When deciding to which newsgroup(s) you should post, be sure to keep
the above guidelines in mind. Occasionally, you may want to post to
more than one group to reach your audience, but when you have their
attention, you should move them to the correct group. One example of
choosing more than one group would be a convention report -- The
general information should probably go to r.a.s.fandom, but if a guest
gives information about current or upcoming episodes, books, movies,
etc., it may be crossposted to r.a.s.current. Follow-ups should go to
whichever group would be most suited for responses; this would usually
be r.a.s.current.
| A list detailing the Star Trek groups is posted semimonthly in the
| groups.
======= OUT-OF-PLACE POSTS =======
Other Science Fiction shows/movies
r.a.s.* are for Star Trek related discussions only. If you want to
talk about something else, then take it to e-mail or to another more
appropriate newsgroup Conversations on r.a.s.* are generally con-
sidered appropriate if they in some way involve Star Trek in addition
to any other subject matter.
Note, however, that the obligatory Star Trek comment technique should
not be used here. This technique consists of posting a message that
has nothing to do with Star Trek with a one-line phrase or statement
at the end containing something Trek-like. This does not make these
posts okay for posting in the Star Trek groups! Either take the
discussion to E-mail or drop the subject.
Other science fiction works, such as Star Wars, have their own news-
groups. Babylon-5 postings really do not belong on these newsgroups
except in comparisons to Star Trek series -- it has its own group,
rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5. Nor do posts on Space Rangers or any other
non-Trek SF show belong here. Rec.arts.sf.tv is their proper home.
Surveys
Occasionally (but more and more frequently), some person on the net
will get an idea into their heads that it would be a terribly original
social sciences project to determine the average age, average net
usage, average number of cats, etc., of users on the net, and they
will post requests for this information across a number of news-
groups. The r.a.s.* newsgroups are a popular target for this, since
so many people read them.
Before you respond to these messages, think about the following:
(1) Who is this person?
(2) Why is your personal life any business of his/hers?
(3) How will this information be used?
(4) Can you trust his/her assertion that all information will be kept
anonymous and confidential? (Even if you use a pseudonym, it's
still pretty easy to track a person's account down using message-id
info.)
(5) Is this person telling the truth about why they want your
information, or will you end up on some E-mailing list for some
corporation?
(6) Assuming it's legit, and they really are working on a project for
their degree in sociology, why are you doing their work for them?
These surveys have been done before, folks. They aren't an original
idea, and most of the hard-core netters avoid them like the plague.
If we filled out every survey that came to us, we'd be at a big loss
for time. (The former author of this netiquette list points out that
his name is known pretty well around the net, which causes him to
attract survey requests *by e-mail*... *sigh*)
Chain Letters
Chain letters, even e-mail chain letters, are illegal. Period. (For
those who don't know, a chain letter is a letter which says, "Send me
$5, and then send this letter to other people, who will then send you
$5, and so on... if you break the chain by not sending me money, bad
things will happen to you.")
Chain letters are sometimes posted on the r.a.s.* groups as a way to
reach a wider audience of potential payees. A good example of a chain
letter is the recent "MAKE.MONEY.FAST" posting by David Rhodes that's
appeared on the net, which purports to tell you how to make millions
of dollars using the chain letter scheme. Such a posting is highly
illegal. The person making such a post is usually kicked off the net.
Chain postings are perhaps the biggest breach of netiquette possible
on the net, and few will hestitate to turn in an offender to the
authorities (usually that person's sysop).
If you ever get a chain letter through e-mail, especially one that
threatens "dire consequences" if you break the chain and don't send in
money, inform that person's system operator *immediately*. If the
person's address is "na...@machine.place.zone," then sending complaints
to "ro...@machine.place.zone" should work. Chain letters posted to a
newsgroup can usually be ignored, but if such a posting offends you,
send an e-mail to the poster informing him/her of the illegality of
their actions (many folk don't know such behavior is illegal). If
their response is "So what?", you can always pursue the first option
mentioned above (contacting their system operator).
