OT - Just an observation

"Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Doug,
>
> > "Shunned" would be a better word, I think. It's a public forum, after
all,
> so it's difficult to actually ban anyone.
>
> I stand corrected - shunned is a better description... but I don't condone
> that kind of childish reaction.
>

Plonked, killfiled. I wouldn't characterize it as childish behavior! Au
contraire! Ignoring tantrums is a parenting skill that's tough to master.

"Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> I stand corrected - shunned is a better description... but I don't condone
> that kind of childish reaction.

So do you think it's better to do exactly what the troll wants,
which is to get attention and engage in namecalling? IMHO, *that*
would be the childish course of action.

> Hmmm, newsgroup - peaceful... doesn't quite seem right....;)

Yeah, it is a bit odd, but I'm starting to like it. :-)
Truthfully, the wreck is pretty tame compared to most of Usenet. And
except for the occasional trolls, the signal-to-noise ratio is
actually pretty good.

> Missed that... but two weeks between lively discussions? Kinda boring....

I guess it depends on what you want from a newsgroup. Is it to get
involved in namecalling or to get and/or provide useful information?

> Less noise and abusive statements yes ...improvement?

See above.

> And now that the good guy's have made the world safe once again... where are
> their words of wisdom and advice?

As to your first point -- I don't think any of us have any
delusions about riding in on white horses. Usenet groups are what
*you* make of them. If you stoop to the level of a troll, the group
becomes about trolls.

As for words of wisdom and advice -- if a thread is started where I
feel I can contribute, I will do so (as will the other "good guy's"
[sic]). In the meantime, I don't think it's necessary to post just to
"hear myself talk" (unlike the trolls).


Chuck Vance (27 days and counting)

Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> On 23 Jun 2004 05:51:40 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
> calmly ranted:
>
> > Chuck Vance (27 days and counting)
>
> Ohmygosh! I didn't even know you were _pregnant_!
>
> Oh, you're not? Then what's the countdown?

It's 27 days of ignoring our resident trollboy whose name must not be said.


Chuck Vance

Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:18:50 GMT, dave in fairfax <[email protected]> wrote:
> > patrick conroy wrote:
> >> Kind'a cool idea. Like a tattoo, arm-band or Hells Angels jacket.
> >> Anyone care if others do it too - as a show of support?
> >
> > Seems to me that it's just another flavor of feeding the troll.
> > Shunning makes the person unseen, not noisily overlooked.
>
> Yup, giving the troll attention just feeds it, even if the attention
> is "look how much attention I'm not giving you".

Actually, it was just something that the members of the Wreck.Cabal
agreed to add to our posts as a show of solidarity. My mistake was in
explaining it in public when I was asked.

The Wreck Cabal Management have already been in contact with me
over this little transgression on my part. Rest assured that won't
happen again.


Chuck Vance
Just say (tmPL) TINC.

On 23 Jun 2004 05:51:40 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
calmly ranted:

> Chuck Vance (27 days and counting)

Ohmygosh! I didn't even know you were _pregnant_!

Oh, you're not? Then what's the countdown?


------------------------------------------------------
No matter how hard you try, you cannot baptize a cat.
----------------------------
http://www.diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development
---------------------------------------------------

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:46:33 GMT, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:
> Doug,
>
>> "Shunned" would be a better word, I think. It's a public forum, after all,
> so it's difficult to actually ban anyone.
>
> I stand corrected - shunned is a better description... but I don't condone
> that kind of childish reaction.

I don't see how deciding not to waste time with an obvious troll is
"childish", sorry.

> Less noise and abusive statements yes ...improvement?

The signal:noise ratio has improved, so yes, I'd say that's improvement.
When a third of the threads are interfered with by, or about, the troll
then that's just more space wasted with no benefit.

> And now that the good guy's have made the world safe once again... where are
> their words of wisdom and advice?

I haven't noticed a lack of woodworking talk going on...I got some good
plane advice the other day, on a saturday even.

