PS:

Here's a copy of the topic list from the day the challenge began.

See any difference?

« Newer topics Viewing titles only View with message text

Family of Four lost at sea 2 new of 2 JohnH (2 authors) Dec 20 2005

Five Day Chatroom Challenge 23 new of 35 JohnH (10 authors) Dec 20
2005

The America's Cup - Team Swiss 6 new of 7 Smithers one of 1000's (3
authors) Dec 20 2005

OT Bush Uses Poll Selectively 8 new of 8 JohnH (5 authors) Dec 20
2005

Here's a Story You Will Never See On Fox News 41 new of 56 jabadoodle
(11 authors) Dec 20 2005

Happy Whatever 3 new of 3 JimH (2 authors) Dec 20 2005

Boating Movie Trivia Contest. 17 new of 32 Martin Schöön (7
authors) Dec 20 2005

OT: Christmas Card Disclaimer 2 new of 2 (2
authors) Dec 20 2005

fuel line hose clamps 4 new of 4 (4 authors)
Dec 20 2005

free Happy Henry eBook 1 new of 1 (1
author) Dec 20 2005

Liberals in mourning 72 new of 78 Doug Kanter (9 authors) Dec 20 2005

Our Fuhrer has done it again 34 new of 40 P Fritz (11 authors) Dec 20
2005

OT--Rasmussen no longermy favorite pollster ;-) 1 new of 1 NOYB (1
author) Dec 20 2005

OT: American Gestapo 84 new of 85 Doug Kanter (11 authors) Dec 20
2005

And then, you have this.. 1 new of 2 Doug Kanter (1 author) Dec 20
2005

God of wind 6 new of 13 brianM (4 authors) Dec 20 2005

OT: Inkjet Refill Kit Warning 6 new of 8
(6 authors) Dec 19 2005

Solution to nausea-thanks bush 7 new of 7 Dixon (4 authors) Dec 19
2005

New England ice fishing 37 new of 56 P. Fritz (13 authors) Dec 19
2005

NYT 'SPYING' SPLASH TIED TO BOOK RELEASE 84 new of 94 Dan Krueger (12
authors) Dec 19 2005

omc thermostat housing gasket sealing 2 new of 2 ben (1 author) Dec
19 2005

Ear to ear grin, holiday suprise 14 new of 16 Wayne. B (8 authors)
Dec 19 2005

OT: Better than multiplication tables 1 new of 1 JohnH (1 author) Dec
19 2005

OT: Nikon customer service. 22 new of 42 JohnH (3 authors) Dec 19
2005

OT: Understanding the NSA 3 new of 3 Bert Robbins (3 authors) Dec 19
2005

A War Without Heroes 1 new of 1 Mule (1 author) Dec 19 2005

Do flares expire? 14 new of 16 (10 authors) Dec 19
2005

A Soldier's Story About Life in Iraq 16 new of 17 Doug Kanter (6
authors) Dec 19 2005

OT: Cool greeting for Cheney

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:25:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually *decreased*
as a result of it.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT
Then refer back to #1.
3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.
4. Stop the flaming.
5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.
6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

:-)

Chuck's challenge was right on.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:25:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of
the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually
*decreased*
as a result of it.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT
Then refer back to #1.
3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.
4. Stop the flaming.
5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.
6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

:-)

Chuck's challenge was right on.
--
John H

So why not live it John rather than depending on flaming folks at alternate
NG's?

Actually, *my* challenge is more appropriate and easier to live by.

Do you sign on John?

On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:26:46 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:25:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of
the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually
*decreased*
as a result of it.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT
Then refer back to #1.
3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.
4. Stop the flaming.
5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.
6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

:-)

Chuck's challenge was right on.
--
John H

So why not live it John rather than depending on flaming folks at alternate
NG's?

Actually, *my* challenge is more appropriate and easier to live by.

Do you sign on John?


Read Chuck's response. It makes good sense. *None* of us should be
name-callers.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:26:46 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:25:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of
the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually
*decreased*
as a result of it.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has
not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that
this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules*
here
(most important!)
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as
OT
Then refer back to #1.
3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.
4. Stop the flaming.
5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.
6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

:-)

Chuck's challenge was right on.
--
John H

So why not live it John rather than depending on flaming folks at
alternate
NG's?

Actually, *my* challenge is more appropriate and easier to live by.

Do you sign on John?


Read Chuck's response. It makes good sense. *None* of us should be
name-callers.
--
John H


Agreed.

And none of us should insult, personally attack or flame
others.............agreed?

While on that subject, none of us should be telling us what is right to post
here while doing the same...............agreed?

So...........................the netcopping needs to
stop....................agreed?

