Bristol newsgroup - alt.bristol
Peter H.M. Brooks
submit suggestions to add to the charter and FAQWA, please either post
them here, or send them to me. I will probably set the group up on
Saturday. I never was keen on this democracy nonsense, and certainly
not keen on relying on the stupidity of committees.
I would like a charter that is open to anybody who has an interest in
Bristol - we will probably have nutters who want to go on about religion,
the latest war or where to find good sex sites, but, WTF, it is easy
enough to skip those.
I think that alt.bristol is a good name, Bristol is quite an
'alternative' place, better than most of the places to which it is an
alternative. Furthermore, it is an easy name to remember and a good
place to chat - anybody searching for a newsgroup on Bristol should
be able to find it easily. If, at some stage in the future, somebody
should wish to set up alt.bristol.balloons, or whatever, it is
also simple, no veto, no vote, no bullshit..
I propose to start the group with the thread; 'Why Bristol is the ne plus
ultra of the known universe'. We can see how things go from there. I may
cross post this to soc.culture.british and uk.misc, but threads ought
to be able to maintain their own life sans cross posting - particularly
ones that mention some new criminal stupidity about to be inflicted
upon us by the council.
The uk.* heirachy is a complete pain - I watched the process where
a sensible attempt to set up uk.philosophy.* was scuppered by philistines
on the committee that apparently thought that philosophy was some sort
of science - I don't see any point in trying to get a group for Bristol
in the uk.* heirachy.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Dom
In article <930160...@psyche.demon.co.uk>,
pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk ("Peter H.M. Brooks") wrote:
>I propose to set up alt.bristol. If anybody would like to
Let's look at those newsgroups.
soc.culture.british,uk.local.southwest,uk.misc,uk.net.news.config,
alt.fan.british-accent,news.groups,uk.net.news,alt.bristol
Free clue.
alt.config *should* be in the groups list.
news.config should not. WTF has this got to do with a.f.b-a?
Perhaps they will tell us.
And I've trimmed other uk.* groups from follow-ups, as if it's
in uk.misc, it shouldn't be elsewhere in uk.*
>I propose to start the group with the thread; 'Why Bristol is the ne plus
>ultra of the known universe'. We can see how things go from there. I may
>cross post this to soc.culture.british and uk.misc, but threads ought
Why? Do WTF you like with s.c.b, but seeing as you don't appear to
read or post in uk.misc apart from through cross-posting, do you
suppose you could have some sense of consideration and refrain
from cross-posting to uk.misc. Those wishing to read your posts
are quite able to subscribe to s.c.b.
>The uk.* heirachy is a complete pain - I watched the process where
>a sensible attempt to set up uk.philosophy.* was scuppered by philistines
>on the committee that apparently thought that philosophy was some sort
>of science - I don't see any point in trying to get a group for Bristol
>in the uk.* heirachy.
So why bother informing uk.n.n.c ?
John Lynch
<pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> writes
>I propose to set up alt.bristol. If anybody would like to
>them here, or send them to me. I will probably set the group up on
>Saturday. I never was keen on this democracy nonsense, and certainly
>not keen on relying on the stupidity of committees.
>
>I would like a charter that is open to anybody who has an interest in
>Bristol - we will probably have nutters who want to go on about religion,
>the latest war or where to find good sex sites, but, WTF, it is easy
>enough to skip those.
>
>I think that alt.bristol is a good name,
alt.bristols would be an even better one
--
John Lynch
A real man should be as useless as possible -- Jeremy Clarkson
Peter H.M. Brooks
waste...@cyberdude.com "26-AM-786" writes:
> You should propose it in alt.config then. I have just watched a
> related newsgroup to one I use being created so I know the procedure.
> Be warned, you need a charter, a traffic report (i.e some evidence of
> the number of postings related to Bristol and the time frame) and most
> importantly you will definitely not be able to call it alt.bristol as
> it is a new 2nd level hierarchy.
>
This is not the case with alt.* groups. All the above are recommended and
advised, none are compulsory. Should I choose to go ahead with none of
them, I shall have broken no rules.
>
> These will be drawn to your attention by a number of alt.config's
> "regulars" and you will probably be advised to create it as a uk group
> anyway as it is mainly of uk interest.
>
Again, this may be advised, but I see no reason to follow the advice.
>
> Why don't you just propose it as uk.local.bristol. The uk groups have
> a lot less spam than the alt ones, and they are automatically added to
> news servers whereas a lot of servers refuse alt groups.
