Ginger PBEM
a little fish in a big pond
Announcing:
A web-assisted PBeM called Ginger. Set in a custom world, with
customized rules. Additional information on world and rules can be
found at "http://www.io.com/~seasong" (follow the Ginger link).
I already have a group assembled, but need 1-3 others to round
them out. I am looking for players who are more into role-playing
than combat, can develop complex, interesting characters, and can
*stay with the game* for a period of at least a year. Experience
with PBeMs is preferable, but *not* required; I can and will tutor
if I come across a promising player.
Munchkin characters don't bother me, *as long as* the character
is interesting. My games are of "variable" power scale, so munchkins
have little advantage here.
The campaign will be starting around the possible discovery of
a potent magical artifact (in a world where magic is rare and
weak), and a quest to get it. However, characters can have a wide
variety of goals, which may or may not have anything to do with the
artifact in question.
I am an experienced PBeM game master, with two PBeMs under my
belt, and a third which was unsalvageable and died. One of the
two PBeMs is *still* running, but is near its conclusion.
Basic PBeM Requirements:
Respond twice a week
Warn me of upcoming absence; I can take over characters for limited
periods of time
Check out the web site regularly; I mark those things which have
most recently been added to. Also, keep track of character details.
Put "Ginger:" in front of all mail subject headers.
The ability to write. You don't have to be an English major, and
I'll overlook poor grammar and occasional errors, but you *must* be
able to get your point across clearly.
Advanced "Stuff":
Ginger is web-assisted. That means that I keep a log of all that
happens, important information on NPCs you've met, and so on, all on
the site. An HTMLized copy of your character will also be on the
site, but you can choose to have this sheet kept in a secret file
name and location, rather than be publicly accessible. Players are
on their honor not to peek at each other's character sheets!
Players are encouraged to create their own pages related to
Ginger! In addition, if you don't have room, you might be able to
store your pages on my site (I have lots of room at the moment)!
Ginger welcomes lurkers: just go by the web site and peek at
the log of events. Or request to be put in everyone's address books,
and get it directly.
Ginger will run for an indefinite amount of time. Although there are
certain "goals" you can fulfill, the game may continue beyond them. At
some point, the game will reach a "retirement" point, if nothing else,
and end then.
Submitting a character:
READ THE WEB PAGES FIRST.
Then send me an essential character concept. I don't require that
the character be fully fleshed out at this point, but any flesh
that's there will be welcome (and may get you in over someone else).
Some idea of your character stats is also a plus.
I don't care what format or order your character notes are in, as
long as I can read them.
Don't give your character magic items unless you are willing to
pay for the merit.
If you want to play a mage, let me know and we'll discuss it.
a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
Larry D. Hols
a little fish in a big pond wrote:
>
> Announcing:
> A web-assisted PBeM called Ginger. Set in a custom world, with
> customized rules. Additional information on world and rules can be
Okay, this post did not discuss any of the xD&D rules, nor did it
discuss any of the TSR worlds. This NG is for the discussion of such.
Please refrain from posting such non-relevant messages here.
Pray, tell, did you decide to announce this here because you saw the
Threshold announcement and figured "it must be okay" because someone
else posted something irrelevant?
Larry
rayzer
Thinks are getting a little out of hands. Does every post have to deal
strictly with AD&D rules, or TSR worlds to belong in this newgroup?
If so, half of the posts in this group would be off topic. I don't
play in any TSR worlds, but make up my own. Does that mean I can't
talk about it in this newsgroup? I modify rules and use a different
spell based system. Does that mean it doesn't belong here?
I make up new monsters with new capabilities. Should I not mention them
here? I have in long time past posted NPCs strictly based on their
characteristics and generic to any fantasy game, since I don't mention
AD&D stats directly, they don't belong here?
I looked over the Ginger PBeM post, and see no reason why it shouldn't
belong in this group. Or are we going to narrow our scope so much we
have to AD&D and TSR in each posting.
=====================================================================
Ray A. Reaux http://csgrad.cs.vt.edu/~reaux/
Cottleston, Cottleston, Cottleston Pie,
A fly can't bird, but a bird can fly.
=====================================================================
Peter David Boddy
Larry D. Hols (hols...@tdsi.net) wrote:
> Okay, this post did not discuss any of the xD&D rules, nor did it
> discuss any of the TSR worlds. This NG is for the discussion of such.
> Please refrain from posting such non-relevant messages here.
> Pray, tell, did you decide to announce this here because you saw the
> Threshold announcement and figured "it must be okay" because someone
> else posted something irrelevant?
So, who died and made you net-cop. I don't see any responses of yours to
any of the "Make money fast..." spams that get posted here with alarming
frequency, nor to any other of the "off-topic" posts. Did you go to the
web-pages he described in the post? Perhaps there is something on AD&D there.
Pete
Pete aka Spitfire
Test your might...
..on my Mortal Kombat Pages...http://chat.carleton.ca/~pdboddy...
..against the likes of: Scorpion Rain Classic Sub-Zero Reptile
Noob Saibot Classic Smoke Ermac
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter David Boddy
Carleton University
Email address: pdb...@chat.carleton.ca
Email address: bx...@freenet.carleton.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------
J. McGuire
Folks....
Let's all take a step back and chill for a bit. I think everyone's a bit
touchy because of the ThresholdMUD situation.
Yes, he was miles off-topic. Yes, he was a boor. Yes, when people tried
to explain this to him he said "Who's gonna make me?"
Well, it looks like someone did. Notice that "Aristotle" hasn't posted
anything in the past 24 hours or so, after at least a half-dozen
messages every day for several days? Maybe his ISP didn't like his
spoofing of all those fake "friends" he had supporting him... maybe
chelmsford.com got annoyed... but in any event, he's quit it. <sigh of
relief>
Now that all that's over, let's be careful that we're not taking out
some of our frustration with that yutz on the poor guy who made an
honest mistake and posted the Ginger PBEM announcement here.
This newsgroup can survive the occasional stray post for a PBEM game a
whole lot better than we can survive turning into a mass of blood-crazed
sharks snapping at anything that moves.
Let's try this one again, maybe?
-- jmm
Wintertree Software
http://www.io.com/~wtsoft
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing" -- Edmund Burke
J. McGuire
Hi, Thomas!
I'm your neighbor on io.com...right down the hard drive, take a left on
Pentagon. 8-) We're really nice people here, honest -- you just missed
the fun with a guy who started spamming some of the .frp. groups with
ads for his MUD, then got majorly obnoxious when people asked him not to
-- and invented a half-dozen fake "friends" to support him and tell
everyone else to shut up. So people's tempers are still a bit frayed.
Yes, you really should have posted the Ginger announcement over in
rec.games.frp.announce. That's where the people looking for PBEM games
would be most likely to see it. No big deal. Drop off another copy over
in r.g.f.a so that it gets to the right people, then kick back here and
relax with us. While this isn't quite the place to get PBEM players,
it's certainly a good place to learn things that will make you a better
DM in any medium, and a great place to share what you know... not to
mention share haiku for mind-flayers, read the latest "Your character is
in DEEP doo-doo when..." one-liners, and add some gasoline to the
eternal 1stEd vs. 2ndEd. AD&D flames.
C'mon in, look around, find a chair. I don't dare speak for the rest of
this group -- we'd get into a month-long flamewar about who can say what
on behalf of whom if I did! -- but I'm certainly happy to welcome you
here.
-- JMM
The Amorphous Mass
"J. McGuire" <7322...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>This newsgroup can survive the occasional stray post for a PBEM game a
>whole lot better than we can survive turning into a mass of blood-crazed
>sharks snapping at anything that moves.
>Let's try this one again, maybe?
A-men!
--
The Amorphous Mass
james-r...@uiowa.edu
aka Hyacinth, elven ambassador to the Human Island of Haven.
J. McGuire
Lance Christensen wrote:
>
> > I'm your neighbor on io.com...right down the hard drive, take a left on
> > Pentagon. 8-) We're really nice people here, honest -- you just missed
> > the fun with a guy who started spamming some of the .frp. groups with
> > ads for his MUD, then got majorly obnoxious when people asked him not to
> > -- and invented a half-dozen fake "friends" to support him and tell
> > everyone else to shut up. So people's tempers are still a bit frayed.
> >
> > Yes, you really should have posted the Ginger announcement over in
> > rec.games.frp.announce. That's where the people looking for PBEM games
> > would be most likely to see it. No big deal.
>
>
> Okay, enought already! This newsgroup is starting to sound a little too
> self-rightous. I felt the Ginger concept was fantasy and close enough to
> AD&D to fit on this page. Or are we so caught up in ourselves as TSR
> followers that we can't allow this?
>
> I have been involved in several PBeM games, many of which have been only
> marginally AD&D and ALL of which originated from ads placed in this
> newsgroup.
>
> Frankly, I figured we were here to discuss gaming, not get off on petty
> tirades against well-meaning people trying to inform.
