Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...


" Don't like my stuff, don't read it. Surely you must have a filter?"
-Chuck Gould- "rec.boats"


Eisboch

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

Chuck Gould wrote:

A dynamic boating newsgroup would be a group where different people
contribute from their own unique perspective, allowing everybody to
gain a wider perspective and appreciation of the pastime. If you feel
that my particular boating experiences or perspectives aren't of
interest to you, they may be of interest to somebody else.

That's true. And, for the record, I've never once said that your posts
weren't germane to the nature of the newsgroup. In fact, I think you
would find quite the opposite. And, if you care to check, I have been
more than effusive in recommending your magazine as a good read full of
talented writers and edited by a pro.

My point was this - you want something that is unachievable in a group
in which the participants are, but their very nature, interested in
everything from soup to nuts. It is of no benefit to you to constantly
rail against the tide and all it does is create the very situation that
you abhor by attracting to you the very ones whose existence here is
fold, spindle and mutilate.

In essence to share differing interests is a natural function in a
community where individual life experience varies from the sublime to
the outrageous. Should you have taken your posts on bagpipes to
rec.music.bagpipes.annoying.the.neighbors.suicide. to.the.point.of?

Put it another way. If you go to your yacht club holiday celebration
(pick a holiday - any holiday) do you just discuss boats, cruising, the
latest in GPS technology or does the discussion among groups scattered
about wander to concerts, local events, shools, politics?

Consider this that type of party - a place where discussions are
curiosities that should be enjoyed - if they are specific to the
purpose, fine - if not, who cares.

90% of what
you post here is entirely OT and profoundly uninteresting to me, but
IMO as long as you aren't actively trolling for a fight (as some of
the other OT specialists prefer to do) your activity is harmless
clutter. Your daily links to You-tube videos always seem to find one
or two interested respondents. Even if your posts were "harmful"
clutter, beyond expressing an opinion there would be nothing that
could be done about it.

I beg to differ. It's actually about 50/50 and where appropriate, in
threads where I might have knowledge or insight to share, I certainly do
so without reservation.

What I find curious though is the approach that you have with regard to
the off topic and oddball discussion. I might point out that you are
not the arbiter of what is and isn't appropriate. Usenet groups are the
ultimate democracy - almost libertarian - and the group reigns supreme
over attempts by those who wish to control. Your role in this is as one
who chides and nags and attempts to force your opinion on everyone else.
You might say you are the very thing you rail against with your only
defense being that you wish for "purity" rather than chaos.

I vote for chaos.

Perhaps we won't ever see eye to eye on this issue, but that doesn't
have to mean that either one of us is a bad guy.

I would agree with that.

Don't like my stuff, don't read it.

Well, I might say the same.

Surely you must have a filter?

Why yes I do, but that's the difference between you and me. I don't
censor myself to "boating" - I like to see what others think, how they
express themselves, how they behave in a confrontation - it's endlessly
fascinating and often amusing - the follies of social interaction if you
will. You get a sense of personality - it's an endless theater of the
mind almost as good as old time radio.

You can't beat it.

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

On Feb 15, 6:53�pm, Short Wave Sportfishing


What I find curious though is the approach that you have with regard to
the off topic and oddball discussion. *I might point out that you are
not the arbiter of what is and isn't appropriate. *Usenet groups are the
ultimate democracy - almost libertarian - and the group reigns supreme
over attempts by those who wish to control. Your role in this is as one
who chides and nags and attempts to force your opinion on everyone else.
* You might say you are the very thing you rail against with your only
defense being that you wish for "purity" rather than chaos.

I vote for chaos.


And that is surely your privilege to do.

But, in trying to foster chaos, how is your activity any different
than mine? (Aside from the end you hope to achieve). You prefer a
group where chaos reigns, where you can be entertained by the flame
wars and "observe" personalities interacting. I feel that the group
has been there, done that, and over the years we have become less
useful as a resource for boaters as a result.

