| |
Main
Date: 22 Sep 2006 11:44:09
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
they saw their recorded television coverage).
This is part of the internet. On the internet you will find news
(including sports results) real-time. Newsgroups are no different.
People shouldn't have to dance around sports results because some
people haven't heard them yet. If YOU don't want to hear the results,
then don't go places were they are. Don't turn on ESPN or The Golf
Channel or read the internet.
|
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 19:10:47
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Larry Bud wrote:
> Dave Lee wrote:
> > "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:1158950649.822681.220750@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > > This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> > > discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
> > > they saw their recorded television coverage).
>
> > However, this is the internet and there is no firm requirement that you be
> > courteous.
>
> That sure is apparent!!
If there is any doubt, feel free to browse through the "Cumwad" thread!
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 18:54:28
From: gpsman
Subject: Re: Hey shitferbrains
|
Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip >
> gpsman wrote:
> > Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip>
> >
> > > I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> > > won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> > > decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts
> > -----
> >
> > - gpsman
>
> Great post gpsman. Very intelligent, especially when we're talking
> about etiquette yet you breach one in the title of this very thread.
What? You don't like it? I won't avoid putting my thoughts about your
netiquitte in the subject line just because you decide you don't like
it.
I don't see what your problem could be, what works for you works for
me.
Get the point?
-----
- gpsman
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 17:44:18
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Dave Lee wrote:
> "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1158950649.822681.220750@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> > discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
> > they saw their recorded television coverage).
> However, this is the internet and there is no firm requirement that you be
> courteous.
That sure is apparent!!
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 23:28:49
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1158950649.822681.220750@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
> they saw their recorded television coverage).
>
> This is part of the internet. On the internet you will find news
> (including sports results) real-time. Newsgroups are no different.
> People shouldn't have to dance around sports results because some
> people haven't heard them yet. If YOU don't want to hear the results,
> then don't go places were they are. Don't turn on ESPN or The Golf
> Channel or read the internet.
>
It is common courtesy here to warn folks when results that may be shown
'delayed live' (after posting) are discussed.
However, this is the internet and there is no firm requirement that you be
courteous.
dave
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 16:15:57
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> No, it's not about me. I watched it live on the internet. And I
> really do think that people who expect there to be no assholes in RSG
> are idiots.
I don't think it's being an asshole to post results in subject headers.
(and I still haven't heard from anyone on when it is appropriate to do
so. If I mention Jack won the '86 Masters, is that ok?) And
apparently I'm an asshole just for holding that opinion, although I
don't think that I've done it. (It just ticks me off when someone is
berated for doing so)
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 16:27:53
From: multi
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 22 Sep 2006 16:15:57 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
>I don't think it's being an asshole to post results in subject headers.
With a few exceptions like myself, assholes NEVER think they're being
assholes.
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:49:45
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
multi wrote:
> On 22 Sep 2006 14:36:53 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
> >I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> >won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> >decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts, yet don't know
> >the results and expect no one to mention it to them.
>
> Then you're an asshole. It takes less effort, not more, to not put
> the results in the subject line, so you are going out of your way to
> be an asshole. On the other hand, the people you're offending are
> idiots, because they expect to be able to read RSG without
> encountering any assholes.
And you're being an asshole for expecting people to change their
subject headings on a generally known topic just for the sake of you.
It's all about you, isn't it?
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 16:05:22
From: multi
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 22 Sep 2006 15:49:45 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
>
>multi wrote:
>> On 22 Sep 2006 14:36:53 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
>> >I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
>> >won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
>> >decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts, yet don't know
>> >the results and expect no one to mention it to them.
>>
>> Then you're an asshole. It takes less effort, not more, to not put
>> the results in the subject line, so you are going out of your way to
>> be an asshole. On the other hand, the people you're offending are
>> idiots, because they expect to be able to read RSG without
>> encountering any assholes.
>
>And you're being an asshole for expecting people to change their
>subject headings on a generally known topic just for the sake of you.
I just went to the trouble of explaining that expecting consideration
from an asshole would make me an idiot, not another asshole. If you
can't understand such a simple distinction, then you're both an
asshole and an idiot.
>It's all about you, isn't it?
No, it's not about me. I watched it live on the internet. And I
really do think that people who expect there to be no assholes in RSG
are idiots.
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:42:14
From: Big_Fan
Subject: GPSman is an exceptional idiot
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> gpsman wrote:
> > Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip>
> >
> > > I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> > > won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> > > decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts
> > -----
> >
> > - gpsman
>
> Great post gpsman. Very intelligent, especially when we're talking
> about etiquette yet you breach one in the title of this very thread.
And since you changed the title...I've made it more accurate.
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:41:14
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> Buford Ressup wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:44:09 -0700, Big_Fan wrote:
> >
> > > This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> > > discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before they
> > > saw their recorded television coverage).
> >
> > No one complained about people discussing the results. What they
> > complained about, and rightly so, was needlessly putting the results in
> > the title of a post.
> >
> > The title of the post was:
> >
> > "Woods beats Monty - a sign of things to come?"
> >
> > Would it have really been that hard to title it:
> >
> > "A sign of things to come? <Ryder Cup SPOILER>"?
> >
> > How much difference would that have made?
> >
> > Nobody is trying to stop you from discussing the results, but some people
> > in the U.S. would appreciate it if you would do it in the bodies of your
> > messages instead of the titles, especially when it hasn't been shown on
> > American TV, yet.
> >
> > If it offends you to be considerate of others, even on the Internet, then
> > do as you please. No one can stop you.
>
> I'm not the one who created the subject.
>
> Why should someone have to change the subject for today's results? In
> other words, if you're so concerned about the Ryder Cup results and
> don't want to know them, why are reading this newsgroup? Are you also
> avoiding the front pages of all news sites (yahoo, MSNBC, etc)?
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:37:43
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: You are an exceptional idiot
|
gpsman wrote:
> Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip>
>
> > I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> > won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> > decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts
> -----
>
> - gpsman
Great post gpsman. Very intelligent, especially when we're talking
about etiquette yet you breach one in the title of this very thread.
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:36:43
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Buford Ressup wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:44:09 -0700, Big_Fan wrote:
>
> > This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> > discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before they
> > saw their recorded television coverage).
>
> No one complained about people discussing the results. What they
> complained about, and rightly so, was needlessly putting the results in
> the title of a post.
>
> The title of the post was:
>
> "Woods beats Monty - a sign of things to come?"
>
> Would it have really been that hard to title it:
>
> "A sign of things to come? <Ryder Cup SPOILER>"?
>
> How much difference would that have made?
>
> Nobody is trying to stop you from discussing the results, but some people
> in the U.S. would appreciate it if you would do it in the bodies of your
> messages instead of the titles, especially when it hasn't been shown on
> American TV, yet.
>
> If it offends you to be considerate of others, even on the Internet, then
> do as you please. No one can stop you.
I'm not the one who created the subject.
Why should someone have to change the subject for today's results? In
other words, if you're so concerned about the Ryder Cup results and
don't want to know them, why are reading this newsgroup? Are you also
avoiding the front pages of all news sites (yahoo, MSNBC, etc)?
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 20:03:31
From: Elroy
Subject: Re: 10-6
|
"Bear" <bearlysane@XShawX.ca > wrote in message
news:r34bh25pc6230p55s76idtct47ia609q61@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 18:02:17 GMT, "Elroy" <diespammers@die.com> wrote:
>
>>Means we gotta go 8.5-3.5 tomorrow. No way...
>
> We?!?!
You?!?!
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 18:23:14
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> > At best it's an outdated expectations of usegroups from the early 90's.
> > At worst it's an unrealistic expectation. Even as vocal as I have
> > been on it, even I realize that it's an opinion and a very grey area,
> > so stating right and wrong definitively on this incorrect. I should
> > have said "I care more aobut what I believe is right.....".
>
> In other words, your personal view of the world trumps everyone else's -
> even if they are unanimously of a different opinion.
>
> How very Generation X.
>
> William Clark
Considering it isn't even close to being unanimous (note the people who
have agreed with me and the people who continue to post Ryder Cup
results content in their subject headers and in post content without
spoilers), I'm not saying my view trumps everyone.
