|
|
Posted by Spex on 06/20/06 08:50
William Davis wrote:
> In article <44971fec$0$22086$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net>,
> Spex <No.spam@ta.com> wrote:
>
>> Martin Heffels wrote:
>>> On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:14:53 -0700, P.C. Ford <meoh@mouse-potato.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please go away. The both of you.
>>> You are using the great Forte Agent, in which you can kill somebody or a
>>> certain subject for a selected time, upon which the filter will be
>>> automaticaly deleted again. Nappy and Tapeguy, and the few others biting in
>>> that thread won't really disappear. The are too hardheaded for that. Maybe
>>> it's time you take up the user manual of Agent and learn how to apply such
>>> filters for your peace of mind :-)
>>>
>>> cheers
>>>
>>> -martin-
>> Quite right Martin.
>>
>> If you don't want to read a particular thread then just don't open it.
>> There are various ways in which to achieve this goal without acting like
>> a newsgroup bouncer.
>>
>> The beauty of usenet is that people cannot get banned and therefore
>> cannot be censored. Its a strength that should be celebrated no matter
>> how daft a thread may get. They always fizzle out in the
>> end.....eventually....
>
> Well, to a certain extent.
>
> The other factor to consider is that usenet postings are effectively
> archived for the foreseeable future. And all worthwhile newsgroups
> constantly attract newbies.
The archiving of the group is a strength too. Pretty easy now to check
someone's past record.
>
> So allowing someone to come in and spread patently false information -
> whether it's a PC guy trashing Macs, or a Mac guy trashing PCs - is more
> than just annoying. It's a disservice to the new readers who might not
> recognize polemic screed and will think that what they are reading is
> factual.
>
I hope people aren't as daft as you suggest. :) Taking advice from a
newsgroup should be just one part of the research one undertakes.
> They go and not only do their own work with what they read here in mind,
> but they often go out and repeat what they've learned here as gospel.
When I was doing some background reading for a new camera purchase I saw
the same old names and screen names spouting the same lines on several
different fora. (dvxuser, dvinfo, xlcinema, thecow.) Once a myth has
been generated it quickly becomes entrenched across the internet because
its actually a relatively small cross section of people that spread
the word.
I only ever read and post to this newsgroup the reason is because its a
free for all. When someone gets too big for their boots there are more
than enough capable people here to pull the rug from under them.
Because there is no vested interest in a particular brand or moderation
the discussions here are much freer. The downside is that every now and
then a thread becomes a verbal ping pong. I'll take that over furtive
efforts by manufacturers to push their products any day.
>
> When it's factually incorrect. When it's one guys lousy experience
> masquerading as a knowing treatist on how that hardware or software
> ALWAYS worksŠ others have a right to know that someone else with
> different opinions feels that persons opinion is a crock.
Over a period of time one does get a sense of where people are coming
from. I have come to respect several regular posters here and that
respect is earned over many months of reading this group. I would urge
anyone new to a newsgroup to get to "know" the posters before taking
advice as verbatim.
>
> In that case, it's not only worth posting a reply, it's a public service
> to those who might benefit from whatever solution is being unfairly
> trashed.
>
> Nothing wrong with that.
Absolutely...long may it continue.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|