Disrespect on this NG
Chaingarden
wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
knowledge around here. If you're going to reply with a sarcastic, degrading
comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it to yourself
and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really annoying?
All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory one-liners
my way, it would just prove my point.
db
Paul Raj Khangure
> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a bit, and I
> wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
Your line lengths are a little too long.
Try wrapping at about 72 - 75 characters per line, to allow easy
quotation.
> group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
> knowledge around here. If you're going to reply with a sarcastic, degrading
USENET has certain policies and etiquette which have been around since
it was created. One such thing is the existance of a newgroup FAQ which
answers all the common simple questions. For someone to come into a
newsgroup and post such a question without looking for the FAQ, is like
someone buying a new car, then asking the sales person how they're meant
to drive it. That kind of behaviour will result in ridicule.
> All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
> arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory one-liners
> my way, it would just prove my point.
There's the humour content.
Paul Raj Khangure
--
I stayed up all last night playing poker with tarot cards.
I got a full house and four people died. - Stephen Wright
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
Greg McConnell
I'm far from being a regular here, but some of these guys have
been here since the beginning. They get sick of reading the same
shit over and over again about who Taim is and how Moiraine gave
Asmodean the clap and that's how he died (read about in the
prologue to TSR). There are at least two FAQ's on the books and
the group itself, and I suppose it's good idea to ask to read
these upon joining a new group like this, and if newbies did that
like they should, they'd discover in the first FAQ that unless
you have something useful to add, don't bother bringing up things
in the second FAQ because it's already been discussed to death.
and no 1 has n e pashins 4 ppl who cant property comm. a simple
sentence.
emc...@hamilton.edu
corrected it below.
bende...@aol.comnojunk (Chaingarden) writes:
> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a
> bit, and I wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for
> everyone else on this group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple
> question that is considered common knowledge around here. If you're
> going to reply with a sarcastic, degrading comment to try to make
> yourself feel superior, why not just keep it to yourself and not
> post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really annoying?
Yes.
The only point when I'll start being insulting to a newbie is when
he's had ample time to correct something he's done wrong, and hasn't.
For what it's worth, this is the way most of the other regulars will
respond, as well. Some of them don't; but frankly, some of the
regulars are jerks. Just like in the real world, unfortuantely.
> All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if
> you've got any arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw
> any derogatory one-liners my way, it would just prove my point.
I'm afraid I honestly can't think of any. But then, I've never been
very good at derogatory one-liners.
--
Eric McCoy <emc...@hamilton.edu>
Michael Hoye
Chaingarden <bende...@aol.comnojunk> wrote:
>I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a bit, and I
>wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
>group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
>knowledge around here.
People who ask genuine, well-thought-out questions that aren't answered in
the FAQ are pretty much never flamed for asking. People who are civil,
intelligent and who format their posts nicely are likewise rarely flamed.
People who do not meet these very simple criteria are first told politely
but tersely that they are going about this wrong. Refusals to be civil,
intelligent or to format your posts properly are generally stepped on.
This is not "irritating", or a waste of time. It's not about feeling
superior. It's about _being_ superior; this is the reason that the
signal-to-noise ratio here is better than just about anywhere else
on Usenet, in my experience.
--
Mike Hoye
Thor
Really? You suck.
--Thor
emc...@hamilton.edu
> > But then, I've never been
> > very good at derogatory one-liners.
> Really? You suck.
Shut the fuck up.
At the very least: Don't force to start a cascade with "Thor" puns.
("My ath ith thor!" "You're a thor lother!" "Thut the fuck up,
already!" "Haven't we had this cascade already?" "Thut up, lother!")
--
Eric McCoy <emc...@hamilton.edu>
Phat Ass
>intelligent and who format their posts nicely are likewise rarely flamed.
Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different. That's all.
Feh...I don't know why I'm even bothering.
Phat Ass
"You ate a lot of paint as a child, didn't you?"
"You mean wall candy?"
-Penny Arcade
Erh, dude, that doesn't make you a hentai. Now, if you buy Donjinshi so you can
watch Trunks repeatedly butt-plug her, _then_ you may be a hentai"
brindle
Brian
wrote:
> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a bit, and I
> wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
> group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
> knowledge around here.
I'm actually a "newbie" here, only reading the newsgroup casually just
before the release of a new book, and I really don't follow any but
the Tor publishing schedule-related threads, typically. I recently
posted a question which was content-related. I was lucky; my question
was not discussed here in the past. (Well, I wasn't lucky; I checked
as best as I could using Deja.) However, I was prepared for flames
anyway. Newsgroups are communities -- even in contentious newsgroups
there is a connection between the participants that operates on a
different level from the actual issue itself. To presume to walk into
that party and expect to be treated as a comrade is a bit
unreasonable.
> If you're going to reply with a sarcastic, degrading
> comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it to yourself
> and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really annoying?
Netiquette dictates that folks like you and I *should* read the
newsgroup for a while, read the FAQ fully and carefully, and (as I
did) see if the subject I want to discuss was discussed previously,
using the archives. Then, and only then, start making minor
contributions to the newsgroup.
--
Brian Charles Kohn (¤bicker¤)
David Chapman
news:20001028190238...@ng-ba1.aol.com...
> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a
bit, and I
> wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone
else on this
> group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is
considered common
> knowledge around here.
Aah, that's just Novak.
"It's just his ... funny little way." [0.5pts]
--
You've got to bleed a little while you sing
Lest the words don't mean a thing
Richard M. Boye'
(note the lack of all context and attributions)
>
> Chaingaden is correct. All the replies just proved his point.
So then I suggest you leave. You will obviously not enjoy this forum.
Afr-j might be more to your liking, since it also teeming with
non-sequiturs and posts responded to without context and is in general a
vortex of indecipherable gibberish.
Bye now.
--
Richard M. Boye' * wa...@webspan.net
http://www.webspan.net/~waldo/ UIN:9021244
"Some men lead lives of quiet desperation.
My desperation makes a pathetic whining sound."
Richard M. Boye'
>
> >People who are civil,
> >intelligent and who format their posts nicely are likewise rarely flamed.
>
> Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different. That's all.
> Feh...I don't know why I'm even bothering.
First of all, as a long-time regular gone into dormancy, I find myself
lurking a good deal more than I used to, and I witnessed your initial
entre into this group, and I can tell you that what you experienced were
-not- flames.
They were posts from people pointing out that your handle is a tad
goofy. Which it is, btw. Many of us started out on the net employing
pseudonyms but dropped them because they are a silly.
Granted, the one you are using is not nearly as boneheaded as those
employed by people who think calling themselves "Asmodean345" and
"Ashaman1!" is a nifty idea are, but really "phat ass?"
Do you call youself an ass and expect to garner respect for it?
Your nick is not "different," it's inane. Inanity is discouraged.
And this has not been a flame either.
Devin L. Ganger
wrote:
> For what it's worth, this is the way most of the other regulars will
> respond, as well. Some of them don't; but frankly, some of the
> regulars are jerks. Just like in the real world, unfortuantely.
Most of the people who attack new posters like that aren't actually
regulars.
--
Devin L. Ganger <dlga...@earthlink.net>
"N race conditions on the wall, N race conditionsa You take one down,
pass it around, and wait. And wait some more." -- Bytor in #tribes
* If replying, please either send an email OR post it here, not both. *
Devin L. Ganger
> Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different. That's all.
That, and your attitude.
timothy d cheng
*lol* Talking to the mirror again?
--
tim
timothy d cheng
> Chaingaden is correct. All the replies just proved his point.
I sense troll.
--
tim
James Williams
> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a bit, and I
> wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
> group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
> knowledge around here.
I can see where the regulars are coming from. Living in Southern California most
of my life, I've heard more than a few stories about movie stars who came off as
real jerks when someone asked for their autograph at a restaurant or amusement
park. They're probably not all assholes, they're just tired of having every quiet,
relaxed moment interrupted by people who can't even remember all the movies they
made.
Oops, I just went off topic. There you go.
Talk about vanity posts, now I'm equating Novak & Co. with movie stars.
*sigh*
On the other hand, it isn't like Netscape Newsgroup (which is what I use) comes
with a warning in big, bold print:
"Lurk before you post!"
"Read the flamin' FAQ!"
"Have really, REALLY thick skin!"
"Post in 72 character lines!"
Speaking of which, am I, and if not does anyone know how to set that in this damn
program, without doing it manually?
Keep in mind that the majority of computer users, in my experience anyway, are not
aware that there is a world outside Netscape, Microsoft, and AOL. They assume (God
help us) that using these companies' programs must create the proper, acceptable
format. Assuming, of course, they even think about it at all. And they almost
certainly have no clue that newsgroups have been around as long as they have, with
all the traditions and expectations that arise from that.
James B. Williams
Young Blandford
bende...@aol.comnojunk (Chaingarden) wrote:
>If you're going to reply with a sarcastic, degrading
> comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it
to yourself
> and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really
annoying?
> All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've
got any
> arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory
one-liners
> my way, it would just prove my point.
>
It is called banter. Most social groups whether at work, with your
friends down the pub or the people on your sports team, have this.
All the in-jokes, the initiation sending for tartan-paint, the
nicknames, they are all part of making a group feel a bit more
special than a collection of people.
New people to a group often have a hard time getting
past this, but most people just pick the
unsaid rules up and join in. There are some who don't though,
they become resentful and bitchy over gentle teasing and react
badly, the group alarm bell rings and everyone backs away to go
have some fun elsewhere.
They _are_ having fun at your expense and why not?
No one knows you, no one cares about you. You are
the one coming cap in hand asking to be let in, and
they don't owe you anything.
If you have got a open mind, why are you on the defensive
so quickly? If you care about being part of the group
then do what everyone has to do when they meet new people:
Talk to them on their terms.
However unfair it may seem to you, the establishment
hold all the cards.
Life _isn't_ fair
--
Young Blandford
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bill McCarthy
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan
Hey! You remind me of a guy that used to post in here a few years ago...
> http://www.webspan.net/~waldo/ UIN:9021244
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Tease.
--
Bill McCarthy
Think. Again.
Brian
<jvw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On the other hand, it isn't like Netscape Newsgroup (which is what I use) comes
> with a warning in big, bold print:
> "Lurk before you post!"
> "Read the flamin' FAQ!"
> "Have really, REALLY thick skin!"
> "Post in 72 character lines!"
Actually, AOL is very deliberate about making the tenets of netiquette
available to its subscribers.
John S. Novak, III
>Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different. That's all.
>Feh...I don't know why I'm even bothering.
>Phat Ass
Well, let's review some critical facts here.
Fact of Life: Your name is important. Your name is even
more important if it is a name you have chosen for yourself, rather
than a given name. Please do not try to deny this fact, and please do
not try to deny that you have an intuitive understanding of this fact.
It is something that becomes clear to all children about the same time
they reach the age of self-awareness and other-awareness, otherwise,
"name-calling" wouldn't be so big a deal. Not to mention, it runs as a
cross-cultural current through all sorts of folklore as a fixation on
True Names.
Giving yourself a silly-assed name on Usenet is no different, really,
than giving yourself a silly-assed name in real life and insisting
people address you as such. Had I some quaint and bizarre impulse to
make a fool of myself, I could easily go to work tomorrow and demand
that my boss reprint my business cards and put "Phat Ass" on them
instead of my name; I could replace the name tag on my office with
"Phat Ass", I could insist my co-workers and friends and family
address myself, and I could reserve restaurant tables with that name.
