Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 15, 3:38?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: Also sad to think that non-boaters have nothing better to do than hang around a NG dedicated to a pastime they don't pursue. Just out of curiosity, do you post your reviews in rec.boats.cruising? No. That's primarily a sailing group. I'm not a sailor. It's been quite a while since I've posted anything close to a "review" on this site as well. |
#2
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 15, 3:38?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: Also sad to think that non-boaters have nothing better to do than hang around a NG dedicated to a pastime they don't pursue. Just out of curiosity, do you post your reviews in rec.boats.cruising? No. That's primarily a sailing group. sail·ing noun 1. the activity of a person or thing that sails. 2. the departure of a ship from port: The cruise line offers sailings every other day. 3. Navigation. any of various methods for determining courses and distances by means of charts or with reference to longitudes and latitudes, rhumb lines, great circles, etc. I'm not a sailor. sail.or noun 1. a person whose occupation is sailing or navigation; mariner. 2. a seaman below the rank of officer. 3. a naval enlistee. 4. a person adept at sailing, esp. with reference to freedom from seasickness. Hmmmm - t'would seem to me that you fit the definition of sailing and sailor perfectly. However, even if there are folks who use sail boats in cruising, your whole focus is cruising rather than boats in general - thus it would be more appropriate for you to, well, haunt rec.boats.cruising. I mean, you earn your money editing a magazine which primarily is for cruisers - it would seem to me that you would want to involve yourself in a newsgroup SPECIFICALLY for cruising and those who participate in that aspect of boating rather than a GENERAL newsgroup that relates to boats in general and not CRUISING in particular. :) |
#3
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 15, 4:43�pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: On Feb 15, 3:38?pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Chuck Gould wrote: Also sad to think that non-boaters have nothing better to do than hang around a NG dedicated to a pastime they don't pursue. Just out of curiosity, do you post your reviews in rec.boats.cruising? No. That's primarily a sailing group. sail·ing noun 1. the activity of a person or thing that sails. 2. the departure of a ship from port: The cruise line offers sailings every other day. 3. Navigation. any of various methods for determining courses and distances by means of charts or with reference to longitudes and latitudes, rhumb lines, great circles, etc. I'm not a sailor. sail.or noun 1. *a person whose occupation is sailing or navigation; mariner. 2. a seaman below the rank of officer. 3. a naval enlistee. 4. a person adept at sailing, esp. with reference to freedom from seasickness. Hmmmm - t'would seem to me that you fit the definition of sailing and sailor perfectly. However, even if there are folks who use sail boats in cruising, your whole focus is cruising rather than boats in general - thus it would be more appropriate for you to, well, haunt rec.boats.cruising. I mean, you earn your money editing a magazine which primarily is for cruisers - it would seem to me that you would want to involve yourself in a newsgroup SPECIFICALLY for cruising and those who participate in that aspect of boating rather than a GENERAL newsgroup that relates to boats in general and not CRUISING in particular. *:) Interesting perspective. So then what, in your opinion, is the difference between "general boating" and specific boating activities? Should fishing posts be considered out of place at rec.boats? Lots of people boat but don't fish. I'll bet there are fishing newsgroups out there somewhere. How about water skiing posts? I've never been on a water ski in my entire life. If you eliminate every single boating activity as too specialized, all that would be left in rec.boats would be the non-boating social chit chat. At that point it would hardly be a boating newsgroup. 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. 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. 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. Don't like my stuff, don't read it. Surely you must have a filter? |
#4
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "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 |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Eisboch" wrote in message news ![]() "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 Hee Hee. Did Chuckie really say that? Florida Jim |
#6
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#7
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#8
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#9
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike wrote:
I couldn't agree more, Chuck. One vote for Chuck. :) |
#10
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Animal Welfare or "animal rights"? | General |