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:18:50 GMT, dave in fairfax <[email protected]> wrote:
> patrick conroy wrote:
>> Kind'a cool idea. Like a tattoo, arm-band or Hells Angels jacket.
>> Anyone care if others do it too - as a show of support?
>
> Seems to me that it's just another flavor of feeding the troll.
> Shunning makes the person unseen, not noisily overlooked.

Yup, giving the troll attention just feeds it, even if the attention
is "look how much attention I'm not giving you".

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 09:24:21 -0500, Conan the Librarian <[email protected]> wrote:
> Actually, it was just something that the members of the Wreck.Cabal
> agreed to add to our posts as a show of solidarity. My mistake was in
> explaining it in public when I was asked.

You're not in the Cabal, I've never seen you at the meetings.

> Chuck Vance
> Just say (tmPL) TINC.

Wups, I mean, "Cabal? There is no cabal."

Conan The Librarian wrote:
> Chuck Vance (27 days and counting)

Gosh Chuck, you're getting so short I can barely see you. What're
your plans?
A blatant attempt to take the thread away from whether it's
sillier to ignore trolls or respond to them. If it's really a
question, well...
Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

patrick conroy wrote:
> Kind'a cool idea. Like a tattoo, arm-band or Hells Angels jacket.
> Anyone care if others do it too - as a show of support?

Seems to me that it's just another flavor of feeding the troll.
Shunning makes the person unseen, not noisily overlooked.
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

Conan the Librarian wrote:
> Actually, it was just something that the members of the Wreck.Cabal
> agreed to add to our posts as a show of solidarity. My mistake was in
> explaining it in public when I was asked.
>
> The Wreck Cabal Management have already been in contact with me over
> this little transgression on my part. Rest assured that won't happen again.

I considered that before making the original getting short
comment, but I guess I misread the dates because it seemed they
were getting shorter rather than longer.
Sorry about getting you in trouble with the powers-that-be. %-)
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/

Bob apparently said,on my timestamp of 22/06/2004 11:20 PM:

> Now that a certain individual has been banned from the group I've noticed

"banned"? This is a public ng....

--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
[email protected]

<snipped>> And now that the good guy's have made the world safe once
again... where are
> their words of wisdom and advice?
>
> Bob S.
>
>
Wisdom is sometimes knowing when NOT to say something.
And what advice do you seek?
Tom

Dave Hinz apparently said,on my timestamp of 26/06/2004 1:14 AM:
>
>
> Wups, I mean, "Cabal? There is no cabal."

you have been terminated

the Internet

Doug Miller wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, "Bob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Now that a certain individual has been banned from the group I've noticed
>>that the noise level has dropped considerably as well as any "lively"
>>discussions too. Hmmmm, kinda boring around here....
>
>
> "Shunned" would be a better word, I think. It's a public forum, after all, so
> it's difficult to actually ban anyone.
>
> "Boring" isn't the most accurate term either IMO. I believe "peaceful" is more
> descriptive.
>
> Lively discussions are not always good discussions, particularly when one
> party is unable to discuss opinions that differ from his own without using
> inflammatory terms such as "miscreant" or "moron". In this case, I think that
> peaceful is preferable to lively.
>
> And you might recall that the absence of that individual did nothing to impair
> the development of a pretty lively discussion about firearms a couple weeks
> ago.
>
>>So where are all those individuals that signed on the dotted line to ban /
>>ignore this certain individual now ? Did I miss your posts that offered
>>some words of advice, a bit of mentoring or even a hint of woodworking
>>related discussion ? Hardly any that I can see.
>
>
> I'm still here, haven't gone anywhere. Dintcha see my post the other day about
> possible causes for bandsaw cuts drifting? Or this morning, about shoes on
> concrete floors?
>
>>It does appear that the cure was worse than the problem in this case.
>
>
> Oh, I don't think so at all. I haven't seen anything from that certain
> individual since his tantrum a few weeks ago, and IMO the community is much
> improved by his absence.
>
>
>>Next time, perhaps you'll consider that maybe the wit of a so-called
>>storyteller is a bit short on wisdom and long on ego.
>
>
> The only negative aspect I can see to the absence of the certain individual is
> that we are no longer entertained by the spectacle of the storyteller sticking
> pins into a gasbag to watch it sputter around the room.
>
>>Not looking for any comments - simply an observation.
>>
>
> Oh -- sorry.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
>
> Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
> by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
> You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
>
>
are YOU the gasbag?

dave

Ahhhhhhhhhhhh yes.... the terrible 3's..... More to come.... enjoy while
you can.