But, of course, I would be making a fool of myself, because it is a
foolish thing to do. The only thing in that vein that would be more
foolish still, would be complaining to all and sundry that I've lost
the respect I've carefully put together over the past many year, "Just
because I changed my name." Of course I would have lost respect.
That's a given. It's a stupid name, and chosen names (moreso ever
than true names) advertise an inner nature.
It's rather the same thing as being annoyed if you're denied entry to a
fancy black-tie party if you show up wearing shredded jeans, no shirt,
covered in body piercings and profane tattoos.
Quit whining-- you're getting exactly the reaction you signed up for.
Fact of Evidence: You didn't get flamed at all. And to the degree
that you got jumped on, you got jumped on not _just_ for your silly
assed name, but for a raft of other errors, as well. Namely, in your
first posting, you displayed no grasp of grammar, a total rambling
incoherency, a rather frowned-upon request for someone to post the
prologue to _Winter's Heart_ despite copyright laws... and a
silly-assed name.
Most of that has been rectified.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@concentric.net
The Humblest Man on the Net
Michael Hoye
Phat Ass <phatt...@aol.compostheap> wrote:
[Mike Hoye wrote...]
>>People who are civil,
>>intelligent and who format their posts nicely are likewise rarely flamed.
>
>Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different.
>That's all.
There's a difference between getting flamed and being held up for
ridicule. And just in case nobody mentioned this to you, the nickname
"Phat Ass" is a license to get mocked mercilessly.
--
Mike Hoye
Donal K. Fellows
<mh...@prince.carleton.ca> writes
>This is not "irritating", or a waste of time. It's not about feeling
>superior. It's about _being_ superior; this is the reason that the
>signal-to-noise ratio here is better than just about anywhere else
>on Usenet, in my experience.
FWIW, this group has only just got a low-enough noise level for me to
bother with reading it. I usually prefer places where the noise level
is around 1% or less of the signal level (yes, these places do exist on
USENET; no, I'm not saying where they are.)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows (at home)
--
FOOLED you! Absorb EGO SHATTERING impulse rays, polyester poltroon!!
(WARNING: There is precisely one error in this message.)
emc...@hamilton.edu
> >Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different.
> >That's all.
>
> There's a difference between getting flamed and being held up for
> ridicule. And just in case nobody mentioned this to you, the nickname
> "Phat Ass" is a license to get mocked mercilessly.
I mean, in most multiplayer computer games, you'd _still_ get mocked
for that name, for all that it's sadly quite a common one.
--
Eric McCoy <emc...@hamilton.edu>
emc...@hamilton.edu
> Giving yourself a silly-assed name on Usenet is no different, really,
> than giving yourself a silly-assed name in real life and insisting
> people address you as such. Had I some quaint and bizarre impulse to
> make a fool of myself, I could easily go to work tomorrow and demand
> that my boss reprint my business cards and put "Phat Ass" on them
> instead of my name; I could replace the name tag on my office with
> "Phat Ass", I could insist my co-workers and friends and family
> address myself, and I could reserve restaurant tables with that name.
Is there anyone else out there who thinks Novak should do this?
--
Eric McCoy <emc...@hamilton.edu>
Michael Hoye
No way. It would kill our hopes for a presidential bid instantly.
--
Mike Hoye
Michael Reagor
Why? It didn't hurt Taft.
--
Michael Reagor mre...@tamu.edu
"He in his madness prays for storms,
And dreams that storms will bring him peace."
-Mikhail Lermontov
Alex Goddard
wrote:
>>People who are civil,
>>intelligent and who format their posts nicely are likewise rarely flamed.
>
>Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different. That's all.
>Feh...I don't know why I'm even bothering.
There's a difference between "different" and stupid. Go ask Kid
Probability.
You could do like the Skwid has done, and include at least your real
name in your .sig.
>"You ate a lot of paint as a child, didn't you?"
>"You mean wall candy?"
>-Penny Arcade
At least you have good taste in comics. Go try Sinfest.
http://www.sinfest.net
--
Alex Goddard
Lord of the Morning Cup(s) of Coffee
Si hoc signum legere potes, operis boni in rebus Latinus alacribus et
fructuosis potiri potes.
Alex Goddard
That was one of the first thoughts that went through my head; but only
if "phat" stands for "Pretty Humble and Tactful."
Chaingarden
I'm probably cutting my lines too short now,
but whatever, now they won't be too long
anyway. When I posted that, I was in a
really pissed off mood, I normally wouldn't
have infringed with my own opinions where
I don't belong. Thanks for taking the time
to respond everyone. Adios.
NINE MORE DAYS!!! WOOOHOOOO!!!!!!!
db
P. Korda
Chaingarden <bende...@aol.comnojunk> wrote:
>I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a bit, and I
>wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
>group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
>comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it to yourself
>and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really annoying?
>All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
>arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory one-liners
>my way, it would just prove my point.
You're ugly and your momma dresses you funny.
-pam, proving points since 11:30 this morning
Aaron Davies
> Chaingarden wrote:
>
> > I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a
> > bit, and I wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for
> > everyone else on this group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple
> > question that is considered common knowledge around here.
>
> I can see where the regulars are coming from. Living in Southern
> California most of my life, I've heard more than a few stories about movie
> stars who came off as real jerks when someone asked for their autograph at
> a restaurant or amusement park. They're probably not all assholes,
> they're just tired of having every quiet, relaxed moment interrupted by
> people who can't even remember all the movies they made.
>
> Oops, I just went off topic. There you go.
>
> Talk about vanity posts, now I'm equating Novak & Co. with movie stars.
>
> *sigh*
>
> On the other hand, it isn't like Netscape Newsgroup (which is what I use)
> comes with a warning in big, bold print:
> "Lurk before you post!"
> "Read the flamin' FAQ!"
> "Have really, REALLY thick skin!"
> "Post in 72 character lines!"
>
> Speaking of which, am I, and if not does anyone know how to set that in
> this damn program, without doing it manually?
If by Newsgroup you mean Messenger, it's in prefs:messages, where you
can set a "wrap outgoing" to an arbitrary standard. I think at the
moment you're wrapping at 80, which is good, but not perfect.
--
__ __
/ ) / )
/--/ __. __ ________ / / __. , __o _ _
/ (_(_/|_/ (_(_) / / <_ /__/_(_/|_\/ <__</_/_)_
Leigh D. Butler
wrote:
<snip>
> "Post in 72 character lines!"
>
> Speaking of which, am I, and if not does anyone know how to set that in this damn
> program, without doing it manually?
AFAIK, you are not. Your lines look way overlong in my reader.
I'm not sure why this would be happening if you are using Netscape,
because I used to use it as a reader and the default line-length was
set to 72 characters, IIRC.
In any case, it's a simple matter to fix it. In the Newsgroups window,
pull down the "Edit" menu and choose "Preferences". Under "Mail &
Newsgroups", click "Messages". In the section "wrap outgoing plain
text messages at __ characters", change the number in the box to 72.
If your messages still look funky after that, try changing it to
something less, like 70 or 65.
HTH.
--
Leigh Butler dal...@concentric.net
**************************************
"You know what that means, don't you? It means he doesn't have a head!
How am I supposed to write for a guy who doesn't have a head? He's got
no lips, no vocal cords! What do you want me to do?"
sama...@my-deja.com
tripl...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Chaingarden wrote:
> >
> > I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite
a bit, and I
> > wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone
else on this
> > group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is
considered common
> > knowledge around here. If you're going to reply with a sarcastic,
degrading
> > comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it
to yourself
> > and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really
annoying?
> > All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if
you've got any
> > arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory
one-liners
> > my way, it would just prove my point.
>
> I'm far from being a regular here, but some of these guys have
> been here since the beginning. They get sick of reading the same
> shit over and over again about who Taim is and how Moiraine gave
> Asmodean the clap and that's how he died (read about in the
> prologue to TSR). There are at least two FAQ's on the books and
> the group itself, and I suppose it's good idea to ask to read
> these upon joining a new group like this, and if newbies did that
> like they should, they'd discover in the first FAQ that unless
> you have something useful to add, don't bother bringing up things
> in the second FAQ because it's already been discussed to death.
>
> and no 1 has n e pashins 4 ppl who cant property comm. a simple
> sentence.
>
well, my theory is, if I am no longer interested in a topic, I read the
header and if I am not interested in it, I don't go in, rather than
going in and giving snyde remarks about reading the FAQ, or simply
saying that the issue has been discussed to death, whether it is
implyed or not, it is a holier than thou approach whichever way you
slice the pie. this is a large enough community where there are enough
people who don't feel that an issue has been discussed enough, they
will jump into these threads with the n00bs (hi) and discuss to death
with them, just because you or someone else has seen it thousands of
times doesn't mean that we have too, and just because it is listed in a
faq somewhere doesn't mean we are restive on the subject, or don't want
to add our two cents to the discussion either, if someone doesn't like
that, fine, don't read it, you have that option just as I have the
option to write, or not write, to read or not to read. but don't tell
me that I have impropper netiquete because I am posting from deja news,
or my line length is not right, copy it into notepad, click on word
wrap and then reply, if it is that much of an issue.
I have been on quite a few news groups and this one by far (well the
counter strike NG is rather bad too) the most head up their asses
holier than thou bunch I have seen, and maybe it is one or two people
that have rubbed me the wrong way from what I have read, but I don't
see anyone trying to change that.
I am sure that someone will go ahead and toss me on their ignore list,
but hey, I am probably already on most for using deja news, as I have
heard some people ignore any deja account. ohwell.
--
Sam
Paragon
Crushes flawed list club!!
http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Halfpipe/9690/
Cwaig
intersesting topic. Beats most of the other stuff
Craig
Chaingarden wrote:
> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a bit, and I
> wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
> group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
> knowledge around here. If you're going to reply with a sarcastic, degrading
> comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it to yourself
> and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really annoying?
> All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
> arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory one-liners
> my way, it would just prove my point.
>
> db
sama...@my-deja.com
bicker_...@NOSPAMyahoo.com wrote:
>
> Netiquette dictates that folks like you and I *should* read the
> newsgroup for a while, read the FAQ fully and carefully, and (as I
> did) see if the subject I want to discuss was discussed previously,
> using the archives. Then, and only then, start making minor
> contributions to the newsgroup.
>
> --
> Brian Charles Kohn (¤bicker¤)
>
this is where I have my issues, mostly. what is netiquette? I can
understand going into a restraunt and someone expecting me not to fart
really loudly, or light up a smoke while they are eating their $30
steak, but this isn't a night out on the town, and in the past it may
have been a group of nerds talking across the nation, and they came up
with a set of standards that they could agree to. This is the
technology age, times and issues change like fashion and music, what
was once accepted as common place, is now only found in cirtain
retreats, what was never accepted, is now common place. in another year
it will change again, how can you expect a set of etiquette rules to
endure that, you can either tell people what you expect, ridicule them
eventually, and finally plonk them, but it will not change them or get
rid of the change.
it seems to me that the people who fiercly hang on to these etiquette
rules for the net are older ppl who were on the net since before AOL
was even a dream, and they only want to have some form of what they
remember stay. well, we aren't on 486 machines, with a video card
pushing a few K of memory.
times change quickly on the net, you can try to hold back from them,
but it usually doesn't work. I am not going to try and change this news
group from what it is, but don't expect to that I will conform either,
if that gets me plonked, oh well.