Also, I'm from Generation X.
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 04:58:22
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
>
> : Btw, which do you consider more inconsiderate. The act of posting
> : spoilers or calling someone names because they don't have a problem
> : with people posting spoilers?
>
> Posting spoilers. I've been called every name imaginable, that's
> never hurt me once. My Saturday afternoon was marred by the 10-6
> thread, though.
Believe me, the names don't "hurt" me either, but I think it's much
more rude to directly call someone an asshole compared to posting
spoilers in this newsgroup.
Marred by it huh? wow.
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 17:22:09
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
:
: Chris Bellomy wrote:
: > Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
: >
: > : Btw, which do you consider more inconsiderate. The act of posting
: > : spoilers or calling someone names because they don't have a problem
: > : with people posting spoilers?
: >
: > Posting spoilers. I've been called every name imaginable, that's
: > never hurt me once. My Saturday afternoon was marred by the 10-6
: > thread, though.
:
: Believe me, the names don't "hurt" me either, but I think it's much
: more rude to directly call someone an asshole compared to posting
: spoilers in this newsgroup.
Well, that just doesn't make any sense, and in fact sets up
using your own argument against you: if you don't want to be
called names, what are you doing in Usenet?
: Marred by it huh? wow.
Yeah, I did plan to watch the afternoon matches until I saw that.
So instead I watched texas u. vs. Iowa State, which sucked.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:16:04
From:
Subject: Re: international play/Ryder cup - does anybody care?
|
dirtymm@msn.com wrote:
> I love the game but I really have little intrest in international play.
> Tiger seems to stink unless there's a big purse.
The Ryder Cup is a highlight of the year for me, in the seasons that
it's played. The international aspect is also very interesting -
particularly the presence of the American players along with all of the
other nationalities that we see week in, week out.
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:14:55
From: gpsman
Subject: Re: You are an exceptional idiot
|
Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip >
> I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts
-----
- gpsman
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 21:46:37
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: You are an exceptional idiot
|
gpsman <gpsman@driversmail.com > wrote:
: Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip >
:
: > I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
: > won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
: > decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts
: -----
:
: - gpsman
Not an idiot, though, so much as a complete asshole who lacks
any consideration for others whatsoever. Even worse than Stemmer!
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 14:36:53
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
3putt wrote:
> .
> >
> > that's fine with me. I get really angry when the TV broadcasts sports
> > on tape and pretends they are live. I think all sports should be
> > broadcast LIVE.
> >
> Yeah, right. We were going to get up at 4 a.m. here on the East Coast to
> watch live coverage? Given that there are plenty of sports web sites
> reporting the activity, why try to be the 1st to post here? What's the
> point?
> "You da man!"?
I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts, yet don't know
the results and expect no one to mention it to them.
Reminds me of people who tape a big game and then expect people at work
or their friends to not discuss the results of it in front of them
until they get home and watch it. The world does NOT revolve around
you. (I say to no one in particular)
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 15:47:14
From: multi
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 22 Sep 2006 14:36:53 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
>I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
>won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
>decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts, yet don't know
>the results and expect no one to mention it to them.
Then you're an asshole. It takes less effort, not more, to not put
the results in the subject line, so you are going out of your way to
be an asshole. On the other hand, the people you're offending are
idiots, because they expect to be able to read RSG without
encountering any assholes.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 14:54:14
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> 3putt wrote:
>> .
>>> that's fine with me. I get really angry when the TV broadcasts sports
>>> on tape and pretends they are live. I think all sports should be
>>> broadcast LIVE.
>>>
>> Yeah, right. We were going to get up at 4 a.m. here on the East Coast to
>> watch live coverage? Given that there are plenty of sports web sites
>> reporting the activity, why try to be the 1st to post here? What's the
>> point?
>> "You da man!"?
>
> I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts, yet don't know
> the results and expect no one to mention it to them.
>
> Reminds me of people who tape a big game and then expect people at work
> or their friends to not discuss the results of it in front of them
> until they get home and watch it. The world does NOT revolve around
> you. (I say to no one in particular)
>
I agree. I watched all of the USA taped coverage today while working and
didn't come in here after a short stint this morning as I realized that
I may get more information than I wanted to hear
Dave
|
| |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 13:42:09
From: jc
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
> they saw their recorded television coverage).
>
> This is part of the internet. On the internet you will find news
> (including sports results) real-time. Newsgroups are no different.
> People shouldn't have to dance around sports results because some
> people haven't heard them yet. If YOU don't want to hear the results,
> then don't go places were they are. Don't turn on ESPN or The Golf
> Channel or read the internet.
that's fine with me. I get really angry when the TV broadcasts sports
on tape and pretends they are live. I think all sports should be
broadcast LIVE.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 21:20:12
From: 3putt
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
.
>
> that's fine with me. I get really angry when the TV broadcasts sports
> on tape and pretends they are live. I think all sports should be
> broadcast LIVE.
>
Yeah, right. We were going to get up at 4 a.m. here on the East Coast to
watch live coverage? Given that there are plenty of sports web sites
reporting the activity, why try to be the 1st to post here? What's the
point?
"You da man!"?
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 02:32:16
From: \R&B\
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1158950649.822681.220750@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
> they saw their recorded television coverage).
>
> This is part of the internet. On the internet you will find news
> (including sports results) real-time. Newsgroups are no different.
> People shouldn't have to dance around sports results because some
> people haven't heard them yet. If YOU don't want to hear the results,
> then don't go places were they are. Don't turn on ESPN or The Golf
> Channel or read the internet.
>
He has a point.
I mean, they're not called OLD NEWS groups.
Randy
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 11:13:46
From: 3putt
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
""R&B"" <noneofyourbusiness@all.com > wrote in message
news:UcudncF6X-h6SYnYnZ2dnUVZ_v2dnZ2d@giganews.com...
> "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1158950649.822681.220750@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
>> discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
>> they saw their recorded television coverage).
>>
>> This is part of the internet. On the internet you will find news
>> (including sports results) real-time. Newsgroups are no different.
>> People shouldn't have to dance around sports results because some
>> people haven't heard them yet. If YOU don't want to hear the results,
>> then don't go places were they are. Don't turn on ESPN or The Golf
>> Channel or read the internet.
>>
>
>
> He has a point.
>
> I mean, they're not called OLD NEWS groups.
>
> Randy
Well, he is "Da Man!".
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 18:26:40
From:
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
"R&B" wrote:
> "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1158950649.822681.220750@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> > discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
> > they saw their recorded television coverage).
> >
> > This is part of the internet. On the internet you will find news
> > (including sports results) real-time. Newsgroups are no different.
> > People shouldn't have to dance around sports results because some
> > people haven't heard them yet. If YOU don't want to hear the results,
> > then don't go places were they are. Don't turn on ESPN or The Golf
> > Channel or read the internet.
> >
>
>
> He has a point.
>
> I mean, they're not called OLD NEWS groups.
>
> Randy
They're not??
Damn! I did not know that. I wish you'd tagged this with "spoiler".
Now my evening is ruined, I tell you, ruined.
But seriously, that one line is an excellent summation of the issue.
If you don't want to hear the news about recent golf events, don't read
a golf newsgroup.
Or don't bitch about it if you do.
It is a very simple solution to the problem, and the bonus is that
those who are complaining or upset about the issue are the very ones
who can control the outcome to their satisfaction, each and every time.
Sounds like a win-win to me.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 17:26:41
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> Apples/oranges Annika. It's so simple to just type one word in a
> subject line on a post that will have several responses. A one time
> situation.
>
> For those that you think are ng challenged, this is just a thoughtful
> thing to do.
It might be thoughtful, but the point PUFFY is making is that it isn't
neccessary.
If folks avoid places they might hear unwanted info, there is no
problem.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 17:14:40
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
> Nobody is saying not to discuss the results of the Ryder Cup real-time;
> what they're saying is that it is considerate to tag your posts in the
> subject line with something indicating real-time discussion (such as
> "SPOILER"), and not putting the results in the subject line.
>
> If you're defending your right to post the results in the subject line,
> well, I guess you have that right. But if you engage in that behavior
> willfully, you're also signalling something else about yourself,
> something pretty profound.
