|
Obit: rec.boats
I've been hanging out here off and on for quite some time. I've met some good
people, made some friends, learned some things--even about boating--and, I hope, have contributed positively to this virtual community. It's well nigh impossible to avoid off-topic chatter in unmoderated newsgroups, and I don't think it's necessary to limit posts to topics that strictly involve boating. When we hang around the docks and marinas IRL, we certainly discuss many topics there. I have never complained about the "signal to noise ratio" in rec.boats. It would be hypocritical of me to do so, since I often post about things that depart from the nominal topic of the newsgroup. What I *have* complained about--obviously with no effect--is the consistently rancorous tone of many of these "discussions." If you identify yourself as "conservative," anyone holding a different view is somehow morally deficient, unpatriotic, irresponsible, even of questionable sexual orientation. If you consider yourself a "liberal," those others are "right wing trash," warmongers, liars, exploiters, fascists and worse. These "discussions" are not about politics, at all. They are about saying whatever you can think of to insult, demean and degrade the other "side." "Liberals" are accused of desiring the failure of our country's economy so as to further their party's political agenda; "conservatives" are said to be cynically aligning themselves with a war that was initiated for financial gain. Know what? There's some merit to each of these beliefs; people of good will and patriotism can and do believe that the current administration's course and policies are justified and correct. And people of good will and patriotism also happen to believe just the opposite. But here, where the combatants are for the most part masked in comforting anonymity, there is a near-perfect lack of civility. That's understandable, given that the constraints in face-to-face conversation that act as a sort of governor in "real life" don't exist here. Newsgroup veterans will say, "Just ignore the people and threads you don't like," and they'd be right--but the sheer volume of these consistently nasty threads creates a certain kind of atmosphere that is almost palpable. And there is a certain kind of morbid fascination that seems to drive us--any of us--to read some of these threads, if only to see just how far they will descend. I am every bit as guilty as anyone else of perpetrating (and perpetuating) these threads. Sure, my complaints are somewhat general--about the chronic logical fallacies, factual errors (especially about certain aspects of finance), and the fact that this kind of bickering serves only to reveal more unsavory aspects of people's personality than we might like to see. Yesterday, there was a post from an anonymous, thoroughgoing coward, attacking one of the regular participants here in the crudest personal terms. It is clear that this person--probably another rec.boats "regular" posting from an anonymous remailer--holds a different political view from the target of his abuse, even though his screeds are purely personal, delivered while cowering behind his remailer. People like this are part of the Usenet landscape, and easily ignored; there is no way that any reasonable person can condone this sort of behavior. Yet in that thoroughly ridiculous thread, there were posts from other people who identify themselves as being of the opposite political view from the target of the abuse--one of those even seemed (to my eye) to relish the abuse being heaped on another. To me, that's tantamount to condoning it. But that has become par for the course in rec.boats. It is about being able to score "points" against one's adversary--and, having done so, to gloat. It is certainly not about boats and boating. Will the newsgroup recover? I have no idea--but I do know that, for the time being, at least, it will go in whatever direction it will without me. Some of you may say, "No big loss;" but for each person like me, who has bothered to write about this when unsubscribing, don't you wonder how many others--people who might actually be interested in boats--have taken a quick look at the tenor of these posts, and simply split? Doesn't the conspicuous dearth of boating content bother anyone? One person acting alone cannot turn that around. Rec.boats has a long history as one of the first newsgroups on Usenet. Like most other newsgroups, it has been through its changes. Maybe it will be about boats again one day. I hope someone will drop me a line to tell me, should that happen. But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons |
rec.boats
"Joe Parsons" wrote in message
... I've been hanging out here off and on for quite some time. I've met some good people, made some friends, learned some things--even about boating--and, I hope, have contributed positively to this virtual community. It's well nigh impossible to avoid off-topic chatter in unmoderated newsgroups, and I don't think it's necessary to limit posts to topics that strictly involve boating. When we hang around the docks and marinas IRL, we certainly discuss many topics there. I have never complained about the "signal to noise ratio" in rec.boats. It would be hypocritical of me to do so, since I often post about things that depart from the nominal topic of the newsgroup. What I *have* complained about--obviously with no effect--is the consistently rancorous tone of many of these "discussions." If you identify yourself as "conservative," anyone holding a different view is somehow morally deficient, unpatriotic, irresponsible, even of questionable sexual orientation. If you consider yourself a "liberal," those others are "right wing trash," warmongers, liars, exploiters, fascists and worse. Joe, I'm sorry about the signal-to-noise ratio going off the charts but there's a reason. We're in a highly charged period of deep division in the country and the it's precipitating exaggerated partisan politics. It started with the 2000 election and, subsided for a while after 911. But the country is heading in a direction that's causing more division than I've experienced since the mid-sixties. I, for one, can't help arguing the points. I'm really sorry we're losing you as you've been a voice of reason. Those among us who are more extreme in our views are likely to drive moderates out of the discussion no matter the forum and that's a problem. Here's an article from the LA Times that talks about what's happening in the country according to the Pew Research Center. I hope this improves before it gets worse but I'm not hopefull. The injection of religious themes into politics and public policy has served to polarize the country further. Survey Finds Americans Are Increasingly Divided Republicans make gains as their differences with Democrats on key issues grow more pronounced. By Ronald Brownstein, Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON - Across a range of domestic and foreign policy issues, the gap between the views of Republican and Democratic partisans is now wider than at any point in the last 16 years, a major new survey has found. The survey, by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, portrays a nation profoundly polarized between two political camps that are virtually identical in size but inimical in their beliefs on virtually all major questions. The center, which began measuring public opinion in 1987, found in its new poll that the disagreement between Republicans and Democrats was greater than ever on topics such as national security, the social safety net, big business and equal rights for minorities. "The extraordinary spirit of national unity that followed the calamitous events of Sept. 11, 2001, has dissolved amid rising polarization and anger," said Andrew Kohut, Pew's director. Since the terrorist attacks, according to the new poll, the share of Americans who consider themselves Republicans has increased to the point that the GOP, for the first time since the party's takeover of Congress in 1994, has drawn even with Democrats in public support. The poll also found voters split almost exactly in half on whether they intend to support President Bush or a Democrat in the 2004 presidential race - and dividing along the same lines of class, race, gender and religious attitudes as in the razor-thin election of 2000. "It is still the 50-50 nation," Kohut said. The poll measured the views of 2,528 adults, an unusually large sample, from July 14 through Aug. 5. The group polled another 1,515 adults from Oct. 15 through Oct. 19 to update opinions on Bush and the war in Iraq. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points for the October survey, and 2 percentage points for the questions posed in the summer. The survey captures several long-term shifts in the currents of U.S. politics. Among the key trends: Polarized Views Across a battery of 24 questions measuring political and policy attitudes, the survey found that the average difference between Republican and Democratic attitudes is about 50% larger than in the late 1980s. On specific issues, 72% of Democrats now say government should do more to help needy people even if that means a bigger federal budget deficit, while 39% of Republicans agree. That 33-point difference is the largest the poll has recorded. Likewise, while 69% of Republicans say the best way to ensure peace is through military strength, 44% of Democrats agree. That 25-point gap is also the largest the poll has recorded - and nearly triple the difference in polls taken as recently as 1997. The gap is also the widest it's been on the question of whether corporations make too much profit: Nearly three-quarters of Democrats agree, compared with just less than half of Republicans. Looking solely at white voters, the poll found 55% of Republicans compared with 34% of Democrats agreed that "we have gone too far in pushing equal rights in this country" - that, too, is the largest gap the survey has recorded. On other policy choices, the poll reported that more than four-fifths of Republicans believed preemptive war was often or sometimes justified, compared with half of Democrats. Similarly, while 85% of Republicans believed it was the right decision to invade Iraq, 54% of Democrats said it was wrong. On virtually all of these issues, independents typically take positions that fall in between the attitudes expressed by partisans. But there is some evidence in the survey that independents also are polarizing between those who lean toward the Democrats and those closer to the GOP. For instance, on both the peace-through-strength and government-aid-to-the-needy questions, attitudes among voters who lean Democratic or Republican are virtually indistinguishable from members of each party. Within this overall pattern of polarization, the survey found that Democratic voters moved markedly to the left since the Clinton administration. The percentage of Democrats who said government should do more to help the needy has jumped by nearly a fourth since 1999, while the share who accepted the peace-through-strength argument has plummeted by more than a fifth since 1997. That movement, analysts say, may reflect both the waning influence of Clinton, who offered a mostly centrist agenda, and the sharp Democratic backlash against Bush. Republican attitudes on these questions, although still predominantly conservative, have changed less in recent years. In their attitudes toward the political parties, Americans are increasingly dividing along lines of values. In 1987, Pew found about 7 in 10 Republican and Democratic voters expressed strong religious beliefs in their answers to questions meant to measure such attitudes. Today, the figures for Democrats are the same, while the share of Republicans with strong religious beliefs has edged up near 80%. Division in Values The study found religious belief is now as strong a factor as income in predicting which party voters will support. And like other recent studies, the poll suggests that religious practice may be an even stronger predictor of partisan behavior than religious belief. The survey found that one of the sharpest divides in attitudes toward Bush's reelection followed the frequency of church attendance. Overall, the poll found voters split evenly, 43% to 43%, on whether they would prefer Bush or an unnamed Democrat in 2004. But Bush led by 26 percentage points among voters who attended church at least once a week, and among those who attended either weekly or a few times a month. Those who attended church only once or twice a year gave the Democrat a narrow margin, while those who attended rarely or never preferred the Democrat by 24 points. That stark division tracked almost identically the pattern found by exit polls in the 2000 race between Bush and Democrat Al Gore. Growing Tolerance The poll reported greater tolerance since 1987 on several questions involving race and homosexuality. Although gaps still exist along party and religious lines, the trend toward tolerance is significant among both Democrats and Republicans, and the religiously devout and the secular. For instance, the share of Americans who believe "it's all right for blacks and whites to date" has jumped from 48% in 1987 to 76% now. The share who say school boards should have the right to fire known homosexuals has dropped from 52% in 1987 to 35% today, with the declines consistent across lines of partisanship, income and religious belief. Divisions remain greater on abortion, with half of Republicans saying they support stricter laws against the practice, while 70% of Democrats oppose such efforts. Partisan Balance Combining all of its surveys since the Sept. 11 attacks, the Pew Center found the two parties drawing almost exactly equal support from the public, with 31% of adults calling themselves Democrats and 30% Republicans. (The rest didn't identify with either side.) That's an improvement for the GOP since the late 1990s, when Pew surveys gave the Democrats a 6-percentage-point edge. Since World War II, polls by various organizations have found Republicans even in partisan identification with the Democrats only twice: toward the end of Ronald Reagan's presidency in 1988 and immediately after the GOP congressional landslide in 1994. Ominously for Democrats, Pew found gains for the GOP above the national average in several swing states, including Iowa, Michigan, West Virginia, Minnesota and Florida. |
rec.boats
"jps" wrote in message ... "Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... snip it all The truth is that some idiots who can't control themselves and are so arrogant that they feel that they can do what they damn well please wherever and whenever they want to attempt to further some dubious objective are so seriously polluting the newsgroup that the rewards of attempting to read it are approaching zero. It used to just be harry and skipper, and a few entries to the kill file alleviated that. Now it is a whole flock of idiots who have no self control or sense of responsibility. It's like spam, no matter how one filters the garbage swamps one. Is there some reason that the rest of us have to be subjected to this crap? Why don't you off topic posers take your stuff to DU or FR or talk.politics or alt.flame or anywhere but here? del cecchi |
rec.boats
It really amazed me to see the number of off-topic posts in this group. I
came here to learn about boats and boating. My questions were answered and the group was a big help. But wading through all the trash has become too much. |
rec.boats
I logged in this afternoon and there were 128 new posts. After deleting the
OT's there were 24. This ratio varies here but 5:1 isn't atypical. There are other boating newsgroups and in them I don't see any OT posts so it's not a necessary part of usenet. I remember other other non-boating groups in the past that somehow became a target of spammers which killed the groups. OT is spam and regardless of the specific ratio on a given day it constantly outnumbers on-topic posts. The "did not/did too" bickering and name calling leaks into boating related threads, you just have to look at the "trailer tires" thread to see an example of how the bile spreads. The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. |
rec.boats
Joe,
When you are right, you are so right! My boat is sleeping under a tarp until spring. I will be off the group until I am boating again. Mark Browne "Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... I've been hanging out here off and on for quite some time. I've met some good people, made some friends, learned some things--even about boating--and, I hope, have contributed positively to this virtual community. It's well nigh impossible to avoid off-topic chatter in unmoderated newsgroups, and I don't think it's necessary to limit posts to topics that strictly involve boating. When we hang around the docks and marinas IRL, we certainly discuss many topics there. I have never complained about the "signal to noise ratio" in rec.boats. It would be hypocritical of me to do so, since I often post about things that depart from the nominal topic of the newsgroup. What I *have* complained about--obviously with no effect--is the consistently rancorous tone of many of these "discussions." If you identify yourself as "conservative," anyone holding a different view is somehow morally deficient, unpatriotic, irresponsible, even of questionable sexual orientation. If you consider yourself a "liberal," those others are "right wing trash," warmongers, liars, exploiters, fascists and worse. These "discussions" are not about politics, at all. They are about saying whatever you can think of to insult, demean and degrade the other "side." "Liberals" are accused of desiring the failure of our country's economy so as to further their party's political agenda; "conservatives" are said to be cynically aligning themselves with a war that was initiated for financial