>
> Lance Christensen
Lance --
Since your newsreader appears to have dropped the last couple of
paragraphs of my post when you read it, here's the rest of what I said:
>> <put first quoteback here> Drop off another copy over
in r.g.f.a so that it gets to the right people, then kick back here and
relax with us. While this isn't quite the place to get PBEM players,
it's certainly a good place to learn things that will make you a better
DM in any medium, and a great place to share what you know... not to
mention share haiku for mind-flayers, read the latest "Your character is
in DEEP doo-doo when..." one-liners, and add some gasoline to the
eternal 1stEd vs. 2ndEd. AD&D flames.
C'mon in, look around, find a chair. I don't dare speak for the rest of
this group -- we'd get into a month-long flamewar about who can say what
on behalf of whom if I did! -- but I'm certainly happy to welcome you
here. <<
I really don't think "I'm certainly happy to welcome you here"
constitutes a "petty tirade", do you?
-- jmm
The Amorphous Mass
Lance Christensen <lech...@ouray.cudenver.edu> wrote:
> Jean McGuire wrote, among other things:
>> Yes, you really should have posted the Ginger announcement over in
>> rec.games.frp.announce. That's where the people looking for PBEM games
>> would be most likely to see it. No big deal.
>
>self-rightous.
That's why Jean told every to sit back and take a deep breath, and tried
hard to make this particular post a gentle, coddling reminder instead
of a self-righteous flame. In case it's not coming across, I am writing
this post in a completely level tone of voice, while reclining in an
office chair.
> I felt the Ginger concept was fantasy and close enough to
>AD&D to fit on this page. Or are we so caught up in ourselves as TSR
>followers that we can't allow this?
You can feel whatever you like :-), but technically MUD announcements
are off-topic. Most people don't mind one every so often, but as Jean
pointed out the Threshold thing has left most people's nerves rattled.
Just as you have every right to mention that you feel that the post
was on-topic, other people have the right to mention politely that they
feel that it's off-topic, and would be more appropriately mentioned
in rec.games.mud.announce. It's not a flame to direct someone to a
more appropriate group, anymore than it's a flame for a secretary
at one desk to direct you to another secretary one floor up and three doors
across. I will say that the original post (I forget the author) telling
the Ginger poster to post elsewhere was excessively hot-tempered.
FYI, this is a "newsgroup," not a "page." USENET and the WWW are two
separate and independent entities.
>Frankly, I figured we were here to discuss gaming, not get off on petty
>tirades against well-meaning people trying to inform.
You figure correctly, although I fail to see how you could consider
Jean's post to be a petty tirade. On the other hand, a certain amount of
nudging is necessary to keep non-gaming posts to a minimum (MUDs have
nothing to do with the sort of gaming discussed here), and as long as that
nudging takes the form of the occasional polite reminder it's fine.
At any rate, the poster surely knows of the existence of rec.games.mud.
announce by now, so there's no real point continuing this thread.
But it is important to realize that by criticizing the "net.cops" you
yourself are playing "net.cop," and that it is imperative for _everyone_
to maintain a cool head about this.
Lance Christensen
> I'm your neighbor on io.com...right down the hard drive, take a left on
> Pentagon. 8-) We're really nice people here, honest -- you just missed
> the fun with a guy who started spamming some of the .frp. groups with
> ads for his MUD, then got majorly obnoxious when people asked him not to
> -- and invented a half-dozen fake "friends" to support him and tell
> everyone else to shut up. So people's tempers are still a bit frayed.
>
> rec.games.frp.announce. That's where the people looking for PBEM games
> would be most likely to see it. No big deal.
<snip>
Okay, enought already! This newsgroup is starting to sound a little too
self-rightous. I felt the Ginger concept was fantasy and close enough to
AD&D to fit on this page. Or are we so caught up in ourselves as TSR
followers that we can't allow this?
I have been involved in several PBeM games, many of which have been only
marginally AD&D and ALL of which originated from ads placed in this
newsgroup.
Frankly, I figured we were here to discuss gaming, not get off on petty
tirades against well-meaning people trying to inform.
Lance Christensen
a little fish in a big pond
I'm not sure what prompted your post, precisely...
J. McGuire (7322...@compuserve.com) wrote:
: Pentagon. 8-) We're really nice people here, honest -- you just missed
: the fun with a guy who started spamming some of the .frp. groups with
Er? I've not been on this newsgroup *that* long, but I've seen
lots of PBeM announcements here... and they weren't flamed anymore
than I've been (your post is the *only* comment on my PBeM announcement
I've seen). The discussion of AD&D games, whether they take place
in real life or over the Internet, does not seem off-topic to me.
What's more, this ISN'T just a PBeM announcement. It's an announcement
of a web site with lots of AD&D stuff. It's a comment about an
up-n-coming way of running AD&D games over the Internet.
In short, it's completely on topic.
: Yes, you really should have posted the Ginger announcement over in
: rec.games.frp.announce. That's where the people looking for PBEM games
: would be most likely to see it. No big deal. Drop off another copy over
: in r.g.f.a so that it gets to the right people, then kick back here and
That is a good idea -- I don't get out much with newsgroups much,
mostly sticking to those I know. Thanks for the tip!
: relax with us. While this isn't quite the place to get PBEM players,
: it's certainly a good place to learn things that will make you a better
: DM in any medium, and a great place to share what you know... not to
: mention share haiku for mind-flayers, read the latest "Your character is
: in DEEP doo-doo when..." one-liners, and add some gasoline to the
: eternal 1stEd vs. 2ndEd. AD&D flames.
Heh. WhatEVER gave you the idea that I'm a newbie? I'm not irritated,
just very, very curious. In all, this is the *politest* letter I've
seen intended for a newbie... which is impressive, given the ratio
of flamebait and flamers on the *DND newsgroup, mailing lists, and
bulletin boards!
a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
...but not *that* little
a little fish in a big pond
Larry D. Hols (hols...@tdsi.net) wrote:
: Okay, this post did not discuss any of the xD&D rules, nor did it
: discuss any of the TSR worlds. This NG is for the discussion of such.
: Please refrain from posting such non-relevant messages here.
:
: Pray, tell, did you decide to announce this here because you saw the
: Threshold announcement and figured "it must be okay" because someone
: else posted something irrelevant?
Ah! HERE are the flames that other post was referring to.. my
reader somehow missed them the first time around!
Ginger is three things:
It is an AD&D game taking place on the Internet.
It is a web page devoted to an AD&D world and house rules involved
with that world.
It is an up-n-coming idea: the use of the WWW to assist AD&D
games over the Internet.
For some reason, I forgot to write "customized AD&D" instead of
"customized rules". For that, I apologize.
And what Threshold announcement?
J. McGuire
a little fish in a big pond wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what prompted your post, precisely...
>
One of the "Ginger PBEM is off-topic" posts that I thought might have
been written in haste by someone fed up with "Aristotle" and his
imaginary friends.
> Er? I've not been on this newsgroup *that* long, but I've seen
> lots of PBeM announcements here... and they weren't flamed anymore
> than I've been (your post is the *only* comment on my PBeM announcement
> I've seen). The discussion of AD&D games, whether they take place
> in real life or over the Internet, does not seem off-topic to me.
If my post was the only comment you've seen, the one that prompted it is
either still making its way to your news server, or has wandered off
into the vast cyber-wasteland where lost packets go to die. At any rate,
I was just trying to say "Please don't take things wrong, some people
are a bit touchy at the moment...you're as welcome here as anyone."
<snip>
> That is a good idea -- I don't get out much with newsgroups much,
> mostly sticking to those I know. Thanks for the tip!
Did you know that Deja News will do a topic search, and list the
newsgroups that have postings relevant to the keywords you're interested
in? Handy way to find some of the more obscure ones.
> Heh. WhatEVER gave you the idea that I'm a newbie?
Mistaken impression, apparently, partly based on my reaction to someone
else's post. Oops!
> I'm not irritated,
> just very, very curious. In all, this is the *politest* letter I've
> seen intended for a newbie... which is impressive, given the ratio
> of flamebait and flamers on the *DND newsgroup, mailing lists, and
> bulletin boards!
Well, I try. After all, we all started out as newbies...I'm half newbie,
half oldy-moldy (just returned to the net after about 12 years
offline... talk about the changes in your old hometown!) myself.
Rudeness just begets more rudeness, and doesn't usually influence
anyone. So I try to stay civil as long as my Scotch-Irish temper can
stand it.
> Just realized: forgot to mention that the customized rules are
> customized AD&D 2nd ed rules ;). Maybe that's what prompted that
> other poster...
Oh, noooo, now you'll get the 1stEd vs. 2ndEd religious war starting up
over here!!! <running and hiding>
-- Jean
a little fish in a big pond
J. McGuire (7322...@compuserve.com) wrote:
: Now that all that's over, let's be careful that we're not taking out
: some of our frustration with that yutz on the poor guy who made an
: honest mistake and posted the Ginger PBEM announcement here.
Hm... I'm not a "poor guy". Although I wish I'd seen the responses
earlier, so I could have stopped them earlier.
Just to try this again:
I am working on an AD&D world, along with customized AD&D 2nd ed
rules, which you can find at http://www.io.com/~seasong/ginger/ginger.html
for details. I would be interested in comments (my statement to that
effect on the site is genuine).