Donnamarie Thiel-Kline
> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a
bit, and I
> wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone
else on this
> group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is
considered common
> knowledge around here.
<<snip remainder of original post about superiority, one-liners, etc.>>
I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
began. At what point did respect become an entitlement? Last I
checked, respect was not something _granted_. It is something one
_earns_ over time based upon one's actions.
No one on this ng knows me from Eve. The words _I_ choose to put here
are all they have on which to form an opinion. The onus is on _me_,
therefore, to exercise some care and judgment in selecting those
words. And if I just come barging in with nary a care for any of the
rules, customs, conventions, and idiosyncracies of the place, then I
have no one to blame but _myself_ if I am greeted with something less
than universal approval and affection.
When a newbie comes to this group and posts their *ahem* _revelations_
("Hey! I bet Tigraine is Rand's Mom! Ain't I brilliant?") without
ever checking the FAQ or other resources available to them, they are in
effect saying that _their_ time is more valuable than that of the other
ng members. They can't be bothered with reading FAQs or following
rules about line length or checking spelling and grammar; instead,
would the rest of you kindly hold their little hands, and wipe their
runny newbie noses, and spoon-feed them whatever it is they want to
know? Oh, and would you do it _right now_ please, and damn it, smile
while you do that, mister! Or else they'll weep and wail and gnash
their teeth and whine incessantly about how _mean_ everyone is.
Let's be blunt. If I don't care enough to invest a little of my time
in preparing a post, why on Earth should I expect anyone else to give a
damn, either? Let alone be nice about it! If you want to be taken
seriously, act like you take others seriously first. Behave as if you
value their time and bandwidth as dearly as your own. Find out about
the prevailing rules and customs. Use the tools available to you like
FAQs and spellcheckers. And then maybe, just maybe, the "regulars"
will treat you seriously. If you want respect, go out and earn it
instead of pissing and moaning when its not handed to you on a silver
platter. In short, if you don't want to be treated like an annoying
child -- DON'T ACT LIKE ONE!
</rant>
And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
obscurity. This thread just annoyed the bejeezus out of me.
donnamarie, sworn enemy of whining
--
"Democracy is being allowed to vote for the candidate you dislike
least." -- Robert Byrne
sama...@my-deja.com
James Williams <jvw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> Keep in mind that the majority of computer users, in my experience
anyway, are not
> aware that there is a world outside Netscape, Microsoft, and AOL.
what are these programs you speak of? I only know of deja news...
> They assume (God
> help us) that using these companies' programs must create the proper,
> acceptable
> format.
format?
> Assuming, of course, they even think about it at all.
think about what?
> And they almost
> certainly have no clue that newsgroups have been around as long as
they have, with
> all the traditions and expectations that arise from that.
>
> James B. Williams
>
>
I have no doubt NGs have been around since before I knew what a dos
prompt was, however just because some people have had the luxury of
being around since the beginning and knowing all of the topics that
have been brought up for the last 5 years, does that make you better
than me? does that mean that my addition to the discussion no matter
how old is irrelevant? is it really worth it to rag on me because my
name is paragon, what if my name was phat mofo? what is a name other
than a designation for what someone calls me.
oh well, I am really getting behind at work so I will leave this
discussion to it's own for now.
--
Sam
Paragon
Crushes flawed list club!!
http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Halfpipe/9690/
sama...@my-deja.com
Young Blandford <youngbl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> However unfair it may seem to you, the establishment
> hold all the cards.
>
> Life _isn't_ fair
> --
>
> Young Blandford
>
and why should I conform to be fair to you? as you say, life isn't
fair, if it doesn't make me any friends, so be it, life isn't fair, you
will have to take me as I am, or not at all. life is give and take, but
others have to be willing to as well.
anyway, I am just playing devils advocate on this, I have no problem
changing a few things to make it easier for all.
not that it matters, I will probably be out of here a few months after
all the hooha for the new book is gone.
--
Sam
Paragon
Crushes flawed list club!!
http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Halfpipe/9690/
Thom Jeffries
> it quite a bit, and I wonder why everyone seems to have
> such little respect for everyone else on this group,
> mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is
> considered common knowledge around here.
I hate to break the news to you, but you just shot
yourself in the foot. This group tends to take itself
seriously enough that it will flame first, explain
later. The reason is that the "common knowledge" is
easily available to any "newbie" who spends the
half-hour (maximum) trying to find the answer to
his/her question. You say these "newbies" deserve
the respect of group, even though they don't respect
the efforts involved in documenting the discussions
here? You say that the "newbies" should be politely
responded to every single time someone pops up and
says "i think rand should break the seales and that
will clean saidar -k3w1d00d69"? You say the group
should calmly tell everyone who asks when the
next book comes out, it's title, it's cover blurb,
where to find the prologue for free, etc. because
they're too goddamn lazy to do a web-search, an
archive search, or just plain read the threads for
a few minutes before posting?
> If you're going
> to reply with a sarcastic, degrading comment to try to
> make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it to
> yourself and not post anything at all?
Cuz the same free society that let's you post your
drivel lets me post mine to. So nyah.
> Does anybody else find this really annoying?
Not really much more annoying that people
who advocate that the world should cater
to its lowest common denominator.
> All you people who post
> those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
> arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw
> any derogatory one-liners my way, it would just prove
> my point.
>
Futuite ipsum et caballum tuum.[1]
Point proven. What point were we talking about again?
Thom Jeffries
[1] If you're looking for a translation in this
footnote, you just might be a lazy bastard that
this group doesn't like. Go look it up if you
care that much. If not, run away before you
get flamed and your self-worth flatlines
because of our bitter retorts.
--
spell checker hell is when the ward is
spilled write in the chequer can't tall.
-Anon
Matthew Hackell
> mh...@prince.carleton.ca (Michael Hoye) wrote:
>
> >In article <u4s1v1...@hamilton.edu>, <emc...@hamilton.edu> wrote:
> >>j...@concentric.net (John S. Novak, III) writes:
> >>
> >>> Giving yourself a silly-assed name on Usenet is no different, really,
> >>> than giving yourself a silly-assed name in real life and insisting
> >>> people address you as such. Had I some quaint and bizarre impulse to
> >>> make a fool of myself, I could easily go to work tomorrow and demand
> >>> that my boss reprint my business cards and put "Phat Ass" on them
> >>> instead of my name; I could replace the name tag on my office with
> >>> "Phat Ass", I could insist my co-workers and friends and family
> >>> address myself, and I could reserve restaurant tables with that name.
> >>
> >>Is there anyone else out there who thinks Novak should do this?
> >
> >No way. It would kill our hopes for a presidential bid instantly.
>
> Why? It didn't hurt Taft.
Dear god. What?
--
Matt
Winner of the Rose Bruford Medal for Effort
Brian
> bicker_...@NOSPAMyahoo.com wrote:
> > Netiquette dictates that folks like you and I *should* read the
> > newsgroup for a while, read the FAQ fully and carefully, and (as I
> > did) see if the subject I want to discuss was discussed previously,
> > using the archives. Then, and only then, start making minor
> > contributions to the newsgroup.
> steak, but this isn't a night out on the town, and in the past it may
> have been a group of nerds talking across the nation, and they came up
> with a set of standards that they could agree to.
The newsgroup news.announce.newusers posts a series of FAQs
periodically, which are to be ready by all new USENET users. The
information we're discussing is posted in that newsgroup, and has been
since the the establishment of the "Big 8" and has appeared in a
similar newsgroup prior to that. These aren't some casual writings
posted by some nerds -- these documents are the results of years of
review and improvement by thousands of USENET participants.
> This is the
> technology age, times and issues change like fashion and music, what
> was once accepted as common place, is now only found in cirtain
> retreats, what was never accepted, is now common place. in another year
> it will change again, how can you expect a set of etiquette rules to
> endure that, you can either tell people what you expect, ridicule them
> eventually, and finally plonk them, but it will not change them or get
> rid of the change.
There are defined review and improvement cycles that govern these
FAQs. The defined procedure is internationally-recognized, and has
helped keep USENET from being a useless pile of anarchy.
Michael Hoye
>this is where I have my issues, mostly. what is netiquette? I can
>understand going into a restraunt and someone expecting me not to fart
>really loudly, or light up a smoke while they are eating their $30
>steak, but this isn't a night out on the town, and in the past it may
>have been a group of nerds talking across the nation, and they came up
>with a set of standards that they could agree to.
This is a public place. Whether it's a restaurant, a movie theatre or, for
a better analogy, a cocktail party or coffeehouse, when you go to a public
place you take some care how you present yourself to people, and you
exercise common courtesy.
In this medium, your post formatting is your appearance. Your spelling and
grammar is your tone of voice. Reading the FAQ and lurking for a bit is
exactly the same as listening to a conversation for a bit before jumping.
Not observing these basic rules is offensive, whether you're in here or
out there.
>This is the
>technology age, times and issues change like fashion and music, what
>was once accepted as common place, is now only found in cirtain
>retreats, what was never accepted, is now common place. in another year
>it will change again, how can you expect a set of etiquette rules to
>endure that, you can either tell people what you expect, ridicule them
>eventually, and finally plonk them, but it will not change them or get
>rid of the change.
Common courtesy and the idea that how you present yourself affects how
people will deal with you are, as ideas go, older than dirt, and they show
no sign of being any less true now than they've ever been.
--
Mike Hoye
Maggie
> Even in the Lurker's Lounge, we could hear Chaingarden say:
<snip a whiner>
> Let's be blunt. If I don't care enough to invest a little of my time
> in preparing a post, why on Earth should I expect anyone else to give a
> damn, either? Let alone be nice about it! If you want to be taken
> seriously, act like you take others seriously first. Behave as if you
> value their time and bandwidth as dearly as your own. Find out about
> the prevailing rules and customs. Use the tools available to you like
> FAQs and spellcheckers. And then maybe, just maybe, the "regulars"
> will treat you seriously. If you want respect, go out and earn it
> instead of pissing and moaning when its not handed to you on a silver
> platter. In short, if you don't want to be treated like an annoying
> child -- DON'T ACT LIKE ONE!
>
> </rant>
>
> And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> obscurity. This thread just annoyed the bejeezus out of me.
No!! Stay, please!!
If I hadn't read earlier that you're not a regular poster, I would
have thought you were from this!
'sides, we like intelligent people to stick around.
--
Maggie UIN 10248195 http://www.chocolatefiends.com
"MAGGIE: In rasfwrj mythology, a minor fertility goddess and patron
goddess of Margaritas. Usually depicted as wearing a chainmail bra
and wielding a killfile." --Magnus Itland on RASFWRJ
Rimrunner
>
>it seems to me that the people who fiercly hang on to these etiquette
>rules for the net are older ppl who were on the net since before AOL
>was even a dream, and they only want to have some form of what they
>remember stay. well, we aren't on 486 machines, with a video card
>pushing a few K of memory.
*howl*
Y'know, in one paragraph you make an argument for conventional real-world
etiquette, then, here, you use the exact same argument as people who argue
*against* conventional etiquette.
You can't have it both ways.
And I have yet to see anything proposed to replace what's considered
proper netiquette, which basically boils down to being polite and having a
clue, that's anywhere near equally satisfactory.