gain. Know what? There's some merit to each of these beliefs; people of good will and patriotism can and do believe that the current administration's course and policies are justified and correct. And people of good will and patriotism also happen to believe just the opposite. But here, where the combatants are for the most part masked in comforting anonymity, there is a near-perfect lack of civility. That's understandable, given that the constraints in face-to-face conversation that act as a sort of governor in "real life" don't exist here. Newsgroup veterans will say, "Just ignore the people and threads you don't like," and they'd be right--but the sheer volume of these consistently nasty threads creates a certain kind of atmosphere that is almost palpable. And there is a certain kind of morbid fascination that seems to drive us--any of us--to read some of these threads, if only to see just how far they will descend. I am every bit as guilty as anyone else of perpetrating (and perpetuating) these threads. Sure, my complaints are somewhat general--about the chronic logical fallacies, factual errors (especially about certain aspects of finance), and the fact that this kind of bickering serves only to reveal more unsavory aspects of people's personality than we might like to see. Yesterday, there was a post from an anonymous, thoroughgoing coward, attacking one of the regular participants here in the crudest personal terms. It is clear that this person--probably another rec.boats "regular" posting from an anonymous remailer--holds a different political view from the target of his abuse, even though his screeds are purely personal, delivered while cowering behind his remailer. People like this are part of the Usenet landscape, and easily ignored; there is no way that any reasonable person can condone this sort of behavior. Yet in that thoroughly ridiculous thread, there were posts from other people who identify themselves as being of the opposite political view from the target of the abuse--one of those even seemed (to my eye) to relish the abuse being heaped on another. To me, that's tantamount to condoning it. But that has become par for the course in rec.boats. It is about being able to score "points" against one's adversary--and, having done so, to gloat. It is certainly not about boats and boating. Will the newsgroup recover? I have no idea--but I do know that, for the time being, at least, it will go in whatever direction it will without me. Some of you may say, "No big loss;" but for each person like me, who has bothered to write about this when unsubscribing, don't you wonder how many others--people who might actually be interested in boats--have taken a quick look at the tenor of these posts, and simply split? Doesn't the conspicuous dearth of boating content bother anyone? One person acting alone cannot turn that around. Rec.boats has a long history as one of the first newsgroups on Usenet. Like most other newsgroups, it has been through its changes. Maybe it will be about boats again one day. I hope someone will drop me a line to tell me, should that happen. But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons |
Obit: rec.boats
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 20:05:42 GMT, Joe Parsons
wrote: I've been hanging out here off and on for quite some time. I've met some good people, made some friends, learned some things--even about boating--and, I hope, have contributed positively to this virtual community. It's well nigh impossible to avoid off-topic chatter in unmoderated newsgroups, and I don't think it's necessary to limit posts to topics that strictly involve boating. When we hang around the docks and marinas IRL, we certainly discuss many topics there. I have never complained about the "signal to noise ratio" in rec.boats. It would be hypocritical of me to do so, since I often post about things that depart from the nominal topic of the newsgroup. What I *have* complained about--obviously with no effect--is the consistently rancorous tone of many of these "discussions." If you identify yourself as "conservative," anyone holding a different view is somehow morally deficient, unpatriotic, irresponsible, even of questionable sexual orientation. If you consider yourself a "liberal," those others are "right wing trash," warmongers, liars, exploiters, fascists and worse. These "discussions" are not about politics, at all. They are about saying whatever you can think of to insult, demean and degrade the other "side." "Liberals" are accused of desiring the failure of our country's economy so as to further their party's political agenda; "conservatives" are said to be cynically aligning themselves with a war that was initiated for financial gain. Know what? There's some merit to each of these beliefs; people of good will and patriotism can and do believe that the current administration's course and policies are justified and correct. And people of good will and patriotism also happen to believe just the opposite. But here, where the combatants are for the most part masked in comforting anonymity, there is a near-perfect lack of civility. That's understandable, given that the constraints in face-to-face conversation that act as a sort of governor in "real life" don't exist here. Newsgroup veterans will say, "Just ignore the people and threads you don't like," and they'd be right--but the sheer volume of these consistently nasty threads creates a certain kind of atmosphere that is almost palpable. And there is a certain kind of morbid fascination that seems to drive us--any of us--to read some of these threads, if only to see just how far they will descend. I am every bit as guilty as anyone else of perpetrating (and perpetuating) these threads. Sure, my complaints are somewhat general--about the chronic logical fallacies, factual errors (especially about certain aspects of finance), and the fact that this kind of bickering serves only to reveal more unsavory aspects of people's personality than we might like to see. Yesterday, there was a post from an anonymous, thoroughgoing coward, attacking one of the regular participants here in the crudest personal terms. It is clear that this person--probably another rec.boats "regular" posting from an anonymous remailer--holds a different political view from the target of his abuse, even though his screeds are purely personal, delivered while cowering behind his remailer. People like this are part of the Usenet landscape, and easily ignored; there is no way that any reasonable person can condone this sort of behavior. Yet in that thoroughly ridiculous thread, there were posts from other people who identify themselves as being of the opposite political view from the target of the abuse--one of those even seemed (to my eye) to relish the abuse being heaped on another. To me, that's tantamount to condoning it. But that has become par for the course in rec.boats. It is about being able to score "points" against one's adversary--and, having done so, to gloat. It is certainly not about boats and boating. Will the newsgroup recover? I have no idea--but I do know that, for the time being, at least, it will go in whatever direction it will without me. Some of you may say, "No big loss;" but for each person like me, who has bothered to write about this when unsubscribing, don't you wonder how many others--people who might actually be interested in boats--have taken a quick look at the tenor of these posts, and simply split? Doesn't the conspicuous dearth of boating content bother anyone? One person acting alone cannot turn that around. Rec.boats has a long history as one of the first newsgroups on Usenet. Like most other newsgroups, it has been through its changes. Maybe it will be about boats again one day. I hope someone will drop me a line to tell me, should that happen. But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons All of you could make a difference here. When I first offered to try to create rec.boats.lounge (or something similar) to welcome the OT posting, the support I got was from "average-joe" boaters. People who didn't come here every day, but when they did, they were discouraged by all the OT. The response was appreciated, but probably not effective enough to make a change. With one (1) exception, no newsgroup "reg" supported my proposal. Since changes or additions to the newsgroup heirarchy must be proposed, defended, and voted on, I didn't think there was enough support to be worth the effort. I'm still not sure, since only one "reg" has bothered to write. If you believe that rec.boats deserves better, then speak up! My email is valid, just get past the spamtrap. Don't bitch about it. Do something about it. Get off your butt and help, or at least give your opinion concerning the group. No vote will succede without advice and support from the regs. Regards, Regards, noah To email me, remove the "OT-" from wrecked.ot-boats.noah. ....as you were. :o) |
Obit: rec.boats
Sorry to see you go Joe.