======= REQUESTING INFORMATION =======
Episode lists
Mike "Vidiot" Brown (br...@vidiot.UUCP) maintains the ST:TNG Program
Guide and the ST:DS9 Program Guide. They're available via anonymous
FTP and UUCP (and also for sale through the mail). He also gets up-
to-date information from Paramount, and posts the press releases and
air schedule to the net. This qualifies as a "Frequently Asked Ques-
tion," but it is added here as well, since this question pops up a few
times a week to many people's irritation. To get the Guides via ftp,
check out site ftp.uu.net. For more info, read the FAQL (see below).
Mark Holtz (mho...@netcom.com) wrote the TOS/TAS, Star Trek Movies,
TNG, and DS9 Lists of Lists. These lists give out various tidbits of
information, as well as a schedule of all Trek episodes with a brief,
Paramount-provided synopsis. Do NOT e-mail Mark Holtz asking for a
copy of the lists. He has only a *VERY* limited amount of disk space
available to him, being that he calls from a public access system, and
cannot keep a copy on-line after posting. You will instead receive
information on where you can FTP, use e-mail server, or download from
a publicly-accessible BBS system. You'll definitely find them on
rtfm.mit.edu, along with other Star Trek Lists. Now that Mark has
discontinued updates of the Lists of Lists, he may be looking for a
replacement maintainer. Contact him for more information.
Other lists are maintained on r.a.s.*. Otto Heuer maintains a list of
the lists, the posters, and when the lists are posted. (The e-mail
addresses of poster's are only given so that you can help update their
information, *not* to request copies -- those of us who post the lists
do not have the time or patience to e-mail them to everyone on the
net.) Archives exist on the net so that you can get copies. To be
honest, I'm not sure of which sites the lists are at now. Check out
the monthly posting of the FAQL for details.
Parodies, Script submissions, etc.
"How many times has So-and-so said or done such-and-such?"
"Where can I get ST parodies?"
"How do I submit scripts?"
These are FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions. Otto "Hack-Man" Heuer
(hac...@pnet51.orb.mn.org) puts out the FAQL (FAQ List) every month.
This answers a lot of questions, and is 99% accurate. It also ex-
plains abbreviations like "IMHO", "BTW", and so forth. This list
exists because many questions are asked with an irritating frequency.
If it's a trivia question, check the FAQL first. All of the people
who put out these lists work hard at them, and understandably get
upset when these lists are ignored.
Requesting answers to the newsgroup
I need information on such-and-such. Please post the answer.
This will clog the newsgroup with 5 billion wrong answers. If you are
in search of information (or trivia), we suggest that you request that
the info be e-mailed to you. Later on, you can (and should) summarize
the answers and post the result to r.a.s.*, as we'll all be interested
in the (hopefully correct) answer. This is especially a good thing to
do if you are taking a straw poll (i.e. "Rate this episode on a scale
of 1-10").
Obviously, if you can't receive e-mail (as happens with a few people),
then of course no one can blame you for wanting an answer posted.
However, please bear in mind that r.a.s.* are newsgroups and not
really an appropriate place to carry on your personal correspondence.
Other Roles
In what else has actor So-and-so appeared?
This is another FAQ which is answered in the Ron Carman's "Star Trek
Actors' Other Roles FAQ" which is posted monthly in r.a.s.misc. This
particular thread is one that many of us would rather not see pop up
on r.a.s.misc again, and certainly not on r.a.s.current, since it does
so at an alarming rate.
"Me, too!" Syndrome
Every now and then someone will ask the net for a certain program or
file. Other people will then respond to this, saying, "Me, too!" "Me,
three," ad nauseam. This is self-defeating. Due to net lags, the
original post may have reach other parts of the net *days* before it
got to you -- the original poster may have already gotten the file he
wanted, and is not going to be looking at the newsgroups solely to
find others who want the information! One good idea is to send that
poster an e-mail note asking them to forward the file (or what-ever)
to you when they get it from whomever ends up giving it to them.
======= MISCELLANEOUS (until I sort them) =======
God/Jesus/Buddha (etc.)
Some Star Trek episodes seem to indicate that there is still some
large amount of deity worship in the future, while other episodes seem
to indicate the opposite. The truth is that they have been very
inconsistent about this, so that arguments about it (using Star Trek
facts) are kind of futile. For those who wish to argue about deities
from a non-Star Trek point of view, there are other newsgroups which
are set up for that very purpose.
