Life doesn't always deteriorate of time, does it?? :) Can't you be
full of vitality in your middle and late years? I don't think "it's all
downhill from here" is an accurate description of life "in general".
Surely there are plenty of pessimists who would argue the point, however.
David
pray4surf wrote:
> : The group may look better than others to you, but trust me, it is a pale
> : shell of it's former self...
> :
> : David
> :
>
> Doesn't that statement pertain to life in general?
>
> Rick
>
>
David David says:
>Life doesn't always deteriorate of time, does it?? :) Can't you be
>full of vitality in your middle and late years? I don't think "it's all
>downhill from here" is an accurate description of life "in general".
>Surely there are plenty of pessimists who would argue the point, however.
Even Methusalah didn't live forever.
Charlie Self
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral
philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for
selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith
In article <[email protected]>, Nobody
<[email protected]> wrote:
> And they all seem to be starting with the same troll
And perpetuated by essentially the same group of people.
In article <[email protected]>, Swingman
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> While I agree with you, it's not like you/I/we haven't had a whack at a
> political thread or two.
Not for some time, here. And an occassional thread is no big deal.
But when I look at nearly HALF the posts being flamewars about a
foreign election I almost wish the moderated group proposal had gone to
a vote.
In article <[email protected]>, Tom Watson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> If you hadn't been spending all yer time givin' em hell on
> news.groups, ye'd have more time to be givin' us hell here. ;<)...
I find myself tiring of both, alas. I've already informed the
news.groups crowd I have things I'd rather do.
> (djb - didya really vote fer soc.religion.satanism, or whatever the
> hell it was? :->)
Some idiot forged a number of ballots, and another decided he had an
obligation to post all the forged names publicly in the interest of
"completely accurate reporting". The only usenet ballot I have cast is
on the recwoodworking.all-ages CFV.
In article <[email protected]>, -linux_lad
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Just ignore what you don't want to read and
> enjoy the stuff you do want to read.
Lad, somehow you must of missed the bit of my post where I used the
word "filters".
In article <[email protected]>, Vic Baron
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Personally, I don't mind
> wading through a bit of crap to get to some of the more interesting threads
> on the wreck.
The number of interesting threads is declining rapidly...
In article <[email protected]>, Jack
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Thought you were leaving?
Where I did I say that?
In article <[email protected]>, Frank
Ketchum <[email protected]> wrote:
> To wit, this one.
But ya just can't help yourself, can ya?
In article <[email protected]>, Todd Fatheree
<[email protected]> wrote:
> If they're being caught by the filters, what's the big deal?
Who made a big deal out of it?
I tend to agree. If your filter caught the 50%, other than as a statistic,
what's the big deal? Then to follow with "see you in 2005" which apparently
means you won't be posting, etc. for a bit also doesn't make sense.
This is the INTERNET way folks. Is now, has been and will be forever. You
have to deal with the trolls, etc. as you see fit. Personally, I don't mind
wading through a bit of crap to get to some of the more interesting threads
on the wreck.
If you don't let it get to you and just hit the delete key, you'll feel a
whole lot better.
Of course, as always, this is just MHO,
Vic
"-linux_lad" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dave Balderstone wrote:
> > The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
> > 50% of all posting to the wreck.
> >
> > See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
>
> This election is pretty important to both sides, so people are
> talking about it. So what? Just ignore what you don't want to read and
> enjoy the stuff you do want to read. Think quality, not quantity.
>
> --
> -linux_lad
> To verify that this post isn't forged, click here:
> http://www.spoofproof.org/verify.php?sig=3d9bb75f4517338b3e025867bc01be25
And they all seem to be starting with the same troll
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:111020040956035392%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
> 50% of all posting to the wreck.
>
> See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:19:12 -0600, Dave Balderstone
<dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote:
>Not for some time, here. And an occassional thread is no big deal.
If you hadn't been spending all yer time givin' em hell on
news.groups, ye'd have more time to be givin' us hell here. ;<)...
(djb - didya really vote fer soc.religion.satanism, or whatever the
hell it was? :->)
watson - who thinks dat dem boyz on news.groups oughta get a hobby -
like woodworking fer instance.
Regards,
Tom.
"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston
Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On 12 Oct 2004 16:19:51 -0700, [email protected] (Mike) wrote:
>Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message news:<111020040956035392%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca>...
>> The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
>> 50% of all posting to the wreck.
>
>Dave, I'd say that many more people reading your post agree with your
>sentiment than disagree but that's probably not true since most
>wreckers interested in discussing woodworking have moved on to greener
>pastures.
>
>> See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
>
>I don't see it improving period. Usenet was a great experiment but
>it's time has come and gone. As sad as it is, r.w. is pretty good
>relative to other groups but it's catching up pretty fast.