CF Joe Parsons wrote: I've been hanging out here off and on for quite some time. I've met some good people, made some friends, learned some things--even about boating--and, I hope, have contributed positively to this virtual community. It's well nigh impossible to avoid off-topic chatter in unmoderated newsgroups, and I don't think it's necessary to limit posts to topics that strictly involve boating. When we hang around the docks and marinas IRL, we certainly discuss many topics there. I have never complained about the "signal to noise ratio" in rec.boats. It would be hypocritical of me to do so, since I often post about things that depart from the nominal topic of the newsgroup. What I *have* complained about--obviously with no effect--is the consistently rancorous tone of many of these "discussions." If you identify yourself as "conservative," anyone holding a different view is somehow morally deficient, unpatriotic, irresponsible, even of questionable sexual orientation. If you consider yourself a "liberal," those others are "right wing trash," warmongers, liars, exploiters, fascists and worse. These "discussions" are not about politics, at all. They are about saying whatever you can think of to insult, demean and degrade the other "side." "Liberals" are accused of desiring the failure of our country's economy so as to further their party's political agenda; "conservatives" are said to be cynically aligning themselves with a war that was initiated for financial gain. Know what? There's some merit to each of these beliefs; people of good will and patriotism can and do believe that the current administration's course and policies are justified and correct. And people of good will and patriotism also happen to believe just the opposite. But here, where the combatants are for the most part masked in comforting anonymity, there is a near-perfect lack of civility. That's understandable, given that the constraints in face-to-face conversation that act as a sort of governor in "real life" don't exist here. Newsgroup veterans will say, "Just ignore the people and threads you don't like," and they'd be right--but the sheer volume of these consistently nasty threads creates a certain kind of atmosphere that is almost palpable. And there is a certain kind of morbid fascination that seems to drive us--any of us--to read some of these threads, if only to see just how far they will descend. I am every bit as guilty as anyone else of perpetrating (and perpetuating) these threads. Sure, my complaints are somewhat general--about the chronic logical fallacies, factual errors (especially about certain aspects of finance), and the fact that this kind of bickering serves only to reveal more unsavory aspects of people's personality than we might like to see. Yesterday, there was a post from an anonymous, thoroughgoing coward, attacking one of the regular participants here in the crudest personal terms. It is clear that this person--probably another rec.boats "regular" posting from an anonymous remailer--holds a different political view from the target of his abuse, even though his screeds are purely personal, delivered while cowering behind his remailer. People like this are part of the Usenet landscape, and easily ignored; there is no way that any reasonable person can condone this sort of behavior. Yet in that thoroughly ridiculous thread, there were posts from other people who identify themselves as being of the opposite political view from the target of the abuse--one of those even seemed (to my eye) to relish the abuse being heaped on another. To me, that's tantamount to condoning it. But that has become par for the course in rec.boats. It is about being able to score "points" against one's adversary--and, having done so, to gloat. It is certainly not about boats and boating. Will the newsgroup recover? I have no idea--but I do know that, for the time being, at least, it will go in whatever direction it will without me. Some of you may say, "No big loss;" but for each person like me, who has bothered to write about this when unsubscribing, don't you wonder how many others--people who might actually be interested in boats--have taken a quick look at the tenor of these posts, and simply split? Doesn't the conspicuous dearth of boating content bother anyone? One person acting alone cannot turn that around. Rec.boats has a long history as one of the first newsgroups on Usenet. Like most other newsgroups, it has been through its changes. Maybe it will be about boats again one day. I hope someone will drop me a line to tell me, should that happen. But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons |
Obit: rec.boats
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 20:05:42 GMT, Joe Parsons
wrote: I've been hanging out here off and on for quite some time. I've met some good people, made some friends, learned some things--even about boating--and, I hope, have contributed positively to this virtual community. It's well nigh impossible to avoid off-topic chatter in unmoderated newsgroups, and I don't think it's necessary to limit posts to topics that strictly involve boating. When we hang around the docks and marinas IRL, we certainly discuss many topics there. I have never complained about the "signal to noise ratio" in rec.boats. It would be hypocritical of me to do so, since I often post about things that depart from the nominal topic of the newsgroup. What I *have* complained about--obviously with no effect--is the consistently rancorous tone of many of these "discussions." If you identify yourself as "conservative," anyone holding a different view is somehow morally deficient, unpatriotic, irresponsible, even of questionable sexual orientation. If you consider yourself a "liberal," those others are "right wing trash," warmongers, liars, exploiters, fascists and worse. These "discussions" are not about politics, at all. They are about saying whatever you can think of to insult, demean and degrade the other "side." "Liberals" are accused of desiring the failure of our country's economy so as to further their party's political agenda; "conservatives" are said to be cynically aligning themselves with a war that was initiated for financial gain. Know what? There's some merit to each of these beliefs; people of good will and patriotism can and do believe that the current administration's course and policies are justified and correct. And people of good will and patriotism also happen to believe just the opposite. But here, where the combatants are for the most part masked in comforting anonymity, there is a near-perfect lack of civility. That's understandable, given that the constraints in face-to-face conversation that act as a sort of governor in "real life" don't exist here. Newsgroup veterans will say, "Just ignore the people and threads you don't like," and they'd be right--but the sheer volume of these consistently nasty threads creates a certain kind of atmosphere that is almost palpable. And there is a certain kind of morbid fascination that seems to drive us--any of us--to read some of these threads, if only to see just how far they will descend. I am every bit as guilty as anyone else of perpetrating (and perpetuating) these threads. Sure, my complaints are somewhat general--about the chronic logical fallacies, factual errors (especially about certain aspects of finance), and the fact that this kind of bickering serves only to reveal more unsavory aspects of people's personality than we might like to see. Yesterday, there was a post from an anonymous, thoroughgoing coward, attacking one of the regular participants here in the crudest personal terms. It is clear that this person--probably another rec.boats "regular" posting from an anonymous remailer--holds a different political view from the target of his abuse, even though his screeds are purely personal, delivered while cowering behind his remailer. People like this are part of the Usenet landscape, and easily ignored; there is no way that any reasonable person can condone this sort of behavior. Yet in that thoroughly ridiculous thread, there were posts from other people who identify themselves as being of the opposite political view from the target of the abuse--one of those even seemed (to my eye) to relish the abuse being heaped on another. To me, that's tantamount to condoning it. But that has become par for the course in rec.boats. It is about being able to score "points" against one's adversary--and, having done so, to gloat. It is certainly not about boats and boating. Will the newsgroup recover? I have no idea--but I do know that, for the time being, at least, it will go in whatever direction it will without me. Some of you may say, "No big loss;" but for each person like me, who has bothered to write about this when unsubscribing, don't you wonder how many others--people who might actually be interested in boats--have taken a quick look at the tenor of these posts, and simply split? Doesn't the conspicuous dearth of boating content bother anyone? One person acting alone cannot turn that around. Rec.boats has a long history as one of the first newsgroups on Usenet. Like most other newsgroups, it has been through its changes. Maybe it will be about boats again one day. I hope someone will drop me a line to tell me, should that happen. But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons Joe, on a personal level, you are an asset to this group. Aside from the fact that I like your prose, the group needs people that care about "the group". Without advocates, this group could easily become a total spam dump. It is happening already. If regs want to talk OT, then let's create a welcome forum for it, not burn down our own house because of it, or drown rec.boats in OT posts. There is room for everyone, and every viewpoint, but only if there is some basic cooperation and respect. If you need a break, enjoy it. I hope that you'll come back with a new energy and focus to help get this group back to "boating". Regards, Regards, noah To email me, remove the "OT-" from wrecked.ot-boats.noah. ....as you were. :o) |
