Format Proposal for AFT/RABT

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:02:49 +0000, Michael O'Neill <onq.RemoveThis@indigo.ie>
wrote:

>Morgoth's Curse wrote:
>>
>> Due to the increase of new posts and/or off-topic posts, I would like
>> to propose that those who wish to post a link preface their
>> topic/subject heading with the identifier [LINK].
>>
>> I barely have time to read and/or respond to new messages and it is
>> really irritating to download a message only to find that it just a
>> link to some website. I don't mind if you want to share an
>> interesting link with the rest of us, but I would prefer to know in
>> advance so I can decide whether or not to skip it.
>>
>> Is anybody else in favor of this proposal?
>>
>> Morgoth's Curse
>
>
>
>My newsread counts this NG as having 4204 messages, aft as having 6467 and alt.flame as having 2309.
>
>I can't keep up with all of them, never mind the other NG's I subscribe.
>
>You have to choose.
>
>
>M.

In other words, you endorse my proposal?

Morgoth's Curse
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

Morgoth's Curse wrote:
>
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:02:49 +0000, Michael O'Neill <onq DeleteThis @indigo.ie>
> wrote:
>
> >Morgoth's Curse wrote:
> >>
> >> Due to the increase of new posts and/or off-topic posts, I would like
> >> to propose that those who wish to post a link preface their
> >> topic/subject heading with the identifier [LINK].
> >>
> >> I barely have time to read and/or respond to new messages and it is
> >> really irritating to download a message only to find that it just a
> >> link to some website. I don't mind if you want to share an
> >> interesting link with the rest of us, but I would prefer to know in
> >> advance so I can decide whether or not to skip it.
> >>
> >> Is anybody else in favor of this proposal?
> >>
> >> Morgoth's Curse
> >
> >
> >
> >My newsread counts this NG as having 4204 messages, aft as having 6467 and alt.flame as having 2309.
> >
> >I can't keep up with all of them, never mind the other NG's I subscribe.
> >
> >You have to choose.
> >
> >
> >M.
>
> In other words, you endorse my proposal?
>
> Morgoth's Curse

On the contrary.

If by now you haven't learnt to control your irritation, differentiate On Topic from Off Topic posts by poster and header alone, and anticipate little
relevant information actually contained in the body of 4-line posts, you shouldn't be on Usenet.

BTW, you get irritated by some really odd things, don't you? Most people in most groups favour posts which link to other sites instead of posting the
content to Usenet, but not you. Ohhhh, no.

Thank God people who put forward restrictive practices tend to get ignored on Usenet. If we acceded to all demands for restriction, there would be
very little real discussion on Usenet at all.

Usenet - 90% flames.

This is the "mug, experienced, know-it-all bastard" kind of flame.

HTH

M.
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:59:13 +0000, Michael O'Neill <onq DeleteThis @indigo.ie>
wrote:

>Morgoth's Curse wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 11:02:49 +0000, Michael O'Neill <onq DeleteThis @indigo.ie>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Morgoth's Curse wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Due to the increase of new posts and/or off-topic posts, I would like
>> >> to propose that those who wish to post a link preface their
>> >> topic/subject heading with the identifier [LINK].
>> >>
>> >> I barely have time to read and/or respond to new messages and it is
>> >> really irritating to download a message only to find that it just a
>> >> link to some website. I don't mind if you want to share an
>> >> interesting link with the rest of us, but I would prefer to know in
>> >> advance so I can decide whether or not to skip it.
>> >>
>> >> Is anybody else in favor of this proposal?
>> >>
>> >> Morgoth's Curse
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >My newsread counts this NG as having 4204 messages, aft as having 6467 and alt.flame as having 2309.
>> >
>> >I can't keep up with all of them, never mind the other NG's I subscribe.
>> >
>> >You have to choose.
>> >
>> >
>> >M.
>>
>> In other words, you endorse my proposal?
>>
>> Morgoth's Curse
>
>On the contrary.

I can't say that I am surprised as you are one of the worst offenders
in regard to this particular problem. I had hoped that you would
welcome a proposal that would actually allow you to browse the
newsgroup more efficiently.

>
>If by now you haven't learnt to control your irritation, differentiate On Topic from Off Topic posts by poster and header alone, and anticipate little
>relevant information actually contained in the body of 4-line posts, you shouldn't be on Usenet.

* Sigh * I had forgotten that such concepts as courtesy and respect
are wholly incomprehensible to you. It is only common courtesy to let
others know that you are posting a link rather than providing any
actual content. There is the obvious and legitimate issue of people
who still use dial-up 'Net access and must waste time accessing the
URL through their browser. You are aware that many websites now
insist that you register before you can view a specific article or
page? I see no reason why I should waste time and money just to find
out whether or not a specific article or cartoon, etc. interests me. I
use Forte Agent to access the newsgroups and even tho I read
everything off-line, I still have to download the headers and decide
whether I want to download the actual message itself. I am merely
asking for an additional piece of information that will help
streamline this process for me and countless others. Is that really
so much to ask?
>
>BTW, you get irritated by some really odd things, don't you? Most people in most groups favour posts which link to other sites instead of posting the
>content to Usenet, but not you. Ohhhh, no.