>
>Cheers,
>Mike
You might try joining a moderated mail group, Mike. I think they're
the wave of the future. There's almost instantaneous response...and
the unwanteds simply get booted.
Have a nice one...
Trent
Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!
Swingman said:
><Greg G.> wrote in message
>
>> I made that mistake here - once. Before I learned that no amount of
>> applied logic, perceived truths, or ad hominem attacks is going to
>> change anyone's position one iota - we all have too much invested in
>> propping up our own individual belief structures - and there is no
>> absolute truth on either side. Such is the nature of modern
>> polyticks. <Sigh>
>
>You've got that right. However, if we could shoot through the monitor ...
LMAO! Perhaps one day - I have a small grain .38 laying in wait...
There are a number of "developers" on my "better off dead" list.
Plus lawyers, politicians, & crack-head gangs on the street corner. *
Greg G.
* This is a joke - no intention of actually following through with
such verbal banter is intended.
Greg G.
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:03:10 GMT, Gino <[email protected]> wrote:
>Usenet used to be the #1 place to find answers to almost any kind of technical
>question.
In the beginning you had to be technical to have access!Only us geeks
were on.
Now "every nut with a modem" is here.
But, I kind'a think that was the point.
What puzzles me is why the folks that are distressed about the signal
to noise ratio participate? The technology exists for anyone to stand
up their own discussion boards.
"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message
> And perpetuated by essentially the same group of people.
While I agree with you, it's not like you/I/we haven't had a whack at a
political thread or two. Just like running a red light, seems we all do it
at different times and for various reasons.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/04/04
<Greg G.> wrote in message
> I made that mistake here - once. Before I learned that no amount of
> applied logic, perceived truths, or ad hominem attacks is going to
> change anyone's position one iota - we all have too much invested in
> propping up our own individual belief structures - and there is no
> absolute truth on either side. Such is the nature of modern
> polyticks. <Sigh>
You've got that right. However, if we could shoot through the monitor ...
;>)
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/04/04
"Gino" wrote in message
> Very True.
> Most of the tech groups are gone now.
> Example If you want CDr or DVd help you have to find a web forum. All the
pros
> have left usenet.
>
> RW has become a chat group for a few old timers. Many newbies are either
dissed
> or ignored.
>
> I doubt anything can save usenet. Like Rome, the unwashed hoards are at
the
> gate, over the gate, and in our yards.
> All the filters in the world can't beat them back.
After 13 years of Usenet, and FidoNet before that, I've heard that old song
about a hundred times each year.
It's simply a matter of perspective. What most experience when they are no
longer "newbies" is that their own internal estimation of what constitutes a
"pro" and "old timer" changes, along with their expectations ... everything
else remains the same.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/04/04
"Leon" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> "pray4surf" <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> Especially from "He who used to be B.A.D". He has cleaned up his
>> act a bit...
>
>
>
>He who used to be BAD, is who now?
>
>
Go up a couple in the thread. Now known as "David".
scott
Dave Balderstone wrote:
> The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
> 50% of all posting to the wreck.
>
> See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
This election is pretty important to both sides, so people are
talking about it. So what? Just ignore what you don't want to read and
enjoy the stuff you do want to read. Think quality, not quantity.
--
-linux_lad
To verify that this post isn't forged, click here:
http://www.spoofproof.org/verify.php?sig=3d9bb75f4517338b3e025867bc01be25
The group may look better than others to you, but trust me, it is a pale
shell of it's former self...
David
pray4surf wrote:
> "Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
> news:111020040956035392%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> : The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
> : 50% of all posting to the wreck.
>
> I don't see that. Unless 'Florida Patriot' initiates an OT post, I'm not
> seeing near the volume you state, and I do not employ filters. Maybe my ISP
> is 'doing me a favor'
>
> This group is actually quite a refuge from others... If you dare, check out
> rec.boats... Hell, even the parrotheads over at alt.fan.jimmy-buffett cannot
> refrain (Grin)
>
> :
> : See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
>
> Aw, com'n stick around. Think this election will actually be decided by
> then? <Groan>
>
> Rick
>
>
>
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 14:06:39 -0500, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>It's simply a matter of perspective. What most experience when they are no
>longer "newbies" is that their own internal estimation of what constitutes a
>"pro" and "old timer" changes, along with their expectations ... everything
>else remains the same.
I think that is mostly the case. I just spent a few minutes looking at
the relevant, on-topic posts from recent days, and the topics are
depressingly familiar. Many of the things being discussed now are
filed away in my archives from a few years ago. There may be more
"clueless newbies" apparent, but that is not necessarily bad. The
truth is that in my participation on this group (6-8 years?) there
have been *very* few discussions that got into real intense
woodworking and they tend to come in bunches. The loss of a few highly
skilled and articulate posters has also contributed to a bit of a
downturn on those types of discussion, but it really hasn't changed
that much.