The Ginger web page is an experiment in using the WWW to assist in
PBeMing, as a source of information for players and lurkers alike,
making access to maps, character data, important NPC info, turn
history, and so on, far easier. In addition, I am experimenting with
the "advertising" aspects of gaming on the Internet; very often,
we play by e-mail because we are seeking players other than those
in our home town.
And yes, I am accepting players for the PBeM: 1-2, maybe 3,
depending on what I see.
----
That look better?
a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
a little fish in a big pond
a little fish in a big pond (sea...@io.com) wrote:
: Announcing:
: A web-assisted PBeM called Ginger. Set in a custom world, with
: customized rules. Additional information on world and rules can be
Just realized: forgot to mention that the customized rules are
customized AD&D 2nd ed rules ;). Maybe that's what prompted that
other poster...
a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
Aardy R. DeVarque
***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***
The following contains the personal opinions of one Raymond Dennis
Reginald DeVarque, and should NOT, I repeat, NOT be considered as either
net.copping or actual practice/custom for rec.games.frp.dnd!
***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***
a little fish in a big pond (sea...@io.com) wrote:
> J. McGuire (7322...@compuserve.com) wrote:
> : Pentagon. 8-) We're really nice people here, honest -- you just missed
> : the fun with a guy who started spamming some of the .frp. groups with
> Er? I've not been on this newsgroup *that* long, but I've seen
> lots of PBeM announcements here... and they weren't flamed anymore
> than I've been (your post is the *only* comment on my PBeM announcement
> I've seen). The discussion of AD&D games, whether they take place
> in real life or over the Internet, does not seem off-topic to me.
> What's more, this ISN'T just a PBeM announcement. It's an announcement
> of a web site with lots of AD&D stuff. It's a comment about an
> up-n-coming way of running AD&D games over the Internet.
> In short, it's completely on topic.
Currently, rec.games.frp.announce contains the following types of posts:
"Gaming related announcements"...
Press releases
FAQs (not the rgfd FAQ yet, though; but it's not at RTFM, either, yet)
Convention ads & info
RPG Gamers wanted
AD&D Gamers wanted
RPG web pages opening
General PBeM RPG players wanted
In this way, there is a single, moderate-traffic place to go for
"information" in the rgf.* hierarchy, which makes such very easy to find.
It's also moderated, which cuts out the spammers. Search features on your
newsreader, as well as DejaNews, allow one to easily find, for example,
all the gamers in your immediate area who've posted Gamers Wanted
announcements in that group without needing to spend time searching
through several dozens of thousands of posts.
Technically, PBeM announcements are already off-topic here, but I like to
pick & choose my fights, and that's not one I think I can win just by
net.copping; public opinion currently isn't nearly as against them as it
is for "gamers wanted thousands of miles away from you," especially since
anyone from anywhere can be in a PBeM, so as long as they're infrequent,
I let 'em slide.
Personally, I think the following posts, which currently get dumped all
over wherever the poster feels like it, should be moved in
rec.games.frp.announce as exclusively as sales of AD&D merchandise are to
rgf.marketplace:
Visit my AD&D web page
AD&D PBeM opening
Are there any PBeM's out there?
Visit my net.books web page
Convention featuring AD&D is this weekend!
AD&D IRC game openings
AD&D-via-MUD game openings
Rationale:
a) these are all _announcements_, not really discussion, and
not really discussion-starters (except threads like this), as such, they
don't add much to the group except another post to ignore;
b) that way, gamers for *all* games can go to a single group when they
need to find, for example, a PBeM, and find one easily, rather than trying
to wade through the 100+ daily posts on this group for the one that
mentions a PBeM--rgf.announce already gets traffic on these topics for
other games, and some for AD&D as well. It seems to me that it'd be very
advantageous to have one place (with about 50 posts per _week_ tops) to
advertise in/read when looking for other PBeM/IRC players. As for web
pages, this way there's one central clearing-house for all "new/updated"
web page announcements, so it's easy to find them;
c) If someone wanted to talk about converting AD&D (expecially combat) to
work on a weekly turnaround basis, for example, that should be fine for
*this* group (and there's always r.g.pbem, I think, as well). The same
goes for "what sorts of things should I include on my AD&D-themed web
page?" and other thread-starters.
d) Very short ads included in .sigs in posts to rgfd are no problem--Sean
& Steve advertise TSR whenever they post, Jean advertises Wintertree,
Terry mentions the latest products he's hawking, many .sigs include URLs,
etc. In this way, a post can be really on-topic, yet also advertise your
PBeM, web page, etc. Get too long and/or involved, though, and you start
getting into alt.fan.warlord material...
The only rationale against I can think of is "But it's still AD&D, and
thus on-topic here", which is disproven by the highly successful (and,
dare I say, profitable? --Quark ;) ) moving of *all* Usenet sales of AD&D
material to rgf.marketplace, the moving of all Usenet AD&D fiction to
rgf.archives (plug: check out The Adventurers for a frequent Greyhawk
fix!), and the mostly-successful attempts to move Gamers Wanted material
to rgf.announce after the moderator indicated it was acceptable material
there. I'd include the discussion of DM utilities being moved to
alt.games.frp.dnd-util, but as an alt group, it isn't reliably carried by
enough ISPs to _insist_ that discussion get totally shunted there (though
it's managed to do just that by itself, though. Try reading it sometime!
:) )
Responses? Counter-arguments?
> : Yes, you really should have posted the Ginger announcement over in
> : rec.games.frp.announce. That's where the people looking for PBEM games
> : would be most likely to see it. No big deal. Drop off another copy over
> : in r.g.f.a so that it gets to the right people, then kick back here and
> That is a good idea -- I don't get out much with newsgroups much,
> mostly sticking to those I know. Thanks for the tip!
For a list of all of the rec.games.frp.* newsgroups and several brief
listings of what goes in each, as well as a listing of other newsgroups of
probable interest to AD&D players, read the FAQ for this newsgroup
(http://sac.uky.edu/~mlmorr0/faq/rgfdfaq.html), specifically sections 2
and 6. You may be surprised what else is out there! :)
> In all, this is the *politest* letter I've
> seen intended for a newbie... which is impressive, given the ratio
> of flamebait and flamers on the *DND newsgroup, mailing lists, and
> bulletin boards!
I must admit, it's even more polite than my net.cop form letters, which
I've striven over the last year or so to refine to the point where the
receiver is happy & convinced rather than PO'd & in a flaming mood.
<shrug> At least the regulars don't flame me for 'em anymore... ;)
> a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
> ...but not *that* little
Are you the same "little fish in a big pond" that was around about 6-12
months ago? Just curious--I remember the nick, but not the name that was
behind it, and it's a bit ...odd... for it to be mere coincidence that two
people use it on this group within a year's time.
a little fish in a big pond
Erg. I just skimmed over this letter. It's long, off-topic, and *might*
be construed as annoying by some folks. I should have e-mailed it (but
my newsgroup provider won't let me change that in the middle of
editting) to Aardy R. DeVarque directly.
So please, pretend this is just an e-mail to ARDV, and that
you didn't see it. Ignore it. Skip it. Etc. Or, if you're a
voyeur, I can't stop you ;).
For that matter, ARDV should have mailed his letter directly to me.
He claims (below) that the letter is not net.copping (although he
refers to it as net.copping later in the letter), so it should not
have been put on the newsgroup either.
And if it had been sent directly to me, I would have been less
irritated by it; I don't like getting chewed out in public,
*especially* when I've already discussed the matter equal-to-equal
with other people. For that matter, I don't like the authoritarian
tones ARDV took in this letter.
Aardy R. DeVarque (jh...@nslsilus.org) wrote:
: ***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***
: The following contains the personal opinions of one Raymond Dennis
: Reginald DeVarque, and should NOT, I repeat, NOT be considered as either
: net.copping or actual practice/custom for rec.games.frp.dnd!
: ***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***NOTICE***
And a durned long one it was, too. Did you have to quote *quite*
so much of what I said, Aardy?
: a little fish in a big pond (sea...@io.com) wrote:
: > J. McGuire (7322...@compuserve.com) wrote:
:
: Currently, rec.games.frp.announce contains the following types of posts:
:
: "Gaming related announcements"...
Yes, thank you, J. McGuire *did* already post this information,
tho. And I accepted it. And, presumably, so did other people who
hadn't already known. But thanks for the thought.
: Technically, PBeM announcements are already off-topic here, but I like to
: pick & choose my fights, and that's not one I think I can win just by
: net.copping; public opinion currently isn't nearly as against them as it
: is for "gamers wanted thousands of miles away from you," especially since
: anyone from anywhere can be in a PBeM, so as long as they're infrequent,
: I let 'em slide.
Okay... Thank you for letting me slide. Who, precisely, are you?
An admin? And whyu are you sstating this if this isn't net.copping?
[moved to rgf.announce]
[visit (web/irc/mud/pbem), are there any (web/irc/mud/pbem), Con]
: Rationale:
: a) these are all _announcements_, not really discussion, and
: not really discussion-starters (except threads like this), as such, they
: don't add much to the group except another post to ignore;
*This* is not a thread. This is an administrative task. Necessary,
but it mostly adds nothing but another post to ignore.
