wrote:

Skipper wrote:

Do you believe your admonition will moderate his behavior, Chuck? Does
he *ever* post about boats or boating? Do you really think he has the
capacity to ever 'get it'? The sad reality is that some are not here for
on-topic discussions. The cruising NG has found the right answer for
these mindless trolls...and that should be the goal for this forum.
Simple solutions are best, IMO.

I'm pretty distressed to hear that my philosophical disagreement with
JimH about the best course for rec.boats to take reads as an
"admonition". It wasn't intended to be.

ad·mo·ni·tion
n.
1- Mild, kind, yet earnest reproof.
2- Cautionary advice or warning.

Middle English amonicioun, from Old French amonition, from Latin
admonitio, admonition-, from admonitus, past participle of admonere, to
admonish.

Sorry to see you take this mendacious tack again, Chuck. Your post was
clearly a veiled admonition to JimH. Old habits, huh?

Jim has every right to express his opinion. I have every right to disagree.

JimH presents as obtuse. Suppose that's not a crime, but his 30 or so
daily mindless musings only clutter and degrade the NG, IMO.

As he points out, as long as we avoid personal insults and name calling,
that's not such a bad thing.

You contend he avoids the personal insults? Take a closer look...or
check out a.politics.

The problem is that history proves again and again that the mix
of personalities in rec.boats (and in most NG's if you look around)
*cannot* discuss a wide range of subjects without devolving to some
pretty nasty behaviors. Perhaps its a sign of the times, and there are
a lot of muddy skirts around in this regard.....certainly including my
own.

I believe it's a sign that some just don't have the ability or bent to
discuss boats and boating to the degree of their 'contributions' here.
They simply go that route to mask their boating ignorance.

If we want to be a useful newsgroup, we may have to settle for fewer
total posts per day in order to attract a greater number of particpants
and posts. As we were, we were seeing example after example of new people
coming to the group, making a post or two, and then (presumably) running
for the exit holding their cyber noses. Who can blame them?

And as I stated above, we must follow the example set in the cruising NG
if we're going to be successful in having a useful forum.

Don't they say that futility is the practice of continuing to do the
same old thing while expecting different results?

Yes, they do.

--
Skipper

wrote:
Skipper wrote:

Do you believe your admonition will moderate his behavior, Chuck? Does
he *ever* post about boats or boating? Do you really think he has the
capacity to ever 'get it'? The sad reality is that some are not here for
on-topic discussions. The cruising NG has found the right answer for
these mindless trolls...and that should be the goal for this forum.
Simple solutions are best, IMO.

--
Skipper

I'm pretty distressed to hear that my philosophical disagreement with
JimH about the best course for rec.boats to take reads as an
"admonition". It wasn't intended to be. Jim has every right to express
his opinion. I have every right to disagree. As he points out, as long
as we avoid personal insults and name calling, that's not such a bad
thing. The problem is that history proves again and again that the mix
of personalities in rec.boats (and in most NG's if you look around)
*cannot* discuss a wide range of subjects without devolving to some
pretty nasty behaviors. Perhaps its a sign of the times, and there are
a lot of muddy skirts around in this regard.....certainly including my
own.

Are we a chatroom, or a newsgroup?

As I have said all along, if we want a chatroom we've had a dandy and
there is no need for anybody to change anything from the late November,
early December model where the majority of threads were OT, and even
the on topic threads quickly devolved into flame fests. If we want to
be a useful newsgroup, we may have to settle for fewer total posts per
day in order to attract a greater number of particpants and posts. As
we were, we were seeing example after example of new people coming to
the group, making a post or two, and then (presumably) running for the
exit holding their cyber noses. Who can blame them?

Why are OT threads a problem, even when the original poster avoids
calling names, etc?
In my opinion and observation, it's because 99% of the bitchy behavior
in this group occurs in OT threads. People then carry those personal
disputes into the on-topic threads and we suddenly have the Hatfields
and the McCoys all over hell. It's because I know darn well, (or
should), that even posting "George Bush did this yesterday" in as
objective a manner as I could manage, to *this* group, is going to
rally a half dozen people to declare that Bush is an idiot who stole
two elections and another half dozed to proclaim that he will be
remembered as the greatest president since Lincoln, at least, and given
the remainder of his second term he could easily eclipse ol' Abe. Who
needs that?

Don't they say that futility is the practice of continuing to do the
same old thing while expecting different results?

Chuck,
In the few political posts that have been made in the past month, they
have quickly degraded into flamefests. 99% of the regulars have
confirmed your position that we should avoid politics or religion and
ignore any flames.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************

Q. What's the difference between a brown-noser and a ****-head?
A. Depth perception.
************************************************** *************

Harry Krause wrote:
wrote:
Skipper wrote:

Do you believe your admonition will moderate his behavior, Chuck? Does
he *ever* post about boats or boating? Do you really think he has the
capacity to ever 'get it'? The sad reality is that some are not here for
on-topic discussions. The cruising NG has found the right answer for
these mindless trolls...and that should be the goal for this forum.
Simple solutions are best, IMO.

--
Skipper

I'm pretty distressed to hear that my philosophical disagreement with
JimH about the best course for rec.boats to take reads as an
"admonition". It wasn't intended to be. Jim has every right to express
his opinion. I have every right to disagree. As he points out, as long
as we avoid personal insults and name calling, that's not such a bad
thing. The problem is that history proves again and again that the mix
of personalities in rec.boats (and in most NG's if you look around)
*cannot* discuss a wide range of subjects without devolving to some
pretty nasty behaviors. Perhaps its a sign of the times, and there are
a lot of muddy skirts around in this regard.....certainly including my
own.

Are we a chatroom, or a newsgroup?

As I have said all along, if we want a chatroom we've had a dandy and
there is no need for anybody to change anything from the late November,
early December model where the majority of threads were OT, and even
the on topic threads quickly devolved into flame fests. If we want to
be a useful newsgroup, we may have to settle for fewer total posts per
day in order to attract a greater number of particpants and posts. As
we were, we were seeing example after example of new people coming to
the group, making a post or two, and then (presumably) running for the
exit holding their cyber noses. Who can blame them?

Why are OT threads a problem, even when the original poster avoids
calling names, etc?
In my opinion and observation, it's because 99% of the bitchy behavior
in this group occurs in OT threads. People then carry those personal
disputes into the on-topic threads and we suddenly have the Hatfields
and the McCoys all over hell. It's because I know darn well, (or
should), that even posting "George Bush did this yesterday" in as
objective a manner as I could manage, to *this* group, is going to
rally a half dozen people to declare that Bush is an idiot who stole
two elections and another half dozed to proclaim that he will be
remembered as the greatest president since Lincoln, at least, and given
the remainder of his second term he could easily eclipse ol' Abe. Who
needs that?

Don't they say that futility is the practice of continuing to do the
same old thing while expecting different results?


Why don't you, Skipper, Smithers, et al, take this to Herring's group
for bitching, and stop cluttering up this newsgroup with these same,
repetitive sermons? I think you guys are burning up more space with this
than we've had heated off-topic discussions lately, eh?

Really. Give it a rest.
I think you are talking to the wrong person. JimH asked the question
and Chuck responded with his ideas.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************

Q. What's the difference between a brown-noser and a ****-head?
A. Depth perception.
************************************************** *************

JimH wrote:
The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually *decreased*
as a result of it.

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.,

I don't think it's more confrontational! Seriously, I think the people
who are now never posting, are the ones who's only agenda was to be
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)

Jim, you've sure got on this anti-"netcopping" thing. I wonder why,
when you used to be the worst offender of this? Why the sudden change?
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT

Thank you!!

3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.

Again, I think the worst offenders of #3 are the one's that are gone,
thus the decreased participation. That's a good thing.
4. Stop the flaming.

That'd be good, but with SOME of the people here, that will never stop!

5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.

6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

Agreed with exceptions stated above!

wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of
the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually
*decreased*
as a result of it.

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has
not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.,

I don't think it's more confrontational! Seriously, I think the people
who are now never posting, are the ones who's only agenda was to be
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)

Jim, you've sure got on this anti-"netcopping" thing. I wonder why,
when you used to be the worst offender of this? Why the sudden change?
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT

Thank you!!

3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.

Again, I think the worst offenders of #3 are the one's that are gone,
thus the decreased participation. That's a good thing.
4. Stop the flaming.

That'd be good, but with SOME of the people here, that will never stop!

5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.

6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

Agreed with exceptions stated above!


Good points.

On 25 Jan 2006 04:50:05 -0800, wrote:


JimH wrote:
The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually *decreased*
as a result of it.

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.,

I don't think it's more confrontational! Seriously, I think the people
who are now never posting, are the ones who's only agenda was to be
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)

Jim, you've sure got on this anti-"netcopping" thing. I wonder why,
when you used to be the worst offender of this? Why the sudden change?
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT

Thank you!!

3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.

Again, I think the worst offenders of #3 are the one's that are gone,
thus the decreased participation. That's a good thing.
4. Stop the flaming.

That'd be good, but with SOME of the people here, that will never stop!

5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.

6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

Agreed with exceptions stated above!

Some good points there. Thanks bassie.

Chuck's Challenge has done much to help clean up the place. The folks
who've left have been more than replaced by new names who've added a lot to
the group.

We don't need the acerbic, antagonistic, name-calling that adds nothing.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

Harry Krause wrote:

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.

That's mostly correct. Smithers, of course, is still here, as is
Skipper...

And then there's Krause. He does not harass, lie, or exhibit obnoxious
behavior. He's special, being of the chosen class. Few possess his
talent and depth of knowledge.

--
Skipper

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 25 Jan 2006 04:50:05 -0800, wrote:


Chuck's Challenge has done much to help clean up the place. The folks
who've left have been more than replaced by new names who've added a lot
to
the group.

We don't need the acerbic, antagonistic, name-calling that adds nothing.

I agree as well........

--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

wrote:
JimH wrote:
The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually *decreased*
as a result of it.

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.
I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.,

I don't think it's more confrontational! Seriously, I think the people
who are now never posting, are the ones who's only agenda was to be
confrontational.
Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)

Jim, you've sure got on this anti-"netcopping" thing. I wonder why,
when you used to be the worst offender of this? Why the sudden change?
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT

Thank you!!

3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.

Again, I think the worst offenders of #3 are the one's that are gone,
thus the decreased participation. That's a good thing.
4. Stop the flaming.

That'd be good, but with SOME of the people here, that will never stop!

5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.

6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

Agreed with exceptions stated above!

Bass,

I agree, rec.boats is a much better place when we use it as a place to
meet and chat amicably about a hobby we all enjoy. As Eisboch said,
Religion and Politics should not be discussed in rec.boats

We don't need to return to the old political and flame trolling.

In the past, 50% of the regulars were ****ed off at the other 50%.

Today, most of us enjoy the camaraderie. The few that are looking for
an argument are easy to ignore.

--
Reggie
************************************************** *************

Q. What's the difference between a brown-noser and a ****-head?
A. Depth perception.
************************************************** *************

Harry Krause wrote:

Reggie Smithers wrote:

I agree, rec.boats is a much better place when we use it as a place to
meet and chat...

Today, most of us enjoy the camaraderie. The few that are looking for
an argument are easy to ignore.

Just for grins, you ought to count up all the words you've posted
regarding boats since you were "born again," and all the words you've
posted about "manners."

Damn it hurts when I have to agree with you. I'd really like to see the
three musketeers from a.politics talk boats 'n boating. That could be
*very* telling.

--
Skipper