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:111020040956035392%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
: The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
: 50% of all posting to the wreck.
I don't see that. Unless 'Florida Patriot' initiates an OT post, I'm not
seeing near the volume you state, and I do not employ filters. Maybe my ISP
is 'doing me a favor'
This group is actually quite a refuge from others... If you dare, check out
rec.boats... Hell, even the parrotheads over at alt.fan.jimmy-buffett cannot
refrain (Grin)
:
: See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
Aw, com'n stick around. Think this election will actually be decided by
then? <Groan>
Rick
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 09:56:03 -0600, Dave Balderstone
<dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote:
>The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
>50% of all posting to the wreck.
Just counted for the last couple of days - 420 essentially on-topic
posts, 80 political or obscene. That works out to about 19%.
The S/N ratio in here is still pretty good.
Tim Douglass
http://www.DouglassClan.com
On 12 Oct 2004 16:19:51 -0700, [email protected] (Mike) wrote:
>Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message news:<111020040956035392%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca>...
>> The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
>> 50% of all posting to the wreck.
>
>Dave, I'd say that many more people reading your post agree with your
>sentiment than disagree but that's probably not true since most
>wreckers interested in discussing woodworking have moved on to greener
>pastures.
>
>> See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
>
>I don't see it improving period. Usenet was a great experiment but
>it's time has come and gone. As sad as it is, r.w. is pretty good
>relative to other groups but it's catching up pretty fast.
>
Very True.
Most of the tech groups are gone now.
Example If you want CDr or DVd help you have to find a web forum. All the pros
have left usenet.
RW has become a chat group for a few old timers. Many newbies are either dissed
or ignored.
I doubt anything can save usenet. Like Rome, the unwashed hoards are at the
gate, over the gate, and in our yards.
All the filters in the world can't beat them back.
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:59:38 -0400, [email protected] (O D) wrote:
>Might want to change that to 2006.
>Because on Nov.3,2004 who ever lost will be bitching that they got
>screwed.
And they'll wait for the Supreme Court to rule on Colorado.
Have a nice one...
Trent
Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!
Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message news:<111020040956035392%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca>...
> The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
> 50% of all posting to the wreck.
Dave, I'd say that many more people reading your post agree with your
sentiment than disagree but that's probably not true since most
wreckers interested in discussing woodworking have moved on to greener
pastures.
> See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
I don't see it improving period. Usenet was a great experiment but
it's time has come and gone. As sad as it is, r.w. is pretty good
relative to other groups but it's catching up pretty fast.
Cheers,
Mike
Trent© <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 12 Oct 2004 16:19:51 -0700, [email protected] (Mike) wrote:
>
> >I don't see it improving period. Usenet was a great experiment but
> >it's time has come and gone. As sad as it is, r.w. is pretty good
> >relative to other groups but it's catching up pretty fast.
> You might try joining a moderated mail group, Mike. I think they're
> the wave of the future. There's almost instantaneous response...and
> the unwanteds simply get booted.
<Lots of stuff snipped>
I participate in a few other woodworking discussion groups that are
quasi-moderated. By that I mean, when a discussion degrades to
pointless bickering (or well-before that stage), one of the moderators
asks them to cool it and that is usually enough. If people in here
would stop responding to the FL Patriot troll, the noise level in here
would drop drastically. Extend that practice to avoid Tom W.'s
on-line breakdown and the noise would be _very_ tolerable.
> Have a nice one...
Thanks, trying my best.
Cheers,
Mike
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:111020041533501455%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> In article <[email protected]>, -linux_lad
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Just ignore what you don't want to read and
> > enjoy the stuff you do want to read.
>
> Lad, somehow you must of missed the bit of my post where I used the
> word "filters".
In about 6 hours since you posted this thread, there are 22 responses on my
machine (I'm pretty frequent with the PLONK) there may be more for other
folks... and 6 of them are from you. So, you made a major contribution to
the crap you complained about.
Thought you were leaving?
Jack
Swingman said:
>
>"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message
>
>> And perpetuated by essentially the same group of people.
>
>While I agree with you, it's not like you/I/we haven't had a whack at a
>political thread or two. Just like running a red light, seems we all do it
>at different times and for various reasons.
I made that mistake here - once. Before I learned that no amount of
applied logic, perceived truths, or ad hominem attacks is going to
change anyone's position one iota - we all have too much invested in
propping up our own individual belief structures - and there is no
absolute truth on either side. Such is the nature of modern
polyticks. <Sigh>
Greg G.