-g,
who remembers when 486 was fast...and isn't *that* old, thankyouverymuch
--
Murder of Crows @ http://www.murderofcrows.net
MP3s @ http://www.mp3.com/MurderOfCrows
"I don't think much of our profession, but contrasted with respectability,
'tis comparatively honest." -- The Pirate King, "Pirates of Penzance"
Christopher Tong
Donnamarie Thiel-Kline wrote:
>
> Even in the Lurker's Lounge, we could hear Chaingarden say:
>
> > I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a
> bit, and I
> > wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone
> else on this
> > group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is
> considered common
> > knowledge around here.
>
> <<snip remainder of original post about superiority, one-liners, etc.>>
>
> I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
> began. At what point did respect become an entitlement? Last I
> checked, respect was not something _granted_. It is something one
> _earns_ over time based upon one's actions.
There's a difference between being respected and being treated decently.
<snip rest of tedious rant>
> </rant>
>
> And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> obscurity. This thread just annoyed the bejeezus out of me.
Well, as you fade back into obscurity, may I advise you take back with
you these words from John S. Novak:
In article <slrn8vchk8.p0h.jsn%40ts030d40.chi-il.concentric.net>, John
S. Novak wrote:
<quote>
There are so few things I enjoy more in life, than coming across the
implication from a lurker that other readers have somehow _earned_
something, and that we sorry prolific lot apparently owe them some
form of entertainment, stimulation, or hoopla; that we should, to be
curt about it, "post better."
</quote>
I don't claim to be a regular, but I see no reason why this quote
shouldn't be applied to your post just as much (or even more) than to
the post that Novak used this on. You haven't earned the right to be
provided with gloriously formatted or to force people to hew to your
conventions.
In general, I agree that a well-written post is easier to read and I am
more likely to read it mself. I do not agree that I ought to go into
Nazi mode if someone does not know how to use the carriage return. If
people wish to make their posts look like a dog's breakfast, then so be
it. Let them, I say. I've got a killfile and slovenliness makes such a
handy marker.
I do not see any reason, however, to go on these massive screeds about
neatness, capitalization, etc. If they want to post that way and people
will read it, fine. It may say something about them and the intellect of
their peers, but who are we to judge them?
> donnamarie, sworn enemy of whining
Irony, thy name is Usenet.
Your in annoyance,
Chris
Michael Reagor
[Snip]
>Nazi mode
Finally, I was getting really tired of this thread.
John S. Novak, III
<dthie...@lutron.com> wrote:
>I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
>began. At what point did respect become an entitlement?
[...]
>And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
>obscurity.
Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
You can stay.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@concentric.net
The Humblest Man on the Net
Alex Goddard
wrote:
>On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:58:28 GMT, Donnamarie Thiel-Kline
><dthie...@lutron.com> wrote:
>
>>I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
>>began. At what point did respect become an entitlement?
>
>[...]
>
>>And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
>>obscurity.
>
>Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
>You can stay.
ITYM, "be initiated."
--
Alex Goddard
Lord of the Morning Cup(s) of Coffee
"Revenge is a dish best served with pinto beans and muffins!"
-Armondo Guitierrez
Davian
Alex Goddard <spiffy...@hotmail.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:39fe351a...@news.fwi.com...
> On 31 Oct 2000 02:46:22 GMT, j...@concentric.net (John S. Novak, III)
> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:58:28 GMT, Donnamarie Thiel-Kline
> ><dthie...@lutron.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when
I
> >>began. At what point did respect become an entitlement?
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >>And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> >>obscurity.
> >
> >Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
> >You can stay.
>
> ITYM, "be initiated."
>
Someone fetch The Loy.
That is, if the goats are sated.
Cause... well... theres nothing worse than a cranky goat.
Amy Gray
j...@concentric.net says...
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:58:28 GMT, Donnamarie Thiel-Kline
> <dthie...@lutron.com> wrote:
>
> >I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
> >began. At what point did respect become an entitlement?
>
> [...]
>
> >And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> >obscurity.
>
> Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
> You can stay.
turn again for at least another month. Maybe I'd better check the
roster.
--
Amy Gray
gr...@friends.edu
Laura M. Parkinson
Psst.. Amy.. if he WANTS to speak for the Hive Mind, are YOU gonna
stop him?
--
-'-,-'-<<0 Trickster 0>>-'-,-'- lpark...@mindspring.com
http://lparkinson.home.mindspring.com
"Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be
destroyed." -Richard Adams, Watership Down
David A. Rothgery
> j...@concentric.net says...
> > Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
> > You can stay.
>
> Novak's speaking for the Hive Mind this week? I didn't think it was his
> turn again for at least another month. Maybe I'd better check the
> roster.
Novak speaks for the Hive Mind whenever he feels like it.
It's in the FAQ somewhere.
--
Dave Rothgery
Picking nits since 1976
drot...@myrealbox.com
http://drothgery.editthispage.com
Amy Gray
lpark...@mindspring.com says...
> gr...@friends.edu (Amy Gray) rhapsodized in blue:
>
> >In article <slrn8vscr...@ts008d33.chi-il.concentric.net>,
> >j...@concentric.net says...
> >> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:58:28 GMT, Donnamarie Thiel-Kline
> >> <dthie...@lutron.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
> >> >began. At what point did respect become an entitlement?
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> >> >obscurity.
> >>
> >> Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
> >> You can stay.
> >
> >Novak's speaking for the Hive Mind this week? I didn't think it was his
> >turn again for at least another month. Maybe I'd better check the
> >roster.
>
> Psst.. Amy.. if he WANTS to speak for the Hive Mind, are YOU gonna
> stop him?
--
Amy Gray
gr...@friends.edu
But I thought _I_ was gonna get a turn. *pout*
Paul Raj Khangure
> prompt was, however just because some people have had the luxury of
> being around since the beginning and knowing all of the topics that
> have been brought up for the last 5 years, does that make you better
> than me? does that mean that my addition to the discussion no matter
> how old is irrelevant?
Yes.
Unless you are actually adding something new, or raising a new point,
then your discussion is irrelevant.
For example, were you discuss the possibility that Luc and ISAM were the
same, or that Elayne and Rand are cousins, or that Rand is the Dragon
Reborn, it would be completely irrelevant.
However, if you were to come up with a new twist on something, or a new
theory, and use the previous discussion (ie FAQ) as a point to launch
your ideas from, then it wouldn't be irrelevant.
Paul Raj Khangure
--
I stayed up all last night playing poker with tarot cards.
I got a full house and four people died. - Stephen Wright
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
P. Korda
Paul Raj Khangure <p...@digitaljunkie.net> wrote:
>Unless you are actually adding something new, or raising a new point,
>then your discussion is irrelevant.
>
>For example, were you discuss the possibility that Luc and ISAM were the
>same, or that Elayne and Rand are cousins, or that Rand is the Dragon
>Reborn, it would be completely irrelevant.
Of course, if somebody really, really wants to post on such a subject,
there is nothing stopping them, and I really don't think anybody's
going to get all nasty at them (well, except for maybe that "cousins"
thing, but that's because the poster would be stoont). They'll
probably be directed to the relevant FAQ section, on the assumption
that they have not heard of the WOTFAQ. This happens all the time. Why
being referred to a summary of previous discussion is taken by some
overly-sensitive individuals as a "flame" is beyond me, though.
>However, if you were to come up with a new twist on something, or a new
>theory, and use the previous discussion (ie FAQ) as a point to launch
>your ideas from, then it wouldn't be irrelevant.
But, it's much easier to just say, "RJ said the FAQ is only 1/3 right,
so I don't need to read it.
-pam
The Great Gray Skwid
spam.som...@home.com says...
> Alex Goddard <spiffy...@hotmail.com.NOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:39fe351a...@news.fwi.com...
> > On 31 Oct 2000 02:46:22 GMT, j...@concentric.net (John S. Novak, III)
> > wrote:
> > >On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:58:28 GMT, Donnamarie Thiel-Kline
> > ><dthie...@lutron.com> wrote:
> > >>I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when
> I
> > >>began. At what point did respect become an entitlement?
> > >[...]
> > >>And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> > >>obscurity.
> > >Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
> > >You can stay.
> > ITYM, "be initiated."
> Someone fetch The Loy.
So...who else subconsciously inserted an 'l' midway into the second word
above on first reading?
> That is, if the goats are sated.
> Cause... well... theres nothing worse than a cranky goat.
You have clearly never encountered a cranky Guanaco.
Velcro gloves alone just ain't gonna cut it, my friend.
--
| | |\ | | | ) Theudegisklos "Skwid" Sweinbrothar
|/| |\ |/ | |X| ( SKWID, Vulture V4 pilot ( The Humblest Mollusc
| | | | | | | ) Evan "Skwid" Langlinais ) on the Net
"What more could you want?" "Orgies on Speed. Good Bye." -- Sinfest
Bud Davis
>
> "Post in 72 character lines!"
>
> Speaking of which, am I, and if not does anyone know how to set that in this damn
> program, without doing it manually?
>
Click Edit, Preferences, below Mail & Newsgroups to Messages. You will
see a box where you can input wrap at ?? characters.
Nostalgia Tagline: A 486 with Windoze is a Maserati with the parking
brake on.
Leigh D. Butler
Tong wrote:
> Donnamarie Thiel-Kline wrote:
<snip>
> > I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
> > began. At what point did respect become an entitlement? Last I
> > checked, respect was not something _granted_. It is something one
> > _earns_ over time based upon one's actions.
>
> There's a difference between being respected and being treated decently.
Not in here. And you've been here long enough to know that.
> <snip rest of tedious rant>
Funny, I thought it was right on point.
> > And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> > obscurity. This thread just annoyed the bejeezus out of me.
>
> Well, as you fade back into obscurity, may I advise you take back with
> you these words from John S. Novak:
>
> In article <slrn8vchk8.p0h.jsn%40ts030d40.chi-il.concentric.net>, John
> S. Novak wrote:
>
> <quote>
>
> There are so few things I enjoy more in life, than coming across the
> implication from a lurker that other readers have somehow _earned_
> something, and that we sorry prolific lot apparently owe them some
> form of entertainment, stimulation, or hoopla; that we should, to be
> curt about it, "post better."
>
> </quote>
>
> I don't claim to be a regular, but I see no reason why this quote
> shouldn't be applied to your post just as much (or even more) than to
> the post that Novak used this on. You haven't earned the right to be
> provided with gloriously formatted or to force people to hew to your
> conventions.
Whoa there, Nellie.
The point Novak was making in the above quote had _nothing_ to do with
proper formatting of posts, as you know damn good and well. He was
referring to someone's plea that we create "hoopla" over the imminent
release of WH. Now, knowing that, everyone go back and reread Novak's
quote and see how Chris is falsely twisting it to his own argument.
I find this to be a particularly repugnant practice on your part,
Chris. This is why we get pissed at the media and their use of "sound-
bites" taken completely out of context. It is irresponsible, to say
the least.
Especially since Novak happens to be one of the regulars in here who
is most vocal in insisting that people adhere to the rules of properly
formatted posting. Given his track record, the fact that you would use
a quote from Novak, of all people, to uphold your railing against
"militant" enforcement of those rules is laughable.
> In general, I agree that a well-written post is easier to read and I am
> more likely to read it mself. I do not agree that I ought to go into
> Nazi mode if someone does not know how to use the carriage return. If
> people wish to make their posts look like a dog's breakfast, then so be
> it. Let them, I say. I've got a killfile and slovenliness makes such a
> handy marker.