Other controversial issues
Some people feel that Star Trek should be "obligated" to introduce ho-
mosexual characters. Other people are homophobic, while still others
could care less about the whole debate. Whatever your attitude, you
aren't going to convince anyone else with your views on the subject
via the net, and it's useless to try -- it just turns into a flame-
war. (But go ahead anyway, if you don't believe this. Some people on
the net actually *enjoy* flamewars...)
We all love to read other people's opinions. Well-thought-out discuss-
ions about social issues as relevant to Star Trek episodes, including
such topics as homosexuality, money, socialism/capitalism, are some-
thing that makes r.a.s.* intellectually interesting. However, if you
stand on a soapbox constructed of your own morals, you're not going to
convince anyone. Please be objective. The issue of homosexuality (if
in fact it is an issue) isn't going to be solved on r.a.s.* (for those
who think it needs to be "solved"). As with religion, if you want to
discuss social issues for their own sake, and not for Star Trek's,
allow us to suggest other newsgroups perhaps more appropriate for it.
And, as always, there is still E-mail...
Stereotyping on the basis on race, gender, etc., is fodder for
flames. Be forewarned.
Where Star Trek is concerned: yes, the females had to wear mini-
skirts. Yes, the third season of the original series gradually re-
duced the extras in the crew to mostly white men and women. Yes, it
could have been done better. The facts remain that 1) Star Trek was a
pioneer as far as race relationships and gender roles go in the 1960s;
2) It was a quarter of century ago, and you can't change what was.
Constructive comments and criticism are all *always* appreciated on
r.a.s.*, though, especially in relation to "Deep Space Nine" or
"Voyager" (since they are still in production). Again, if you just
want to argue about races and racism (or whatever) in general, we
suggest discussing it on the appropriate newsgroup.
Claiming to be an authority
If you are, that's great; we love to hear input "straight from the
horse's mouth." Be forewarned, though: many of us on the net are
authorities about physics, video, the military, astronomy... we cover
a wide range of fields, so you'll probably get blasted by a real
authority if you're not *really* an authority but try to pass yourself
off as one. (You'll get to know who's who in the coming weeks, and
what their expertises are.) Don't mistake this -- everyone *still*
wants your input no matter who you are, but if you're not sure about
some topic, don't confuse other netters by asserting yourself as an
authority, when in fact you might be incorrect in your answer. If
you're unsure, it's best to say so. *Someone* will know the right
answer, and then we'll all learn something new.
Rumors
The same can be said for rumors. It's best to substantiate your
stories; otherwise, r.a.s.* becomes adrift with the rumors that half
of the cast of Star Trek have just died, and so forth. Your mother's
sister's husband's best friend's friend is probably a questionable
source, unless your mother's sister's husband's best friend's friend
is a member of the cast, crew, or a journalist. 8^)
Equating actors with characters
Shatner argued for such-and-such in episode "so-and-so"
A typical response to this goes, "No, he didn't. His character
Captain Kirk did," so be forewarned. Confusing actors with their
characters often generates nasty messages. This is justifiable, in a
sense. For example, if actor X has a certain political view, but his
or her character Y has a diametrically opposed view, then we do X a
discredit every time we equate his or her views to be the same as Y's
-- in some cases, it might actually and technically be a slander.
On a similar note: We all like to know what the stars of the show are
up to now -- who doesn't? However, these stars of "Star Trek" have a
right to their personal lives as well, which have nothing to do with
"Star Trek." It doesn't make sense to flame actor X for the way he/she
interacts (or doesn't interact) with actor Y off the set. Much of the
time, people jump to conclusions about actor X based on a shockingly
small amount of evidence, which may be either incorrect or taken out of
context. Please use discretion when passing judgement on the behavior
of an actor -- your information may be incorrect, out of context, and,
at any rate, nobody's business but the actor and those he/she directly
affects. Slander (or would it be libel on a newsgroup?) is an ugly
phenomenon.
"Canon" and "non-canon"
"Canon" means that Gene Roddenberry (or his duly-appointed represent-
ative) has declared something to be officially part of the "Star Trek"
universe. Included are TOS, TNG, DS9, Voyager, and the movies, pri-
marily. "Non-canon" is everything else (the books, the animated
series, comic books, the story you made up when you were playing "Star
Trek" with your friends during recess back in Kindergarten, etc.) You
can get into some pretty good arguments with people on the net about
whether or not something actually "happened" in the "Star Trek" uni-
verse or not. Since "Star Trek" is science fiction (to most of us,
anyway), some people have pointed out that arguing about whether some-
thing fictional is "real" or "unreal" involves a lot of null state-
ments ("Nothing unreal exists" -- from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home).