Bob S.


"patrick conroy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:hH%[email protected]...
>
> > Correcting that kind of behavior is even more difficult. Try solving the
> > problem instead of ignoring it...
>
> Somethings just cannot be "solved" for a 3 year old. :)
> We do let them know that the behavior is unacceptable in certain
> areas/times - and acceptable in one: in their rooms, door closed.
>
> IMHO, 3 yr olds have the emotional swings yet lack the skills to verbalize
> or direct their feelings - and a tantrum pours out. Trying not to "wig
out"
> when it happens is tough.
>
> That's was my gist in my original response.
>
> Just my opinion, now wise enough to see that every child brings a special
> nuance to parenting 101. What works for one, doesn't for the others.
Same
> goes for adults, I guess.
>
>
>

"Doug Miller" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, "Bob"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> >Now that a certain individual has been banned from the group I've noticed
> >that the noise level has dropped considerably as well as any "lively"
> >discussions too. Hmmmm, kinda boring around here....
>
> "Shunned" would be a better word, I think. It's a public forum, after all,
so
> it's difficult to actually ban anyone.
>
> "Boring" isn't the most accurate term either IMO. I believe "peaceful" is
more
> descriptive.
>
> Lively discussions are not always good discussions, particularly when one
> party is unable to discuss opinions that differ from his own without using
> inflammatory terms such as "miscreant" or "moron". In this case, I think
that
> peaceful is preferable to lively.
>
> And you might recall that the absence of that individual did nothing to
impair
> the development of a pretty lively discussion about firearms a couple
weeks
> ago.
> >
> >So where are all those individuals that signed on the dotted line to ban
/
> >ignore this certain individual now ? Did I miss your posts that offered
> >some words of advice, a bit of mentoring or even a hint of woodworking
> >related discussion ? Hardly any that I can see.
>
> I'm still here, haven't gone anywhere. Dintcha see my post the other day
about
> possible causes for bandsaw cuts drifting? Or this morning, about shoes on
> concrete floors?
> >
> >It does appear that the cure was worse than the problem in this case.
>
> Oh, I don't think so at all. I haven't seen anything from that certain
> individual since his tantrum a few weeks ago, and IMO the community is
much
> improved by his absence.
>
> >Next time, perhaps you'll consider that maybe the wit of a so-called
> >storyteller is a bit short on wisdom and long on ego.
>
> The only negative aspect I can see to the absence of the certain
individual is
> that we are no longer entertained by the spectacle of the storyteller
sticking
> pins into a gasbag to watch it sputter around the room.
> >
> >Not looking for any comments - simply an observation.
> >
> Oh -- sorry.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Doug:
Nice response. Without flaming the OP you addressed each of his points in a
calm and reasonable manner-just the opposite of the "shunned" individual.

Bob
>
> Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
> by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
> You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
>
>

there is no cabal

-anon

Bob wrote:
> Now that a certain individual has been banned from the group I've noticed
> that the noise level has dropped considerably as well as any "lively"
> discussions too. Hmmmm, kinda boring around here....
>
> So where are all those individuals that signed on the dotted line to ban /
> ignore this certain individual now ? Did I miss your posts that offered
> some words of advice, a bit of mentoring or even a hint of woodworking
> related discussion ? Hardly any that I can see.
>
> It does appear that the cure was worse than the problem in this case. Next
> time, perhaps you'll consider that maybe the wit of a so-called storyteller
> is a bit short on wisdom and long on ego.
>
> Not looking for any comments - simply an observation.
>
>
> Bob S.
>
>
It IS boring as hell around here, which is why I haven't
looked in much lately. (not looking for comments either! :) )


dave

Noons wrote:

> Bob apparently said,on my timestamp of 22/06/2004 11:20 PM:
>
>> Now that a certain individual has been banned from the group I've noticed
>
> "banned"? This is a public ng....