rec.boats
"Joe Parsons" wrote... I've been hanging out here off and on for quite some time. I've met some good people, made some friends, learned some things--even about boating--and, I hope, have contributed positively to this virtual community. [trimmed] But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons Sorry to see you go Joe, I've appreciated your thoughts. Take care. -rick- |
rec.boats
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:06:10 -0800, "jps" wrote:
jps- you are an intelligent guy, and I would like to engage you directly as to why you think it's OK to litter a boating newsgroup with off-topic political posts, and to draw in irrelevant and ignorant trolls. Regards, noah To email me, remove the "OT-" from wrecked.ot-boats.noah. ....as you were. :o) |
Obit: rec.boats
Joe Parsons wrote in message
But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons Joe, keep in touch, you have my email address. I'll send you my real address, hope to meet up in CA next time I'm there, buddy! |
Obit: rec.boats
On 7 Nov 2003 00:22:24 -0600, noah wrote:
[snip] But for now, I am...out of here. Joe Parsons Joe, on a personal level, you are an asset to this group. Aside from the fact that I like your prose, Thank you. the group needs people that care about "the group". Without advocates, this group could easily become a total spam dump. It is happening already. I don't see the problem as spam--that is quite easily dealt with, even without filters. The problem is that the rec.boats has been essentially turned into a venue for politically-flavored bickering--and not very good bickering at that. If regs want to talk OT, then let's create a welcome forum for it, It's a nice idea, but I don't think it's necessary. As I've said over and over again, it's not OT chatter that has ruined the newsgroup. not burn down our own house because of it, or drown rec.boats in OT posts. There is room for everyone, and every viewpoint, but only if there is some basic cooperation and respect. If you need a break, enjoy it. I hope that you'll come back with a new energy and focus to help get this group back to "boating". I am not leaving because I need a "break," Noah. I am leaving because this newsgroup no longer has anything substantive to offer on the subject of boats--and wading through this...marsh of doctrinaire nonsense is too unpleasant to be worthwhile. I'm going to comment on a couple of the other followups, as well. Joe Parsons |
rec.boats
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:06:10 -0800, "jps" wrote:
[snip] I have never complained about the "signal to noise ratio" in rec.boats. It would be hypocritical of me to do so, since I often post about things that depart from the nominal topic of the newsgroup. What I *have* complained about--obviously with no effect--is the consistently rancorous tone of many of these "discussions." If you identify yourself as "conservative," anyone holding a different view is somehow morally deficient, unpatriotic, irresponsible, even of questionable sexual orientation. If you consider yourself a "liberal," those others are "right wing trash," warmongers, liars, exploiters, fascists and worse. Joe, I'm sorry about the signal-to-noise ratio going off the charts The problem, as I have been saying over and over, is not simply the "noise;" it is the *kind* of noise that is driving people--people who are interested in boating--away. but there's a reason. Yes, there is. But, frankly, I don't believe that the reason you give below is even close to correct. I don't disagree that there are, in fact, "deep divisions" in our country and in our society. There always have been. But the fact that I may hold a different opinion from someone else here does not mean that I am compelled to a) seek every opportunity to pontificate on my opinion or b) avail myself of every opportunity to score a "point" against those I consider my adversaries. The existence of an audience in a newsgroup does not constitute a bully pulpit for anyone with a cause. Think of a gathering at a public park. People have gotten together because of some common interest--let's say they all like to fly model airplanes. One of the members has just had a religious conversion. He gathers groups of people together to preach to them. After a while, someone who objects to that person's brand of religion argues with him. A few people take sides. Soon, everyone is talking and arguing, louder and louder. Tempers flare--and if even if physical combat doesn't ensue, the reason people gathered in the first place has been supplanted by this public brawl. After a while, everyone gathers up there stuff and leaves, a bad taste in their mouths. We're in a highly charged period of deep division in the country and the it's precipitating exaggerated partisan politics. It started with the 2000 election and, subsided for a while after 911. But the country is heading in a direction that's causing more division than I've experienced since the mid-sixties. I, for one, can't help arguing the points. I'm really sorry we're losing you as you've been a voice of reason. Those among us who are more extreme in our views are likely to drive moderates out of the discussion no matter the forum and that's a problem. Chuck, you (plural) are doing more than "driving moderates out of the discussion." You (plural) who have turned rec.boats into this kind of pointless fracas have literally ruined a formerly thriving boating forum. And as for "can't help arguing the points," I can understand that, when individuals are provoked (as so many here are), it is natural to respond in kind. The "air" in rec.boats is redolent with cyber-testosterone. Every guy in these mêlées is out to make points. Period. Do you really think Harry Krause is ever going to be able to get the nameless dentist to concede a point about anything? Will jps and wally ever come to an agreement? Will you and Karen Smith suddenly become fast friends? No. It's all dicksizing and posturing--at the expense of the entire newsgroup. Here's an article from the LA Times that talks about what's happening in the country according to the Pew Research Center. I hope this improves before it gets worse but I'm not hopefull. The injection of religious themes into politics and public policy has served to polarize the country further. Do you think there might be a possibility that people who want to discuss these issues might want to go to appropriately dedicated newsgroups? That trying to force people to listen to these political arguments is the exact equivalent of newly converted evangelists who buttonhole people at social gatherings to preach to them? Survey Finds Americans Are Increasingly Divided Republicans make gains as their differences with Democrats on key issues grow more pronounced. By Ronald Brownstein, Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON - Across a range of domestic and foreign policy issues, the gap between the views of Republican and Democratic partisans is now wider than This reminds me of a time, years and years ago, when I was an Amway distributor. Most people know that Amway relies not only on person-to-person selling, but on recruiting others to sell products. The real money was in recruiting--in "building an organization." I used to pounce on every opportunity at social gatherings to maneuver conversations to Amway. It was crass behavior that, happily, I outgrew. But I am seeing the exact equivalent in these threads. Not to offend you, but you have provided an example of just that same behavior in appending that article. More later...I just can't resist. Joe Parsons |
rec.boats
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:39:33 -0600, "Del Cecchi" wrote:
"jps" wrote in message ... "Joe Parsons" wrote in message ... snip it all The truth is that some idiots who can't control themselves and are so arrogant that they feel that they can do what they damn well please wherever and whenever they want to attempt to further some dubious objective are so seriously polluting the newsgroup that the rewards of attempting to read it are approaching zero. It used to just be harry and skipper, and a few entries to the kill file alleviated that. Now it is a whole flock of idiots who have no self control or sense of responsibility. It's like spam, no matter how one filters the garbage swamps one. Agreed. Is there some reason that the rest of us have to be subjected to this crap? I think you have succinctly articulated the attitude of many here--although I'm guessing many of them have simply given up and gone away. Why don't you off topic posers take your stuff to DU or FR or talk.politics or alt.flame or anywhere but here? Ah! Because they'd feel they had to concede defeat somehow--who's going to "drop his weapon" first? Alternatively, they're afraid of losing their audience. Joe Parsons |
rec.boats
On 7 Nov 2003 01:32:44 -0600, noah wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:06:10 -0800, "jps" wrote: jps- you are an intelligent guy, and I would like to engage you directly as to why you think it's OK to litter a boating newsgroup with off-topic political posts, and to draw in irrelevant and ignorant trolls. I'd be interested in hearing that, too. Joe Parsons Regards, noah To email me, remove the "OT-" from wrecked.ot-boats.noah. ...as you were. :o) |
rec.boats
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote:
The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. |
rec.boats
Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:
Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
rec.boats
JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD You can always count on the righties to try to instigate a little of the ultra-violence. -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:56:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:
JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD You can always count on the righties to try to instigate a little of the ultra-violence. I sincerely hope you're not intimating that I'm instigating anything. Your mouth is doing the instigating! I was simply posting a topic relating to boats, specifically, your boat. You are the one with the "bring 'em on' attitude being displayed. Cool it! John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
rec.boats
I'm sorry about the signal-to-noise ratio going off the charts but there's a reason. We're in a highly charged period of deep division in the country and the it's precipitating exaggerated partisan politics. It started with the 2000 election and, subsided for a while after 911. But the country is heading in a direction that's causing more division than I've experienced since the mid-sixties. I, for one, can't help arguing the points. I'm really sorry we're losing you as you've been a voice of reason. Those among us who are more extreme in our views are likely to drive moderates out of the discussion no matter the forum and that's a problem. Here's an article from the LA Times that talks about what's happening in the country according to the Pew Research Center. I hope this improves before it gets worse but I'm not hopefull. The injection of religious themes into politics and public policy has served to polarize the country further. Survey Finds Americans Are Increasingly Divided Republicans make gains as their differences with Democrats on key issues grow more pronounced. By Ronald Brownstein, Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON - Across a range of domestic and foreign policy issues, the gap between the views of Republican and Democratic partisans is now wider than at any point in the last 16 years, a major new survey has found. The survey, by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, portrays a nation profoundly polarized between two political camps that are virtually identical in size but inimical in their beliefs on virtually all major questions. The center, which began measuring public opinion in 1987, found in its new poll that the disagreement between Republicans and Democrats was greater than ever on topics such as national security, the social safety net, big business and equal rights for minorities. "The extraordinary spirit of national unity that followed the calamitous events of Sept. 11, 2001, has dissolved amid rising polarization and anger," said Andrew Kohut, Pew's director. Since the terrorist attacks, according to the new poll, the share of Americans who consider themselves Republicans has increased to the point that the GOP, for the first time since the party's takeover of Congress in 1994, has drawn even with Democrats in public support. The poll also found voters split almost exactly in half on whether they intend to support President Bush or a Democrat in the 2004 presidential race - and dividing along the same lines of class, race, gender and religious attitudes as in the razor-thin election of 2000. "It is still the 50-50 nation," Kohut said. The poll measured the views of 2,528 adults, an unusually large sample, from July 14 through Aug. 5. The group polled another 1,515 adults from Oct. 15 through Oct. 19 to update opinions on Bush and the war in Iraq. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points for the October survey, and 2 percentage points for the questions posed in the summer. The survey captures several long-term shifts in the currents of U.S. politics. Among the key trends: Polarized Views Across a battery of 24 questions measuring political and policy attitudes, the survey found that the average difference between Republican and Democratic attitudes is about 50% larger than in the late 1980s. On specific issues, 72% of Democrats now say government should do more to help needy people even if that means a bigger federal budget deficit, while 39% of Republicans agree. That 33-point difference is the largest the poll has recorded. Likewise, while 69% of Republicans say the best way to ensure peace is through military strength, 44% of Democrats agree. That 25-point gap is also the largest the poll has recorded - and nearly triple the difference in polls taken as recently as 1997. The gap is also the widest it's been on the question of whether corporations make too much profit: Nearly three-quarters of Democrats agree, compared with just less than half of Republicans. Looking solely at white voters, the poll found 55% of Republicans compared with 34% of Democrats agreed that "we have gone too far in pushing equal rights in this country" - that, too, is the largest gap the survey has recorded. On other policy choices, the poll reported that more than four-fifths of Republicans believed preemptive war was often or sometimes justified, compared with half of Democrats. Similarly, while 85% of Republicans believed it was the right decision to invade Iraq, 54% of Democrats said it was wrong. On virtually all of these issues, independents typically take positions that fall in between the attitudes expressed by partisans. But there is some evidence in the survey that independents also are polarizing between those who lean toward the Democrats and those closer to the GOP. For instance, on both the peace-through-strength and government-aid-to-the-needy questions, attitudes among voters who lean Democratic or Republican are virtually indistinguishable from members of each party. Within this overall pattern of polarization, the survey found that Democratic voters moved markedly to the left since the Clinton administration. The percentage of Democrats who said government should do more to help the needy has jumped by nearly a fourth since 1999, while the share who accepted the peace-through-strength argument has plummeted by more than a fifth since 1997. That movement, analysts say, may reflect both the waning influence of Clinton, who offered a mostly centrist agenda, and the sharp Democratic backlash against Bush. Republican attitudes on these questions, although still predominantly conservative, have changed less in recent years. In their attitudes toward the political parties, Americans are increasingly dividing along lines of values. In 1987, Pew found about 7 in 10 Republican and Democratic voters expressed strong religious beliefs in their answers to questions meant to measure such attitudes. Today, the figures for Democrats are the same, while the share of Republicans with strong religious beliefs has edged up near 80%. Division in Values The study found religious belief is now as strong a factor as income in predicting which party voters will support. And like other recent studies, the poll suggests that religious practice may be an even stronger predictor of partisan behavior than religious belief. The survey found that one of the sharpest divides in attitudes toward Bush's reelection followed the frequency of church attendance. Overall, the poll found voters split evenly, 43% to 43%, on whether they would prefer Bush or an unnamed Democrat in 2004. But Bush led by 26 percentage points among voters who attended church at least once a week, and among those who attended either weekly or a few times a month. Those who attended church only once or twice a year gave the Democrat a narrow margin, while those who attended rarely or never preferred the Democrat by 24 points. That stark division tracked almost identically the pattern found by