If you are at the golf course and someone asks you who won the
Michigan-Wisconsin game, do you first query everyone in the clubhouse
to see if they'd like to hear the results before you announce them?
And even that is a poor analogy because people normally don't go to the
golf course to discuss football. But expecting people in a GOLF
newsgroup to not talk about GOLF is idiotic. PUFFY is right on this
one (he was way overdue). If it means that much to you to not hear the
results, DON'T GO TO A GOLF NEWSGROUP!
When Tennessee played their opening game against Cal this year, I
thought I was safe since I was in Illinois for a wedding. I TIVO'd the
game and made extra efforts to avoid ESPN or any newscast that might
leak the score before I got back home. It wasn't too tough since you
Yankees have only a passing interest in college football. Down here,
you couldn't go anywhere without hearing people talk about it. Anyway,
I did great all weekend until we went to the in-laws house to say our
goodbyes when another Tennessee couple asked, "How did the Big Orange
do this weekend?"
"Oh, they killed them!"
I could've acted silly and put my hands over my ears and screamed,
"Don't tell me, don't tell me!" I didn't do that because I don't have
the right to tell someone else what they can discuss. Telling someone
on a GOLF newsgroup to not talk about GOLF borders on the ridiculous.
Maybe we should build a fence?
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 18:49:39
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
annika1980 wrote:
(snip)
>
> I could've acted silly and put my hands over my ears and screamed,
> "Don't tell me, don't tell me!" I didn't do that because I don't have
> the right to tell someone else what they can discuss. Telling someone
> on a GOLF newsgroup to not talk about GOLF borders on the ridiculous.
> Maybe we should build a fence?
>
nah, just do what I did and stay out of here until after 3pm
PDT...solves the problem
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 18:51:04
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
long&left wrote:
> annika1980 wrote:
> (snip)
>>
>> I could've acted silly and put my hands over my ears and screamed,
>> "Don't tell me, don't tell me!" I didn't do that because I don't have
>> the right to tell someone else what they can discuss. Telling someone
>> on a GOLF newsgroup to not talk about GOLF borders on the ridiculous.
>> Maybe we should build a fence?
>>
>
> nah, just do what I did and stay out of here until after 3pm
> PDT...solves the problem
oh, and I'm certainly not sticking up for Big_Fan, who is IMO an
inconsiderate asshole...
|
| | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 08:03:46
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> You have persitently claimed that it is your right to go ahead and post
> anything you like (especially spoilers) without any regard to the wishes
> of the vast majority of this ng. That is what you have "defended".
>
"Vast majority?"
Vocal minority is more like it.
I count you and Dalecki. Who else ya got?
Oh yeah, Bellomy. He doesn't count ... he bitches about everything.
|
| | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 06:33:14
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> > As for unsubstantiated spectulation. If you can read, then you know
> > that I'm correct. Do you deny that there are posts out there with Ryder
> > Cup spoilers in the header? Do you deny that there are posts out there
> > without SPOILER in the header that have spoilers in the contents, even
> > posts that YOU have responded to?
>
> Aaah, the "have you stopped beating your wife" tactic. No, sorry, but
> everyone else who posted spoilers has either stopped, or apologized for
> their mistake on doing so, and accepted the netiquette of this ng. You
> are the only one who has loudly proclaimed that you will ignore those
> wishes, and post where and what you please - to hell with everyone else.
>
> That's the difference.
>
> William Clark
Really? Everyone who has posted spoilers over the last weekend has
stopped or apologized and accepted? Wow, you really live in your own
little world don't you?
Actually I have never said that I will post where and what I please
(much less to say the hell with anyone else), but then again you like
to exaggerate don't you?
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 16:20:25
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
> :> If you're a buddy of Bret's, you clearly have bad enough judgment to
> :> be a buddy of mine. I'm letting the whole spoiler thing go, it's over
> :> now. I'll call you names next time. :-p
> :
> : Btw, no one is a buddy of Bret's. He just tolerates some people more
> : than others! (and it varies day-to-day.)
>
> That's my fault. I gave him inferiority issues with my massive
> length (off the tee).
>
> --
> Chris Bellomy
> C-List Charter Member
> http://clist.org/
That must be why he's pretty much given up the game. Poor guy.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 01:21:00
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 23 Sep 2006 17:14:40 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com >
wrote:
>When Tennessee played their opening game against Cal this year, I
>thought I was safe since I was in Illinois for a wedding. I TIVO'd the
>game and made extra efforts to avoid ESPN or any newscast that might
>leak the score before I got back home.
Have you seen _Air Force One_? That was a funny joke early in the
movie.
I heard a talk radio host (National ESPN evenings) who didn't want to
know the results of a game (Broncos-Patriots???) and when someone in
her airplane started to talk about it, put her hands over her ears,
saying la-la-la-la-la!!!
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 19:33:11
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
annika1980 wrote:
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
>>Nobody is saying not to discuss the results of the Ryder Cup real-time;
>>what they're saying is that it is considerate to tag your posts in the
>>subject line with something indicating real-time discussion (such as
>>"SPOILER"), and not putting the results in the subject line.
>>
>>If you're defending your right to post the results in the subject line,
>>well, I guess you have that right. But if you engage in that behavior
>>willfully, you're also signalling something else about yourself,
>>something pretty profound.
>
>
> If you are at the golf course and someone asks you who won the
> Michigan-Wisconsin game, do you first query everyone in the clubhouse
> to see if they'd like to hear the results before you announce them?
>
> And even that is a poor analogy because people normally don't go to the
> golf course to discuss football. But expecting people in a GOLF
> newsgroup to not talk about GOLF is idiotic. PUFFY is right on this
> one (he was way overdue). If it means that much to you to not hear the
> results, DON'T GO TO A GOLF NEWSGROUP!
Sure, we know that. But what does it cost to be considerate? Nothing,
of course.
Those who are protesting so much are confusing things here. Yes, it's
probably smart not to go to a golf newsgroup if you don't want to know
the results.
But just as surely, those of us who know about this issue have it in our
control to be considerate of others who might not have thought of this.
It's really that simple.
> When Tennessee played their opening game against Cal this year, I
> thought I was safe since I was in Illinois for a wedding. I TIVO'd the
> game and made extra efforts to avoid ESPN or any newscast that might
> leak the score before I got back home. It wasn't too tough since you
> Yankees have only a passing interest in college football. Down here,
> you couldn't go anywhere without hearing people talk about it. Anyway,
> I did great all weekend until we went to the in-laws house to say our
> goodbyes when another Tennessee couple asked, "How did the Big Orange
> do this weekend?"
> "Oh, they killed them!"
That's too bad.
This means, then, that people should go out of their way on a newsgroup
to post the results in the subject lines? Because you were caught on it
once?
Or would it be the considerate thing to simply put spoiler in the
subject line?
> I could've acted silly and put my hands over my ears and screamed,
> "Don't tell me, don't tell me!" I didn't do that because I don't have
> the right to tell someone else what they can discuss. Telling someone
> on a GOLF newsgroup to not talk about GOLF borders on the ridiculous.
> Maybe we should build a fence?
Ah, Rob, now you're doing what you always do, which is when you lose the
argument, you try to change the argument to something it wasn't.
Frosty, you know darned well that nobody who has weighed in on this has
suggested people don't talk about golf on RSG. The only--only--issue
revolves around putting something in the subject line.
Frostbite, surely even you....oops. Sorry Bret. For just a second
there, I thought you were our esteemed "Professor."
You're the last guy in the world I'd expect to sound like that.
Mike
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 19:21:41
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 23 Sep 2006 17:14:40 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com >
wrote:
>If you are at the golf course and someone asks you who won the
>Michigan-Wisconsin game, do you first query everyone in the clubhouse
>to see if they'd like to hear the results before you announce them?
>
>And even that is a poor analogy because people normally don't go to the
>golf course to discuss football. But expecting people in a GOLF
>newsgroup to not talk about GOLF is idiotic. PUFFY is right on this
>one (he was way overdue). If it means that much to you to not hear the
>results, DON'T GO TO A GOLF NEWSGROUP!