JimH wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:26:46 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 19:25:14 -0500, " JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT
comREMOVETHIS wrote:

The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of
the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually
*decreased*
as a result of it.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has
not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that
this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules*
here
(most important!)
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as
OT
Then refer back to #1.
3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.
4. Stop the flaming.
5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.
6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

:-)

Chuck's challenge was right on.
--
John H
So why not live it John rather than depending on flaming folks at
alternate
NG's?

Actually, *my* challenge is more appropriate and easier to live by.

Do you sign on John?

Read Chuck's response. It makes good sense. *None* of us should be
name-callers.
--
John H


Agreed.

And none of us should insult, personally attack or flame
others.............agreed?

While on that subject, none of us should be telling us what is right to post
here while doing the same...............agreed?

So...........................the netcopping needs to
stop....................agreed?


JimH,
Let me cut and paste your last two sentences and see if you see yourself
in this:

While on that subject, none of us should be telling us what is right
to post
here while doing the same...............agreed?

So...........................the netcopping needs to
stop....................agreed?

In the first sentence you tell everyone that no one should be telling us
what is right to post here. In the very next sentence you are telling
everyone what they can post in here.

Chucks recommendations that was supported by 99% of the regulars is the
correct path to follow.


--
Reggie
************************************************** *************

Q. What's the difference between a brown-noser and a ****-head?
A. Depth perception.
************************************************** *************

JimH wrote:
The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually *decreased*
as a result of it.

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.,

I don't think it's more confrontational! Seriously, I think the people
who are now never posting, are the ones who's only agenda was to be
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)

Jim, you've sure got on this anti-"netcopping" thing. I wonder why,
when you used to be the worst offender of this? Why the sudden change?
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT

Thank you!!

3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.

Again, I think the worst offenders of #3 are the one's that are gone,
thus the decreased participation. That's a good thing.
4. Stop the flaming.

That'd be good, but with SOME of the people here, that will never stop!

5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.

6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

Agreed with exceptions stated above!

wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of
the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually
*decreased*
as a result of it.

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has
not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.,

I don't think it's more confrontational! Seriously, I think the people
who are now never posting, are the ones who's only agenda was to be
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)

Jim, you've sure got on this anti-"netcopping" thing. I wonder why,
when you used to be the worst offender of this? Why the sudden change?
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT

Thank you!!

3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.

Again, I think the worst offenders of #3 are the one's that are gone,
thus the decreased participation. That's a good thing.
4. Stop the flaming.

That'd be good, but with SOME of the people here, that will never stop!

5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.

6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

Agreed with exceptions stated above!


Good points.

On 25 Jan 2006 04:50:05 -0800, wrote:


JimH wrote:
The *Challenge*: Perhaps it is time to revisit this issue since the
original *Challenge* a month or so ago.

I am not disputing the validity of that original challenge but I do have
some comments and suggestions.

Since that *Challenge* this NG is dripping wet with tensions because of the
various mandates placed on it and the participation has actually *decreased*
as a result of it.

The only decrease in participation is from people who's ONLY agenda
here was to harass, lie about others, and otherwise be obnoxious. If
you noticed, those people are never heard from anymore. I personally
think that's a good thing.

I am not suggesting that the *Challenge* was wrong but that we need to
perhaps revisit the restrictions it called for as it is obvious it has not
worked, including the netcopping of those mandates. I suggest that this
new and improved atmosphere has made the NG stale and perhaps even more
confrontational.,

I don't think it's more confrontational! Seriously, I think the people
who are now never posting, are the ones who's only agenda was to be
confrontational.

Suggestions:

1. Stop all netcopping Ignore those who don't abide by the *rules* here
(most important!)

Jim, you've sure got on this anti-"netcopping" thing. I wonder why,
when you used to be the worst offender of this? Why the sudden change?
2. Allow any sort of topic to be posted but make sure it is marked as OT

Thank you!!

3. Stop the personal attacks and insults.

Again, I think the worst offenders of #3 are the one's that are gone,
thus the decreased participation. That's a good thing.
4. Stop the flaming.

That'd be good, but with SOME of the people here, that will never stop!

5. Stop the trolling for heated arguments.

6. Ignore those who do not abide by these rules.

Do those things and we are fine. Keep on as we are and we are nothing
better than what we were.

Agreed with exceptions stated above!

Some good points there. Thanks bassie.

Chuck's Challenge has done much to help clean up the place. The folks
who've left have been more than replaced by new names who've added a lot to
the group.

We don't need the acerbic, antagonistic, name-calling that adds nothing.
--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 25 Jan 2006 04:50:05 -0800, wrote:


Chuck's Challenge has done much to help clean up the place. The folks
who've left have been more than replaced by new names who've added a lot
to
the group.

We don't need the acerbic, antagonistic, name-calling that adds nothing.

I agree as well........

--
John H

******Have a spectacular day!******