Why an admin task? Because we are discussing the structure and
needs of the newsgroup, INSTEAD of the topics the newsgroup was
started for. This is not a discussion of AD&D; this is a discussion
of the AD&D newsgroup.
And while it may be necessary to find a satisfactory answer, it
is NOT a thread, but a task. And likely, it's ignored by most of
the newsgroup.
: b) that way, gamers for *all* games can go to a single group when they
: need to find, for example, a PBeM, and find one easily, rather than trying
: to wade through the 100+ daily posts on this group for the one that
: mentions a PBeM--rgf.announce already gets traffic on these topics for
: other games, and some for AD&D as well. It seems to me that it'd be very
: advantageous to have one place (with about 50 posts per _week_ tops) to
: advertise in/read when looking for other PBeM/IRC players. As for web
: pages, this way there's one central clearing-house for all "new/updated"
: web page announcements, so it's easy to find them;
This would have to be rec.games.frp.pbem.announce, however. I've
been to rec.games.frp.announce, and I still had to wade through a lot
to get to the PBeM announcements. Same goes for web pages.
If I'm going to wade regardless, through both newsgroups, I might
as well wade through them in one place. Note that this is not a valid
statement... it is just intended to point up the logic error in
the argument you gave.
: c) If someone wanted to talk about converting AD&D (expecially combat) to
: work on a weekly turnaround basis, for example, that should be fine for
: *this* group (and there's always r.g.pbem, I think, as well). The same
: goes for "what sorts of things should I include on my AD&D-themed web
: page?" and other thread-starters.
It is tempting to be irritated here. I've *already discussed this* aspect,
on this newsgroup, with others. If you are going to net.cop, please
net.cop something that hasn't already been taken care of.
Redundancy of thread *is* something public opinion is against. I'm
reminded of all the "not this again!" posts out there.
In fact, this whole post is a *bit late*. If you're going to
act like the authority, please do so in a timely manner, *before*
the criminal has already gone through punishment, redemption,
and forgiveness, okay?
: > That is a good idea -- I don't get out much with newsgroups much,
: > mostly sticking to those I know. Thanks for the tip!
:
: For a list of all of the rec.games.frp.* newsgroups and several brief
: listings of what goes in each, as well as a listing of other newsgroups of
: probable interest to AD&D players, read the FAQ for this newsgroup
: (http://sac.uky.edu/~mlmorr0/faq/rgfdfaq.html), specifically sections 2
: and 6. You may be surprised what else is out there! :)
Thank you, but I already know how to find other newsgroups. I just
do not take the hours+ necessary to fight through a list of
newsgroups that tells me next to nothing about them, and then spend
the requisite days-weeks of time necessary to find out for certain
if the group is what I want.
On occasion, I take the advice/recommendation of someone whose opinion
I trust and try out a newsgroup that seems to be what I am looking
for. In this case, J. McGuire.
McGuire's advice had another thing going for it: it was *specific*
and it *addressed my need*. It did not involve "here's the phone
book, I'm sure there's a name you like in there somewhere".
: > a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
: > ...but not *that* little
:
: Are you the same "little fish in a big pond" that was around about 6-12
: months ago? Just curious--I remember the nick, but not the name that was
: behind it, and it's a bit ...odd... for it to be mere coincidence that two
: people use it on this group within a year's time.
Yeah. I was off this newsgroup for a few months (4 I think) because I
was moving from Louisiana to Austin, TX. Then, for another little
while, I didn't post anything cuz I had no time. In the process, I
changed e-mail addresses.
My name was Thomas Weigel then, too :).
a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
...but not *that* little.
Aardy R. DeVarque
a little fish in a big pond (sea...@io.com) wrote:
> So please, pretend this is just an e-mail to ARDV, and that
> you didn't see it. Ignore it. Skip it. Etc. Or, if you're a
> voyeur, I can't stop you ;).
Call me a Voyeur then. :) In any case, I'm keeping this public (for now
anyway) in order that anyone else who feels like you, or who is curious
what the heck I was talking about in my previous post can experience a
little elucidation. :)
> For that matter, ARDV should have mailed his letter directly to me.
> He claims (below) that the letter is not net.copping (although he
> refers to it as net.copping later in the letter), so it should not
> have been put on the newsgroup either.
It wasn't net.copping. I started off stating the "givens" of the current
situation (the first part of your post I considered part of those
"givens"), and then espoused an opinion on a topic I know a lot of people
disagree with me on, in order to stimulate discussion on the ideas raised
and see what everyone else thinks of it. At the end of all that were a
couple comments & some small-talk aimed directly at you.
> And if it had been sent directly to me, I would have been less
> irritated by it; I don't like getting chewed out in public,
> *especially* when I've already discussed the matter equal-to-equal
> with other people. For that matter, I don't like the authoritarian
> tones ARDV took in this letter.
I was not trying to chew you out at all. If I were, trust me--you'd know
it. ;) I was also not trying to be authoritarian; I'm sorry that you
misread my intentions so completely. :( I was trying to state the current
situation, suggest a possible change to group custom, state my reasons why
I think the change makes sense, and see how others respond. It looks to
me like you're against. <shrug> Which is ok, I expected negative
responses.
In hindsight, I probably should have changed the subject to something
like RFC: Proper Post Placement? I still may, if only to attract some
attention to it, since a lot of people seem to have already tuned *this*
thread out. <shrug>
> Aardy R. DeVarque (jh...@nslsilus.org) wrote:
> : Currently, rec.games.frp.announce contains the following types of posts:
> :
> : "Gaming related announcements"...
> Yes, thank you, J. McGuire *did* already post this information,
> tho. And I accepted it. And, presumably, so did other people who
> hadn't already known. But thanks for the thought.
Y'know, there *is* an FAQ for this group for a reason... ;) ;) ;)
> : Technically, PBeM announcements are already off-topic here, but I like to
> : pick & choose my fights, and that's not one I think I can win just by
> : net.copping; public opinion currently isn't nearly as against them as it
> : is for "gamers wanted thousands of miles away from you," especially since
> : anyone from anywhere can be in a PBeM, so as long as they're infrequent,
> : I let 'em slide.
> Okay... Thank you for letting me slide. Who, precisely, are you?
> An admin? And whyu are you sstating this if this isn't net.copping?
Who am I? I'm a nobody. There's no reason to listen to a word I say
unless you really want to. <shrug> Feel free to ignore me; lord knows
plenty of other people do. :)
Notice I didn't say "so...I let this one slide"; I'm speaking in the
general case, of PBeM announcements as a genre of posts. You original
post happens to fall into that category, but I'm not getting beyond the
general case here. It should *NOT* be taken as a personal insult to you!
As for me letting them slide, that's personal choice, based on past
reception. The group seems to, at this point, like PBeM announcements
about as much as discussions of whether or not medieval armor was really
tested by firing a cross-bow at it point-blank. Both are _technically_
off-topic here, but both are tolerated by group consensus; thus, even
though I believe PBeM announcements would be better served by posting
elsewhere and not here, I generally keep my mouth shut to avoid getting
flamed up one side & down the other. IOW, I "let 'em slide".
And I stated all that as a preamble to what I went on to suggest.
[Note that section which can best be summed up as "I suggest the group
consider certain topics to be solely rgf.announce material, and not rgfd
material" was snipped before I got here. I'd add it back to prove it, but
that's a bear & a half with this system. :) ]
> [moved to rgf.announce]
> [visit (web/irc/mud/pbem), are there any (web/irc/mud/pbem), Con]
Not "moved to rgf.announce", "*suggest* that such be moved"
> : Rationale:
> : a) these are all _announcements_, not really discussion, and
> : not really discussion-starters (except threads like this), as such, they
> : don't add much to the group except another post to ignore;
> *This* is not a thread. This is an administrative task. Necessary,
> but it mostly adds nothing but another post to ignore.
> Why an admin task? Because we are discussing the structure and
> needs of the newsgroup, INSTEAD of the topics the newsgroup was
> started for. This is not a discussion of AD&D; this is a discussion
> of the AD&D newsgroup.
> And while it may be necessary to find a satisfactory answer, it
> is NOT a thread, but a task. And likely, it's ignored by most of
> the newsgroup.
The Usenet term for what you are calling an "administrative task" is a
meta thread (A thread on Usenet is a series of responses linked by the
Subject line; even series of responses to off-topic spam are still
"threads"). Meta threads are considered on-topic for the group they
discuss. Another example of a meta thread would be a discussion of
"Should we write up an RFD for rec.games.frp.dnd.mages-and-armor?" And
even then they're still ignored by a goodly chunk of the newsgroup. :)
[Note that discussion of official RFDs's & CFV's are *not* considered meta
threads, and all such discussion is limited to news.groups. Unless one
is either a) Ken Arromdee or b) a rec.arts.anime.* reader. ;)]
> : b) that way, gamers for *all* games can go to a single group when they
> : need to find, for example, a PBeM, and find one easily, rather than trying
> : to wade through the 100+ daily posts on this group for the one that
> : mentions a PBeM--rgf.announce already gets traffic on these topics for
> : other games, and some for AD&D as well. It seems to me that it'd be very
> : advantageous to have one place (with about 50 posts per _week_ tops) to
> : advertise in/read when looking for other PBeM/IRC players. As for web
> : pages, this way there's one central clearing-house for all "new/updated"
> : web page announcements, so it's easy to find them;
> This would have to be rec.games.frp.pbem.announce, however. I've
> been to rec.games.frp.announce, and I still had to wade through a lot
> to get to the PBeM announcements. Same goes for web pages.