I have reviewed over 30,000 messages in the Tolkien newsgroups during
the past 3 years and have noticed that this practice actually tends to
stifle discussion rather than encourage it. I applaud any attempt to
conserve bandwidth, of course, and I certainly don't wish to
contribute to newsgroup bloat, but I advise people to quote at least
the most significant passages or to provide a capsule summary. People
who respond to the post often end up quoting entire sections of it
anyway.

>Thank God people who put forward restrictive practices tend to get ignored on Usenet. If we acceded to all demands for restriction, there would be
>very little real discussion on Usenet at all.

As mentioned earlier, this proposal is not intended to restrict or
discourage. You are free to post a link. I only ask that you label
it as you would label and off-topic post or a movie post.

>
>Usenet - 90% flames.
>
>This is the "mug, experienced, know-it-all bastard" kind of flame.
>
>HTH
>
>M.

Spoken like a true fugitive from alt.flame, Mr. O'Neill.

Morgoth's Curse
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 12:28:44 -0500, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown.RemoveThis@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>It seems "Morgoth's Curse" wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien in
>article <aqck00hit70oeqgqllk79jnm2di441og6s.RemoveThis@4ax.com>:
>>Due to the increase of new posts and/or off-topic posts, I would like
>>to propose that those who wish to post a link preface their
>>topic/subject heading with the identifier [LINK].
>>
>>Is anybody else in favor of this proposal?
>
>FWIW, it looks to me like a solution in search of a problem.
>
>Is this problem really all that serious? I can't remember any
>messages that consisted solely of a link -- except the ones
>advertising ebay auctions, about which I've already commented (and
>which are just an unhappy fact of life).

Given how many posts you delete without even reading them (which I
understand is your policy regarding any thread identified with the
movies), I am not surprised that you may not have noticed it. It is a
problem, Stan, and it will only grow worse as the number of
Tolkien-related websites continue to rise. My proposal is intended to
help us cope with that.
>
>You seem to tie this to "new posts" (which are not a bad thing) and
>"off-topic posts", which are a bad thing but (a) not all that large
>a proportion of articles lately and (b) not affected by any
>newsgroup rule that might be adopted, since people who do that are
>hardly ever regulars here, and if so are easily killfiled.

I was not quite clear in my post. I meant that the increase in both
new posts (which is desirable) and off-topic posts (which is
deplorable) has necessitated a new approach to help people
differentiate between the gems and the garbage. (In other words, we
will have more time to participate in threads that genuinely interest
us.) A new label such as [LINK] will not solve the problem
completely, of course, but it is a step in the right direction. If
nothing else, it may encourage people provide some additional
information regarding the contents of the URL. I welcome any further
suggestions in regard to this issue.

By the way, I should make it clear now that I am not demanding that
every post with a URL in it be labeled [LINK}. I have no objection to
people providing a URL or a list of websites to support an argument,
for example, or in answer to a specific question. I only ask that
people who are posting _ONLY_ the URL label it accordingly.

I personally favor the approach utilized by such posters as Mike Perry
or Cave Troll. 90% of their posts are URLs, but they are at least
considerate enough to provide a summary of the info on the link.

Morgoth's Curse.
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 13:03:47 -0500, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown.TakeThisOut@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>It seems "Morgoth's Curse" wrote in rec.arts.books.tolkien in
>article <r08n005v16okhano8ciiid3boakii2m8gf.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>:
>>Given how many posts you delete without even reading them (which I
>>understand is your policy regarding any thread identified with the
>>movies), I am not surprised that you may not have noticed it. It is a
>>problem, Stan, and it will only grow worse as the number of
>>Tolkien-related websites continue to rise. My proposal is intended to
>>help us cope with that.
>
>I see from another of your articles in this thread that you have
>identified one of the chief offenders in this matter of links. Since
>I killfiled him long ago, that explains why I have not noticed a
>problem.

Actually, it is point in his favor that Michael O'Neill is now
labeling his posts when they are off-topic. I was referring to people
who post a link without any explanation (or an inadequate explanation)
of the URL's contents.

>Since he seems to irritate you on other grounds in addition to this
>matter of links, I marvel that you have not killfiled him but
>continue to read his articles. Surely there is more than enough
>food for discussion here from people who don't set one's blood
>pressure soaring?