So have I got a killfile, as do most people here. But I consider my
Bozo Bin a court of last resort. Likewise, most people consider that
rants like Donnamarie's serve a greater purpose than simply letting
off steam or ripping a luser a new one.
People write them in the faint hope that the newbies out there might
actually understand _why_ we insist on the rules that we do and why
it's not us all marching around being arbitrarily demanding for no
reason. And in the hope that, understanding this, some might make the
effort to uphold those rules and allow us to enjoy whatever
contributions they have to make to this group. Then I won't have to
killfile them.
> I do not see any reason, however, to go on these massive screeds about
> neatness, capitalization, etc. If they want to post that way and people
> will read it, fine. It may say something about them and the intellect of
> their peers, but who are we to judge them?
We are the people they apparently want to read their thoughts. If they
didn't want us to, why the hell are they here? So, fine. You want
something from me, you're gonna have to sell it.
Here, selling it means making it look pretty. If it doesn't look
pretty, there are hundreds of other posts out there that do look
pretty, and I have no intention of buying the shitty product when I
can have the pretty product for the same amount of effort or less.
That's what Donnamarie and Novak and so many other people are trying
to say in their "tedious rants" on the subject. They are, in fact,
trying to do others a service in explaining these things to them, as I
am (believe it or not) trying to do you a service by explaining them
to you.
If someone then chooses to willfully ignore this attempt to awaken
them to the realities of Getting Listened To And Treated With Respect
In Rasfwr-j, well, that's their right. But then I'll simply give up
and plonk them, as is my right.
I see no reason to get annoyed at someone for making at least a token
attempt to educate someone before plonking them out of hand. I
personally find it indicative of patience and generosity.
--
Leigh Butler dal...@concentric.net
**************************************
So it goes.
cd skogsberg
>In article <20001028190238...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
> bende...@aol.comnojunk (Chaingarden) wrote:
>> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite
>> a bit, and I wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect
>> for everyone else on this group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a
>> simple question that is considered common knowledge around here.
>I hate to break the news to you, but you just shot yourself in the
>foot. This group tends to take itself seriously enough that it will
>flame first, explain later.
Wrong. The regulars (a group to which I would probably be counted,
when the red revolution comes, and we're all going up against the
wall, but I digress) tend to be ... ah, blunt. Some people claim this
is flaming, mostly because some people see anything but accolades and
praises for their products as flames, and on another hand some people
feel that "wouldn't it be nice if everyone was nice", which is true
but about as unlikely to happen as a Communist utopia where every
comrade pulls his weight for the hive, so to speak. And on a third
hand we have the trolls, who come in, say "you people are all being
m33n to n00bi3z", and then watch the ires rise.
>The reason is that the "common knowledge" is easily available to any
>"newbie" who spends the half-hour (maximum) trying to find the answer
>to his/her question. You say these "newbies" deserve the respect of
>group, even though they don't respect the efforts involved in
>documenting the discussions here? You say that the "newbies" should
>be politely responded to every single time someone pops up and says
>"i think rand should break the seales and that will clean saidar
>-k3w1d00d69"? You say the group should calmly tell everyone who asks
>when the next book comes out, it's title, it's cover blurb, where to
>find the prologue for free, etc. because they're too goddamn lazy to
>do a web-search, an archive search, or just plain read the threads
>for a few minutes before posting?
This, on the other hand, is correct, and quite well written, too.
>> All you people who post
>> those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
>> arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw
>> any derogatory one-liners my way, it would just prove
>> my point.
>Futuite ipsum et caballum tuum.[1]
>Point proven. What point were we talking about again?
>[1] If you're looking for a translation in this
> footnote, you just might be a lazy bastard that
> this group doesn't like. Go look it up if you
> care that much. If not, run away before you
> get flamed and your self-worth flatlines
> because of our bitter retorts.
Now you're being an asshole, and give fuel to the "m33n to n00bi3z"
brigade. Stop it. It's bad enough with the crossposting cascaders
(though they seem to have given up - not enough hostile feedback for
them, I guess), without people sticking a figurative stick into the
figurative anthill.
/cd
--
"While I would pay good money to see Salem the Talking Cat burrow through
someone's chest in primetime, I think you're reaching." -- Vheissu
Gabriel JT Wright
> In article <slrn8vscr...@ts008d33.chi-il.concentric.net>,
> j...@concentric.net says...
> > Actually, the Hive Mind likes you.
> > You can stay.
> Novak's speaking for the Hive Mind this week?
No, not 'for'. Novak is the Hive Mind, and the Hive Mind is Novak.
Gabriel
--
Gabriel JT Wright
Medical Vision Lab, Dept. Engineering Science.
Oxford University.
cd skogsberg
>gr...@friends.edu (Amy Gray) writes:
>> In article <slrn8vscr...@ts008d33.chi-il.concentric.net>,
>> j...@concentric.net says...
>> > Actually, the Hive Mind likes you. You can stay.
>> Novak's speaking for the Hive Mind this week?
>No, not 'for'. Novak is the Hive Mind, and the Hive Mind is Novak.
They don't call us "the Novak Matrix" for nothing.
/cd, and I've got a bitchin' trenchcoat, too...
--
"Students are worthless, lazy, degenerate, morally bankrupt scum.
I should know. I am one." -- Karen Kruzycka
Thom Jeffries
d97...@dtek.chalmers.se (cd skogsberg) wrote:
> Thom Jeffries <thom_j...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >In article <20001028190238...@ng-ba1.aol.com>,
> > bende...@aol.comnojunk (Chaingarden) wrote:
>
> >> I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite
> >> a bit, and I wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect
> >> for everyone else on this group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a
> >> simple question that is considered common knowledge around here.
>
> >I hate to break the news to you, but you just shot yourself in the
> >foot. This group tends to take itself seriously enough that it will
> >flame first, explain later.
>
> Wrong. The regulars (a group to which I would probably be counted,
> when the red revolution comes, and we're all going up against the
> wall, but I digress) tend to be ... ah, blunt. Some people claim this
> is flaming, mostly because some people see anything but accolades and
> praises for their products as flames, and on another hand some people
> feel that "wouldn't it be nice if everyone was nice", which is true
> but about as unlikely to happen as a Communist utopia where every
> comrade pulls his weight for the hive, so to speak.
True. Speaking in haste has landed my foot squarely in
the shite (again, sigh). Blunt is a much better word,
but I suppose I'm one of those who see flames where
others would see critique.
*snip*
> >> All you people who post
> >> those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
> >> arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw
> >> any derogatory one-liners my way, it would just prove
> >> my point.
>
> >Futuite ipsum et caballum tuum.[1]
> >Point proven. What point were we talking about again?
>
> >[1] If you're looking for a translation in this
> > footnote, you just might be a lazy bastard that
> > this group doesn't like. Go look it up if you
> > care that much. If not, run away before you
> > get flamed and your self-worth flatlines
> > because of our bitter retorts.
>
> Now you're being an asshole, and give fuel to the "m33n to n00bi3z"
> brigade. Stop it.
Ack. Now you're being "m33n 2 53m1-1urk3r5".
I'll stop if you stop.
> It's bad enough with the crossposting cascaders
> (though they seem to have given up - not enough hostile feedback for
> them, I guess), without people sticking a figurative stick into the
> figurative anthill.
I almost kinda miss these, especially considering
that they've been replaced by disgruntled folk
who want to reform our straight-shooting off-topic asses.
Thom Jeffries
m...@me.com.invalid
wrote:
>Gabriel JT Wright <gab...@robots.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>>gr...@friends.edu (Amy Gray) writes:
>>> In article <slrn8vscr...@ts008d33.chi-il.concentric.net>,
>>> j...@concentric.net says...
>
>>> > Actually, the Hive Mind likes you. You can stay.
>
>>> Novak's speaking for the Hive Mind this week?
>
>>No, not 'for'. Novak is the Hive Mind, and the Hive Mind is Novak.
>
>They don't call us "the Novak Matrix" for nothing.
>
>/cd, and I've got a bitchin' trenchcoat, too...
Silly origami Scandahoovian, there is no trenchcoat...
sama...@my-deja.com
rim...@NOSPAMdrizzle.com (Rimrunner) wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:51:49 GMT, sama...@my-deja.com
> <sama...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> >it seems to me that the people who fiercly hang on to these etiquette
> >rules for the net are older ppl who were on the net since before AOL
> >was even a dream, and they only want to have some form of what they
> >remember stay. well, we aren't on 486 machines, with a video card
> >pushing a few K of memory.
>
> *howl*
>
> Y'know, in one paragraph you make an argument for conventional real-
world
> etiquette, then, here, you use the exact same argument as people who
argue
> *against* conventional etiquette.
>
> You can't have it both ways.
>
> And I have yet to see anything proposed to replace what's considered
> proper netiquette, which basically boils down to being polite and
having a
> clue, that's anywhere near equally satisfactory.
>
> -g,
well, in some cases etiquette is nessisary, in some cases it isn't. I
come to newsgroups to enjoy casual conversation, not worry about my
line lengths. I can respect that you all worry about it, but is it
really so difficult to respect what I worry about?
basically if you find gramatical errors, or my line lengths are too
long, you can bring it up, but I probably won't do anything about it,
that is not what I am here for. I am here to stay fresh on WoT. you can
ignore me if you want, but that doesn't solve your problem, it only
hides me from you, and what if I bring up some interesting facts about
a book that no one has ever thought of, you will miss it, unless of
course you read it as a response that someone made.
at any rate, as I said in another post to this thread, I am just
playing devils advokate, because I am bored waiting for work. just tell
me how to adjust my line lengths in deja (as I never could find it),
and it is done, that is if they aren't right.
--
Sam
Paragon
Crushes flawed list club!!
http://www.geocities.com/Pipeline/Halfpipe/9690/
dili...@home.com
wrote:
>Gabriel JT Wright <gab...@robots.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>>gr...@friends.edu (Amy Gray) writes:
>>> In article <slrn8vscr...@ts008d33.chi-il.concentric.net>,
>>> j...@concentric.net says...
>
>>> > Actually, the Hive Mind likes you. You can stay.
>
>>> Novak's speaking for the Hive Mind this week?
>
>>No, not 'for'. Novak is the Hive Mind, and the Hive Mind is Novak.
>
>They don't call us "the Novak Matrix" for nothing.
>
>/cd, and I've got a bitchin' trenchcoat, too...
Silly origami Scandahoovian, there is no trenchcoat...
--
John Dilick
dili...@home.com
Yeah, I've been dead for six months for tax reasons. Deal.
sama...@my-deja.com
Paul Raj Khangure <p...@digitaljunkie.net> wrote:
> In an Age long past, an Age yet to come, sama...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > does that mean that my addition to the discussion no matter
> > how old is irrelevant?
>
> Yes.
>
> Unless you are actually adding something new, or raising a new point,
> then your discussion is irrelevant.
>
> For example, were you discuss the possibility that Luc and ISAM were
the
> same, or that Elayne and Rand are cousins, or that Rand is the Dragon
> Reborn, it would be completely irrelevant.
heh, I don't think that I would bring up something so obtuse.
<sarcasm>I just have to tell you that moghedein is a forsaken!</sarcasm>
>
> However, if you were to come up with a new twist on something, or a
new
> theory, and use the previous discussion (ie FAQ) as a point to launch
> your ideas from, then it wouldn't be irrelevant.
