Jon Meinecke said:"Tom Sherman" <[email hidden]> wrote
Quoted message said:Jon Meinecke said:I meant, what effect has such "standing up" had on
the newgroup "contributions" of others? Did it convince
the "perpetrator(s)" to leave or change their behavior?
Did it convince people not to leave?
That was not the point I was trying to make. The point is
that people need to get a thicker skin.
There are a number of models of interaction, on Usenet,
in the "real" world... Thicker skin is one way. Perspective
of self is another.
Quoted message said:This is Usenet, after all.
...and not everyone's cup of tea.
Single estate, first-flush organic SFTGFOP Darjeeling
for me, please... Made with water fresh from a high
mountain stream. After a day of bike riding or a hike
in the forest. On the edge of an alpine meadow or the
shore of a lake or the middle of a prairie or a desert...
Sipped in the company of kind and thoughtful and
gentle people engaged in life...
[responding in kind to base-est posts, "giving as good"
as or "better than you get"]
If people do not like the posts of The Troll of Worthington, they should
just ignore the posts and threads and go on posting recumbent content.
How little self-respect can a person have if a Usenet troll chases them off?
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Quoted message said:[may] contribute to some people's opinion of where
"better is". [...].
No, the point is I will not let myself be pushed around
by a Usenet bully.
Pushed around? Perhaps not, but by responding you are
engaged.
Yes, but I am a "wacko nut" who was raised in the forest by wolves.
Quoted message said:You argue that the people who "abandoned" ARBR made
it useless. They were too thin skinned, were bullied and
didn't stand up for themselves. They are now smug and
objects of disdain for proclaiming their opinion that other
forums are superior...
And you want these people back? %^)
No, but I have no objection to restating my opinion.
Quoted message said:There is no "back". There is no there "here".
There is what is, and what could be.
I argue that ARBR (and all newsgroups) are communities,--
or ecosystems. They are not simply full of thick-skinned
tough carnivores. They change over time and exist with
often a delicate balance. Moreover, we likely agree that
a process of *intentional* "habitat destruction" altered the
balance of ARBR. Sadly, that's unremarkable in Usenet,
just par for the course...
If we want a Usenet group useful for discussion of recumbent
bikes, I assert we have to provide content and improve the
curb appeal. Attracting a diverse group of people whose
presense creates a broad sense of community and value
cannot be done by creating an atmosphere of little more
than ongoing p*ssing contests.*
But apparently, that's just me. %^)
Yes, but instead of providing content, people [censored] and moan, then run
off to the nanny forum.
Quoted message said:Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and
expecting different results.
Albert Einstein, (attributed)
Jon
* -- Could we at least go for accuracy rather than distance? %^P
Real men can pee their name in the snow.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
POST FREE OR DIE!
"To diverge from the above, one should not participate
in off-topic Usenet discussions on political topics
unless one is willing to deal with the resulting
ugliness. In my case I have been called among other
things a Communist, Al Qaeda supporter, Saddam Hussein
supporter, Kim Il Jung supporter, an anti-Semite, a
terrorist sympathizer, a rectal opening, anti-American,
an extremist wacko nut, a god dammed liberal, a piece
of excrement, and an apologist for murder: this list is
by no means exhaustive."