> If I'm going to wade regardless, through both newsgroups, I might
> as well wade through them in one place. Note that this is not a valid
> statement... it is just intended to point up the logic error in
> the argument you gave.
I don't think there's a logic error--is it easier to find, for example, a
post about a PBeM opening, in a group with _maybe_ 50 posts per *week*,
most of which are announcements of games opening (whether live, at Cons,
PBeMs, or IRC;),or in a group with 100-150 posts per *day*? The term
"needle in a haystack" comes to mind. I'd like to think people who are
actually looking to join a PBeM don't *want* to rely on serendipity to
find a game. (And many definitely don't--otherwise http://www.pbem.com/
wouldn't have a list of PBeMs...) I think the fact that rgf.marketplace
and rgf.archives work as well as they do are good precedents in this
situation.
> : c) If someone wanted to talk about converting AD&D (expecially combat) to
> : work on a weekly turnaround basis, for example, that should be fine for
> : *this* group (and there's always r.g.pbem, I think, as well). The same
> : goes for "what sorts of things should I include on my AD&D-themed web
> : page?" and other thread-starters.
> It is tempting to be irritated here. I've *already discussed this* aspect,
> on this newsgroup, with others. If you are going to net.cop, please
> net.cop something that hasn't already been taken care of.
You completely missed the point. The comment you quoted is one of the
answers to the question "What if this group decided that things currently
frequently posted here, such as web page announcements really do belong
more on rgf.announce?" It is NOT a comment about what anyone may or may
not do right now under current group consensus. I'm sorry you took it
that way.
> In fact, this whole post is a *bit late*. If you're going to
> act like the authority, please do so in a timely manner, *before*
> the criminal has already gone through punishment, redemption,
> and forgiveness, okay?
Yup. And if I were actually trying to act like an authority, then I'd
feel suitably chastized by this point. :) (Though it is possible to get
a post a week late and both not notice how late it is, and not have any
followups on your server yet, which could produce several "late"
responses. Aren't asynchronous media fun? ;) )
> : > That is a good idea -- I don't get out much with newsgroups much,
> : > mostly sticking to those I know. Thanks for the tip!
> :
> : For a list of all of the rec.games.frp.* newsgroups and several brief
> : listings of what goes in each, as well as a listing of other newsgroups of
> : probable interest to AD&D players, read the FAQ for this newsgroup
> : (http://sac.uky.edu/~mlmorr0/faq/rgfdfaq.html), specifically sections 2
> : and 6. You may be surprised what else is out there! :)
> Thank you, but I already know how to find other newsgroups. I just
> do not take the hours+ necessary to fight through a list of
> newsgroups that tells me next to nothing about them, and then spend
> the requisite days-weeks of time necessary to find out for certain
> if the group is what I want.
Umm--did you actually read what I wrote? TO repeat: sections 2 and 6 of
the rec.games.frp.dnd Frequently Asked Questions document, available at
the above web address contain a couple lists of RPG-related newsgroups,
with descriptions of what each is about. No need to fight through a list
of newsgroups that's miles long with no info about any of them! :)
> McGuire's advice had another thing going for it: it was *specific*
> and it *addressed my need*. It did not involve "here's the phone
> book, I'm sure there's a name you like in there somewhere".
Two signs of a good redirection. If I were actually trying to redirect
you, I'd've included them as well. :) The FAQ newsgroup listings are
good for those people who want to know what else is out there for RPG'ers
besides rgfd--none have anything near the length to be more than a
2-minute read or so--there's not more than a dozen rgf.* groups, y'know.
:)
Aardy
F=S+T
a little fish in a big pond
Okay.. I see why Aardy kept it pub the first time... so I'll respond
to this properly.
Aardy R. DeVarque (jh...@nslsilus.org) wrote:
: a little fish in a big pond (sea...@io.com) wrote:
: > And if it had been sent directly to me, I would have been less
: > irritated by it; I don't like getting chewed out in public,
: > *especially* when I've already discussed the matter equal-to-equal
: > with other people. For that matter, I don't like the authoritarian
: > tones ARDV took in this letter.
:
: I was not trying to chew you out at all. If I were, trust me--you'd know
: it. ;) I was also not trying to be authoritarian; I'm sorry that you
: misread my intentions so completely. :( I was trying to state the current
: situation, suggest a possible change to group custom, state my reasons why
: I think the change makes sense, and see how others respond. It looks to
: me like you're against. <shrug> Which is ok, I expected negative
: responses.
While I understand your intent *now*, I went back and still couldn't
see it in the letter I responded to. Although with the above
statement of intent prefixed to the letter you sent, the letter
takes on a while different meaning. Interesting. Anyway..
: In hindsight, I probably should have changed the subject to something
: like RFC: Proper Post Placement? I still may, if only to attract some
: attention to it, since a lot of people seem to have already tuned *this*
: thread out. <shrug>
I did this myself; this is a topic worth discussion.
: > Aardy R. DeVarque (jh...@nslsilus.org) wrote:
:
: As for me letting them slide, that's personal choice, based on past
: reception. The group seems to, at this point, like PBeM announcements
: about as much as discussions of whether or not medieval armor was really
: tested by firing a cross-bow at it point-blank. Both are _technically_
: off-topic here, but both are tolerated by group consensus; thus, even
That's where I disagree. But I believe in information-relation
propogation ;). If we're to discuss the AD&D rules for a crossbow
and its realism, we need to know if our idea of the crossbow is
correct. *Preferably*, there would be an expert on crossbows
somewhere on the list who could prevent much of the unecessary
sidebar of whether or not crossbows were ever tested point blank,
but if need be, we should be able to discuss that when it comes
up.
In an ideal world, there would be exactly one expert on each topic,
and a gamer's cyclopedia would gradually build up as a sort of
FAQ supplement ;). In an *ideal* world.
Otherwise, I'm perfectly willing to share my own experiences in
martial arts (shotokan karate and aikido) in order to further the
discussion of AD&D martial arts rules. Obviously, I won't go into
near the same detail, completeness, or annoying sidebars about it
that I would on rec.martial-arts... and it *is* a thin line of
when a sidebar is going too far :(.
: [Note that section which can best be summed up as "I suggest the group
: consider certain topics to be solely rgf.announce material, and not rgfd
: material" was snipped before I got here. I'd add it back to prove it, but
: that's a bear & a half with this system. :) ]
Sorry. I did read that, but was trying to cut down on post size; I
really hate it when the whole durned thing is quoted the whole way
through... if I wanted to read the whole thing, I'd read the old
post.
: > *This* is not a thread. This is an administrative task. Necessary,
: > but it mostly adds nothing but another post to ignore.
:
: The Usenet term for what you are calling an "administrative task" is a
: meta thread (A thread on Usenet is a series of responses linked by the
Same thing. As *I* said, it's a necessary thing. I understand that
it's a necessary thing. But I don't have to like it. Fancy word for
it or not.
Sorry for my misdefinition of 'thread', tho. I know better than
that ;).
: > If I'm going to wade regardless, through both newsgroups, I might
: > as well wade through them in one place. Note that this is not a valid
: > statement... it is just intended to point up the logic error in
: > the argument you gave.
:
: I don't think there's a logic error--is it easier to find, for example, a
: post about a PBeM opening, in a group with _maybe_ 50 posts per *week*,
Maybe. Depends on your ratios. 6 PBEM posts out of 150 posts (I counted,
that's the number on my news server, for rfg.dnd) compared to 1 PBEM
post out of 55 posts (for rfg.announce). That is, 6 AD&D PBEMS and 1
AD&D PBEM. Assuming I have no other rules books, I'll take the 1 in
25 odds over the 1 in 55 odds. *Especially* if I'm interested
primarily in AD&D and not the other stuff on .announce.
Of course, this litle fish is interested in other things on rfg.announce,
and is very glad to have found it... but we're assuming an AD&D default
here.
: find a game. (And many definitely don't--otherwise http://www.pbem.com/
: wouldn't have a list of PBeMs...) I think the fact that rgf.marketplace
: and rgf.archives work as well as they do are good precedents in this
: situation.
Very possibly. However, the fact that rfg.announce *doesn't* work
as well right now might be precedent as well. Perhaps that should
tell us something. (only 55 posts? C'mon, there's more gaming web
sites, pbems, etc., starting up a day than *that*).
[McGuire's redirection]
: Two signs of a good redirection. If I were actually trying to redirect
: you, I'd've included them as well. :) The FAQ newsgroup listings are
: good for those people who want to know what else is out there for RPG'ers
: besides rgfd--none have anything near the length to be more than a
: 2-minute read or so--there's not more than a dozen rgf.* groups, y'know.