>
> Paul Raj Khangure
>
such as if I were to reference that the black threads connected to the
forsaken are as it states in the books a connection to the dark one,
and the way the taint is cleared off of saidin, and then add my twist
to what I think can be accomplished. rand, if he were smart would go up
to taim, and knowing how to do it, attemp to cut the black thread off
of him, if he were a forsaken he would know it, if not he would know it
both by the reaction taim would give. he has cut them twice with the
same results, once seeing them once not, why not try the same thing on
taim? perhaps that has been brought up in the past, perhaps not, but it
would answer many questions, and I didn't see it in the faq.
Young Blandford
sama...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > However unfair it may seem to you, the establishment
> > hold all the cards.
> >
> > Life _isn't_ fair
>
> and why should I conform to be fair to you? as you say, life isn't
> fair, if it doesn't make me any friends, so be it, life isn't fair,
you
> will have to take me as I am, or not at all. life is give and take,
but
> others have to be willing to as well.
Wrong end of the stick, matey. If you want to be read, responded
to, talked to, brought into beer rounds or whatever counts
as being in, then you have to change or the group will
ignore you. You don't have to change, but you dont have to
be accepted. There is no organised cold shouldering, the
world simply doesn't care about you until you intrest them.
And right now I'm intrested in that tasty bit sitting in
the sales team not 20 metres from me.
--
Young Blandford
Devin L. Ganger
<spiffy...@hotmail.com.NOSPAM> wrote:
> That was one of the first thoughts that went through my head; but only
> if "phat" stands for "Pretty Humble and Tactful."
The Most PHAT Man On The Net?
Hmm. I like it. Novak, we've got a winner here. Get them cards
printed.
--
Devin L. Ganger <dlga...@earthlink.net>
"N race conditions on the wall, N race conditionsa You take one down,
pass it around, and wait. And wait some more." -- Bytor in #tribes
* If replying, please either send an email OR post it here, not both. *
Henk de Wilde
rim...@NOSPAMdrizzle.com (Rimrunner) wrung from the keyboard:
<piggybacking>
>On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:51:49 GMT, sama...@my-deja.com
><sama...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>>it seems to me that the people who fiercly hang on to these etiquette
>>rules for the net are older ppl who were on the net since before AOL
>>was even a dream, and they only want to have some form of what they
>>remember stay. well, we aren't on 486 machines, with a video card
>>pushing a few K of memory.
The fundamental equipment for reading is, _and always will be_, a pair
of eyes and a brain. Formatting, capitalization and proper grammar are
tools to make reading easier on the eyes and brain. Netetiquette is
the condensed experience of many thousands of people, regarding ways
of writing that help produce read worthy text, even if you haven't the
faintest idea what computer, OS or newsreader someone else is using.
>Y'know, in one paragraph you make an argument for conventional real-world
>etiquette, then, here, you use the exact same argument as people who argue
>*against* conventional etiquette.
>
>You can't have it both ways.
>
>And I have yet to see anything proposed to replace what's considered
>proper netiquette, which basically boils down to being polite and having a
>clue, that's anywhere near equally satisfactory.
And you will never see anything either, as one of the basic rules of
written communication is that the other guy/gal/group will have to
take the trouble to read what you wrote. If they don't like it, for
_any_ reason at all, in the long run their reply will always be a
deafening silence.
>who remembers when 486 was fast...and isn't *that* old, thankyouverymuch
ObMeToo: I remember being impressed with a 8086 with _coprocessor_,
and I would be amazed if I was the only one here
--
Being crazy just means you're having original delusions
Henk de Wilde
Chucky&Janica
>you handle yourself. If your good, you won't get flamed. If you are
an
>idiot or do something that seems idiotic then you will.
You're.
Consider yourself flamed.
There goes your perfect record. *grin*
*pulls down sign hanging over Rachel's head that says '30 days without
a flame', scrubs out the '30' and writes a zero*
C&J
--
13 & 13b of 12, The CMM Collective.
Go here: http://internettrash.com/users/saint_chucky
Chucky&Janica
>(note the lack of all context and attributions)
I noted a lack of any need for them. But obviously the only grey thing
between your ears is your eyebrow.
Note the singular. Buy some tweezers.
>> Chaingaden is correct. All the replies just proved his point.
>
>Afr-j might be more to your liking, since it also teeming with
>non-sequiturs and posts responded to without context and is in
general a
>vortex of indecipherable gibberish.
It is not. We have the occasional bit of nonsensical jabbering, but
it's all in fun. It's completely decipherable - but then, we are
seasoned campaigners. Just as this post was perfectly understandable.
Did you really not follow it, or were you just proving Chaingarden's
point a little more?
Either way, the Other Group will be happy to take those you throw
away. We're not mean or sarcastic to new posters either, even if they
ask stupid questions. The only exceptions are posters from here who
talk about killfiles like they're the best thing since sliced bread,
or people who come in, make no attempt to post on-topic, and complain
about off-topic posts.
Chucky&Janica
<20001028190238...@ng-ba1.aol.com>...
>I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a
bit, and I
>wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone
else on this
>group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is
considered common
degrading
>comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it
to yourself
>and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really
annoying?
>All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've
got any
>arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory
one-liners
>my way, it would just prove my point.
Hi Chaingarden, I happen to agree with you, but you're never going to
get them to change. I mainly just skip most of this group's posts,
there's rarely anything very interesting (to me at least), and I only
post a little bit anyway. Good luck with that whole 'getting people to
be nice' thing - I tried it for over a year to no effect (except a few
sarcastic cries of "We're so M33N 2 NEWB33Z!"), but you go ahead. I'll
be watching.
*dances the Welcome Wagon Dance for Chaingarden*
Welcome aboard anyway!
Chucky&Janica
>> Then why the hell did I get flamed? Because my nick is..different.
That's all.
>
>That, and your attitude.
Phat?
I like your nickname, your attitude, and your signature.
Sorry I didn't welcome you before. I don't really read the boring
threads here, which basically means I load the posts, then mark them
all as read. Sometimes, like now, we sit down (Janica and I) and try
to make a bit of sense, have a bit of a chat. Or an argument about the
UN, it's all good.
*dances the Welcome Wagon Dance for Phat Ass*
Chucky&Janica
>> For what it's worth, this is the way most of the other regulars
will
>> respond, as well. Some of them don't; but frankly, some of the
>> regulars are jerks. Just like in the real world, unfortuantely.
>
>Most of the people who attack new posters like that aren't actually
>regulars.
*choke*
Chucky&Janica
>They were posts from people pointing out that your handle is a tad
>goofy. Which it is, btw. Many of us started out on the net employing
>pseudonyms but dropped them because they are a silly.
Yeah. Like 'Boye' is your real name.
(joking)
>Granted, the one you are using is not nearly as boneheaded as those
>employed by people who think calling themselves "Asmodean345" and
>"Ashaman1!" is a nifty idea are, but really "phat ass?"
I think it's funny.
>Do you call youself an ass and expect to garner respect for it?
Why not? It's more realistic than calling yourself by your real-life
name and expecting to get respect for it. I mean honestly. Newborn
babies who shit their nappies are called by their real names.
And snookums.
>Your nick is not "different," it's inane. Inanity is discouraged.
It's not inane, it's different. It's 'fat' with a 'ph' instead of an
'f'. And I think it's funny. And the fact that he was hassled about it
just goes to show that this group is suffering from a sickness.
>And this has not been a flame either.
If it was, we'd know all about it, right?
Davian
Chucky&Janica <janica....@pp.inet.fi> wrote in message
news:U8ZK5.135$j8....@read2.inet.fi...
> >Your nick is not "different," it's inane. Inanity is discouraged.
>
> It's not inane, it's different. It's 'fat' with a 'ph' instead of an
> 'f'. And I think it's funny. And the fact that he was hassled about it
> just goes to show that this group is suffering from a sickness.
It's not different. It's slang used everywhere by idiotic 15 year olds
who think being called "Pimp Daddy" is the highest compliment one can
give.
Chucky&Janica
>> Giving yourself a silly-assed name on Usenet is no different,
really,
>> than giving yourself a silly-assed name in real life and insisting
>> people address you as such. Had I some quaint and bizarre impulse
to
>> make a fool of myself, I could easily go to work tomorrow and
demand
>> that my boss reprint my business cards and put "Phat Ass" on them
>> instead of my name; I could replace the name tag on my office with
>> "Phat Ass", I could insist my co-workers and friends and family
>> address myself, and I could reserve restaurant tables with that
name.
>
>Is there anyone else out there who thinks Novak should do this?
Is there anyone else out there who doesn't think he would really need
to?
Sorry - feeling petty and spiteful today. Thought I'd add my protest
to the others in the form of just adding to the crap.
Chucky&Janica
>Giving yourself a silly-assed name on Usenet is no different, really,
>than giving yourself a silly-assed name in real life and insisting
>people address you as such. Had I some quaint and bizarre impulse to
>make a fool of myself, I could easily go to work tomorrow and demand
>that my boss reprint my business cards and put "Phat Ass" on them
>instead of my name; I could replace the name tag on my office with
>"Phat Ass", I could insist my co-workers and friends and family
>address myself, and I could reserve restaurant tables with that name.
*addresses the void*
Harry S. Truman had no middle name. The only thing dumber than middle
initials is having a number at the back.
Maggie
> John S. Novak, III kirjoitti viestissä ...
>
> >Giving yourself a silly-assed name on Usenet is no different, really,
> >than giving yourself a silly-assed name in real life and insisting
> >people address you as such. Had I some quaint and bizarre impulse to
> >make a fool of myself, I could easily go to work tomorrow and demand
> >that my boss reprint my business cards and put "Phat Ass" on them
> >instead of my name; I could replace the name tag on my office with
> >"Phat Ass", I could insist my co-workers and friends and family
> >address myself, and I could reserve restaurant tables with that name.
>
> *addresses the void*
>
> Harry S. Truman had no middle name. The only thing dumber than middle
> initials is having a number at the back.
ObNitpick: You spelled it wrong.
It's Harry S Truman. No period after the S.
--
Maggie UIN 10248195 http://www.chocolatefiends.com
"MAGGIE: In rasfwrj mythology, a minor fertility goddess and patron
goddess of Margaritas. Usually depicted as wearing a chainmail bra
and wielding a killfile." --Magnus Itland on RASFWRJ
Andy Shih
>this is where I have my issues, mostly. what is netiquette?
<snip etiqutte example>
Since you are able to access the World Wide Web, I suggest a simple
exercise. Go on a search engine, any search engine, and type in
netiquette. You will get all you ask for and more.
I'm not trying to be mean, but it seems like a pretty obvious
solution.
andy shih
Andy Shih
wrote:
>I've never posted on this newsgroup before, but I've read it quite a bit, and I
>wonder why everyone seems to have such little respect for everyone else on this
>group, mainly at "newbies" who ask a simple question that is considered common
>knowledge around here. If you're going to reply with a sarcastic, degrading
>comment to try to make yourself feel superior, why not just keep it to yourself
>and not post anything at all? Does anybody else find this really annoying?
>All you people who post those one-liners, defend yourselves if you've got any
>arguments, I've got an open mind. Just don't throw any derogatory one-liners
>my way, it would just prove my point.
>
As far as I can tell, the disrespect isn't aimed at newbies, but at
stupid people. In fact, I really like the way the regulars of this
newsgroup deal with the stupidity of the world. Many here are quite
imaginative and creative with their flames. It sure as hell is good
for a few chuckles and a brighter day. Seriously, though, I have not
seen anything that can be even remotely called a flame. Some people
are just too sensitive.
