On 7 Nov 2003 00:53:16 -0600, noah wrote:

[snip]

At any rate, again, the signal to noise ratio has reached the point
where we are losing posters. I'm betting that if we forced the noise
back down to a whisper, the vandals would slink back to their
respective rocks, crawl under, and be quiet.

Think about it, the decision is yours.

Gene, you made my day.

When I first posted my "whine" about OT, I got good email support from
casual visitors, but only one "reg". I backed off. If I couldn't get
the support from regs, then the vote probably wouldn't do well.

Because of the fundamental makeup of rec.boats, I believe any sort of vote would
be essentially irrelevant. An unmoderated newsgroup has to operate by
consensus.

This newsgroup can be changed. An FAQ can be adopted. A sister
"discussion" group for OT can be created.

And watch that group be roundly ignored. The people who are most visible in
these squabbles *enjoy* the attention. I've seen exactly this kind of
phenomenon in at least two other newsgroups. One of them died a lingering
death; the other...well, we don't know just yet.

ut it is ALL subject to
being supported, defended, and voted on by the people who frequent
here. Support for the change will have to be more than "casual" to be
effective.

I agree wholeheartedly--with the exception of the "vote." Consensus, yes.
Vote, meaningless.

Taking a vote presupposes that the kind of nasty, arrogant, doctrinaire,
personal bickering *might* be acceptable, and sanctioned. Since I don't think
there's a lot of doubt about the kind of damage this does to a newsgroup, a vote
would not be honored even if it were to "approve" of what is going on now.

In the 5 or so years that I have been around here, there has been a
definite decline in the number of on-topic posts, and posters.

Go back less than that--but for crying out loud, folks, don't try to lay the
blame for the deterioration on [Clinton][Hillary][GWBush][Pat
Robertson][whoever].

We deserve better. The group deserves better. It is my opinipon that
the level of OT posting is now inviting outside trolls to pump up the
OT.

Again, in case I haven't said it for the last 15 nanoseconds or so: the problem
in rec.boats is NOT off-topic posts. Those are just fine, IMO.

have been told that "this is the way it is". That rec.boats is
an open forum, like the lounge at the yacht club.

I have belonged to, or been associated with, four yacht clubs in my life. I
have *never* seen this kind of bickering, even in the most heated discussions.
Most people just don't behave like this in Real Life(tm). There's too much risk
of confrontation--even of personal injury. Here, we see lots of posturing and
rhetoric--but generally from the safety of anonymous accounts.

I may be alone in
my opinion, but I don't buy it, and I don't like it. I have
participated in OT threads, but I would rather do it elsewhere. There
is a reason that there are over 40,000 newsgroups.

Try 90,000 newsgroups.

Each one, believe
it or not, has a "topic". )

"Topics" are commonly ignored--and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Thanks for your thoughts, Noah.

Joe Parsons

If anyone would like to see rec.boats returned to "boating", then say
so. Those of us who might be willing to go through the crap of Usenet
procedure will need your support to make it worthwhile.