>
Not many servers refuse all alt groups - some are indeed selective, if
an alt group has traffic that is interesting, or if a subscriber requests
it, then it will be carried.
I don't feel like going through the silly hoops that the uk.* committee
are keen on. When I heard about their throwing out uk.philosophy, I decided
that there was no point wasting time with them.
Thank you for bringing all this to my attention, though.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Peter H.M. Brooks
jly...@ldta.demon.co.uk "John Lynch" writes:
I am not averse to that as well - I think that there are some groups with
longer names that cater to them, though.
How about a deal. If you support my creation of alt.bristol [it usually
needs a few booster messages to deal with the few cancelgroups that the
pocket hitlers send out], I will support your creation of alt.bristols
in the same fashion.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Steph
"Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:930160...@psyche.demon.co.uk...
> I propose to set up alt.bristol. If anybody would like to
> submit suggestions to add to the charter and FAQWA, please either post
> them here, or send them to me. I will probably set the group up on
> Saturday. I never was keen on this democracy nonsense, and certainly
> not keen on relying on the stupidity of committees.
>
> I would like a charter that is open to anybody who has an interest in
> Bristol -
Shouldn't need a big server then.
Peter H.M. Brooks
I agree, usenet is spread over the globe, not confined to one server.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Steve Yerbury
<jly...@ldta.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>I think that alt.bristol is a good name,
>
>alt.bristols would be an even better one
alt.big.bristols.phwaar
--
Steve Yerbury
You can't get a body in Bodyshop
kermit
Brooks") wrote:
>I propose to set up alt.bristol. If anybody would like to
>submit suggestions to add to the charter and FAQWA, please either post
>them here, or send them to me. I will probably set the group up on
>Saturday.
I look forward to seeing it appear, despite being averse to the uk
heirarchy, I still believe that it belongs there.
K
-- Visit the UK.L.SW Website for the lowdown on the nutters.
http://browser.to/uklsw
John Lynch
<pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> writes
>> >
>> >I think that alt.bristol is a good name,
>>
>> alt.bristols would be an even better one
>>
>longer names that cater to them, though.
>
>How about a deal. If you support my creation of alt.bristol [it usually
>needs a few booster messages to deal with the few cancelgroups that the
>pocket hitlers send out], I will support your creation of alt.bristols
>in the same fashion.
>
bothered to see the other one through. alt.bristols would probably get
on my tits after a while
John Lynch
<ste...@stevey.demon.co.uk> writes><jly...@ldta.demon.co.uk> writes
>>>
>>>I think that alt.bristol is a good name,
>>
>>alt.bristols would be an even better one
>
>
Stick one in each ear and ask for the operator
Peter H.M. Brooks
> On Wed, 23 Jun 99 17:54:57 GMT, pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk ("Peter H.M.
> Brooks") wrote:
>
> >I propose to set up alt.bristol. If anybody would like to
> >submit suggestions to add to the charter and FAQWA, please either post
> >them here, or send them to me. I will probably set the group up on
> >Saturday.
>
> I look forward to seeing it appear, despite being averse to the uk
> heirarchy, I still believe that it belongs there.
>
I would have no objection to somebody else setting up the application to
the uk heirachy. I just don't feel like doing it myself. In the mean time -
since an application to the uk committee can keep them happy for a few
weeks with tedious detail - people can chat on alt.bristol. If the uk
crew have the sense to create the group, eventually, then, if people
wish, then they can post there rather than to alt.bristol. It doesn't
matter that much.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Peter H.M. Brooks
jly...@ldta.demon.co.uk "John Lynch" writes:
> In article <930164...@psyche.demon.co.uk>, Peter H.M. Brooks
> <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> writes
> >> >
> >> >I think that alt.bristol is a good name,
> >>
> >> alt.bristols would be an even better one
> >>
> >I am not averse to that as well - I think that there are some groups with
> >longer names that cater to them, though.
> >
> >How about a deal. If you support my creation of alt.bristol [it usually
> >needs a few booster messages to deal with the few cancelgroups that the
> >pocket hitlers send out], I will support your creation of alt.bristols
> >in the same fashion.
> >
> Of course I shall support alt.bristol. I don't know that I could be
> bothered to see the other one through. alt.bristols would probably get
> on my tits after a while
>
Thank you, John. I agree, it is nicer if these things pop out unexpectedly
from time to time.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Ian Henden
land.demon.co.uk> put his/her 2penn'orth in to say
>On Wed, 23 Jun 99 19:09:39 GMT, pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk ("Peter H.M.