exit polls in the 2000 race between Bush and Democrat Al Gore. Growing Tolerance The poll reported greater tolerance since 1987 on several questions involving race and homosexuality. Although gaps still exist along party and religious lines, the trend toward tolerance is significant among both Democrats and Republicans, and the religiously devout and the secular. For instance, the share of Americans who believe "it's all right for blacks and whites to date" has jumped from 48% in 1987 to 76% now. The share who say school boards should have the right to fire known homosexuals has dropped from 52% in 1987 to 35% today, with the declines consistent across lines of partisanship, income and religious belief. Divisions remain greater on abortion, with half of Republicans saying they support stricter laws against the practice, while 70% of Democrats oppose such efforts. Partisan Balance Combining all of its surveys since the Sept. 11 attacks, the Pew Center found the two parties drawing almost exactly equal support from the public, with 31% of adults calling themselves Democrats and 30% Republicans. (The rest didn't identify with either side.) That's an improvement for the GOP since the late 1990s, when Pew surveys gave the Democrats a 6-percentage-point edge. Since World War II, polls by various organizations have found Republicans even in partisan identification with the Democrats only twice: toward the end of Ronald Reagan's presidency in 1988 and immediately after the GOP congressional landslide in 1994. Ominously for Democrats, Pew found gains for the GOP above the national average in several swing states, including Iowa, Michigan, West Virginia, Minnesota and Florida. For what it's worth, I too am disheartened by all the political stuff posted here. I'm sure there are political news groups more appropriate for these posts. I'm fairly new to boating and enjoy the exchange of info and experience and from time to time have ventured my 2 Cents worth. I find I'm visiting this group less & less for these reasons. What do Reps., Dems, Iraq and George Bush et al, have to do with boating? I challenge all the political hot heads to post in appropriate groups. Americans may be divided, but I hoped it was regarding 2 strokes vs 4 strokes, inboards vs outboards and the like, on this group. I regard political posters in the same light as telemarketers. They are uninvited, unwelcome, a nuisance, generally despised and I didn't want to hear from them in the first place. Ahhhhh... I feel better now, nothing like a little vent. |
rec.boats
Harry Krause wrote in message ...
I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 ================================================== ======== Sorry, hadn't realized you were under investigation by those guys. |
rec.boats
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:16:47 -0500, Gene Kearns wrote:
On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:20:29 -0500, JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:56:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD You can always count on the righties to try to instigate a little of the ultra-violence. I sincerely hope you're not intimating that I'm instigating anything. Your mouth is doing the instigating! I was simply posting a topic relating to boats, specifically, your boat. You are the one with the "bring 'em on' attitude being displayed. Cool it! John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD John, Harry has just about yanked your chain clean out..... he dropped the address of the Baltimore office of the FBI on you.... not his address. The address he posted is of no consequence. The location of his boat is of consequence. His 'come and get me' posts, of late, could actually get him in trouble. Some of the folks on the NG seem off the wall enough to take him up on it. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
rec.boats
JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:16:47 -0500, Gene Kearns wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:20:29 -0500, JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:56:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD You can always count on the righties to try to instigate a little of the ultra-violence. I sincerely hope you're not intimating that I'm instigating anything. Your mouth is doing the instigating! I was simply posting a topic relating to boats, specifically, your boat. You are the one with the "bring 'em on' attitude being displayed. Cool it! John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD John, Harry has just about yanked your chain clean out..... he dropped the address of the Baltimore office of the FBI on you.... not his address. The address he posted is of no consequence. The location of his boat is of consequence. His 'come and get me' posts, of late, could actually get him in trouble. Some of the folks on the NG seem off the wall enough to take him up on it. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD *All* of the "folks" on this NG "off the wall" enough to do what you suggest, and suggest is exactly what you are doing, are, interestingly enough, right wingers. The righties are out of control, here and elsewhere. Why aren't you slightly more moderate righties working to rein in those on your side of the aisle who are clearly out of control? Or would that be an exercise in responsibility, which, of course, is what the right wants to avoid. -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Why aren't you slightly more moderate righties working to rein in those on your side of the aisle who are clearly out of control? You mean, like you lefties do with the not-so-moderate guys on *your* side? I mean lefties like this guy: "STFU" wrote in message news:Kgsrb.154970$e01.538931@attbi_s02... |
rec.boats
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Why aren't you slightly more moderate righties working to rein in those on your side of the aisle who are clearly out of control? You mean, like you lefties do with the not-so-moderate guys on *your* side? I mean lefties like this guy: "STFU" wrote in message news:Kgsrb.154970$e01.538931@attbi_s02... Oh, I think he is one of you, actually. But in any event, I've only read a couple of his posts and he doesn't seem to be on the edge of violence, as so many of you righties are. -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
Gene Kearns wrote:
*All* of the "folks" on this NG "off the wall" enough to do what you suggest, and suggest is exactly what you are doing, are, interestingly enough, right wingers. The righties are out of control, here and elsewhere. Why aren't you slightly more moderate righties working to rein in those on your side of the aisle who are clearly out of control? Or would that be an exercise in responsibility, which, of course, is what the right wants to avoid. Having killed a lot of these threads and thus, not privy to the vigilante aspects..... I'll not comment on that. However, it seems that the two polarized sides (that can't get past their fetish to boats) are pretty equally distributed. If not, this ot foolishness would die out and go away by itself. The fact that it hasn't leads me to the conclusion that both sides are equal contributors to the problem. I haven't done a count lately, but I suspect the vociferous righties outnumber the vociferous lefties by at least two to one. But that isn't where I was aiming my comment, as you noticed. The righties here provide me with nothing more than an endless supply of giggles. I don't have the slightest interest in visiting harm upon them. But a number of them over the years have voiced their interest in visiting harm upon me, one way or another, and several years ago, a couple of them tried to play games with a suicide phone line my wife maintained at that time for some of her more troubled patients. One of the righties got himself into serious do-do for that little escapade of his. Another merely was visited by the police. The first no longer posts here. -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:41:04 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:
JohnH wrote: On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:16:47 -0500, Gene Kearns wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:20:29 -0500, JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:56:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD You can always count on the righties to try to instigate a little of the ultra-violence. I sincerely hope you're not intimating that I'm instigating anything. Your mouth is doing the instigating! I was simply posting a topic relating to boats, specifically, your boat. You are the one with the "bring 'em on' attitude being displayed. Cool it! John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD John, Harry has just about yanked your chain clean out..... he dropped the address of the Baltimore office of the FBI on you.... not his address. The address he posted is of no consequence. The location of his boat is of consequence. His 'come and get me' posts, of late, could actually get him in trouble. Some of the folks on the NG seem off the wall enough to take him up on it. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD *All* of the "folks" on this NG "off the wall" enough to do what you suggest, and suggest is exactly what you are doing, are, interestingly enough, right wingers. The righties are out of control, here and elsewhere. Why aren't you slightly more moderate righties working to rein in those on your side of the aisle who are clearly out of control? Or would that be an exercise in responsibility, which, of course, is what the right wants to avoid. All you off the wall guys, get your asses under control! There, now do your thing Harry. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