I will continue to "jawbone" for a group where we stick to boating
most of the time. You don't have to like that or agree that having a
group centered on boating is better than a group with no particular
focus at all.

You will probably continue to use the group as a blog, informing us
all about the details of your personal life and posting links to
videos you find amusing. I don't have to care much either way about
that, or agree that flame wars are useful entertainment.

None of us have any ability to "control" anybody else. How unfortunate
that anybody would interpret the expression of my personal opinion as
some sort of control mechanism. Perhaps my opinion will influence
somebody, perhaps not. Same as the opinions you express- no difference
at all.

(BTW, you asked about discussions at the yacht club; one thing that is
never, ever, ever discussed is partisan politics. In general, the
members respect one another enough to also respect individual
political perspectives. Live and let live.)

The sign over the cyber door still says "Boating Newsgroup". I fail to
see how it is wrong to try to influence content toward that end. It's
your right and privilege to disagree.

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

I couldn't agree more, Chuck.

--Mike

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Feb 15, 6:53?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing


What I find curious though is the approach that you have with regard to
the off topic and oddball discussion. I might point out that you are
not the arbiter of what is and isn't appropriate. Usenet groups are the
ultimate democracy - almost libertarian - and the group reigns supreme
over attempts by those who wish to control. Your role in this is as one
who chides and nags and attempts to force your opinion on everyone else.
You might say you are the very thing you rail against with your only
defense being that you wish for "purity" rather than chaos.

I vote for chaos.


And that is surely your privilege to do.

But, in trying to foster chaos, how is your activity any different
than mine? (Aside from the end you hope to achieve). You prefer a
group where chaos reigns, where you can be entertained by the flame
wars and "observe" personalities interacting. I feel that the group
has been there, done that, and over the years we have become less
useful as a resource for boaters as a result.

I will continue to "jawbone" for a group where we stick to boating
most of the time. You don't have to like that or agree that having a
group centered on boating is better than a group with no particular
focus at all.

You will probably continue to use the group as a blog, informing us
all about the details of your personal life and posting links to
videos you find amusing. I don't have to care much either way about
that, or agree that flame wars are useful entertainment.

None of us have any ability to "control" anybody else. How unfortunate
that anybody would interpret the expression of my personal opinion as
some sort of control mechanism. Perhaps my opinion will influence
somebody, perhaps not. Same as the opinions you express- no difference
at all.

(BTW, you asked about discussions at the yacht club; one thing that is
never, ever, ever discussed is partisan politics. In general, the
members respect one another enough to also respect individual
political perspectives. Live and let live.)

The sign over the cyber door still says "Boating Newsgroup". I fail to
see how it is wrong to try to influence content toward that end. It's
your right and privilege to disagree.

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 15, 6:53�pm, Short Wave Sportfishing

What I find curious though is the approach that you have with regard to
the off topic and oddball discussion. �I might point out that you are
not the arbiter of what is and isn't appropriate. �Usenet groups are the
ultimate democracy - almost libertarian - and the group reigns supreme
over attempts by those who wish to control. Your role in this is as one
who chides and nags and attempts to force your opinion on everyone else.
� You might say you are the very thing you rail against with your only
defense being that you wish for "purity" rather than chaos.

I vote for chaos.

And that is surely your privilege to do.

But, in trying to foster chaos, how is your activity any different
than mine? (Aside from the end you hope to achieve). You prefer a
group where chaos reigns, where you can be entertained by the flame
wars and "observe" personalities interacting. I feel that the group
has been there, done that, and over the years we have become less
useful as a resource for boaters as a result.

I would posit that it's finished it's intended purpose long ago. There
are more resources on the Web, more detail, more expertise - everything
from boating blogs to discussion forums on manufacturer's sites to -
well, it's all there already - even digest forms.

How many times does a question have to be answered before you point to
the search engine of choice with the appropriate URL and say, look here
- your answer lies at the feet of the Oracle of Google.