Apples/oranges Annika. It's so simple to just type one word in a
subject line on a post that will have several responses. A one time
situation.
For those that you think are ng challenged, this is just a thoughtful
thing to do.
___,
\o
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 04:52:25
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> > If you see one agreeing to my opinion, then you haven't counted very
> > well. I've read four or five actually post that they agree. I've also
> > seen quite a few subject headers that contain "Spoiler" content and
> > also quite a few subjects that did not have "Spoiler" in the header but
> > contained spoiler content. Add them all up and it's most likely dozens
> > that don't share your opinion.
>
> But again, you offer unsubstantiated speculation. And no one has
> maintained that they are right and entitled to behave like this in the
> way that you have.
>
> William Clark
Behaved like this in the way that I have? The only behavior I have
exhibited is defending my position on the topic.
As for unsubstantiated spectulation. If you can read, then you know
that I'm correct. Do you deny that there are posts out there with Ryder
Cup spoilers in the header? Do you deny that there are posts out there
without SPOILER in the header that have spoilers in the contents, even
posts that YOU have responded to?
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 09:00:58
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
In article <1159271545.662307.259310@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >,
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
> > > If you see one agreeing to my opinion, then you haven't counted very
> > > well. I've read four or five actually post that they agree. I've also
> > > seen quite a few subject headers that contain "Spoiler" content and
> > > also quite a few subjects that did not have "Spoiler" in the header but
> > > contained spoiler content. Add them all up and it's most likely dozens
> > > that don't share your opinion.
> >
> > But again, you offer unsubstantiated speculation. And no one has
> > maintained that they are right and entitled to behave like this in the
> > way that you have.
> >
> > William Clark
>
> Behaved like this in the way that I have? The only behavior I have
> exhibited is defending my position on the topic.
You have persitently claimed that it is your right to go ahead and post
anything you like (especially spoilers) without any regard to the wishes
of the vast majority of this ng. That is what you have "defended".
>
> As for unsubstantiated spectulation. If you can read, then you know
> that I'm correct. Do you deny that there are posts out there with Ryder
> Cup spoilers in the header? Do you deny that there are posts out there
> without SPOILER in the header that have spoilers in the contents, even
> posts that YOU have responded to?
Aaah, the "have you stopped beating your wife" tactic. No, sorry, but
everyone else who posted spoilers has either stopped, or apologized for
their mistake on doing so, and accepted the netiquette of this ng. You
are the only one who has loudly proclaimed that you will ignore those
wishes, and post where and what you please - to hell with everyone else.
That's the difference.
William Clark
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 05:35:21
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
>>
> If you're a buddy of Bret's, you clearly have bad enough judgment to
> be a buddy of mine. I'm letting the whole spoiler thing go, it's over
> now. I'll call you names next time. :-p
HITLER.....NAZIS.....NAZIS .... HITLER .....
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 05:01:36
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
> :> : Believe me, the names don't "hurt" me either, but I think it's much
> :> : more rude to directly call someone an asshole compared to posting
> :> : spoilers in this newsgroup.
> :>
> :> Well, that just doesn't make any sense, and in fact sets up
> :> using your own argument against you: if you don't want to be
> :> called names, what are you doing in Usenet?
> :
> : Well it does make sense. First, I said it doesn't hurt me. Second, I
> : just said that is more rude. I said nothing about not wanting to be
> : called names. Feel free to say whatever you want.
>
> OK. Purdon't blows.
>
> If you're a buddy of Bret's, you clearly have bad enough judgment to
> be a buddy of mine. I'm letting the whole spoiler thing go, it's over
> now. I'll call you names next time. :-p
>
> --
> Chris Bellomy
> C-List Charter Member
> http://clist.org/
After Purdue's performance at basketball and football the last few
years, I can't really argue with any criticism! We do have nice golf
course now though. :-)
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 14:32:10
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> If you're a buddy of Bret's, you clearly have bad enough judgment to
> be a buddy of mine. I'm letting the whole spoiler thing go, it's over
> now. I'll call you names next time. :-p
Btw, no one is a buddy of Bret's. He just tolerates some people more
than others! (and it varies day-to-day.)
:-)
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 22:08:46
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
: > If you're a buddy of Bret's, you clearly have bad enough judgment to
: > be a buddy of mine. I'm letting the whole spoiler thing go, it's over
: > now. I'll call you names next time. :-p
:
: Btw, no one is a buddy of Bret's. He just tolerates some people more
: than others! (and it varies day-to-day.)
That's my fault. I gave him inferiority issues with my massive
length (off the tee).
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 16:11:07
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> "Any of you who had ongoing threads going in rsg before the
> Ryder Cup started should put those discussions on the back
> burner until after you've seen the replay of the Cup played
> to its conclusion on Sunday so that people like me can post
> whatever we want in our Subject headers for no good reason."
>
> --
> Chris Bellomy
> C-List Charter Member
> http://clist.org/
For no good reason? As if there really is a good reason for any of
them?
Notice I never said I would put anything in the header? Have I?
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 16:09:36
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> This isn't catering to anyone's needs; it's using the ordinary social
> skills that result in being considerate of others not because you have
> to, but because you can.
>
> Nobody is saying not to discuss the results of the Ryder Cup real-time;
> what they're saying is that it is considerate to tag your posts in the
> subject line with something indicating real-time discussion (such as
> "SPOILER"), and not putting the results in the subject line.
>
> If you're defending your right to post the results in the subject line,
> well, I guess you have that right. But if you engage in that behavior
> willfully, you're also signalling something else about yourself,
> something pretty profound.
It's not "ordinary social skills". Ordinary social skills are not
calling people names, which some people have chosen to do against me on
this topic. How is it different than someone going to work and
expecting people to warn him/her before they talk about results of an
event? It is a ridiculous expectation given the real-time nature of
this forum.
And I've said over and over that I don't usually do this myself
(although I haven't gone back and checked). In the "real" world, I
probably go beyond normal etiquette when dealing with other people. I
go out of my way to do the right thing. One thing I don't do, I don't
go on the internet, anywhere, if I don't want to know the results of an
event and I certainly wouldn't be bothered if I went somewhere and it
was mentioned.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 18:36:34
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
>>This isn't catering to anyone's needs; it's using the ordinary social
>>skills that result in being considerate of others not because you have
>>to, but because you can.
>>
>>Nobody is saying not to discuss the results of the Ryder Cup real-time;
>>what they're saying is that it is considerate to tag your posts in the
>>subject line with something indicating real-time discussion (such as
>>"SPOILER"), and not putting the results in the subject line.
>>
>>If you're defending your right to post the results in the subject line,
>>well, I guess you have that right. But if you engage in that behavior
>>willfully, you're also signalling something else about yourself,
>>something pretty profound.
>
>
> It's not "ordinary social skills". Ordinary social skills are not
> calling people names, which some people have chosen to do against me on
> this topic.
I didn't call you any names.
The fact that others may or may not be considerate is irrelevant; what's
relevant is whether you employ consideration yourself.
And you are the one in control of that.
> How is it different than someone going to work and
> expecting people to warn him/her before they talk about results of an
> event? It is a ridiculous expectation given the real-time nature of
> this forum.
Expectatation? That others be considerate? Maybe.
But is anything stopping you from employing that consideration as an
expression of normal social skills?
Turn your question around: Would you, at work, intentionally tell
someone about the results of some event if you knew they didn't want to
know those results?
Would you?
> And I've said over and over that I don't usually do this myself
> (although I haven't gone back and checked).
People aren't perfect, and sometimes they slip. You can usually tell
their motivation if they're contrite after the mistake.
> In the "real" world, I
> probably go beyond normal etiquette when dealing with other people. I
> go out of my way to do the right thing. One thing I don't do, I don't
> go on the internet, anywhere, if I don't want to know the results of an
> event and I certainly wouldn't be bothered if I went somewhere and it
> was mentioned.
I do the same. But I also do not discuss real-time results on RSG while
using a subject line that gives away the results. Why don't I do that?
Because I'm trying to be considerate of others for whom it is an issue.
I think it comes down to nothing more than that.
Mike
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 13:17:59
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
In article <1159052976.167529.194120@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >,
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
> > This isn't catering to anyone's needs; it's using the ordinary social
> > skills that result in being considerate of others not because you have
> > to, but because you can.