However if someone exhibits behavior sufficiently egregious then his ISP may
decide to pull his account.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Dave Hinz wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:18:50 GMT, dave in fairfax <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>patrick conroy wrote:
>>
>>>Kind'a cool idea. Like a tattoo, arm-band or Hells Angels jacket.
>>>Anyone care if others do it too - as a show of support?
>>
>>Seems to me that it's just another flavor of feeding the troll.
>>Shunning makes the person unseen, not noisily overlooked.
>
> Yup, giving the troll attention just feeds it, even if the attention
> is "look how much attention I'm not giving you".

Actually, it was just something that the members of the Wreck.Cabal
agreed to add to our posts as a show of solidarity. My mistake was in
explaining it in public when I was asked.

The Wreck Cabal Management have already been in contact with me over
this little transgression on my part. Rest assured that won't happen again.


Chuck Vance
Just say (tmPL) TINC.

"Conan The Librarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message

> It's 27 days of ignoring our resident trollboy whose name must not be
said.

Ah! I was wunderin' too.

Kind'a cool idea. Like a tattoo, arm-band or Hells Angels jacket.
Anyone care if others do it too - as a show of support?

On 24 Jun 2004 04:54:10 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
calmly ranted:

>Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> On 23 Jun 2004 05:51:40 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
>> calmly ranted:
>>
>> > Chuck Vance (27 days and counting)
>>
>> Ohmygosh! I didn't even know you were _pregnant_!
>>
>> Oh, you're not? Then what's the countdown?
>
> It's 27 days of ignoring our resident trollboy whose name must not be said.

That's MUCH better than (and not unlike) an unwanted pregnancy.
Kudos.

Carry on.


------------------------------------------------------
I survived the D.C. Blizzard of 2000...from California.
----------------------------
http://www.diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development
--------------------------------------------------

Counting what?

Kevin
--
=====
"Conan The Librarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Chuck Vance (27 days and counting)

"Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:hH%[email protected]...

> Correcting that kind of behavior is even more difficult. Try solving the
> problem instead of ignoring it...

Somethings just cannot be "solved" for a 3 year old. :)
We do let them know that the behavior is unacceptable in certain
areas/times - and acceptable in one: in their rooms, door closed.

IMHO, 3 yr olds have the emotional swings yet lack the skills to verbalize
or direct their feelings - and a tantrum pours out. Trying not to "wig out"
when it happens is tough.

That's was my gist in my original response.

Just my opinion, now wise enough to see that every child brings a special
nuance to parenting 101. What works for one, doesn't for the others. Same
goes for adults, I guess.

Correcting that kind of behavior is even more difficult. Try solving the
problem instead of ignoring it...

Bob S.

and if you plonked me...Thanks, I won't hear any more of your rhetoric.

"patrick conroy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Plonked, killfiled. I wouldn't characterize it as childish behavior! Au
> contraire! Ignoring tantrums is a parenting skill that's tough to master.
>
>

That doesn't mean he's banned from the group.

Kevin
--
=====

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> However if someone exhibits behavior sufficiently egregious then his ISP
may
> decide to pull his account.

"Conan the Librarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>

> Wreck Cabal

Sum'b*tch! I *knew it existed*! I knew it!

You bahstuds holding meetings in the Grassy Knoll, driving cars with those
100MPG carburetors, and visiting the alien spaceships in Area 51, aren't
you!!!

jo4hn wrote:
> there is no cabal
>
> -anon
>
sure. and there are no miscreants either.

dave

In article <[email protected]>,
Conan the Librarian <[email protected]> wrote:

> The Wreck Cabal Management have already been in contact with me over
> this little transgression on my part. Rest assured that won't happen again.

Cabal? Oh yeah, that little group we let you form so y'all could feel
better. We actually encourage that sort of thing from the lower levels;
keeps 'em well distracted.

