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.

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.
B: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Andrew Morris

[snip]

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]
>

>> 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.
B: 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

cfsmtb

Keep posting Andrew. Your contributions are worthwhile.

__________________
Noli nothis permittere te terere

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

amirm

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.

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.

Daveb

HUMBUG 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.

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.