: :)
As I said before, it *sounded* like a redirection. And an irritating
one. To reiterate..
If I was interested in spending the time and effort necessary to
go through the "not more than a dozen" newsgroups for gaming, I'd
probably get out more. But gaming isn't my only interest. And while
there's probably a newsgroup for them, I'll bet they're not listed in
the rfg.dnd FAQ.
For that matter, while the rfg.FAQ *does* provide more information
about each group, that info is still not sufficient that I can
decide a particular group is what I want; at best, I can eliminate
those I'm *definitely* not interested in by game system. If my
interests were narrow enough to restrict the list to the usable
point, I wouldn't need the FAQ.
Oops, gotta go.
a little fish in a big pond (Thomas Weigel)
Aardy R. DeVarque
A suggestion for what this community considers "off-topic"--ONLY a
suggestion at this point; I'd love to hear what other peopke think about
this!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
GIVENS:
Currently, rec.games.frp.announce contains the following types of posts:
"Gaming related announcements"...
Press releases
FAQs (not the rgfd FAQ yet, though; but it's not at RTFM, either, yet)
Convention ads & info
RPG Gamers wanted
AD&D Gamers wanted
RPG web pages opening
General PBeM RPG players wanted
In this way, there is a single, moderate-traffic place to go for
"information" in the rgf.* hierarchy, which makes such very easy to find.
It's also moderated, which cuts out the spammers. Search features on your
newsreader, as well as DejaNews, allow one to easily find, for example,
all the gamers in your immediate area who've posted Gamers Wanted
announcements in that group without needing to spend time searching
through several dozens of thousands of posts.
Technically, PBeM announcements are already off-topic in rgfd, but public
opinion currently isn't nearly as against them as it is for "gamers wanted
thousands of miles away from you," especially since anyone from anywhere
can be in a PBeM, so as long as they're infrequent and in good taste, most
people ignore them.
SUGGESTION:
Personally, I think the following posts, which currently get dumped all
over wherever the poster feels like it, should be posted in
rec.games.frp.announce as exclusively as sales of AD&D merchandise are in
rgf.marketplace:
Visit my AD&D web page
AD&D PBeM opening
Are there any PBeM's out there?
Visit my net.books web page
Convention featuring AD&D is this weekend!
AD&D IRC game openings
AD&D-via-MUD game openings
Rationale:
a) these are all _announcements_, not really discussion, and
not really discussion-starters (except threads like this), as such, they
don't add much to the group except another post to ignore;
b) that way, gamers for *all* games can go to a single group when they
need to find, for example, a PBeM, and find one easily, rather than trying
to wade through the 100+ daily posts on this group for the one that
mentions a PBeM--rgf.announce already gets traffic on these topics for
other games, and some for AD&D as well. It seems to me that it'd be very
advantageous to have one place (with about 50 posts per _week_ tops) to
advertise in/read when looking for other PBeM/IRC players. As for web
pages, this way there's one central clearing-house for all "new/updated"
web page announcements, so it's easy to find them;
c) If someone wanted to talk about converting AD&D (expecially combat) to
work on a weekly turnaround basis, for example, that should be fine for
*this* group (and there's always r.g.pbem, I think, as well). The same
goes for "what sorts of things should I include on my AD&D-themed web
page?" and other thread-starters.
d) Very short ads included in .sigs in posts to rgfd are no problem--Sean
& Steve advertise TSR whenever they post, Jean advertises Wintertree,
Terry mentions the latest products he's hawking, many .sigs include URLs,
etc. In this way, a post can be really on-topic, yet also advertise your
PBeM, web page, etc. Get too long and/or involved, though, and you start
getting into alt.fan.warlord material...
The only rationale against I can think of is "But it's still AD&D, and
thus on-topic here", which is disproven by the highly successful (and,
dare I say, profitable? --Quark ;) ) moving of *all* Usenet sales of AD&D
material to rgf.marketplace, the moving of all Usenet AD&D fiction to
rgf.archives (plug: check out The Adventurers for a frequent Greyhawk
fix!), and the mostly-successful attempts to move Gamers Wanted material
to rgf.announce after the moderator indicated it was acceptable material
there. I'd include the discussion of DM utilities being moved to
alt.games.frp.dnd-util, but as an alt group, it isn't reliably carried by
enough ISPs to _insist_ that discussion get totally shunted there (though
it's managed to do just that by itself, though. Try reading it sometime!
:) )
Responses? Counter-arguments?
Aardy R. DeVarque
Feudalism: Serf & TUrf
Aardy R. DeVarque
a little fish in a big pond (sea...@io.com) wrote:
> Okay.. I see why Aardy kept it pub the first time... so I'll respond
> to this properly.
After re-reading my original again, I agree that I didn't make my
intentionsl crystal clear. Mea culpa.
> Aardy R. DeVarque (jh...@nslsilus.org) wrote:
> : a little fish in a big pond (sea...@io.com) wrote:
> : In hindsight, I probably should have changed the subject to something
> : like RFC: Proper Post Placement? I still may, if only to attract some
> : attention to it, since a lot of people seem to have already tuned *this*
> : thread out. <shrug>
> I did this myself; this is a topic worth discussion.
And I have now reposted a revised form of my original post.
> : > Aardy R. DeVarque (jh...@nslsilus.org) wrote:
> :
> : As for me letting them slide, that's personal choice, based on past
> : reception. The group seems to, at this point, like PBeM announcements
> : about as much as discussions of whether or not medieval armor was really
> : tested by firing a cross-bow at it point-blank. Both are _technically_
> : off-topic here, but both are tolerated by group consensus; thus, even
> That's where I disagree. But I believe in information-relation
> propogation ;). If we're to discuss the AD&D rules for a crossbow
> and its realism, we need to know if our idea of the crossbow is
> correct.
You misread. :) I was referring to the medieval practice of testing
*plate armor* by shooting a crossbow at it, point-blank. Said practice
has little impact on the AD&D rules (except the briefest mention in a
thread on the toughness of armor), and should be *generally* kept to
soc.history.medieval.
ALso, I was pointing out that this group *likes* such sidebar "real world"
discussions, and then comparing the current tolerance of PBeM
announcements to the obvious tolerance of said RL topics.
> *Preferably*, there would be an expert on crossbows
> somewhere on the list who could prevent much of the unecessary
> sidebar of whether or not crossbows were ever tested point blank,
> but if need be, we should be able to discuss that when it comes
> up.
Yup. However, to get this back to PBeM's, "e-mail me if you wnt to join
my PBeM!" isn't really conducive to *discussions*, now is it?
> Otherwise, I'm perfectly willing to share my own experiences in
> martial arts (shotokan karate and aikido) in order to further the
> discussion of AD&D martial arts rules. Obviously, I won't go into
> near the same detail, completeness, or annoying sidebars about it
> that I would on rec.martial-arts... and it *is* a thin line of
> when a sidebar is going too far :(.
Agreed. I like many of the side discussions myself--in moderation, as
with anything. :) And my actual proposal didn't include such tangental
discussions at all, as you probably noticed, just the things that are pure
announcements and don't really attract any discussion other than snide
remarks and/or redirections/flames.
> : > If I'm going to wade regardless, through both newsgroups, I might
> : > as well wade through them in one place. Note that this is not a valid
> : > statement... it is just intended to point up the logic error in
> : > the argument you gave.
> :
> : I don't think there's a logic error--is it easier to find, for example, a
> : post about a PBeM opening, in a group with _maybe_ 50 posts per *week*,
> Maybe. Depends on your ratios. 6 PBEM posts out of 150 posts (I counted,
> that's the number on my news server, for rfg.dnd) compared to 1 PBEM
> post out of 55 posts (for rfg.announce). That is, 6 AD&D PBEMS and 1
> AD&D PBEM. Assuming I have no other rules books, I'll take the 1 in
> 25 odds over the 1 in 55 odds. *Especially* if I'm interested
> primarily in AD&D and not the other stuff on .announce.
Here's the data from my server:
Total posts in rgfd: 1518
1) "Are there any fantasy PBeMs?": 1
2) "What tricks to DMs use to handle PBeM playing?": 2
3) "Join my PBWeb!": 1
4) "Join my PBeM!": 3
Total PBeM-related announcements 5
#2 is on-topic discussion for the group, so I discount it, as my proposal
wouldn't affect it. The ratio, from my server's POV, is 5/~1500, or
roughly 1 in *300*
Total posts in rgf.announce: 36
"Join my [AD&D] PBeM!": 1
The ratio, from my server's POV is 1 in 36
There's almost an entire factor of 10 difference between those numbers.
In addition, if the PBeM announcements/looking fors had all been posted in
rgf.announce, then there would be a ratio of 6/41 or roughly 1 in *7*!
Do you see where I'm coming from on this point?
> Of course, this litle fish is interested in other things on rfg.announce,
> and is very glad to have found it... but we're assuming an AD&D default
> here.