> >
> > Nobody is saying not to discuss the results of the Ryder Cup real-time;
> > what they're saying is that it is considerate to tag your posts in the
> > subject line with something indicating real-time discussion (such as
> > "SPOILER"), and not putting the results in the subject line.
> >
> > If you're defending your right to post the results in the subject line,
> > well, I guess you have that right. But if you engage in that behavior
> > willfully, you're also signalling something else about yourself,
> > something pretty profound.
>
> It's not "ordinary social skills". Ordinary social skills are not
> calling people names, which some people have chosen to do against me on
> this topic. How is it different than someone going to work and
> expecting people to warn him/her before they talk about results of an
> event? It is a ridiculous expectation given the real-time nature of
> this forum.
There are a particular set of "social skills" that are defined for the
Usenet. When you violate them, and then follow that up with such an
arrogant disregard for others in your "justification", then you deserve
all the approbrium you get.
William Clark
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 16:02:42
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> On 23 Sep 2006 15:04:38 -0700, "Laura M" <fingerson88@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Big_Fan wrote:
> >
> >> No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
> >> do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
> >> accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
> >> to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
> >> onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
> >
> >Hey, Big_Fan....you're a Big_Asshole.
>
> That seems to be the consensus.
I love how they people who think it's rude to put spoilers in headers
think it's ok to call people names. Hypocrites.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 18:17:45
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 23 Sep 2006 16:02:42 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>> On 23 Sep 2006 15:04:38 -0700, "Laura M" <fingerson88@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Big_Fan wrote:
>> >
>> >> No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
>> >> do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
>> >> accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
>> >> to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
>> >> onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
>> >
>> >Hey, Big_Fan....you're a Big_Asshole.
>>
>> That seems to be the consensus.
>
>I love how they people who think it's rude to put spoilers in headers
>think it's ok to call people names. Hypocrites.
Well, I didn't call you anything. I just noted that you've gained a
lot of support for that specific appellation.
--
___,
\o
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 13:18:51
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
In article <1159052562.860010.161600@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >,
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
> Bobby Knight wrote:
> > On 23 Sep 2006 15:04:38 -0700, "Laura M" <fingerson88@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Big_Fan wrote:
> > >
> > >> No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
> > >> do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
> > >> accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
> > >> to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
> > >> onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
> > >
> > >Hey, Big_Fan....you're a Big_Asshole.
> >
> > That seems to be the consensus.
>
> I love how they people who think it's rude to put spoilers in headers
> think it's ok to call people names. Hypocrites.
Right, you are being SOOOOO wronged in this forum.
Shame on all of us . . . NOT!
William Clark
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 16:01:38
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Laura M wrote:
> Big_Fan wrote:
>
> > No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
> > do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
> > accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
> > to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
> > onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
>
> Hey, Big_Fan....you're a Big_Asshole.
Thanks Arrogant M, for thinking the world resolves around YOU.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 16:00:37
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: You are an exceptional idiot
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> gpsman <gpsman@driversmail.com> wrote:
> : Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip>
> :
> :> I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> :> won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> :> decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts
> : -----
> :
> : - gpsman
>
> Not an idiot, though, so much as a complete asshole who lacks
> any consideration for others whatsoever. Even worse than Stemmer!
Like I said, not as big of an asshole as you, who thinks the world
revolves around you so much that everyone should cater to your needs.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 23:25:35
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: You are an exceptional idiot
|
Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
:
: Chris Bellomy wrote:
: > gpsman <gpsman@driversmail.com> wrote:
: > : Big_Fan wrote: <brevity snip>
: > :
: > :> I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
: > :> won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
: > :> decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts
: > : -----
: > :
: > : - gpsman
: >
: > Not an idiot, though, so much as a complete asshole who lacks
: > any consideration for others whatsoever. Even worse than Stemmer!
:
: Like I said, not as big of an asshole as you, who thinks the world
: revolves around you so much that everyone should cater to your needs.
It's not my needs, dumbass, I don't really give a shit about
the Ryder Cup. But I do think about those who do and try to
have a little consideration for them.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 22:49:18
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
: This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
: discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
: they saw their recorded television coverage).
:
: This is part of the internet. On the internet you will find news
: (including sports results) real-time. Newsgroups are no different.
: People shouldn't have to dance around sports results because some
: people haven't heard them yet. If YOU don't want to hear the results,
: then don't go places were they are. Don't turn on ESPN or The Golf
: Channel or read the internet.
Shorter Big_Fan:
"Any of you who had ongoing threads going in rsg before the
Ryder Cup started should put those discussions on the back
burner until after you've seen the replay of the Cup played
to its conclusion on Sunday so that people like me can post
whatever we want in our Subject headers for no good reason."
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 15:04:38
From: Laura M
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
> do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
> accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
> to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
> onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
Hey, Big_Fan....you're a Big_Asshole.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 17:11:54
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 23 Sep 2006 15:04:38 -0700, "Laura M" <fingerson88@aol.com > wrote:
>
>Big_Fan wrote:
>
>> No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
>> do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
>> accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
>> to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
>> onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
>
>Hey, Big_Fan....you're a Big_Asshole.
That seems to be the consensus.
___,
\o
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 14:13:09
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Buford Ressup wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:36:43 -0700, Big_Fan wrote:
>
> >
> > Buford Ressup wrote:
> >> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:44:09 -0700, Big_Fan wrote:
> >>
> >> > This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
> >> > discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
> >> > they saw their recorded television coverage).
> >>
> >> No one complained about people discussing the results. What they
> >> complained about, and rightly so, was needlessly putting the results in
> >> the title of a post.
> >>
> >> The title of the post was:
> >>
> >> "Woods beats Monty - a sign of things to come?"
> >>
> >> Would it have really been that hard to title it:
> >>
> >> "A sign of things to come? <Ryder Cup SPOILER>"?
> >>
> >> How much difference would that have made?
> >>
> >> Nobody is trying to stop you from discussing the results, but some
> >> people in the U.S. would appreciate it if you would do it in the bodies
> >> of your messages instead of the titles, especially when it hasn't been
> >> shown on American TV, yet.
> >>
> >> If it offends you to be considerate of others, even on the Internet,
> >> then do as you please. No one can stop you.
> >
> > I'm not the one who created the subject.
>
> No, you're the one who claimed that people don't want you to discuss the
> results. I pointed out that you were making that up.
>
> >
> > Why should someone have to change the subject for today's results?
> > In other words, if you're so concerned about the Ryder Cup results and don't
> > want to know them, why are reading this newsgroup? Are you also avoiding
> > the front pages of all news sites (yahoo, MSNBC, etc)?
>
> Actually, I personally am not concerned about the results. Some people
> are, though. I just don't like jerks who think they should be able to do
> anything they please without the slightest consideration of others, even
> when that consideration costs them no money and no effort at all.
>
> The original poster can probably be forgiven, because he probably wasn't
> even thinking about it when he titled his thread. Accidents happen. You,
> though, are a different matter. You're continuing to defend your "right"
> to say whatever you please any time you please.
No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2006 17:54:02
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> Buford Ressup wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:36:43 -0700, Big_Fan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Buford Ressup wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:44:09 -0700, Big_Fan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>This post is a response to someone complaining about someone else
>>>>>discussing the results (either before they are shown on TV or before
>>>>>they saw their recorded television coverage).
>>>>
>>>>No one complained about people discussing the results. What they
>>>>complained about, and rightly so, was needlessly putting the results in
>>>>the title of a post.
>>>>
>>>>The title of the post was:
>>>>
>>>>"Woods beats Monty - a sign of things to come?"
>>>>
>>>>Would it have really been that hard to title it:
>>>>
>>>>"A sign of things to come? <Ryder Cup SPOILER>"?
>>>>
>>>>How much difference would that have made?
>>>>
>>>>Nobody is trying to stop you from discussing the results, but some
>>>>people in the U.S. would appreciate it if you would do it in the bodies
>>>>of your messages instead of the titles, especially when it hasn't been
>>>>shown on American TV, yet.
>>>>
>>>>If it offends you to be considerate of others, even on the Internet,
>>>>then do as you please. No one can stop you.