rec.boats
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:41:04 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:
JohnH wrote: On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:16:47 -0500, Gene Kearns wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:20:29 -0500, JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:56:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD You can always count on the righties to try to instigate a little of the ultra-violence. I sincerely hope you're not intimating that I'm instigating anything. Your mouth is doing the instigating! I was simply posting a topic relating to boats, specifically, your boat. You are the one with the "bring 'em on' attitude being displayed. Cool it! John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD John, Harry has just about yanked your chain clean out..... he dropped the address of the Baltimore office of the FBI on you.... not his address. The address he posted is of no consequence. The location of his boat is of consequence. His 'come and get me' posts, of late, could actually get him in trouble. Some of the folks on the NG seem off the wall enough to take him up on it. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD *All* of the "folks" on this NG "off the wall" enough to do what you suggest, and suggest is exactly what you are doing, are, interestingly enough, right wingers. The righties are out of control, here and elsewhere. Why aren't you slightly more moderate righties working to rein in those on your side of the aisle who are clearly out of control? Or would that be an exercise in responsibility, which, of course, is what the right wants to avoid. And don't accuse me of being a moderate right winger. I'm on the left of the scale! I just don't like stupidity, which saying "come and get me" seems to be. You, however, know best. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD |
rec.boats
JohnH wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:41:04 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: JohnH wrote: On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:16:47 -0500, Gene Kearns wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:20:29 -0500, JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:56:51 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: JohnH wrote: On Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:35:46 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:07:30 GMT, "Paul" wrote: The mean spirited post by the guy using the remailer should have been ignored. It should have been left to die alone with no replies but instead it turns into a hot thread. That speaks volumes. Is it unpleasant enough to drive people away? Obviously it is. It can only be stopped by those who post the OT. It can only be stopped if they stop posting OT. It's pretty simple. ================================================== = Not quite that simple, the real key in my opinion is to stop replying but that would require a consensus which is not likely to be reached any time soon. It's a lot like society as a whole, certain behavior is acceptable, other not. We set the standard by choosing what we reply to, and how we do it. In an unmoderated group self control is all there is. My personal remedy for some off topic, offensive, anonymous post is to delete it, and hope it stays that way. If the pattern continues there are ways of zeroing in on the suspect. We've done that before with a few individuals and usually when you start to smoke them out they just go away never come back. I suggest that any rightie who is really upset with me come with guns ablazing to where I hang my hat: 7142 Ambassador Road Baltimore, Maryland 21244-2754 (410) 265-8080 Harry, everyone knows where your boat is kept. They know the name. They also know that lead sinkers make much less noise than lead bullets, but they still make nice cracks in fiberglass. If I were you, I would STFU with your requests for violence. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD You can always count on the righties to try to instigate a little of the ultra-violence. I sincerely hope you're not intimating that I'm instigating anything. Your mouth is doing the instigating! I was simply posting a topic relating to boats, specifically, your boat. You are the one with the "bring 'em on' attitude being displayed. Cool it! John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD John, Harry has just about yanked your chain clean out..... he dropped the address of the Baltimore office of the FBI on you.... not his address. The address he posted is of no consequence. The location of his boat is of consequence. His 'come and get me' posts, of late, could actually get him in trouble. Some of the folks on the NG seem off the wall enough to take him up on it. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD *All* of the "folks" on this NG "off the wall" enough to do what you suggest, and suggest is exactly what you are doing, are, interestingly enough, right wingers. The righties are out of control, here and elsewhere. Why aren't you slightly more moderate righties working to rein in those on your side of the aisle who are clearly out of control? Or would that be an exercise in responsibility, which, of course, is what the right wants to avoid. All you off the wall guys, get your asses under control! There, now do your thing Harry. John On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD Well, finally, a rightie steps up to the plate and does the right thing. Thank you, John. (BTW, I never meant to lump JohnH in the group of irresponsible, out of control righties. Though I think he is politically confused, he's a pretty decent guy!)_ (The above might be described as a left-handed compliment) -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 10:27:22 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote: (BTW, I never meant to lump JohnH in the group of irresponsible, out of control righties. Though I think he is politically confused, he's a pretty decent guy!)_ ============================================ Since you were replying to me when you posted the FBI address, I was concerned that you were lumping me into that category also. Personally, I'm one of those infuriating fence straddlers that just can't be pinned down polically. :-) My port side engine tends to run a little warmer than the st'bd however. |
rec.boats
Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 10:27:22 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: (BTW, I never meant to lump JohnH in the group of irresponsible, out of control righties. Though I think he is politically confused, he's a pretty decent guy!)_ ============================================ Since you were replying to me when you posted the FBI address, I was concerned that you were lumping me into that category also. Personally, I'm one of those infuriating fence straddlers that just can't be pinned down polically. :-) My port side engine tends to run a little warmer than the st'bd however. Indeed, you seem decent, too. Gotta wonder how many of the nutsie cases in here actually called the FBI office and demanded to speak to me. Three? That's my guess. -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 12:56:23 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote: Gotta wonder how many of the nutsie cases in here actually called the FBI office and demanded to speak to me. Three? That's my guess. Musta been a bunch. When I called the guy answered the phone "Harry Krause speaking", followed by a bunch of snickering in the background. bb |
rec.boats
bb wrote:
On Sun, 09 Nov 2003 12:56:23 -0500, Harry Krause wrote: Gotta wonder how many of the nutsie cases in here actually called the FBI office and demanded to speak to me. Three? That's my guess. Musta been a bunch. When I called the guy answered the phone "Harry Krause speaking", followed by a bunch of snickering in the background. bb Gawd, I love it. I had a chat with Bob, our pet bobcat, about the possibility of konservative nutsie intruders, and he immediately went out to the garage toolbox for the file he uses to point up his claws. Bob was really inspired by his cousin, the white tiger, who went a tad ballistic out in Vegas a few weeks ago. Bob, you see, is a yellow-dog Democat. -- Email sent to is never read. |
rec.boats
|
rec.boats
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:57 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com