"-rick-" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
-rick- wrote:

/*$.02
I don't think any topics should be "banned" (as if you could). I prefer
voluntary self restraint and occasionally seeing things I don't like to
vacuous and boring.
*/$.02

-rick-


Here's a fair question for you: if the newsgroup is vacuous and boring
without the bitchy name calling and political fights, (as that is all
that is missing from before),

1) Can you assist in providing some more stimulating boating content?

or

2) If you're not interested in the boating content, would "rec.boats"
be the best NG for you?



It would have to be acknowledged as reality that people who hung out
here simply to watch the daily stink fights must be very disappointed
with the group these last couple of weeks.


????

Hey Chuck,

I apparently failed to make myself understood. Let's try that again.

I did not say and don't think that the news group is vacuous and boring
without bitchy name calling and political fights. That is a welcome
change.

My point was that *if* most of us can manage self restraint there will be
no need for banned topics or any one attempting to impose censor like
control. I was drawing a contrast between extremes and expressing my
preference that we not overshoot and become overly bland and narrow.

We likely have common goals; an enjoyable, informative and interesting
forum. I prefer that it mostly relate to boating but have no problem with
cordial tangents or even lively debate on virtually any subject. I do
appreciate the improved tone and congratulate you for your persuasive
efforts and all posters for the results achieved.

As to your questions:

1) I try to contribute when I have something relevant to add and also
occasionally post something irrelevant as if I were talking with friends.

2) If I were not interested in boating content I wouldn't be here.


Chuck highlights the difference between liberal/progressives and
conservatives once again. Chuck wants to exert control and the other side
wants to rely upon self-control.

Bert,
I think everyone including Chuck, has recommended personal self-control.
Since this is an unmoderated NG it would be silly for anyone to recommend
anyone "exert control".


"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"-rick-" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
-rick- wrote:

/*$.02
I don't think any topics should be "banned" (as if you could). I prefer
voluntary self restraint and occasionally seeing things I don't like to
vacuous and boring.
*/$.02

-rick-


Here's a fair question for you: if the newsgroup is vacuous and boring
without the bitchy name calling and political fights, (as that is all
that is missing from before),

1) Can you assist in providing some more stimulating boating content?

or

2) If you're not interested in the boating content, would "rec.boats"
be the best NG for you?



It would have to be acknowledged as reality that people who hung out
here simply to watch the daily stink fights must be very disappointed
with the group these last couple of weeks.


????

Hey Chuck,

I apparently failed to make myself understood. Let's try that again.

I did not say and don't think that the news group is vacuous and boring
without bitchy name calling and political fights. That is a welcome
change.

My point was that *if* most of us can manage self restraint there will be
no need for banned topics or any one attempting to impose censor like
control. I was drawing a contrast between extremes and expressing my
preference that we not overshoot and become overly bland and narrow.

We likely have common goals; an enjoyable, informative and interesting
forum. I prefer that it mostly relate to boating but have no problem with
cordial tangents or even lively debate on virtually any subject. I do
appreciate the improved tone and congratulate you for your persuasive
efforts and all posters for the results achieved.

As to your questions:

1) I try to contribute when I have something relevant to add and also
occasionally post something irrelevant as if I were talking with friends.

2) If I were not interested in boating content I wouldn't be here.


Chuck highlights the difference between liberal/progressives and
conservatives once again. Chuck wants to exert control and the other side
wants to rely upon self-control.

Reggie Smithers wrote:
Bert,
I think everyone including Chuck, has recommended personal self-control.
Since this is an unmoderated NG it would be silly for anyone to recommend
anyone "exert control".


Yes...that's the voice of reason.
When any one poster preaches, issues directives or tries to exert
control over other posters, you can expect some will rebel.

Bert Robbins wrote:


Chuck highlights the difference between liberal/progressives and
conservatives once again. Chuck wants to exert control and the other side
wants to rely upon self-control.


Happy New Year, Bert

I thought we'd lost you. Glad to see you're still aboard.

Any insights on the differences between the way that liberals and
conservatives boat?
(That's "boat", with a "b") :-)

Nobody can control anybody else. The change you're viewing in the NG is
the result of self control among most of the previous worst offenders.
Surprising difference, isn't it?

"Bert Robbins" wrote ...

Chuck highlights the difference between liberal/progressives and conservatives
once again. Chuck wants to exert control and the other side wants to rely upon
self-control.

I'm not the other side.

-rick-

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 14:22:17 -0800, "-rick-" wrote:


"Bert Robbins" wrote ...

Chuck highlights the difference between liberal/progressives and conservatives
once again. Chuck wants to exert control and the other side wants to rely upon
self-control.

I'm not the other side.

-rick-


That was just a troll through the woods!

--
John H.

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes