An Apology

Andrew Morris

I'd like to retract my flippant opinion, that I believed the Nudie Ride was
"just wrong"...

Unfortunately, I was attempting to be humorous, obviously something I am not
very good at, as my comment appears to have generated several hundred posts
as a result of an individual who believes my Newsgroup Etiquette is
substandard.

Apparently top posting breaches an unwritten law of the Newsgroup, which is
incidentally unmoderated.

Spam, too, is clearly a breach of Newsgroup Etiquette, and the individual in
question, appears to delight in occupying people's precious bandwidth with
repetitive, meaningless waffle.

Having been abused, wished to be dead, and generally berated, I will become
a silent viewer of this newsgroup, and decline to offer any contribution in
the future. Should further abuse be directed towards myself, I will direct
it to the ISP of the individual in question, or take matters further.

THanks to those who thought it was a bit of sport, which it wasn't, and
thanks to those who stood up for a weak belief that the Usenet is an
unmoderated medium, not to be ruled through bombastic opinion.

Cheers,

Andrew

DRS

"Andrew Morris" <use.the.newsgroup@to.reply> wrote in message
news:40c5cbad$0$3032$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au
> I'd like to retract my flippant opinion, that I believed the Nudie
> Ride was "just wrong"...
>
> Unfortunately, I was attempting to be humorous, obviously something I
> am not very good at, as my comment appears to have generated several
> hundred posts as a result of an individual who believes my Newsgroup
> Etiquette is substandard.
>
> Apparently top posting breaches an unwritten law of the Newsgroup,
> which is incidentally unmoderated.

It breaches Usenet etiquette, full stop. It's not specific to this group.
And that this group is unmoderated is not any sort of excuse for selfishness
and stupidity, which is exactly what top posting is and why Usenet etiquette
guides advocate bottom or inline posting.

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html

http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/gey_stv0.htm

http://www.fscked.co.uk/writing/top-posting-cuss.html

> Spam, too, is clearly a breach of Newsgroup Etiquette, and the
> individual in question, appears to delight in occupying people's
> precious bandwidth with repetitive, meaningless waffle.

Er, no. As usual you don't have a clue so just leave it alone.

> Having been abused, wished to be dead, and generally berated, I will
> become a silent viewer of this newsgroup, and decline to offer any
> contribution in the future. Should further abuse be directed towards
> myself, I will direct it to the ISP of the individual in question, or
> take matters further.

Now *that's* whining. ISPs don't give a flying fuck if someone's been rude
to you in a news group. Given that you are the one breaching well known and
understand netiquette in this instance the good ones won't give you so much
as the time of day. And that doesn't even begin to cover the implied
off-line threat you made towards me because you didn't like my rhetoric.
The only person who's done anything the least bit actionable is you,
sunshine.

> THanks to those who thought it was a bit of sport, which it wasn't,
> and thanks to those who stood up for a weak belief that the Usenet is
> an unmoderated medium, not to be ruled through bombastic opinion.

It's the top-posters who are trying to "rule through bombastic opinion".
They have to because they don't have a rational leg to stand on.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Andrew Morris

[snip]

> Now *that's* whining. ISPs don't give a flying fuck if someone's been
rude
> to you in a news group. Given that you are the one breaching well known
and
> understand netiquette in this instance the good ones won't give you so
much
> as the time of day. And that doesn't even begin to cover the implied
> off-line threat you made towards me because you didn't like my rhetoric.
> The only person who's done anything the least bit actionable is you,
> sunshine.

Off-line threat? I wouldnt waste the effort, on someone who has nothing
better to do with themselves.

> > THanks to those who thought it was a bit of sport, which it wasn't,
> > and thanks to those who stood up for a weak belief that the Usenet is
> > an unmoderated medium, not to be ruled through bombastic opinion.
>
> It's the top-posters who are trying to "rule through bombastic opinion".
> They have to because they don't have a rational leg to stand on.

Unlike those who don't have a rational bone in their body.

I've had enough of this. No more aus.bicycle for me until it's moderated.

DRS

"Andrew Morris" <use.the.newsgroup@to.reply> wrote in message
news:40c5d218$0$8989$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au
> [snip]
>
>> Now *that's* whining. ISPs don't give a flying fuck if someone's
>> been rude to you in a news group. Given that you are the one
>> breaching well known and understand netiquette in this instance the
>> good ones won't give you so much as the time of day. And that
>> doesn't even begin to cover the implied off-line threat you made
>> towards me because you didn't like my rhetoric. The only person
>> who's done anything the least bit actionable is you, sunshine.
>
> Off-line threat? I wouldnt waste the effort, on someone who has
> nothing better to do with themselves.

Yes, implied threat: "Now you'd really better hope and pray we never
meet..." (Message id 40c5cb20$0$31674$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au).

>>> THanks to those who thought it was a bit of sport, which it wasn't,
>>> and thanks to those who stood up for a weak belief that the Usenet
>>> is an unmoderated medium, not to be ruled through bombastic opinion.
>>
>> It's the top-posters who are trying to "rule through bombastic
>> opinion". They have to because they don't have a rational leg to
>> stand on.
>
> Unlike those who don't have a rational bone in their body.
>
> I've had enough of this. No more aus.bicycle for me until it's
> moderated.