Out of curiosity, just this past few minutes, I Googled algae problems
for diesel fuel and found eleven entries on the web that detailed the
problem and probable causes and solutions. Why ask here for opinion when
one can find factual resources?

Usenet had it's time and it's well past.

I will continue to "jawbone" for a group where we stick to boating
most of the time. You don't have to like that or agree that having a
group centered on boating is better than a group with no particular
focus at all.

The "focused" groups are moderated forums on the Web where individuals
submit entries, have them approved and posted. These range from purpose
specific forums like hunting, fishing, sailing, power boating, trailer
boating to email lists which, by the way, have supplanted Usenet if only
for the same reasons you attempt to dictate here - purpose built and
subscribed to. I belong to four email lists that are specific to my
interests - International trucks/tractors, Corvette, club list and one
photography group which is attached to a site that I post to - two of
which I moderate. I have no problems with annotating a particular post
with editorial commentary and allowing the discussion to broaden, but I
have limits, as do the group members and attempt to keep the discussions
on track. I have terminated discussions that achieved all that could be
achieved with an explanation of why I used my authority as moderator.
Sometimes, other moderators might question a particular post or thread
and we hash that out offline and come to a consensus. That is how the
email groups were chartered and that's how they work.

You want to have a purpose built Usenet group that serves no purpose -
it seems a little Quixotic.

Boating is what brought us together as individuals - note the
individuals. In any group of individuals, interests vary and I'll say it
again - it's a yacht club party only a little more open.

You will probably continue to use the group as a blog, informing us
all about the details of your personal life and posting links to
videos you find amusing. I don't have to care much either way about
that, or agree that flame wars are useful entertainment.

I suppose your entry about Valentines Day disguised as a boating thread
was - interesting? Was that informative - something that nobody else in
the whole of this august body never knew? Was it related to boating in
some way or just finger exercise warming up for your next editorial?

Oddly, I saw several Valentines Day blog entries similar to yours here -
hmmmm....pot - kettle - black?

None of us have any ability to "control" anybody else. How unfortunate
that anybody would interpret the expression of my personal opinion as
some sort of control mechanism. Perhaps my opinion will influence
somebody, perhaps not. Same as the opinions you express- no difference
at all.

It is exactly an attempt at control - from the Chuckie dots to the
quasi-resource "articles" - you use this group exactly as I or others do
- not as often, but the intent is the same.

People in glass houses - et cetera.

(BTW, you asked about discussions at the yacht club; one thing that is
never, ever, ever discussed is partisan politics. In general, the
members respect one another enough to also respect individual
political perspectives. Live and let live.)

Oh please. Politics is politics from who is going to be the next
Commodore or Race Director to what the club will or will not support.
Each side of an issue is partisan with respect to each other.

The sign over the cyber door still says "Boating Newsgroup". I fail to
see how it is wrong to try to influence content toward that end. It's
your right and privilege to disagree.

Very - um...enlightened of you.

And I do.

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

Mike wrote:
I couldn't agree more, Chuck.

One vote for Chuck. :)

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 02:53:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

Chuck Gould wrote:

A dynamic boating newsgroup would be a group where different people
contribute from their own unique perspective, allowing everybody to
gain a wider perspective and appreciation of the pastime. If you feel
that my particular boating experiences or perspectives aren't of
interest to you, they may be of interest to somebody else.

That's true. And, for the record, I've never once said that your posts
weren't germane to the nature of the newsgroup. In fact, I think you
would find quite the opposite. And, if you care to check, I have been
more than effusive in recommending your magazine as a good read full of
talented writers and edited by a pro.

My point was this - you want something that is unachievable in a group
in which the participants are, but their very nature, interested in
everything from soup to nuts. It is of no benefit to you to constantly
rail against the tide and all it does is create the very situation that
you abhor by attracting to you the very ones whose existence here is
fold, spindle and mutilate.

In essence to share differing interests is a natural function in a
community where individual life experience varies from the sublime to
the outrageous. Should you have taken your posts on bagpipes to
rec.music.bagpipes.annoying.the.neighbors.suicide .to.the.point.of?