>>>
>>>I'm not the one who created the subject.
>>
>>No, you're the one who claimed that people don't want you to discuss the
>>results. I pointed out that you were making that up.
>>
>>
>>>Why should someone have to change the subject for today's results?
>>> In other words, if you're so concerned about the Ryder Cup results and don't
>>>want to know them, why are reading this newsgroup? Are you also avoiding
>>>the front pages of all news sites (yahoo, MSNBC, etc)?
>>
>>Actually, I personally am not concerned about the results. Some people
>>are, though. I just don't like jerks who think they should be able to do
>>anything they please without the slightest consideration of others, even
>>when that consideration costs them no money and no effort at all.
>>
>>The original poster can probably be forgiven, because he probably wasn't
>>even thinking about it when he titled his thread. Accidents happen. You,
>>though, are a different matter. You're continuing to defend your "right"
>>to say whatever you please any time you please.
>
>
> No, I don't defent my right to do whatever I want whenver I please. I
> do defend my right to discuss real-time topics that are easily
> accesssible public information on an internet forum. To expect others
> to cater to YOUR needs because YOU choose to not know real-time
> onformation is being inconsiderate to those people, not vice-versa.
>
This isn't catering to anyone's needs; it's using the ordinary social
skills that result in being considerate of others not because you have
to, but because you can.
Nobody is saying not to discuss the results of the Ryder Cup real-time;
what they're saying is that it is considerate to tag your posts in the
subject line with something indicating real-time discussion (such as
"SPOILER"), and not putting the results in the subject line.
If you're defending your right to post the results in the subject line,
well, I guess you have that right. But if you engage in that behavior
willfully, you're also signalling something else about yourself,
something pretty profound.
Mike
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 19:01:26
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
William A. T. Clark wrote:
> In article <1159233793.927820.116280@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > At best it's an outdated expectations of usegroups from the early 90's.
> > > > At worst it's an unrealistic expectation. Even as vocal as I have
> > > > been on it, even I realize that it's an opinion and a very grey area,
> > > > so stating right and wrong definitively on this incorrect. I should
> > > > have said "I care more aobut what I believe is right.....".
> > >
> > > In other words, your personal view of the world trumps everyone else's -
> > > even if they are unanimously of a different opinion.
> > >
> > > How very Generation X.
> > >
> > > William Clark
> >
> > Considering it isn't even close to being unanimous (note the people who
> > have agreed with me and the people who continue to post Ryder Cup
> > results content in their subject headers and in post content without
> > spoilers), I'm not saying my view trumps everyone.
> >
> > Also, I'm from Generation X.
>
> Well, I see about one agreeing with your insistence on being able to
> ignore the wishes of the (vast) majority.
>
> The Generation X was blindingly obvious.
>
> William Clark
Actually I meant to say not from Generation X, so I'm glad it is
blindingly obvious.
If you see one agreeing to my opinion, then you haven't counted very
well. I've read four or five actually post that they agree. I've also
seen quite a few subject headers that contain "Spoiler" content and
also quite a few subjects that did not have "Spoiler" in the header but
contained spoiler content. Add them all up and it's most likely dozens
that don't share your opinion.
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 06:48:30
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
In article <1159236086.470515.52540@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >,
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
> William A. T. Clark wrote:
> > In article <1159233793.927820.116280@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > At best it's an outdated expectations of usegroups from the early
> > > > > 90's.
> > > > > At worst it's an unrealistic expectation. Even as vocal as I have
> > > > > been on it, even I realize that it's an opinion and a very grey area,
> > > > > so stating right and wrong definitively on this incorrect. I should
> > > > > have said "I care more aobut what I believe is right.....".
> > > >
> > > > In other words, your personal view of the world trumps everyone else's
> > > > -
> > > > even if they are unanimously of a different opinion.
> > > >
> > > > How very Generation X.
> > > >
> > > > William Clark
> > >
> > > Considering it isn't even close to being unanimous (note the people who
> > > have agreed with me and the people who continue to post Ryder Cup
> > > results content in their subject headers and in post content without
> > > spoilers), I'm not saying my view trumps everyone.
> > >
> > > Also, I'm from Generation X.
> >
> > Well, I see about one agreeing with your insistence on being able to
> > ignore the wishes of the (vast) majority.
> >
> > The Generation X was blindingly obvious.
> >
> > William Clark
>
> Actually I meant to say not from Generation X, so I'm glad it is
> blindingly obvious.
Well, you certainly behave like generation X.
>
> If you see one agreeing to my opinion, then you haven't counted very
> well. I've read four or five actually post that they agree. I've also
> seen quite a few subject headers that contain "Spoiler" content and
> also quite a few subjects that did not have "Spoiler" in the header but
> contained spoiler content. Add them all up and it's most likely dozens
> that don't share your opinion.
But again, you offer unsubstantiated speculation. And no one has
maintained that they are right and entitled to behave like this in the
way that you have.
William Clark
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 17:14:01
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> : Believe me, the names don't "hurt" me either, but I think it's much
> : more rude to directly call someone an asshole compared to posting
> : spoilers in this newsgroup.
>
> Well, that just doesn't make any sense, and in fact sets up
> using your own argument against you: if you don't want to be
> called names, what are you doing in Usenet?
Well it does make sense. First, I said it doesn't hurt me. Second, I
just said that is more rude. I said nothing about not wanting to be
called names. Feel free to say whatever you want.
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 02:06:52
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
: > : Believe me, the names don't "hurt" me either, but I think it's much
: > : more rude to directly call someone an asshole compared to posting
: > : spoilers in this newsgroup.
: >
: > Well, that just doesn't make any sense, and in fact sets up
: > using your own argument against you: if you don't want to be
: > called names, what are you doing in Usenet?
:
: Well it does make sense. First, I said it doesn't hurt me. Second, I
: just said that is more rude. I said nothing about not wanting to be
: called names. Feel free to say whatever you want.
OK. Purdon't blows.
If you're a buddy of Bret's, you clearly have bad enough judgment to
be a buddy of mine. I'm letting the whole spoiler thing go, it's over
now. I'll call you names next time. :-p
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 14:27:28
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> : Marred by it huh? wow.
>
> Yeah, I did plan to watch the afternoon matches until I saw that.
> So instead I watched texas u. vs. Iowa State, which sucked.
>
So knowing you planned to watch the tape-delayed matches, you still
made a conscious decision to log onto RSG? Is this your first day on
the Internet? I think you got what you deserved and made PUFFY's point
for him.
When Tiger and Cink had their long playoff recently I enjoyed every
shot of it, because I resisted the temptation to go online knowing that
I might see the result of the tape-delayed broadcast. Use your brain,
dude.
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 21:58:44
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
annika1980 <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
:
: Chris Bellomy wrote:
: > : Marred by it huh? wow.
: >
: > Yeah, I did plan to watch the afternoon matches until I saw that.
: > So instead I watched texas u. vs. Iowa State, which sucked.
:
: So knowing you planned to watch the tape-delayed matches, you still
: made a conscious decision to log onto RSG?
Sure. I had threads I had been participating in. What was I supposed
to do, stay away until Sunday so that I could let the idiots post
whatever they wanted without repercussion?
: Is this your first day on
: the Internet? I think you got what you deserved and made PUFFY's point
: for him.
Look, Bret, NOBODY deserves tu-Iowa State. You've stepped over the
line on that one, pal.
: When Tiger and Cink had their long playoff recently I enjoyed every
: shot of it, because I resisted the temptation to go online knowing that
: I might see the result of the tape-delayed broadcast. Use your brain,
: dude.
I did. My brain told me that a bunch of inconsiderate assholes
like to screw things up for everybody else. What else is new?
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 09:40:26
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
long&left wrote:
> >
> > nah, just do what I did and stay out of here until after 3pm
> > PDT...solves the problem
>
> oh, and I'm certainly not sticking up for Big_Fan, who is IMO an
> inconsiderate asshole...
Nah, I've dealt with him online for 10 years. He's not an asshole.
He is a royal pain in the ass, however.
God, just wait until Purdue ever wins 3 games in a row. You'll see.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 11:01:55
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
annika1980 wrote:
(snip)
> God, just wait until Purdue ever wins 3 games in a row. You'll see.