Greg G responds:
>Before I learned that no amount of
>applied logic, perceived truths, or ad hominem attacks is going to
>change anyone's position one iota - we all have too much invested in
>propping up our own individual belief structures - and there is no
>absolute truth on either side. Such is the nature of modern
>polyticks. <Sigh>
>
And historical politics. Check out the 1830s and 1840s and 1850s, and then move
on to Grant's adminstration, and to the Teapot Dome Scandals.
The names may change, but the game's the same.
Charlie Self
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral
philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for
selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith
Charlie Self said:
>Greg G responds:
>
>>Before I learned that no amount of
>>applied logic, perceived truths, or ad hominem attacks is going to
>>change anyone's position one iota - we all have too much invested in
>>propping up our own individual belief structures - and there is no
>>absolute truth on either side. Such is the nature of modern
>>polyticks. <Sigh>
>>
>
>And historical politics. Check out the 1830s and 1840s and 1850s, and then move
>on to Grant's adminstration, and to the Teapot Dome Scandals.
With "modern" applying to whatever era you happen to be living in.
Haven't done in depth studies of the above, but familiar with.
>The names may change, but the game's the same.
Pretty much true concerning all endeavors of the human race.
Avarice Rules!
As stated on my pre-election web site back in 1999:
"For the bulk of the human race, in spite of it's rapid development of
technology and science, hasn't altered it's fundamentally reptilian
motivational stimuli in 10,000 years." *
Greg G.
* http://www.thevideodoc.com/popin1.htm
Greg G.
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 14:06:39 -0500, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Gino" wrote in message
>
>> Very True.
>> Most of the tech groups are gone now.
>> Example If you want CDr or DVd help you have to find a web forum. All the
>pros
>> have left usenet.
>>
>> RW has become a chat group for a few old timers. Many newbies are either
>dissed
>> or ignored.
>>
>> I doubt anything can save usenet. Like Rome, the unwashed hoards are at
>the
>> gate, over the gate, and in our yards.
>> All the filters in the world can't beat them back.
>
>After 13 years of Usenet, and FidoNet before that, I've heard that old song
>about a hundred times each year.
>
>It's simply a matter of perspective. What most experience when they are no
>longer "newbies" is that their own internal estimation of what constitutes a
>"pro" and "old timer" changes, along with their expectations ... everything
>else remains the same.
I disagree. The change is very real.
Usenet used to be the #1 place to find answers to almost any kind of technical
question.
This stopped being true within the last 2 years, but the last 8 months have been
far worse.
Now it's almost useless to ask tech question in many kinds of groups. But the
web forums, that used to be the playground of the clueless, are bursting with
instant expertise.
I've been here since 1994 and the changes I've seen in the last year is very
ominous.
Usenet, all of usenet has become the home of the political loonies, and they
aren't going to leave in november.
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:37:49 -0600, Dave Balderstone
<dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>, Vic Baron
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I don't mind
>> wading through a bit of crap to get to some of the more interesting threads
>> on the wreck.
>
>The number of interesting threads is declining rapidly...
Then why not just go and BUILD something?!! lol
Have a nice one...
Trent
Budweiser: Helping ugly people have sex since 1876!
"Dave Balderstone" <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in message
news:111020040956035392%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca...
> The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
> 50% of all posting to the wreck.
>
> See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.
If they're being caught by the filters, what's the big deal?
todd
Dave Balderstone said:
>In article <[email protected]>, Nobody
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> And they all seem to be starting with the same troll
>
>
>And perpetuated by essentially the same group of people.
Damned neocons. Banish them all, I say. ;-)
Greg G.
"Scott Lurndal" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "pray4surf" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> Especially from "He who used to be B.A.D". He has cleaned up his
> act a bit...
He who used to be BAD, is who now?
"pray4surf" <[email protected]> writes:
>: The group may look better than others to you, but trust me, it is a pale
>: shell of it's former self...
>:
>: David
>:
>
>Doesn't that statement pertain to life in general?
>
>Rick
>
>
Especially from "He who used to be B.A.D". He has cleaned up his
act a bit...
scott
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:52:31 -0400, Trent© <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>You might try joining a moderated mail group, Mike. I think they're
>the wave of the future. There's almost instantaneous response...and
>the unwanteds simply get booted.
>
Hmm! I like that idea. I think I'll start one called
"rec.woodworking.all-ages". :)
I hear you Dave! I drop in once or twice a day to see if there is
anything here of interest to woodworkers such as myself. Doesn't seem
to be much at all anymore. This place used to be a great resource. I
couldn't believe the attention paid to the thread about table saw wax!
David
Dave Balderstone wrote:
> The volume of political posts being caught by my fiilters is now nearly
> 50% of all posting to the wreck.
>
> See you in 2005. I can't see this improving this year, more's the pity.