A-yup. :)
> : find a game. (And many definitely don't--otherwise http://www.pbem.com/
> : wouldn't have a list of PBeMs...) I think the fact that rgf.marketplace
> : and rgf.archives work as well as they do are good precedents in this
> : situation.
> Very possibly. However, the fact that rfg.announce *doesn't* work
> as well right now might be precedent as well. Perhaps that should
> tell us something. (only 55 posts? C'mon, there's more gaming web
> sites, pbems, etc., starting up a day than *that*).
Well, that number is affected by two things: 1) your servers expiration
time, 2) the fact that the moderator seems to only pass posts on thursdays
& fridays.
AFAICT, there really aren't all that many PBeM's, for example, that start
up that frequently. As for web pages, it seems more common to either not
post an announcement, or to keep the announcements in the .sigfile.
> If I was interested in spending the time and effort necessary to
> go through the "not more than a dozen" newsgroups for gaming, I'd
> probably get out more. But gaming isn't my only interest. And while
> there's probably a newsgroup for them, I'll bet they're not listed in
> the rfg.dnd FAQ.
YOu mean the "other interests", right? If so, you're *probably* right.
> For that matter, while the rfg.FAQ *does* provide more information
> about each group, that info is still not sufficient that I can
> decide a particular group is what I want; at best, I can eliminate
> those I'm *definitely* not interested in by game system.
Have you seen "Where should I post this?" in Section 2, or were you just
looking at the list in Section 6?
Aardy
F=S+T
J. McGuire
Neil Watson wrote:
> I have used rgfa befor. I don't know who moderates it but he/she is not
> doing a very good job. I posted a 'players wanted' add [sic] and it
> took several days to get on.
R.g.f.a is moderated by Coyt Watters. He had severe hardware problems
for a while, couldn't get online for a few days. Perhaps that was the
delay you encountered? Remember, also, that he's doing this on his *own*
free time. Yes, there might be delays -- there always are, in a
moderated group -- but IMO, r.g.f.a's delays beat pages and pages of
spam for get-rich-quick schemes and XXX-rated websites/900-numbers/etc.
I don't think it's ever taken more than 48 hours for one of my posts to
make it up there, including propagation delays.
> Then it only appeared for one day!
That's the fault of your ISP. Once something's posted, it's there until
your news server dumps it.
> The group spends half the time empty.
Again, it's your ISP's fault. I've never seen it empty. Right now,
Netcom's news server shows 30 posts there.
> Either there's not enough traffic to making posting there worthwhile
> or most of the posts just don't make it there...
....or people such as yourself just don't post there! Honestly, even if
your ISP isn't holding r.g.f.a posts for very long, others certainly
are. Maybe you could contact your sysadmin about being a little more
reasonable with r.g.f.a? They should be able to keep a week's worth of
it around, easy.
-- jmm
Neil Watson
In article <54itpc$5...@news.acns.nwu.edu>, jh...@nslsilus.org says...
>
>A suggestion for what this community considers "off-topic"--ONLY a
>suggestion at this point; I'd love to hear what other peopke think about
>this!
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=
>GIVENS:
>Currently, rec.games.frp.announce contains the following types of posts:
>
>"Gaming related announcements"...
>
>Press releases
>FAQs (not the rgfd FAQ yet, though; but it's not at RTFM, either, yet)
>Convention ads & info
>RPG Gamers wanted
>AD&D Gamers wanted
>RPG web pages opening
>General PBeM RPG players wanted
>
days to get on. Then it only appeared for one day! The group spends half
the time empty. Either there's not enough traffic to making posting there
--
******************
Neil H. Watson
Quirky quotes and words of wisdom...
Check out my web page at:
http://www.clo.com/~neil/
*****************
Paul Reitsma
Larry D. Hols (hols...@tdsi.net) wrote:
> Okay, this post did not discuss any of the xD&D rules, nor did it
> discuss any of the TSR worlds. This NG is for the discussion of such.
> Please refrain from posting such non-relevant messages here.
>
> Pray, tell, did you decide to announce this here because you saw the
> Threshold announcement and figured "it must be okay" because someone
> else posted something irrelevant?
Okay, this post did not discuss any of the xD&D rules, nor did it
discuss any of the TSR worlds. This NG is for the discussion of such.
Please refrain from posting such non-relevant messages here.
Or do messages complaining about other people's messages automatically
belong (as opposed to, say... being sent by email?)?
Please don't take this as a flame (it isn't meant as one), but simply as
a reminder to all and sundry that, if a post is inappropriate, it
generally doesn't require 21 follow-ups informing us of that fact
(though the author may receive 21 emails...).
It'd be great if people did this and, while I'm whining, if people
checked ahead in a message thread before replying (if possible) so
somebody asking for advice doesn't get 21 people telling him _exactly_
the same thing (pet peeve).
Muchos gracias.
PulSAR
(who realizes that his own post argues against his own post, and will
flog himself for a while as pennance...)
Kate the Short
In article <54o6r4$h...@cyberlink.clo.com>, Neil Watson <ne...@clo.com> wrote:
>In article <54itpc$5...@news.acns.nwu.edu>, jh...@nslsilus.org says...
>>
>>suggestion at this point; I'd love to hear what other peopke think about
>>this!
>> =-=-=-=-=-=-=
>>GIVENS:
>>Currently, rec.games.frp.announce contains the following types of posts:
>>
>>"Gaming related announcements"...
>>
>>Press releases
>>FAQs (not the rgfd FAQ yet, though; but it's not at RTFM, either, yet)
>>Convention ads & info
>>RPG Gamers wanted
>>AD&D Gamers wanted
>>RPG web pages opening
>>General PBeM RPG players wanted
>
>doing a very good job. I posted a 'players wanted' add and it took several
>days to get on. Then it only appeared for one day! The group spends half
>the time empty. Either there's not enough traffic to making posting there
>worthwhile or most of the posts just don't make it there...
Hi Neil! Just a few comments on this:
On the matter of it taking several days to get on, you never know what is
going on in a moderator's life. The moderation of a newsgroup,
*especially* when done by one person and not a 'bot or a group of people,
is not an easy task. If you're out of town for the weekend or if there's
a family emergency (or if there's a hardware or software glitch), then
there will be propagation delays. You can't expect a moderator to live at
his or her computer 24/7! So there will be two-day gaps in when things
are posted. Also, if there's a propagation delay between his news system
and yours, it'll take longer to get there.
On the matter of posts only staying on your server for one day, I assume
that you aren't able to unread the posts you've already read? Posts
automatically disappear into the "read" pile once you've read them (unless
you unread them or mark or save them for return). That's something you
can control. But, after three or seven or fourteen or thirty days, your
news server will *automatically* expire all articles. Again, that's
something that the moderator can't control. If the posts are removed
after three days, the best thing to do is to ask your sysadmin/newsadmin
to extend the amount of time a post hangs around to seven or fourteen
days, especially if it's a low-traffic moderated group.
On the matter of the group appearing empty: well, you read all of the
posts in it. And it doesn't get the traffic that rgfd does due to the
sheer lack of followups that make it a moderated group. I subbed to both
rgfd and rgf.announce today. Someone mentioned that there were 6 AD&D
PBEM announcements in rgfd, and only 1 in rgf.announce? Well, when I
subscribed, it said there were 50 unread posts in announce, and over
*3000* in rgfd! So remember that these groups are not just for those who
read them daily, but are also there for those who are looking for the
first time. It's easy for a new PBEM person to check out .announce, while
it's a bit harder to sift through hundreds or thousands of posts on the
main group.
Finally, on the matter of not enough traffic: that's the point of having
a moderated group: little traffic makes it very easy for the newcomer,
casual reader, and current subscriber of the newsgroup to find the
specific information she needs without flamewars. Would you like to see
more PBEM and Local-gamers information? Then encourage more people to at
least *crosspost* the announcements between the two groups, with followups
set to the poster. That will guarantee more exposure in the beginning,
get more traffic to the group; then you can swiitch more people to
.announce-only postings of local-gaming, pbem, pbm, pbIRC, LARP, and other
games, pages, and the like.
I hope that these explanations might make a little more sense out of the
size and propagation of posts in the rgf.announce newsgroup. :) As
always, if you have more questions, post to the group or write the
aardvark.
kate.
[Hiya, Aardy! ;) ]
| Kate the Short - (ka...@cicero.spc.uchicago.edu) - at the U of Chicago |
| Patron Saint of rec.arts.comics.marvel.xbooks, and Really Short Person |
| Keeper of the RAC.MX Read Before Posting and Where Can I Find It? FAQs |
| Exclamation Points are the Spice of Life, and the Sorrow of the Reader |
Noah Dowd
Aardy R. DeVarque wrote:
>
> SUGGESTION:
> Personally, I think the following posts, which currently get dumped all
> over wherever the poster feels like it, should be posted in
> rec.games.frp.announce as exclusively as sales of AD&D merchandise are in
> rgf.marketplace:
>
> Visit my AD&D web page
> AD&D PBeM opening
> Are there any PBeM's out there?
> Visit my net.books web page
> Convention featuring AD&D is this weekend!
> AD&D IRC game openings
> AD&D-via-MUD game openings
<snip reasons>
> Responses? Counter-arguments?