Still, can be a lot of fun, when it doesn't degenerate into
name-calling.
Martin Duke periodically posts a "Canon vs. non-canon" FAQ to the
newsgroups, which goes into much more detail about the subject.
Spoilers (Please protect them!)
Many people on r.a.s.* would like to be surprised by an episode. If
you blurt out what happens in the episode to them, they won't enjoy it
as much (it's like knowing what's in the present before you unwrap it
-- no fun at all for some of us). Please confine all discussion of
current and upcoming episodes to r.a.s.current (or r.a.s.tech, if the
topic is of a technological nature). Also, protect them from unwary
readers by inserting blank lines in front of the information, and by
putting *SPOILERS FOR <EPISODE>* in the subject line. For more infor-
mation and the rationale behind this, please see the the semimonthly
posting on spoilers posted by yours truly, David Henderson.
Please don't post spoilers on r.a.s.misc or r.a.s.fandom; or, if you
feel you absolutely must, PLEASE protect your spoilers!
April Fools' Day posts
April 1st, known as "April Fools' Day" (or "All Fools' Day"), is the
closest thing that the Internet has to an "official holiday." Many
posts that you read on that day should be eyed with suspicion (or a
liberal sense of humor). Many of these "faux" posts can be quite
amusing, though, admittedly, a large portion of them are amateurish.
Some of the posts are obviously hoaxes, whereas others leave you
wondering. Insecure posters will often put an "April Fools!!!" indi-
cator at the end of the post, but such indicators are rare. Don't
even bother flaming anybody's posts on April 1st. You'll be deluged
with a billion "It was an "April Fools'" post! Didn't you get the
joke!" Relax, sip some herbal tea, and laugh at the funnier posts.
Net lag often comes into play here -- your site might get an "April
Fools'" post several days late. To compensate, some "April Fools'"
posts are sent out by their authors a day or two early. Thus, all
posts from about March 30th through April 3rd should be taken with a
grain of salt.
****************
When it all comes down to it, we're all here because we enjoy talking
about "Star Trek." Much of the above netiquette suggestions boil down
to the following statement: r.a.s.*'ers aren't the issue. "Star
Trek" is the issue. When we make the r.a.s.*'ers the issue instead of
"Star Trek," our conversations are quickly reduced to battles of ego.
****************
======= CREDITS =======
Thanks to...
Many thanks to the people who had suggestions for this list, or merely
words of encouragement. These include, among others (in alphabetical
order):
Sean Ahern, Carol J. Botteron, Dorothy Bowe, Mark Brader, Cindy Brown,
James P. Callison, Suman Chakrabarti, Brian A. Cole, Alan Coopersmith,
Sharon Crichton, Albert Crosby, John G. Dobnick, Matthew W. Gertz,
Andrew Hackard, Otto "Hack-Man" Heuer, David E. Hollingsworth, Mark
Holtz, Vicki Holzhauer, Romain Kang, Mike Kelsey, Dirk Loedding, Mark
A. Lindsay, Timothy W. Lynch, Siobahn Morgan, Windsor A. Morgan,
Michael Park, Jonathan C. Pederson, David Richardson, Michael Rosen,
Eric Rossing, Dave Spensley, The Technicolour Throw-Up (Yecch!),
Jamesena Talbott, Peter Taylor, Francis A. Uy, John Whelan, and
ma...@husc.HARVARD.EDU.
Comments are welcome and appreciated!
David Henderson, N9LVI
--
David Henderson, dav...@camelot.bradley.edu | Maintainer, R.A.S.* Info Lists
Founder of the AAAAAAAAAAAA -- An +-------+ Editor, Babylon 5 Encyclopedia
All-American Academic Association | Creator, Babylon 5 Appearances Chart
Against Any And All Acronym Abuse | Co-Author, Star Trek Spellings Lists
<A HREF=http://lydia.bradley.edu/compserv/hotline/homepages/davidh/>Home</A>