I get the feeling that most of the regulars here are quite
intelligent, or at least know how to use their brains. When someone
actually contributes something worthwhile (instead of some drivel like
"could someone talk about something that interests me"), the
discussion that ensues is generally very well thought out and
insightful. Sure, it can get a little heated at times and the
language a bit strong, but it isn't something I haven't heard before,
and it doesn't really bother me. They are just words.
For further proof as to how an intelligent newbie is accepted into the
group, go look up Rachel's introduction at deja.com. Of course, a
formal introduction is not necessary. I would serve as an example
there. I didn't introduce myself to the group. I lurked for a long
time, found the FAQ's, learned the conventions, and posted when I
thought I had something to contribute. The end result was an
education about the Electoral College that I very much appreciate.
People might not know me as well, but hopefully, that will change.
The key here is to realize that you are new, check your attitude at
the door, and listen to what people have to say without getting too
personal. I'm sure I've annoyed a couple of people here, but I do my
best not to. That's really all anyone is asking of newbies around
here.
andy shih
T Sean Connolly
wrote:
>Cool, didn't expect much of a response.
>I'm probably cutting my lines too short now,
>but whatever, now they won't be too long
>anyway. When I posted that, I was in a
>really pissed off mood, I normally wouldn't
>have infringed with my own opinions where
>I don't belong. Thanks for taking the time
>to respond everyone. Adios.
>
>NINE MORE DAYS!!! WOOOHOOOO!!!!!!!
Your line lengths are a little too short.
Try wrapping at about 72 - 75 characters per line, to allow easy
quotation.
--
T Sean Connolly tsean.connolly @ btinternet.com
John Prutzman
John Prutzman..Phat_Ass on #AFD
"You ate a lot of paint as a child, didn't you?"
"You mean wall candy?"
-Penny Arcade
Ctduggan
>From: "Davian" spam.som...@home.com
>Date: 10/31/00 2:25 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <Z0FL5.71676$hD4.16...@news1.rdc1.mi.home.com>
Ctduggan
>This is why we get pissed at the media and their use of "sound-
>bites" taken completely out of context.
<nitpick>
What the hell is a sound bite? Is it like a good nibble?....
</nitpick>
A serious nitpick though is the word "media" - if ever there was a term that
should be used guardedly, this is it. Are you talking about news media, or
about methods of communication?
John S. Novak, III
>basically if you find gramatical errors, or my line lengths are too
>long, you can bring it up, but I probably won't do anything about it,
>that is not what I am here for.
No, you are here, presumably, to have a conversation.
Which is going to be difficult to do if people find your posts so
annoying, unreadable, or unworthy based on your formatting and grammar
that they don't bother.
And believe me, you're about three posts away from that.
Your line lengths, at any rate, seem fine.
Your lack of consistent capitalization, on the other hand, is fucking
annoying.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@concentric.net
The Humblest Man on the Net
Julianna Avedon
>well, my theory is, if I am no longer interested in a topic, I read the
>header and if I am not interested in it, I don't go in, rather than
>going in and giving snyde remarks about reading the FAQ,
A perfectly acceptable practice, to be sure. I’ve every reason to
believe many of the regulars here behave in similar ways. However,
it’s not everyone’s approach and I’m not able to come up with any
reasons why this well-ensconced group, who like themselves just fine,
warts and all, should adapt themselves to your methods. These people
have a wide variety of differences of personal style and cultural
background. They’re not like you. You and they both are not like
me, and I don’t think any of us should be. I vote we all get to be
the way we are.
> or simply
>saying that the issue has been discussed to death, whether it is
>implyed or not, it is a holier than thou approach whichever way you
>slice the pie.
Dood: You must not know very many ways to slice a pie. I can easily
interpret the statements that an issue has been "discussed to death"
as nothing more than information that they’re weary of the topic and
won’t be participating in the discussion, and further, you might find
a nugget or two from scanning the text in the FAQ’s. I can also slice
this pie to account for a wide variety of differences of personal
style and cultural background. This is the internet; the entire
electronically-able world has access to the musings posted here. Few
cultures approach social interactions in the same way. What’s
considered rude and confrontational in one culture, isn’t always in
another.
> this is a large enough community where there are enough
>people who don't feel that an issue has been discussed enough, they
>will jump into these threads with the n00bs (hi) and discuss to death
>with them, just because you or someone else has seen it thousands of
>times doesn't mean that we have too, and just because it is listed in a
>faq somewhere doesn't mean we are restive on the subject,
^^^^^^^
I do not think this means what you think it means.
>or don't want
>to add our two cents to the discussion either,
If this is true and correct, I think you’d see at least a handful of
newbies jumping into the discussion, eager to participate. I’ve been
lurking on this group since about June and began posting in August and
I don’t think I’ve ever seen it happen. If it did, it was short-lived
and I missed it. I’m thinking most happy, well-integrated newbies
read the FAQ and glean satisfaction from it.
I myself am a relative newbie. I read the books, I read John Novak’s
FAQ and Pam Korda’s FAQ. I enjoyed the books but I haven’t read them
several times over and I’ve no plans to do so. After reading the
FAQ’s I’ve no questions or personal theories I’m nursing about which I
can start or even continue an on-topic thread. Many of these people
have devoted much more time and scholarly activity to these books
than I’ve any interest in or hope of doing. And if one reads the
group for a while, it quickly sorts itself into people who’s
intelligence and opinions one can respect and people who seem to be
posturing dumbfucks in all or most of their posts. This will change,
of course, dependent upon one’s definition of intelligent and
dumbfuck, but the principle is the same.
>if someone doesn't like
>that, fine, don't read it, you have that option just as I have the
>option to write, or not write, to read or not to read. but don't tell
>me that I have impropper netiquete because I am posting from deja news,
>or my line length is not right, copy it into notepad, click on word
>wrap and then reply, if it is that much of an issue.
Actually, Sam, this presumes that if your posts are unreadable people
will take the time to make them readable just for the pleasure of
perusing your pearls of wisdom. If your posts are unreadable, and
good GAWD, _they are_, very, very few (read this as none) of the
posters to this group, newbies, midbies or oldbies, will be bothered
to manipulate your text just for the possibility of reading something
clever hidden in a 28-line run on sentence. Unless perhaps like me,
they’re terribly bored that evening, or the only other option is doing
the washing up. Don’t hold your breath.
This group is comprised of a wide variety of personal styles and
cultural differences. (Have you read this before? Good. I want to
make sure you ‘get’ that part.) Not all of the readers and posters
are native speakers of English. Some of the non-native speakers are
impressively adept at the language, nonetheless. Others are not.
Your ‘whatever’ approach to grammatics will be too difficult for some
non-native speakers to make sense of. They won't bother.
Three times a year at least, I’m forced to answer the question "why
bother with grammar?" for a group of 18, -20 year-old students in
creative writing courses. There are a number of things I say to them,
not all appropriate to this venue, but one is particularly
appropriate to this newsgroup. If one intends to lead one’s life
speaking and writing only about concrete, measurable subject matter in
very short sentences, grammar is perhaps not important. If for the
rest of your life you will never need to communicate an idea more
complex than: "There is a car. The car is red." then perhaps you will
find yourself able to communicate your ideas even without employing an
acceptable use of English grammar. The minute you begin trying to
convey ideas which are abstract in nature, or communicate
complex, analytical argument or debate, especially to people with
different native languages, and personal and cultural backgrounds,
you’re going to need grammar to help you clarify your complicated
notions.
Remember going to the amusement park as a child and seeing the signs
with a mark on them that said "You must be _this_ tall to safely get
on this ride?" The people of this newsgroup are complex, analytical,
intelligent, they are a host of abstract concepts just waiting to
burst forth. (No, not now, Mr. Loy. Put that thing back in your
pants).
Where the mark is a competent use of English grammar, you must be
_this_ literate to comfortably participate in this newsgroup.
>I have been on quite a few news groups and this one by far (well the
>counter strike NG is rather bad too) the most head up their asses
>holier than thou bunch I have seen, and maybe it is one or two people
>that have rubbed me the wrong way from what I have read, but I don't
>see anyone trying to change that.
I’ve been hanging around on the internet for about 5 years now. I’ve
read and integrated happily into a number of newsgroups, and other
forums, as well. Many of them devolve eventually into a chaotic
muddle which could only hope to interest tree-dwelling crap-flingers.
This group appears to have solid, working mechanisms to prevent such
deconstruction. Yes, Mr. Novak is brusque. ‘Brusque’ is not
'flamed.' Believe me, if Mr. Novak had flamed you, your socks
would still be sparking a week from next Tuesday. He may be terse,
but he’s also possessed of a remarkable and singular clarity of
thought, a keen intelligence and believe it or not, a sense of humour.
I don’t always agree with him, but I do admire the _way_ he thinks and
I don’t think I’d want to change him. I don’t think many of these
good folks want to change him. It’s possible, if you spent some
time reading this group you wouldn’t want to change him, either.
There are a great many people on this group whose personal styles,
while initially offputting, I’ve grown to enjoy.
If a group can be said to have a personality, then this group
is cranky. Also intelligent, evocative, engaging and funny. .. And
cranky. Not every member, not every day, not on every subject. It’s
not a reason to go scurrying off in a huff, though. At least for me.
Your mileage may vary.
Again, I’ve been posting to this group only since August, and reading
it since about June. This group is still evaluating me and I’m still
evaluating this group. I may yet decide the group is not to my tastes
and take my posting elsewhere. If so, I won’t be trying to change the
group before I go.
If I chose a restaurant that turns out to be too formal for my tastes,
I don’t try to change the theme of the restaurant, I just go
elsewhere. If I accept a job with a firm that expects a higher level
of competence from it’s employees than I have to offer, I either
acquire that level of competence or pick up and seek employment
elsewhere. I don’t try to "dumb-down" the entire firm. It’s no
different with this group. They are what they are, they don’t wish to
change, a lot of folks like them the way they are.
If you don’t like the mix of personal styles, if you’re not capable of
keeping up to the expected level of linguistic competence, if you’re
not happy here for any reason, there are a lot of other forums where
you might find conversation more to your tastes. You are correct,
though: no one’s trying to change things here.
Best of luck,
Julsy
_______________
On this refulgent summer day it is a luxury to
breathe the breath of life.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Julsy's Homey Little Pad: http://www.geocities.com/athens/parthenon/4500
Matthew Hackell
> Ok..Is /this/ better?
>
> John Prutzman..Phat_Ass on #AFD
As a matter of fact, yes. Not wonderful, perhaps, but certainly better.
--
Matt
Winner of the Rose Bruford Medal for Effort
Chucky&Janica
>I have been reading this group on and off for 4 years now, and have
lost
>track of how many times the issue of netiquette has been discussed in
the
>group.
>
>I suggest that there should be a FAQ on the TAN topics that have been
>discussed to death, so those "not so new" newbies (i.e. poeple been
reading
>the group for a few months) will not respond to those stupid threads.
>Otherwise, it seems not fair that on-topic threads that have been
discussed
>to death is frowned upon in this group, while off-topic threads can
be
>discussed again and again.
You know, that is so true (no sarcasm).