>
Oh, alright, I'll take the bait.
Yes. I think this is a very good suggestion.
-Noah
(reasons? I don't need no steenkin' reasons)
--
"Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes."
Aardy R. DeVarque
> suggestion at this point; I'd love to hear what other peopke think about
> this!
...and I get one negative response and two rebuttals of that particular
response. Does anyone else actually care? Or is it a case of y'all only
starting to care if someone starts actively net.copping, at which time
'everyone' is suddenly against?
Aardy
F=S+T
Beeblebrox
> > suggestion at this point; I'd love to hear what other peopke think about
Keep up the good work, Mr. Vark :)
--
Jan Jongejan 8-{) --me with moustache
Dept. Comp.Sci.,
Univ. of Groningen, and add a cigar...
Netherlands.
email: jj...@cs.rug.nl
ETAN MOONSTAR
>> SUGGESTION:
>> Personally, I think the following posts, which currently get dumped all
>> over wherever the poster feels like it, should be posted in
>> rec.games.frp.announce as exclusively as sales of AD&D merchandise are in
>> rgf.marketplace:
>>
>> Visit my AD&D web page
>> AD&D PBeM opening
>> Are there any PBeM's out there?
>> Visit my net.books web page
>> Convention featuring AD&D is this weekend!
>> AD&D IRC game openings
>> AD&D-via-MUD game openings
>>
> Oh, alright, I'll take the bait.
> Yes. I think this is a very good suggestion.
For the most part, I agree. The only exception I would like to extend is
that a person can advertise their web page (I'm currently working on my home
page, and I know how much a page designer wants other people to look at their
page after all the work they put into it!) or upcoming conventions IN THEIR SIG
FILES. That way, people uninterested in these things can skip over them as
easily as they ignore the repetitive quotes and inane ASCII art currently used
as sig files, while people who DO want to find out about web pages and
conventions can do so without wading through a bunch of generic roleplaying
announcements. How about that idea, Aardy?
--Etan Moonstar
Phase
>> suggestion at this point; I'd love to hear what other peopke think about
>> this!
>
>response. Does anyone else actually care? Or is it a case of y'all only
>starting to care if someone starts actively net.copping, at which time
>'everyone' is suddenly against?
in that order of precedence me thinks. The "Great MUD" thread had
everyone's interest because they wanted to argue. This thread is
supposed to be a serious discussion however, and is probably getting
less attention for the reason given in my first statement.
I agreed with your suggestions I think, kinda forgot them now. (:
-
Phase FX - http://www.cs.sc.edu/~jason-e
"Dreams are what love is made of."
The Amorphous Mass
>> suggestion at this point; I'd love to hear what other peopke think about
>> this!
>
>response. Does anyone else actually care? Or is it a case of y'all only
>starting to care if someone starts actively net.copping, at which time
>'everyone' is suddenly against?
I think it's more a case of silence == agreement, reinforced by an
aversion to posting what is effectively a "me too!" I didn't have any
objections to your suggestion. It looked fine to me.
The Amorphous Mass
sl...@cc.usu.edu (ETAN MOONSTAR) wrote:
>
> For the most part, I agree. The only exception I would like to extend is
>that a person can advertise their web page (I'm currently working on my home
>page, and I know how much a page designer wants other people to look at their
>page after all the work they put into it!) or upcoming conventions IN THEIR SIG
>FILES. That way, people uninterested in these things can skip over them as
>easily as they ignore the repetitive quotes and inane ASCII art currently used
>as sig files, while people who DO want to find out about web pages and
>conventions can do so without wading through a bunch of generic roleplaying
>announcements. How about that idea, Aardy?
IANARD :-), but I think the current consensus is that *any* sort of
advertising is OK as long as it is confined to a tasteful .sig. I certainly
don't mind if someone signs off on-topic posts with "visit EuthanasiaMUD!
bunny.rabbit.com 999" or similar ads for web pages, ftp sites or even
freeware, shareware, or commercial products. AFAIK, Aardy is more concerned
with *whole posts* that advertise these things, and I second his concern.
Especially if they're posted 3+ times a week.
And before anyone comments, no I don't fly into a blind rage every time
I see a "check out X" post. As long as they only pop up every once in
a while I don't mind them at all.
Aardy R. DeVarque
ETAN MOONSTAR (sl...@cc.usu.edu) wrote:
> For the most part, I agree. The only exception I would like to extend is
> that a person can advertise their web page (I'm currently working on my home
> page, and I know how much a page designer wants other people to look at their
> page after all the work they put into it!) or upcoming conventions IN THEIR
> How about that idea, Aardy?
A sig file mention of a web page wouldn't be a post that solely advertised
a web page, now would it? The *post* would (hopefully ;) ) be on-topic.
Unless, of course, someone were to post a post that was nothing but their
.sig, in which case *then* it'd be off-topic.
*BRIEF* .sig file mentions are the standard way of getting around
"off-topic" topics. SOme other paraphrased examples I've seen in
.sigfiles and have *no* problem with:
"Come see my auction in rgf.marketplace"
"Read my story, found in rgf.archives"
"Visit the Great Campaign World, at http://www.foo.bar.com/~me/"
"MyMUD: telnet foo.bar.com 6969"
However, a 20K .sig that included the entire catalog for an auction, for
example, would be right out. ;)
Also, something along these lines wouldn't really count as "off-topic"
under this as well:
"Schlemiel wrote:
> I'm looking for the FAQ for this group, where can I find it?
The FAQ can be found at http://sac.uky.edu/~mlmorr0/faq/rgfdfaq.html"
(Sneaky, aren't I)
Or substitute "Great Net Spell Book" for "FAQ" (though this sort of
one-off informative message is better served by sending it through e-mail,
unless it seems to be something of more general interest).
Aardy
F=S+T
a little fish in a big pond
: > A suggestion for what this community considers "off-topic"--ONLY a
: > this!
: ...and I get one negative response and two rebuttals of that particular
: response. Does anyone else actually care? Or is it a case of y'all only
: starting to care if someone starts actively net.copping, at which time
: 'everyone' is suddenly against?
That's actually a pretty good rate. Higher numbers is usually
reserved for flames.
It's also possible that people have continued to tune out this particular
thread and its descendants; it might be advisable to bring it up in
another few weeks, when it's "fresh" again.
Or you could net.cop to bring attention to it, but...
Tim Breen
> IANARD :-)
"I am not Aardy R. DeVarque"? Ooooohhhhh, Baaaaaaad.
[snip]
I agree; pretty much anything goes in .sig files. Any most things in
gentle moderation don't bother me TOO much.
-- Tim
http://personalweb.lightside.com/Pfiles/breen1.html
" The Red Queen shook her head. "You may call it 'nonsense'
if you like," she said, "but _I've_ heard nonsense, compared
with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!" "
- Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
Shawn Vincent
Kate the Short wrote ...
> On the matter of posts only staying on your server for one day, I assume
> that you aren't able to unread the posts you've already read? Posts
> automatically disappear into the "read" pile once you've read them (unless
> you unread them or mark or save them for return). That's something you
> can control. But, after three or seven or fourteen or thirty days, your
> news server will *automatically* expire all articles. Again, that's
> something that the moderator can't control. If the posts are removed
> after three days, the best thing to do is to ask your sysadmin/newsadmin
> to extend the amount of time a post hangs around to seven or fourteen
> days, especially if it's a low-traffic moderated group.
Hm. Actually, it's possible to post messages to newsgroups that have
shorter or longer expiration times. There's some wierd header you can
specify. Local newsfeeds don't have to pay attention to it, but some do.
So it's technically possible for a moderator to post things for only a day.
It's related to the 'Distribution' header, which does the same sort of
'viewport manipulation', only w.r.t. geography.
Whether one *would* or not, given that it's kinda pointless, and rarely used,
is another issue.
<shrug>....take care,
-Shawn.
Steven Taylor
ETAN MOONSTAR wrote:
> For the most part, I agree. The only exception I would like to extend is
> that a person can advertise their web page (I'm currently working on my home
> page, and I know how much a page designer wants other people to look at their
> page after all the work they put into it!) or upcoming conventions IN THEIR SIG
> FILES. That way, people uninterested in these things can skip over them as
> easily as they ignore the repetitive quotes and inane ASCII art currently used
> as sig files, while people who DO want to find out about web pages and
> conventions can do so without wading through a bunch of generic roleplaying
> announcements. How about that idea, Aardy?
I just checked out Aardy's origional post on Deja News. He agreed with
you on the .sig file ads:
d) Very short ads included in .sigs in posts to rgfd are no
problem--Sean& Steve advertise TSR whenever they post, Jean advertises
Wintertree,Terry mentions the latest products he's hawking, many .sigs
include URLs,etc. In this way, a post can be really on-topic, yet also
advertise your PBeM, web page, etc. Get too long and/or involved,
though, and you start
getting into alt.fan.warlord material...
I think all of us agree that .sig ads are OK, as long as the post they
are attached to is on topic.
I don't even mind Mad's CLinton/Gore .sig, even though I'm a epublican
:)
Steven Taylor