>Brooks") wrote:
>
>>In article <STmFJdA7...@ldta.demon.co.uk>
>> jly...@ldta.demon.co.uk "John Lynch" writes:
>>
>>> In article <930160...@psyche.demon.co.uk>, Peter H.M. Brooks
>>> <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> writes
>>> >I propose to set up alt.bristol. If anybody would like to
>>> >submit suggestions to add to the charter and FAQWA, please either post
>>> >them here, or send them to me. I will probably set the group up on
>>> >not keen on relying on the stupidity of committees.
>>> >
>>> >I would like a charter that is open to anybody who has an interest in
>>> >the latest war or where to find good sex sites, but, WTF, it is easy
>>> >enough to skip those.
>>> >
>>>
>>> alt.bristols would be an even better one
>>>
>>I am not averse to that as well - I think that there are some groups with
>>longer names that cater to them, though.
>>
>>How about a deal. If you support my creation of alt.bristol [it usually
>>needs a few booster messages to deal with the few cancelgroups that the
>>pocket hitlers send out], I will support your creation of alt.bristols
>>in the same fashion.
>
>it, Peter, you can be assured of our full support.
>
Even if it is a bit one-sided from some members...
>Joanna
--
Ian Henden
Blade Runner
wrote:
>Why don't you just propose it as uk.local.bristol. The uk groups have
>a lot less spam than the alt ones, and they are automatically added to
>news servers whereas a lot of servers refuse alt groups.
Indeed. I see no reason why it shouldn't go through as a fast track
provided you can demonstrate support.
FU set to unnc only
--
Geoff (Blade Runner)
Newsgroups: alt.uk.virgin-net.oldbies, uk.local.north-staffs
Simple RFD creation with the online RFD Maker
http://www.cthree.freeserve.co.uk/rfdmaker/
Peter H.M. Brooks
joa...@lotos-land.demon.co.uk "Joanna Prescott" writes:
> >I am not averse to that as well - I think that there are some groups with
> >longer names that cater to them, though.
> >
> >How about a deal. If you support my creation of alt.bristol [it usually
> >needs a few booster messages to deal with the few cancelgroups that the
> >pocket hitlers send out], I will support your creation of alt.bristols
> >in the same fashion.
>
> I have little interest in bristols but whatever you decided to call
> it, Peter, you can be assured of our full support.
>
Thank you, I think it might be fun. I have had an offer from somebody who
would like to set up uk.local.bristol, that would be fun too.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Jasper Janssen
Brooks") wrote in <930163...@psyche.demon.co.uk>:
>This is not the case with alt.* groups. All the above are recommended and
>advised, none are compulsory. Should I choose to go ahead with none of
>them, I shall have broken no rules.
And neither shall various alt.config groupies break any rules by sending
out rmgroups for your group.
Jasper
Steve Yerbury
<joa...@lotos-land.demon.co.uk> writes
>On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 22:46:15 GMT, em...@our.discretion.too (Madame
>Fifi) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:35:25 GMT,
>>joa...@lotos-land.demon.co.uk (Joanna Prescott)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have little interest in bristols but whatever you decided to call
>>>it, Peter, you can be assured of our full support.
>>
>
>No prize this time, It's C Brassiere.
>
>Joanna
>
What did the brassiere say to the top hat?
Ian Henden
>
>Er..I'll take the tits and you can have head?
>
>I dunno, tell me.
>
>Joanna
>
--
Ian Henden
Paul Bolchover
Peter H.M. Brooks <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Thank you, I think it might be fun. I have had an offer from somebody who
>would like to set up uk.local.bristol, that would be fun too.
Just to clarify, that's me. I would appreciate it if people stopped
newgrouping alt.bristol until the uk.local.* group has had a chance -
I expect it to be up and running in 2 1/2 weeks.
Paul Bolchover
ANNA Warman
out:
>Peter H.M. Brooks <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Thank you, I think it might be fun. I have had an offer from somebody who
>>would like to set up uk.local.bristol, that would be fun too.
>
>Just to clarify, that's me. I would appreciate it if people stopped
>newgrouping alt.bristol until the uk.local.* group has had a chance -
>I expect it to be up and running in 2 1/2 weeks.
I take uk.net.news.announce and if a RFD for uk.local.bristol was
raised, I've not seen it.