>
I've only got another 25 or 30 years to live...
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 09:00:54
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> IMO you're not an asshole because of your breach of etiquette. It's
> because you're unconcerned and inconsiderate regarding your breach of
> etiquette. You don't understand that it's just as easy to be considerate
> as is to not be, and probably never will...
And you don't understand that its selfish to expect people to do
something like that in this forum, and probably never will...
And you probably don't even comprehend that calling someone an asshole
is far worse than me voicing my opinion on something that I don't even
practice myself.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 13:14:32
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
In article <1159113653.968737.320950@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >,
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
> > IMO you're not an asshole because of your breach of etiquette. It's
> > because you're unconcerned and inconsiderate regarding your breach of
> > etiquette. You don't understand that it's just as easy to be considerate
> > as is to not be, and probably never will...
>
> And you don't understand that its selfish to expect people to do
> something like that in this forum, and probably never will...
>
> And you probably don't even comprehend that calling someone an asshole
> is far worse than me voicing my opinion on something that I don't even
> practice myself.
Oh, yes, let's have the injured martyr act to deflect any more of the
well-deserved criticism. Time for a pity party for BigFan.
William Clark
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 09:21:52
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
>> IMO you're not an asshole because of your breach of etiquette. It's
>> because you're unconcerned and inconsiderate regarding your breach of
>> etiquette. You don't understand that it's just as easy to be considerate
>> as is to not be, and probably never will...
>
> And you don't understand that its selfish to expect people to do
> something like that in this forum, and probably never will...
>
> And you probably don't even comprehend that calling someone an asshole
> is far worse than me voicing my opinion on something that I don't even
> practice myself.
you have again illustrated my point...
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 08:05:19
From: gpsman
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> 3putt wrote:
> > .
> > >
> > > that's fine with me. I get really angry when the TV broadcasts sports
> > > on tape and pretends they are live. I think all sports should be
> > > broadcast LIVE.
> > >
> > Yeah, right. We were going to get up at 4 a.m. here on the East Coast to
> > watch live coverage? Given that there are plenty of sports web sites
> > reporting the activity, why try to be the 1st to post here? What's the
> > point?
> > "You da man!"?
>
> I certainly won't make a point to be the first to post here, but I
> won't avoid putting results in the subject line just because someone
> decides the must go to the newsgroup to read some posts, yet don't know
> the results and expect no one to mention it to them.
You may mention and discuss results to your heart's content but it
would be the action of a perfectly clueless idiot and asshole to insist
on publishing those results in the subject line.
People come to newgroups to discuss much more than "news" and a
newsgroup is *not* intended to discuss *only* or primarily, news. SOP
when publishing results of a recent event are to include "Spoiler" in
the subject line and any results in the message body. This is what is
known as extending a "courtesy" to fellow ng members.
It might be argued that professional tournament results are
inappropiate material for a golf ng with a title beginning with
"recreation".
> Reminds me of people who tape a big game and then expect people at work
> or their friends to not discuss the results of it in front of them
> until they get home and watch it. The world does NOT revolve around
> you. (I say to no one in particular)
Try saying it while looking in a mirror. And add "you stupid fucktard"
to the end.
-----
- gpsman
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 07:20:46
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
long&left wrote:
> long&left wrote:
> > annika1980 wrote:
> > (snip)
> >>
> >> I could've acted silly and put my hands over my ears and screamed,
> >> "Don't tell me, don't tell me!" I didn't do that because I don't have
> >> the right to tell someone else what they can discuss. Telling someone
> >> on a GOLF newsgroup to not talk about GOLF borders on the ridiculous.
> >> Maybe we should build a fence?
> >>
> >
> > nah, just do what I did and stay out of here until after 3pm
> > PDT...solves the problem
>
> oh, and I'm certainly not sticking up for Big_Fan, who is IMO an
> inconsiderate asshole...
I'm not going to comment any more on the topic, but I do find it
hilarious that I'm an asshole for voicing that opinion (although not
practicing) because it is a breach of etiquette, but intelligent people
like yourself think it's ok to call me names. Of course I'm sure that
all goes right over your head.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 08:34:39
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> long&left wrote:
>> long&left wrote:
>>> annika1980 wrote:
>>> (snip)
>>>> I could've acted silly and put my hands over my ears and screamed,
>>>> "Don't tell me, don't tell me!" I didn't do that because I don't have
>>>> the right to tell someone else what they can discuss. Telling someone
>>>> on a GOLF newsgroup to not talk about GOLF borders on the ridiculous.
>>>> Maybe we should build a fence?
>>>>
>>> nah, just do what I did and stay out of here until after 3pm
>>> PDT...solves the problem
>> oh, and I'm certainly not sticking up for Big_Fan, who is IMO an
>> inconsiderate asshole...
>
> I'm not going to comment any more on the topic, but I do find it
> hilarious that I'm an asshole for voicing that opinion (although not
> practicing) because it is a breach of etiquette, but intelligent people
> like yourself think it's ok to call me names. Of course I'm sure that
> all goes right over your head.
>
IMO you're not an asshole because of your breach of etiquette. It's
because you're unconcerned and inconsiderate regarding your breach of
etiquette. You don't understand that it's just as easy to be considerate
as is to not be, and probably never will...
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 19:29:00
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> Annika. You have more going for you than to put yourself in
> accordance with this slimeball, even if you DO agree on one topic with
> him you shouldn't reveal it.
Cronyism at it's best/worst. Your Groupthink is showing.
What qualifies him for slimeball status?
That he offered up a discussion of the need for putting SPOILER in a
post's header?
That argument gets tossed around on these boards every time there's a
Ryder Cup or Open Championship played abroad. One side says you should
be polite or correct and put the word SPOILER in the subject line.
They'll often use pussified words like "Netiquette" to make their
point. They ignore the obvious truth in what PUFFY was saying, that
anyone who doesn't wish to hear golf results discussed in real time is
a fool for visiting a golf newsgroup where such discussion is the norm.
There is no "Netiquette" that covers such a bad case of 'The Dumbass.'
Silly arguments like "How much trouble would it be to put SPOILER in
the subject line?" are easily countered with, "How much trouble is it
to not visit a golf newsgroup if you don't want to hear current golf
news discussed?" There should not be a requirement of "Netiquette" or
political correctness to appease stupid people who show up in a golf
newsgroup expecting not to hear golf talk. That would be like going
into a political newsgroup on election night and expecting not to hear
the results.
What's next? Shall we also fill the first page of the screen with blank
text just in case some idiot accidentally clicked on the post which
said "SPOILER?"
The telling thing about all this is that the brouhaha didn't start with
any complaints from someone who didn't want to hear results. It
started from the usual suspects ("cronies")who just love to argue about
minutiae. PUFFY made a post warning everyone that he'd be discussing RC
results in real time and he gets called a bunch of names for not seeing
the need to put "SPOILER" in the subject line of future posts. His
original post in this thread was the SPOILER, not to mention a fine
troll which brought out the usual name-calling. The guy (Elroy) who
posted the "10-6" thread emerged relatively unscathed by comparison.
It's clear that many of you just had a hard-on for PUFFY and couldn't
wait to attack him. Well back the fuck off! That's my job!
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 21:51:47
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 24 Sep 2006 19:29:00 -0700, "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com >
wrote:
>
>Bobby Knight wrote:
>> Annika. You have more going for you than to put yourself in
>> accordance with this slimeball, even if you DO agree on one topic with
>> him you shouldn't reveal it.
>
>Cronyism at it's best/worst. Your Groupthink is showing.
Don't be sophomoric. I'm speaking for myself, as I always do and you
know it. The catchphrase groupthink is below you.
>
>What qualifies him for slimeball status?
>That he offered up a discussion of the need for putting SPOILER in a
>post's header?
Nope. Just the continuing bullshit that he throws out.
>The telling thing about all this is that the brouhaha didn't start with
>any complaints from someone who didn't want to hear results. It
>started from the usual suspects ("cronies")who just love to argue about
>minutiae.
