Oooh, an ADD newsgroup, I'll bet every there stays on topic.

You mean this isn't the ADD newsgroup?

Hehe, that was good. It had to be done.

"Gary Warner" wrote in message
...
REC.BOATS SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES:

If you've participated in Usenet but not in rec.boats before, you will
find the experience both familiar and eerily disconcerting. As with most
newsgroups, rec.boats has it's share of politics, off topic posts,
personal attacks, and long running feuds. But there are some
quirks about rec.boats that your previous newsgroup experiences
may not have prepared you for.

The Lie and The Obligation game: Many here often and pointedly
accuse others of lying about the things they claim to own or to have
done. Why one person would care in the least whether another
person that they will in all likelihood never meet is telling the truth
about their personal life is just one of the oddities that can be found
here. Another is the bizarre notion that once a person is accused
of lying about their life it somehow becomes that person's obligation
to prove themselves.

Another strange game played here, and my personal favorite, is the,
off topic threads about off topic posts game. In most newsgroups it's not
uncommon for someone's off topic post to be met with something like,
"What does that have to do with this group?" But here in rec.boats
this is taken to a new level by people that start entirely new threads
just to point out that others are posting off topic. What it really
amazing about these grumbling threads is that most of them are not
themselves marked by their authors as off topic.

One could, as you will soon notice, go on at great length about the
curious nature of rec.boats, but it will probably be more
enjoyable for you to discover these oddities yourself. B

Before I end, I would be remiss if I didn't assure you that
there is a wealth of valuable posts here. Whether your interest
is in boats, politics, or simply observing people, rec.boats
is all you could hope it would be....and maybe just a little more.



[ Permission to reprint granted to anyone that isn't a Yankee's fan,
No rights held by Major League Baseball. ]

Joe Parsons wrote in message . ..

Long-established Usenet convention agrees that e-mail is NOT to be posted
publicly without the express knowledge and consent of the original author.

A convention that I don't subscribe to. While I don't make a practice
of posting e-mails, anybody sending e-mail to the "public" e-mail
address I use here has no reasonable expectation that it will remain
private unless agreed to in advance.

On 21 Oct 2003 10:25:41 -0700, (Curtis CCR) wrote:

Joe Parsons wrote in message . ..

Long-established Usenet convention agrees that e-mail is NOT to be posted
publicly without the express knowledge and consent of the original author.

A convention that I don't subscribe to. While I don't make a practice
of posting e-mails, anybody sending e-mail to the "public" e-mail
address I use here has no reasonable expectation that it will remain
private unless agreed to in advance.

I probably would have been well advised to mention that one should send emails
with the expectation that they *could* be posted--and, before entering into some
sort of covenant with the correspondent, to avoid saying anything in email that
might be embarrassing if made public.

As adamant as I personally am about keeping private email private, I would not
hesitate to post anything abusive that was sent to me by email.

Joe Parsons

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 02:05:20 GMT, "Paul" wrote:

Oooh, an ADD newsgroup, I'll bet every there stays on topic.

You mean this isn't the ADD newsgroup?

Maybe we can make it an "honorary" ADD newsgroup.

God knows, it's at least as contentious.

Joe Parsons

Joe Parsons wrote in message . ..
On 21 Oct 2003 10:25:41 -0700, (Curtis CCR) wrote:

Joe Parsons wrote in message . ..

Long-established Usenet convention agrees that e-mail is NOT to be posted
publicly without the express knowledge and consent of the original author.

A convention that I don't subscribe to. While I don't make a practice
of posting e-mails, anybody sending e-mail to the "public" e-mail
address I use here has no reasonable expectation that it will remain
private unless agreed to in advance.

I probably would have been well advised to mention that one should send emails
with the expectation that they *could* be posted--and, before entering into some
sort of covenant with the correspondent, to avoid saying anything in email that
might be embarrassing if made public.

As adamant as I personally am about keeping private email private, I would not
hesitate to post anything abusive that was sent to me by email.

That is generally the way I look at it. Though there have been many
times when I have seen people flamed mercilessly for doing just that.