Put it another way. If you go to your yacht club holiday celebration
(pick a holiday - any holiday) do you just discuss boats, cruising, the
latest in GPS technology or does the discussion among groups scattered
about wander to concerts, local events, shools, politics?

Consider this that type of party - a place where discussions are
curiosities that should be enjoyed - if they are specific to the
purpose, fine - if not, who cares.

90% of what
you post here is entirely OT and profoundly uninteresting to me, but
IMO as long as you aren't actively trolling for a fight (as some of
the other OT specialists prefer to do) your activity is harmless
clutter. Your daily links to You-tube videos always seem to find one
or two interested respondents. Even if your posts were "harmful"
clutter, beyond expressing an opinion there would be nothing that
could be done about it.

I beg to differ. It's actually about 50/50 and where appropriate, in
threads where I might have knowledge or insight to share, I certainly do
so without reservation.

What I find curious though is the approach that you have with regard to
the off topic and oddball discussion. I might point out that you are
not the arbiter of what is and isn't appropriate. Usenet groups are the
ultimate democracy - almost libertarian - and the group reigns supreme
over attempts by those who wish to control. Your role in this is as one
who chides and nags and attempts to force your opinion on everyone else.
You might say you are the very thing you rail against with your only
defense being that you wish for "purity" rather than chaos.

I vote for chaos.

Perhaps we won't ever see eye to eye on this issue, but that doesn't
have to mean that either one of us is a bad guy.

I would agree with that.

Don't like my stuff, don't read it.

Well, I might say the same.

Surely you must have a filter?

Why yes I do, but that's the difference between you and me. I don't
censor myself to "boating" - I like to see what others think, how they
express themselves, how they behave in a confrontation - it's endlessly
fascinating and often amusing - the follies of social interaction if you
will. You get a sense of personality - it's an endless theater of the
mind almost as good as old time radio.

You can't beat it.

The folks over in a.politics would love your chaos, especially if it's
political or religious and results in a lot of name calling.

I can't believe you *prefer* that.
--
***** Have a decent day! *****

John H

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

JLH wrote:

The folks over in a.politics would love your chaos, especially if it's
political or religious and results in a lot of name calling.

I can't believe you *prefer* that.

Hmmmm - perhaps a small, slight twist of phrase would be in order.

How about "ordered" chaos?

Chaos is a concept and in the context of rec.boats and my discussion
with Chuck, it pertains to the off-topic threads as they often appear
here. It's a relative term and not meant, in this discussion anyway, to
be taken literally.

Perhaps I should have used disorder rather than chaos.

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:35:01 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

JLH wrote:

The folks over in a.politics would love your chaos, especially if it's
political or religious and results in a lot of name calling.

I can't believe you *prefer* that.

Hmmmm - perhaps a small, slight twist of phrase would be in order.

How about "ordered" chaos?

Chaos is a concept and in the context of rec.boats and my discussion
with Chuck, it pertains to the off-topic threads as they often appear
here. It's a relative term and not meant, in this discussion anyway, to
be taken literally.

Perhaps I should have used disorder rather than chaos.

As long as the 'ordered' part of the chaos precludes political or religious
trolls intended to cause flame fests...


--
***** Have a decent day! *****

John H

Europe Tests Established Chemicals on Millions of Animals
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
JLH wrote:

The folks over in a.politics would love your chaos, especially if it's
political or religious and results in a lot of name calling.
I can't believe you *prefer* that.

Hmmmm - perhaps a small, slight twist of phrase would be in order.

How about "ordered" chaos?

Chaos is a concept and in the context of rec.boats and my discussion
with Chuck, it pertains to the off-topic threads as they often appear
here. It's a relative term and not meant, in this discussion anyway, to
be taken literally.

Perhaps I should have used disorder rather than chaos.


Frankly, I consider almost any activity here that ****es off the
self-righteous a**holes who plague this newsgroup worthwhile.