But if the FAQ doesn't stop newcomers from talking about old on-topic
stuff, will it stop old off-topic discussions? I mean, these days a
newcomer who asks who killed Asmodean gets a FAQ pointer and sarcastic
remarks. A newcomer who makes some remark about earning their stripes
before being accepted here should get the same, you think? A FAQ
pointer?
I like it. It's...it's very rasfwr-j.
Chucky&Janica
>It's not different. It's slang used everywhere by idiotic 15 year
olds
>who think being called "Pimp Daddy" is the highest compliment one can
>give.
Ah. Maybe I laughed because your definition of 'everywhere' is limited
to English-speaking countries...in fact probably just the US. But that
doesn't matter. I just don't think it is a bad name, and it's no less
mature than somebody expecting to be respected for no better reason
than the fact that they are posting under a sensible name. It's the
Internet, man. It's meant to be fun.
*shrug*
Anyway, thanks for replying to me. It's kindof a novelty.
Chucky&Janica
>> Harry S. Truman had no middle name. The only thing dumber than
middle
>> initials is having a number at the back.
>
>ObNitpick: You spelled it wrong.
>
>It's Harry S Truman. No period after the S.
Of course. My mistake. Cos it didn't abbreviate anything.
Thanks for answering my post. It's nice to shout and yell, but nicer
to converse.
Chucky&Janica
>> Consider yourself flamed.
>>
>> There goes your perfect record. *grin*
>>
>> *pulls down sign hanging over Rachel's head that says '30 days
without
>> a flame', scrubs out the '30' and writes a zero*
>
>Seems more like a nitpick than a flame for me.
It wasn't a flame, I was joking. I don't flame, if by 'flame' you mean
say nasty things to people that hurt their feelings. But if you ask
around, you'll see that nobody here actually recognises or concedes a
flame at any point in history - they just tend to say, "That's not a
flame, if you'd been flamed, you'd KNOW." It's all about perspective.
Anyway, spell-fecking is (was) my job, so I just have fun.
> But if you want to call
>it one, then I'll take it as one. So, does that mean I have to get
all
>sorts of defensive and whinny now?
You can whinny if you want. Can I call you Mrs. Ed?
Christopher Tong
"Leigh D. Butler" wrote:
> Apropos of nothing, on Mon, 30 Oct 2000 18:15:53 -0800 Christopher
> Tong wrote:
> > Donnamarie Thiel-Kline wrote:
> <snip>
> > > I've read this entire thread and confess I remain as baffled as when I
> > > began. At what point did respect become an entitlement? Last I
> > > checked, respect was not something _granted_. It is something one
> > > _earns_ over time based upon one's actions.
> > There's a difference between being respected and being treated decently.
> Not in here. And you've been here long enough to know that.
So you're redefining the meaning of respect? I generally don't give much
stock to the viewpoint of someone who I just met, nor do I expect
someone to put much stock in my viewpoint if we've just been introduced.
However, there is, in my experience, a difference between giving what
little is due and giving nothing at all.
> > > And now if you all will excuse me, I shall drift back into relative
> > > obscurity. This thread just annoyed the bejeezus out of me.
> > Well, as you fade back into obscurity, may I advise you take back with
> > you these words from John S. Novak:
<snip the quote and exposition>
> Whoa there, Nellie.
>
> The point Novak was making in the above quote had _nothing_ to do with
> proper formatting of posts, as you know damn good and well. He was
> referring to someone's plea that we create "hoopla" over the imminent
> release of WH. Now, knowing that, everyone go back and reread Novak's
> quote and see how Chris is falsely twisting it to his own argument.
>
> I find this to be a particularly repugnant practice on your part,
> Chris. This is why we get pissed at the media and their use of "sound-
> bites" taken completely out of context. It is irresponsible, to say
> the least.
Irresponsible? I found it irresponsible that Novak would choose to
castigate the poster that was quoted for asking the group to post
certain things and then turning right around and endorsing a post in
which another poster asked the group to post things in a certain way.
It's all or nothing here, IMO[1].
> Especially since Novak happens to be one of the regulars in here who
> is most vocal in insisting that people adhere to the rules of properly
> formatted posting. Given his track record, the fact that you would use
> a quote from Novak, of all people, to uphold your railing against
> "militant" enforcement of those rules is laughable.
I know he is extremely vocal in adhering to the rules properly. However,
I'm well aware that in this case he was being extremely vocal in
insisting that people adhere to his rules. That's why I put his quote
in. I'm know that it was a fairly nasty thing to do, especially since
Novak probably didn't intend it to get used this way.
It annoys me either way that someone should feel fit to dictate to me
the way I ought to post, regardless of the content of the post or the
format in which it is posted. I post according to what _I_ desire. I
expect others to post according to how they desire too. I do not write
my posts the way I do because of some kind of fiat or due to the
dictates of the greater group. I write my posts the way I do because
that is the way I want to write them. Whether it happens to coincide
with the way you like to post is beside the point.
> > In general, I agree that a well-written post is easier to read and I am
> > more likely to read it mself. I do not agree that I ought to go into
> > Nazi mode if someone does not know how to use the carriage return. If
> > people wish to make their posts look like a dog's breakfast, then so be
> > it. Let them, I say. I've got a killfile and slovenliness makes such a
> > handy marker.
> So have I got a killfile, as do most people here. But I consider my
> Bozo Bin a court of last resort. Likewise, most people consider that
> rants like Donnamarie's serve a greater purpose than simply letting
> off steam or ripping a luser a new one.
>
> People write them in the faint hope that the newbies out there might
> actually understand _why_ we insist on the rules that we do and why
> it's not us all marching around being arbitrarily demanding for no
> reason. And in the hope that, understanding this, some might make the
> effort to uphold those rules and allow us to enjoy whatever
> contributions they have to make to this group. Then I won't have to
> killfile them.
Well my general feeling is that the group has done a remarkable job in
keeping people to their standards. This is probably due to the existence
of afrj. However, my feeling is that you're driving away a lot of people
from this newsgroup as well who would make worthwhile contributors
except for their lack of desire to write beautifully formatted posts,
lack of resources or ignorance about computers (whatever happened to
Flavio, anyway?) I'm more than willing to read any post that as long as
it is understandable. I will quickly give the boot to posts below a
certain standard, but I've only actually kill-filed two people so far
and neither of them were for not maintaining grammatical standards, so I
guess my standards are pretty low.
My general impression is that in many ways, the group is stagnating.
Many people here doubtless think it's a good thing or don't think it is
stagnating at all, obviously, but I've noticed that it's like this place
is becoming like some exclusive club of close friends and not a
discussion group anymore.
I know that I definitely don't feel welcome in such an environment[2]; I
get the impression that there are many others who don't either. Hence
they go to the bulletin boards and we never hear from them again. I
believe that this is detrimental in general. People don't hear about new
ideas or theories and then you get the same questions being heard over
and over again; worse yet, the same questions get asked at book signings
over and over again and RJ just smirks and says "RAFO".
> > I do not see any reason, however, to go on these massive screeds about
> > neatness, capitalization, etc. If they want to post that way and people
> > will read it, fine. It may say something about them and the intellect of
> > their peers, but who are we to judge them?
>
> We are the people they apparently want to read their thoughts. If they
> didn't want us to, why the hell are they here? So, fine. You want
> something from me, you're gonna have to sell it.
I dunno about that. Most people post here so _someone_ can share their
interest in Wheel of Time. At least most of those who don't come here
exclusively because of the latest Loy entry in
alt.humour.best-of-usenet.
When WH comes out, the newsgroup will be swamped by people who want to
post their thoughts on the book. Many of those people will think that WH
is the best written work to appear since the Sumerians took a chisel to
stone. Many of them will have perfectly valid viewpoints that you (as in
the regulars of the group) will pass over just because of a lack of
capital letters or a tendency to reply before quoted text. Nowhere does
it say that the postings in the group are specifically to the regulars
of rasfwrj; come the release of WH, plenty of new people will come in.
If enough of them stay, you will be overrun[3].
<snip>
Chris
[1] My feeling is that Novak made a post in which he appeared to
disapprove of people dictating to others what and how to post without
actually posting. If he's only going to apply such standards to one
subset of people, then he should say so.
[2] So why am I here? I find the place interesting. I don't post much,
but I get a kick of of watching what goes on here. I should've been a
sociologist - guess net voyeur would have to do as a working title.
[3] God, that sounds almost Brezhnevian (if there is such a word). I
really don't mean it in that threatening a sense. But it would be
interesting to see the group overrun by a whole ton r0xx0r d00ds all
spouting "cyndane is lanfear! cyndane is lanfear!" come the day.
emc...@hamilton.edu
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:47:55 GMT, sama...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >well, my theory is, if I am no longer interested in a topic, I read the
> >header and if I am not interested in it, I don't go in, rather than
> >going in and giving snyde remarks about reading the FAQ,
>
> A perfectly acceptable practice, to be sure. I’ve every reason to
> believe many of the regulars here behave in similar ways.
I do, for one. Most of the time.
By the way, your apostrophes are showing up as octal 222, whatever
that may be.
> However, it’s not everyone’s approach and I’m not able to come up
> with any reasons why this well-ensconced group, who like themselves
> just fine, warts and all, should adapt themselves to your methods.
> These people have a wide variety of differences of personal style
> and cultural background.
I respectfully disagree about the latter point.
Wasn't there some recent discussion about how many black rasfwrj
regulars there are? Did we decide if that was more a factor of RJ or
the group?
I refuse to reply to the rest of your post by virtue of the fact that
it seems really long.
--
Eric McCoy <emc...@hamilton.edu>
Bill McCarthy
> Ok..Is /this/ better?
>
> John Prutzman..Phat_Ass on #AFD
Yes John. And welcome to r.a.sf.w.r-j.
(One other tidbit: I'm not sure which program you're posting with, but
please put a "-- " on the line before your name on your .sig. This allows
other news programs to automatically snip .sigs for the replier. See
below)
--
Bill McCarthy
Think. Again.
Bill McCarthy
> Julianna Avedon <SOte...@sendnospam.msn.com> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:47:55 GMT, sama...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > >well, my theory is, if I am no longer interested in a topic, I read the
> > >header and if I am not interested in it, I don't go in, rather than
> > >going in and giving snyde remarks about reading the FAQ,
> >
> > believe many of the regulars here behave in similar ways.
>
> I do, for one. Most of the time.
>
> By the way, your apostrophes are showing up as octal 222, whatever
> that may be.
They show up fine here. Your periods, however, show up as fnords.
HTH.
<snip rest>
Siren
"Julianna Avedon" <SOte...@sendnospam.msn.com> wrote in message
news:k21vvsc1ke549m7n8...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:47:55 GMT, sama...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> A perfectly acceptable practice, to be sure. I've every reason to
> believe many of the regulars here behave in similar ways. However,
> it's not everyone's approach and I'm not able to come up with any
> reasons why this well-ensconced group, who like themselves just fine,
> warts and all, should adapt themselves to your methods. These people
> have a wide variety of differences of personal style and cultural
> background. They're not like you. You and they both are not like
> me, and I don't think any of us should be. I vote we all get to be
> the way we are.
>
Yawn... yada.. yada... Lecturing must be a hobby of yours.
Johan Gustafsson
Because she's so incredibly good at it?
--
Johan Gustafsson *** e98...@efd.lth.se
"That is a fine way to speak to a sick man," said Orm, "to liken him to
a Smalander." - Frans G. Bengtsson, "The Long Ships"