In your dreams. All you've ever had to do to get on is inline or bottom
post but no, you had to cause trouble and now you've got the bloody gall to
try to blame me. Get over yourself.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Anus

"Andrew Morris" <use.the.newsgroup@to.reply> wrote in message
news:40c5cbad$0$3032$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> I'd like to retract my flippant opinion, that I believed the Nudie Ride
was
> "just wrong"...
>
> Unfortunately, I was attempting to be humorous, obviously something I am
not
> very good at, as my comment appears to have generated several hundred
posts
> as a result of an individual who believes my Newsgroup Etiquette is
> substandard.
>
> Apparently top posting breaches an unwritten law of the Newsgroup, which
is
> incidentally unmoderated.
>
> Spam, too, is clearly a breach of Newsgroup Etiquette, and the individual
in
> question, appears to delight in occupying people's precious bandwidth with
> repetitive, meaningless waffle.
>
> Having been abused, wished to be dead, and generally berated, I will
become
> a silent viewer of this newsgroup, and decline to offer any contribution
in
> the future. Should further abuse be directed towards myself, I will
direct
> it to the ISP of the individual in question, or take matters further.
>
> THanks to those who thought it was a bit of sport, which it wasn't, and
> thanks to those who stood up for a weak belief that the Usenet is an
> unmoderated medium, not to be ruled through bombastic opinion.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrew
>
>

Who cares? *yawns* It's the 'net!

Theo Bekkers

"Andrew Morris" wrote
> I'd like to retract my flippant opinion, that I believed the Nudie Ride
was
> "just wrong"...
>
> Unfortunately, I was attempting to be humorous, obviously something I am
not
> very good at, as my comment appears to have generated several hundred
posts
> as a result of an individual who believes my Newsgroup Etiquette is
> substandard.
>
> Apparently top posting breaches an unwritten law of the Newsgroup, which
is
> incidentally unmoderated.

> THanks to those who thought it was a bit of sport, which it wasn't, and
> thanks to those who stood up for a weak belief that the Usenet is an
> unmoderated medium, not to be ruled through bombastic opinion.

Keep posting Andrew and ignore or block DRS. Usenet is an unmoderated forum
and anyone is entitled to post what and how they like. Some things you do
will annoy some people. (I prefer bottom posting but it doesn't upset me if
others top-post). What annoys me is people who don't snip anything, but hey,
that's my problem.

Some people (like DRS) are anal about it. But then, he's probably anal about
a lot of things. Not worth wasting 100 posts on.

Cheers

Theo

Theo Bekkers

"DRS" wrote
> It breaches Usenet etiquette, full stop. It's not specific to this group.
> And that this group is unmoderated is not any sort of excuse for
selfishness
> and stupidity, which is exactly what top posting is and why Usenet
etiquette
> guides advocate bottom or inline posting.

Don't be so bloody anal DRS. Top-posting will not be the end of the world,
or even the end of usenet. Leading by example is better than preaching.

Theo

Marty Wallace

"Theo Bekkers" <theo@bekkers.com.au> wrote in message
news:40c71fc5$1@news.bekkers.com.au...
> "DRS" wrote
> > It breaches Usenet etiquette, full stop. It's not specific to this
group.
> > And that this group is unmoderated is not any sort of excuse for
> selfishness
> > and stupidity, which is exactly what top posting is and why Usenet
> etiquette
> > guides advocate bottom or inline posting.
>
> Don't be so bloody anal DRS. Top-posting will not be the end of the world,
> or even the end of usenet. Leading by example is better than preaching.
>
> Theo
>
>

Just drop the whole thing and allow everyone to calm down.
Don't argue, don't reply. Move on.
Let's talk about the thing we all love and have in common... BIKES..Yaaayyy!

Marty

cfsmtb

Keep posting Andrew. Your contributions are worthwhile.



--

HUMBUG

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 00:22:29 +1000, Andrew Morris <use.the.newsgroup@to.reply> Wrote :
>
> Apparently top posting breaches an unwritten law of the Newsgroup, which is
> incidentally unmoderated.


Ahhh fuck another thread for the kill file...:-(

amirm

Andrew Morris wrote:
> (snip)
> Having been abused, wished to be dead, and generally berated, I will
> become a silent viewer of this newsgroup, and decline to offer any
> contribution in the future.
> (snip)



Andrew,

You should not give up contributing to the community if you believe
in your contribution. Bitter individual confrontations should not
discourage you or any one else. Any discussion group or forum would
be dead boring if all users agreed all the time. Keep on reading
and posting.

Cheers, Amir.



--

DaveB

HUMBUG wrote:

> Ahhh fuck another thread for the kill file...:-(

Given the state of the newsgroup at the moment, I think I might have to
switch to a reader that supports a kill file (currently using Netscape
and pretty sure it doesn't). Anyone got a suggestion? Must be a) free,
b) not IE/Outlook Express c) run on XP.

DaveB

Marty Wallace

"amirm" <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
news:twtxc.86179$Qr.26072@fe28.usenetserver.com...
> Andrew Morris wrote:
> > (snip)
> > Having been abused, wished to be dead, and generally berated, I will
> > become a silent viewer of this newsgroup, and decline to offer any
> > contribution in the future.
> > (snip)
>
>
>
> Andrew,
>
> You should not give up contributing to the community if you believe
> in your contribution. Bitter individual confrontations should not
> discourage you or any one else. Any discussion group or forum would
> be dead boring if all users agreed all the time. Keep on reading
> and posting.
>
> Cheers, Amir.
>

However, in general, once an argument has gone past about three "back and
forths" the issue is unlikely to be resolved and it usually degrades to
personal abuse. At that point it's best to ignore the thread altogether and
find something new to chat about.

Marty

Evan

DaveB wrote:
>
> Given the state of the newsgroup at the moment, I think I might have to
> switch to a reader that supports a kill file (currently using Netscape
> and pretty sure it doesn't). Anyone got a suggestion? Must be a) free,
> b) not IE/Outlook Express c) run on XP.
>

Mozilla Thunderbird has a filtering system.