Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision

From: godot22@earthlink.net (PJ Killian)

Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000

In article <5qneqt$f8r$1@slate.new.discreet.co.uk>, graeme@discreet.co.uk
(Graeme Griffiths) wrote:

> No-one "teaches" Usenet or Netiquette they are skills you pick up as you go.
> News admins _should_ point new users to the entry points to Usenet
> (news.announce.newusers is a good one) so they can pick up information
> before they commit huge howlers and annoy everyone in a public forum.

Well, guess what--they don't. You can either sit back, be snot-nosed every
time someone who hasn't had the experience or acquired the knowledge makes
an attempt to advance the conversation or do something proactively helpful
for the group, or you could actually help. Your reaction to the attempted
vote-by-posting was the former.

I am all for Usenet tradition, I really am, but not as a bludgeon to make
inexperienced users look dumb in the eyes of fellow veterans, and not as a
means to ignore what they have to say.

> Of course, like all users of a computer none of us read the manual until
> we've pressed all the buttons so this doesn't work as efficiently as we'd
> like. It would be interesting to see news reader software that only allowed
> you to post once you'd read a certain set of docs..... no one would use it
> but it would be interesting.

Well, my newsreader has an option that brings up a dialogue box that warns
me that "You are posting something that will be read by thousands of
people. Are you SURE you want to do this?" It's gotten me out of trouble
more than once. ;-)

> But ask yourself this, if every newbie posted "so how do I post/start a
> newsgroup/change an FAQ/set up a vote" when they needed it in a newsgroup of
> their choice (like this one), how much traffic would that generate ? Perhaps
> there is a forum for that ? Now go and find it.

Perhaps if every newsgroup were as unfriendly as this one, there would be
no traffic from newbies at all. You can debate whether this is a good thing
or not, but tearing down people who are trying to build up, however
inadequately, is rude in *any* social context, IMO. Go to your average NG
in the alt.* hierarchy and see how many *truly* clueless people there are
on Usenet and maybe you'll think twice about lambasting/patronizing people
(by which I don't really man myself, BTW) who are really *participating*
but not doing it in a way you like.

> So, it would seem, quite a few of us have been on or around Usenet for a
> while and picked up the necessary knowledge about Netiquette and protocol.
> Armed with that we feel we have a reasonable take on the ads situation.

Fine, if that take was not to belittle everyone who disagrees with you.
Granted, it's hard to keep one's composure when someone's calling you
"dishonest" or worse, like the charges that have been levelled (IMO
unfairly) at Greg, but to ignore the voices of people because they do not
follow the correct protocol is like the president of a nation ignoring
protesters because the sentences on their signs end in prepositions.

> For instance its common practice to hold a formal discussion before you hold
> a vote (you decide what to vote on in the discussion). I posted a CFD (Call
> For Discussion) a couple of days ago for this very purpose and have, so far,
> seen nada, nothing, zip. Its going to be difficult to hold a vote based on
> that.

Well, I've seen several responses, some of which I agreed with, others I
did not disagree with vehemently enough to respond directly. Regardless of
your opinion of my Netiquette, I DO know enough to not post a "ME TOO."

PJ Killian
North American Indoor Soccer Union PBeM
(http://home.earthlink.net/~godot22/home.html)

**SPAM FILTERS ARE BEING TESTED. Do your worst.**

References

Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
mlwilliams <mwilliams@signal.dra.hmg.gb>
Wed, 16 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000
Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)
Wed, 16 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000
Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
mlwilliams <mwilliams@signal.dra.hmg.gb>
Thu, 17 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000
Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
graeme@discreet.co.uk (Graeme Griffiths)
Fri, 18 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000

Referenced By

Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
mlwilliams <mwilliams@signal.dra.hmg.gb>
Wed, 16 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000
Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)
Wed, 16 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000
Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
mlwilliams <mwilliams@signal.dra.hmg.gb>
Thu, 17 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000
Re: PROPOSAL: Vote on FAQ Revision
graeme@discreet.co.uk (Graeme Griffiths)
Fri, 18 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0000