A suggestion to the Wreckers:
If you like the idea, vote "Yes."
If you want them out of our hair, vote "Yes".
If you don't care one way or the other, won't go visit, don't
agree with their reasons, don't agree with their morals, don't
want the limitations, etc, just don't vote.
But, only if you have some really -compelling- reason they should
not be able to start their group, should you vote "No."
Live and let live.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If God approved of nudity, we all would have been born naked.
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
http://www.diversify.com Your Wild & Woody Website Wonk
So your vote is for confusion and duplication? If this was for
anything other than just a rec.woodworking duplicate your point would
be valid - but it is to create an *identical* newsgroup! No
difference. That benefits nobody. It is a bad idea and needs to be
rejected on that basis. If there is someone who wants to create a
valid and reasonable proposal (such as the original moderated proposal
only with a better moderation team) then *that* would be properly
handled the way you describe. Saying "let them do something wrong, bad
and injurious in a small way to our online world just to get them out
of our hair" is an irresponsible attitude.
That's my thought, Tim - and I will vote accordingly.
"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
Why don't you go check out alt.genealogy.methods for a good example of
a group created by someone who thought they had a better idea? Yes, it's
alt rather than rec., but it's the first example I can think of of a
group that was very vocally proposed and has since effectively died.
Sorry, Dave - I'm not following. And I'd prefer to not check out that
group instead I'd rather ask others (you) what you think happened.
I like to consider myself bright enough to change my mind if someone
"shows me the light".
I see newsgroups as dynamic - people come, people go. If I'm in the
Elks Club, I've got no beef about a Moose Lodge opening up across the
How can something as inexhaustible as "participation in an internet
newsgroup" become diluted by another newsgroup? More power to them -
if it's any good, I'll join. If it's better, I'll switch.
And yes - there's some self-centered hypocrisy at work, on my part. I
didn't give a toot about Howard Stern until I had children myself.
No, but you might beef about somebody trying to open up another Elks Club
right across the street. IMO that's a bit closer analogy.
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
IMO the problem with the proposal is that it's simply a duplication of
the namespace with no mechanism to enforce the proposed "all-ages" part
of the proposal.
If they had stayed with the moderated proposal and found a group of
moderators that could be trusted I would have voted yes. As it stands,
the proposal makes no sense.
And under that a sign: "Everyone welcome to come in and hang out, even
those sewer-dwelling mad dog Elks across the street - and they are
welcome to talk and act here just as they do there".
Rec.woodworking.all-ages is *IDENTICAL* to the existing newsgroup.
There is *NO* difference other than the name. It is an ill-advised
attempt to create a moderated newsgroup without a moderator and
because it is badly planned and badly implemented it needs to be
rejected until such time as someone presents a proposal that is well
thought out and planned in such a way that it will meet the goals of
the proponents and be acceptable to the usenet community as well.
Appreciate the food-for-thought. Which is *why* I like this place.
But, why just not let the market decide?
If the new newsgroup sucks, it will wither and die, right?
Did "Fox" dilute NBC, ABC, CBS?
Or was is generally accepted as a win for the TV viewing public(*)?
(*) NB: There's NOT much on Fox, that I'll watch. There's not much on
TV that I'll watch, but I think that's beside my (attempted) point.
No, it will just whither. There's virtually no acceptable mechanism for
removing a newsgroup once it's been created, so the appropriate time to
do that is in the voting process.
The point of the RFD anc CFV process is for the proponent(s) of the new
group to lobby for support and build a consensus that the new group is
needed and will add something of value to usenet on its creation.
The proponents of this CFV have done the opposite, and now appear to be
actively avoiding any discussion.
As a result, creating the new group is unlikely to add any value.
I was seriously considering voting in favor of the mooderated proposal,
had the proponents put together a viable moderation team. They failed
to do so, and then pulled the moderation from their proposal. At that
point, the new group simply became an attempted duplication of the
existing wreck under a new name. No redeeming features whatsoever.
That's why I voted no.
"In general, crossposting
is not encouraged. If you feel the need to crosspost between
rec.woodworking.all-ages and another newsgroup, please only do it if the
post is on-topic to all groups in the crosspost. Please limit crossposts
to a maximum of two or three groups, and set follow-ups to a single
group if you must crosspost. Posts should never be crossposted between
rec.woodworking.all-ages and rec.woodworking under any circumstances."
So what happens if someone does? They get sent to the principal's
Talk about toothless paper. There's only one sensible vote: NO.
Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite
Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999
Yes, and it's unmoderated. There's no way to enforce it, just like
there's no way to enforce the "no bad language" rules.
I find it interseting that the examples they gave of "bad language"
in the Wreck were mostly a result of our troll infestation. I
can't help but think that the trolls might be _attracted to_ their
unmoderated nicy-nice group rather than honor their request
to stay away. The people who cause trouble like that look for
easy targets, and respect isn't something they have.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.