The issue of Michael O'Neill is vexing. It is impossible to killfile
him completely because he uses multiple aliases AND because so many
different people respond to his posts without bothering to snip the
contents. On the other hand, he does label his posts correctly and I
can thus delete those posts secure in the knowledge that I have
already read them. I am certain that J.R.R. Tolkien had someone like
Michael O'Neill in mind when he wrote in The Hobbit: "You could tell
what a Baggins would say on any question without the bother of asking
him.

I readily concede, however, that O'Neill does occasionally post matter
related to Tolkien and those posts are occasionally worth reading.

I tend to reserve my killfile for people without any redeeming value
whatsoever: Sexual perverts, racists, spammers, etc.

Morgoth's Curse
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:21:05 GMT,
Morgoth's Curse <morgothscurse2002.RemoveThis@nospamyahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I readily concede, however, that O'Neill does occasionally post matter
> related to Tolkien and those posts are occasionally worth reading.

He does it with sufficient infrequency that I doubt I will even miss him. I
asked him and his friend BaronJosefR (or whatever) to please clearly mark
off-topic posts as such, and then came this whole rash of OT posts that were
not marked as such. There are others here that are doing this as well,
though not to the same frequency. It seems to me to be a matter of common
courtesy to mark off-topic posts as such, but Michael seems to feel that his
ramblings are of such monumental importance that someone here to discuss
Tolkien should be subjected to them. BaronJosef is of the same caliber and
ultimately I've killfiled both. I have a standing warning, and folks can
call me a netcop if they want, that if I see them altering their headers to
get past killfiles that I will report them to their ISPs.

--
Aaron Clausen

tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @)
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

þus cwæð AC:
> and then came this whole rash of OT posts that were
> not marked as such.

In all fairness to comrade O'Neill, most of the latest rush of OT posts
are not his, but have been posted by someone who's forged his name and
email address.

--
Now let the night be dark for all of me.
Let the night be too dark for me to see
Into the future. Let what will be, be.
- Robert Frost
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

"TT Arvind" <ttarvind DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a926bb0ea50a2bb989a39@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
> þus cwæð AC:
> > and then came this whole rash of OT posts that were
> > not marked as such.
>
> In all fairness to comrade O'Neill, most of the latest rush of OT posts
> are not his, but have been posted by someone who's forged his name and
> email address.
>

[Extreme sarcasm ON]
Yes, lets not condemn O'Neill for 3 *years* of OT posts because someone
forged his name for the last 5 *days*.
[Extreme sarcasm OFF]
COME ON!!!!
Why would you feel the need to post this?


T.A.
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:17:21 -0000, TT Arvind <ttarvind.DeleteThis@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>þus cwæð AC:
>> and then came this whole rash of OT posts that were
>> not marked as such.
>
>In all fairness to comrade O'Neill, most of the latest rush of OT posts
>are not his, but have been posted by someone who's forged his name and
>email address.

And how do we know that, Oh Wise Marvin of Indjah?

Huh?

Huh?


the softrat
"LotR: You've seen the epic. Now experience the Whole Story!"
mailto:softrat@pobox.com
--
42.7% of all statistics are made up on the spot. -- Steven Wright
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:17:21 -0000, TT Arvind <ttarvind.RemoveThis@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>þus cwæð AC:
>> and then came this whole rash of OT posts that were
>> not marked as such.
>
>In all fairness to comrade O'Neill, most of the latest rush of OT posts
>are not his, but have been posted by someone who's forged his name and
>email address.
Wow, they did it so well, that my killfile continued to kill those
posts. Now THAT's a forgery to be proud of (or something)

--
Sindamor Pandaturion
[remove -remove- to reply]
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 04:17:21 -0000,
TT Arvind <ttarvind RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> þus cwæð AC:
>> and then came this whole rash of OT posts that were
>> not marked as such.
>
> In all fairness to comrade O'Neill, most of the latest rush of OT posts
> are not his, but have been posted by someone who's forged his name and
> email address.

I killfiled him before this latest rash of posts. Let's be honest, how many
on-topic posts do either Michael or Baron make? I'm not even sure if these
guys even give a damn about anything written about JRRT.

--
Aaron Clausen

tao_of_cow/\alberni.net (replace /\ with @)
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

þus cwæð The American:

> COME ON!!!!
> Why would you feel the need to post this?

AC requested O'Neill for the umpteenth to include "OT" in his headers.
He agreed to do so, and actually started doing so. OT posts with "OT" in
the subject line seem to me, at least, to be a welcome improvement over
OT posts without "OT" in the subject line. I for one am glad O'Neill is
now doing this, and I hope he continues. You are, of course, free to
feel differently.

--
Don't judge a book by its movie.
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT 

þus cwæð the softrat:

> And how do we know that, Oh Wise Marvin of Indjah?

Ummm... because they're supporting Bush and praising the US, particularly
the Republicans? Not to mention the little matter of where the headers
say the post came from.

--
Sauron lived in the garden with a boat paddle.
- MegaHAL
 >> Stay informed about: Format Proposal for AFT/RABT