--
ANNA
http://www.warman.demon.co.uk/anna/Welcome.html
To reply by email, first remove .MY_BRA.
Paul Bolchover
In article <37737135...@news.demon.co.uk>,
ANNA Warman <AN...@warman.de.MY_BRA.mon.co.uk> wrote:
>In soc.culture.british, pb1...@cus.cam.ac.uk (Paul Bolchover) tapped
>out:
>
>>Peter H.M. Brooks <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>Thank you, I think it might be fun. I have had an offer from somebody who
>>>would like to set up uk.local.bristol, that would be fun too.
>>
>>Just to clarify, that's me. I would appreciate it if people stopped
>>newgrouping alt.bristol until the uk.local.* group has had a chance -
>>I expect it to be up and running in 2 1/2 weeks.
>
>I take uk.net.news.announce and if a RFD for uk.local.bristol was
>raised, I've not seen it.
It's currently sitting in control's inbox, waiting for him to post it.
Paul Bolchover
martinp
>
> > Of course I shall support alt.bristol.
what about the bristols that are self supporting?
> I don't know that I could be
> > bothered to see the other one through. alt.bristols would probably get
> > on my tits after a while
Aha! in that case you need the subgroups alt.bristol.cities and not
alt.bristols.rovers.
martinp
>
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:930160...@psyche.demon.co.uk...
> > I propose to set up alt.bristol. If anybody would like to
> > submit suggestions to add to the charter and FAQWA, please either post
> > them here, or send them to me. I will probably set the group up on
> > Saturday. I never was keen on this democracy nonsense, and certainly
> > not keen on relying on the stupidity of committees.
> >
> > I would like a charter that is open to anybody who has an interest in
> > Bristol -
>
Peter H.M. Brooks
pb1...@cus.cam.ac.uk "Paul Bolchover" writes:
> In article <930241...@psyche.demon.co.uk>,
> Peter H.M. Brooks <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Thank you, I think it might be fun. I have had an offer from somebody who
> >would like to set up uk.local.bristol, that would be fun too.
>
> Just to clarify, that's me. I would appreciate it if people stopped
> newgrouping alt.bristol until the uk.local.* group has had a chance -
> I expect it to be up and running in 2 1/2 weeks.
>
Do you see a problem with alt.bristol existing as well as uk.local.bristol?
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Peter H.M. Brooks
AN...@warman.de.MY_BRA.mon.co.uk "ANNA Warman" writes:
> In soc.culture.british, pb1...@cus.cam.ac.uk (Paul Bolchover) tapped
> out:
>
> >Peter H.M. Brooks <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>Thank you, I think it might be fun. I have had an offer from somebody who
> >>would like to set up uk.local.bristol, that would be fun too.
> >
> >Just to clarify, that's me. I would appreciate it if people stopped
> >newgrouping alt.bristol until the uk.local.* group has had a chance -
> >I expect it to be up and running in 2 1/2 weeks.
>
> I take uk.net.news.announce and if a RFD for uk.local.bristol was
> raised, I've not seen it.
>
I don't think it has got that far yet. I am quite pleased not to be involved
in the long discussion about it. The silly thing is that the committee thinks
that it should stop RFD's [requests for discussion], as part of its job
in blocking new groups.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Peter H.M. Brooks
m.pat...@consunet.nl "martinp" writes:
> > > I would like a charter that is open to anybody who has an interest in
> > > Bristol -
> >
> > Shouldn't need a big server then.
> B cup big enough?
>
At least a 'D' for Bristol.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Peter H.M. Brooks
m.pat...@consunet.nl "martinp" writes:
> Peter H.M. Brooks wrote:
> >
>
> > > Of course I shall support alt.bristol.
> what about the bristols that are self supporting?
.
Those aren't bristols, they are just tits, nice ones, no doubt, but not
bristols.
>
> > I don't know that I could be
> > > bothered to see the other one through. alt.bristols would probably get
> > > on my tits after a while
> Aha! in that case you need the subgroups alt.bristol.cities and not
> alt.bristols.rovers.
>
Sod rovers - though roving over the bristols might be a theme.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Paul Bolchover
In article <930329...@psyche.demon.co.uk>,
Peter H.M. Brooks <pe...@psyche.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>I don't think it has got that far yet. I am quite pleased not to be involved
>in the long discussion about it. The silly thing is that the committee thinks
>that it should stop RFD's [requests for discussion], as part of its job
>in blocking new groups.
That is a complete exaggeration, and you know it.