Doug,

> "Shunned" would be a better word, I think. It's a public forum, after all,
so it's difficult to actually ban anyone.

I stand corrected - shunned is a better description... but I don't condone
that kind of childish reaction.

> "Boring" isn't the most accurate term either IMO. I believe "peaceful" is
more descriptive.


Hmmm, newsgroup - peaceful... doesn't quite seem right....;)

> Lively discussions are not always good discussions, particularly when one
party is unable to discuss opinions that differ from his own without using
> inflammatory terms such as "miscreant" or "moron". In this case, I think
that peaceful is preferable to lively.

Agree...

> And you might recall that the absence of that individual did nothing to
impair the development of a pretty lively discussion about firearms a couple
weeks
> ago.

Missed that... but two weeks between lively discussions? Kinda boring....


> I'm still here, haven't gone anywhere. Dintcha see my post the other day
about possible causes for bandsaw cuts drifting? Or this morning, about
shoes on
> concrete floors?

Your post about shoes was made after I made my post...

> Oh, I don't think so at all. I haven't seen anything from that certain
individual since his tantrum a few weeks ago, and IMO the community is much
> improved by his absence.

Less noise and abusive statements yes ...improvement?

> The only negative aspect I can see to the absence of the certain
individual is
> that we are no longer entertained by the spectacle of the storyteller
sticking
> pins into a gasbag to watch it sputter around the room.

And now that the good guy's have made the world safe once again... where are
their words of wisdom and advice?

Bob S.

"Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:hH%[email protected]...
>
> and if you plonked me...Thanks, I won't hear any more of your rhetoric.
>

Whoops!
Nope - I should have typed: "Shunned aka. 'plonked', 'killfiled'..."
Think I have only three non-porno's, non-spammer's in my killfile.

I've got still way to much 'dorking to master berfore I plonk on a larger
scale.

<re-reading>

> and if you plonked me [...] I won't hear any more of your rhetoric.
Huh? Wouldn't you have to plonk me? :)

Kevin Singleton wrote:

> Counting what?
>
> Kevin
it isn't Crows.

I'd tell you , but it'll spoil the fun...


dave

In article <[email protected]>, "Bob" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Now that a certain individual has been banned from the group I've noticed
>that the noise level has dropped considerably as well as any "lively"
>discussions too. Hmmmm, kinda boring around here....

"Shunned" would be a better word, I think. It's a public forum, after all, so
it's difficult to actually ban anyone.

"Boring" isn't the most accurate term either IMO. I believe "peaceful" is more
descriptive.

Lively discussions are not always good discussions, particularly when one
party is unable to discuss opinions that differ from his own without using
inflammatory terms such as "miscreant" or "moron". In this case, I think that
peaceful is preferable to lively.

And you might recall that the absence of that individual did nothing to impair
the development of a pretty lively discussion about firearms a couple weeks
ago.
>
>So where are all those individuals that signed on the dotted line to ban /
>ignore this certain individual now ? Did I miss your posts that offered
>some words of advice, a bit of mentoring or even a hint of woodworking
>related discussion ? Hardly any that I can see.

I'm still here, haven't gone anywhere. Dintcha see my post the other day about
possible causes for bandsaw cuts drifting? Or this morning, about shoes on
concrete floors?
>
>It does appear that the cure was worse than the problem in this case.

Oh, I don't think so at all. I haven't seen anything from that certain
individual since his tantrum a few weeks ago, and IMO the community is much
improved by his absence.

>Next time, perhaps you'll consider that maybe the wit of a so-called
>storyteller is a bit short on wisdom and long on ego.

The only negative aspect I can see to the absence of the certain individual is
that we are no longer entertained by the spectacle of the storyteller sticking
pins into a gasbag to watch it sputter around the room.
>
>Not looking for any comments - simply an observation.
>
Oh -- sorry.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

patrick conroy wrote:


> Kind'a cool idea. Like a tattoo, arm-band or Hells Angels jacket.
> Anyone care if others do it too - as a show of support?
>
>
of course not! knock yourself out.

dave