Well, we had a death in the immediate family, I only checked my
computer once or twice in the last week until today, and I have no
idea who all has replied to him, or what was said. Sso again, you're
making the simple mistake of assuming that there's some kind of
in-step thinking on my part. You need to drop the "crony" crap. That
also puts you in step with some other really low-life pricks... plus
you know better.
> PUFFY made a post warning everyone that he'd be discussing RC
>results in real time and he gets called a bunch of names for not seeing
>the need to put "SPOILER" in the subject line of future posts.
His "warning" was just a preemptive effort to pissing as many off as
he could. You might call it a troll, but I look at it as someone
being a smart-ass. "I'm gonna fuck with you even though I obviously
know it's being an asshole"....what kind of response did he expect to
that.
<clip >
>It's clear that many of you just had a hard-on for PUFFY and couldn't
>wait to attack him. Well back the fuck off! That's my job!
>Well back the fuck off! That's my job!
I waited longer than I should have. He's an asshole, and it is
obvious that you know tha tfrom another news group...but you agree
about the spoiler issue. That's what I can't understand, mainly
because of the lame analogies that you offered.
Like you even have a thought that I'd back off, even if you were doing
your job effectively. :-)
--
___,
\o
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 17:33:44
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> well, maybe...but you see, the difference between you and I is that I
> don't care what you think of me...you obviously care plenty what
> everyone around here thinks of you. How many posts today? 20+ or there
> abouts? In which you are defending your Usenet honor so we will all
> think better of you??
>
> nah, ain't gonna happen
Yes, I'm defending my honor. That's what it is.
I care more about what is right than what people think of me.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 19:35:27
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
>>well, maybe...but you see, the difference between you and I is that I
>>don't care what you think of me...you obviously care plenty what
>>everyone around here thinks of you. How many posts today? 20+ or there
>>abouts? In which you are defending your Usenet honor so we will all
>>think better of you??
>>
>>nah, ain't gonna happen
>
>
> Yes, I'm defending my honor. That's what it is.
>
> I care more about what is right than what people think of me.
>
We know. Except you're not right.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 11:41:15
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> There are a particular set of "social skills" that are defined for the
> Usenet. When you violate them, and then follow that up with such an
> arrogant disregard for others in your "justification", then you deserve
> all the approbrium you get.
>
> William Clark
Wow, I'd hate to see how you feel about jaywalking. The death penalty?
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 20:43:05
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
On 24 Sep 2006 11:41:15 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
>> There are a particular set of "social skills" that are defined for the
>> Usenet. When you violate them, and then follow that up with such an
>> arrogant disregard for others in your "justification", then you deserve
>> all the approbrium you get.
>>
>> William Clark
>
>Wow, I'd hate to see how you feel about jaywalking. The death penalty?
Look up the word approbrium. Your thinking, as well as your attitude
here is third grade level. I didn't call you a name earlier, but that
was my mistake. Asshole. Schmuck. Dickbreath....and most of all,
moron.
Don't bother to reply, the only was to deal with shit like you is to
place your posts where they will never see my computer screen.
Annika. You have more going for you than to put yourself in
accordance with this slimeball, even if you DO agree on one topic with
him you shouldn't reveal it.
--
___,
\o
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 11:34:26
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
long&left wrote:
> Big_Fan wrote:
> >> IMO you're not an asshole because of your breach of etiquette. It's
> >> because you're unconcerned and inconsiderate regarding your breach of
> >> etiquette. You don't understand that it's just as easy to be considerate
> >> as is to not be, and probably never will...
> >
> > And you don't understand that its selfish to expect people to do
> > something like that in this forum, and probably never will...
> >
> > And you probably don't even comprehend that calling someone an asshole
> > is far worse than me voicing my opinion on something that I don't even
> > practice myself.
>
> you have again illustrated my point...
That you are inconsiderate as well?
It's funny how some people feel that when someone is an asshole, then
they can say or do whatever they like to that person, yet don't think
it reflects poorly on them. Amazing.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 16:26:01
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> long&left wrote:
>> Big_Fan wrote:
>>>> IMO you're not an asshole because of your breach of etiquette. It's
>>>> because you're unconcerned and inconsiderate regarding your breach of
>>>> etiquette. You don't understand that it's just as easy to be considerate
>>>> as is to not be, and probably never will...
>>> And you don't understand that its selfish to expect people to do
>>> something like that in this forum, and probably never will...
>>>
>>> And you probably don't even comprehend that calling someone an asshole
>>> is far worse than me voicing my opinion on something that I don't even
>>> practice myself.
>> you have again illustrated my point...
>
> That you are inconsiderate as well?
>
> It's funny how some people feel that when someone is an asshole, then
> they can say or do whatever they like to that person, yet don't think
> it reflects poorly on them. Amazing.
>
well, maybe...but you see, the difference between you and I is that I
don't care what you think of me...you obviously care plenty what
everyone around here thinks of you. How many posts today? 20+ or there
abouts? In which you are defending your Usenet honor so we will all
think better of you??
nah, ain't gonna happen
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2006 11:32:56
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
long&left wrote:
> annika1980 wrote:
> (snip)
> > God, just wait until Purdue ever wins 3 games in a row. You'll see.
> >
>
> I've only got another 25 or 30 years to live...
Sat, Sep 2 Indiana State W 60-35
Sat, Sep 9 Miami (OH) W 38-31
Sat, Sep 16 Ball State W 38-28
Sat, Sep 23 Minnesota W 27-21
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 06:55:46
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
> I guess I missed that. Perhaps you could list all the intelligent
> people who are agreeing with you on this topic, that is, that it's just
> fine to be intentionally inconsiderate of others?
That's your interpretation of the topic after you tried to twist it.
What PUFFY said in his original post was that he didn't see the need to
put SPOILER in the subject line of a post in a golf newsgroup.
Everything else is spin.
I agreed with him as did R&B, to name just two. Now I'm just "an
uneducated redneck loser," but Randy is pretty smart.
Our point is that talking about golf results in real time without
putting SPOILER in the subject line isn't inconsiderate at all. It is
what is expected in a golf newsgroup. Trying to get everyone else to
embrace your silly idea of Netiquette is inconsiderate. Going into a
golf newsgroup with the expectation that nobody will mention the golf
scores because you don't want to hear them yet is inconsiderate of
others, dontcha think?
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 11:21:19
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
annika1980 wrote:
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
>>I guess I missed that. Perhaps you could list all the intelligent
>>people who are agreeing with you on this topic, that is, that it's just
>>fine to be intentionally inconsiderate of others?
>
>
> That's your interpretation of the topic after you tried to twist it.
It was never twisted. There have always been two issues: Whether
people who want to avoid knowing should peruse RSG, and whether it is in
considerate to post the info in the header intentionally, knowing that
it may spoil others' enjoyment.
Couldn't be clearer, and there is no twisting.
> What PUFFY said in his original post was that he didn't see the need to
> put SPOILER in the subject line of a post in a golf newsgroup.
> Everything else is spin.
I'm sorry, Bret--you're right so often that it's a shock when you
aren't, but in this case you should read the entire thread.
> I agreed with him as did R&B, to name just two. Now I'm just "an
> uneducated redneck loser," but Randy is pretty smart.
So I'll ask you: Do you think it's good to be inconsiderate? Is that
your stance here?
Doesn't sound all that smart to me.
> Our point is that talking about golf results in real time without
> putting SPOILER in the subject line isn't inconsiderate at all. It is
> what is expected in a golf newsgroup. Trying to get everyone else to
> embrace your silly idea of Netiquette is inconsiderate. Going into a
> golf newsgroup with the expectation that nobody will mention the golf
> scores because you don't want to hear them yet is inconsiderate of
> others, dontcha think?
This isn't about netiquette; it's about someone intentionally trying to
screw up others' enjoyment. How could it be simpler?
Answer: It couldn't.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2005 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2005/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 05:27:07
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Bobby Knight wrote:
> On 24 Sep 2006 11:41:15 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> There are a particular set of "social skills" that are defined for the
> >> Usenet. When you violate them, and then follow that up with such an
> >> arrogant disregard for others in your "justification", then you deserve
> >> all the approbrium you get.
> >>
> >> William Clark
> >
> >Wow, I'd hate to see how you feel about jaywalking. The death penalty?
>
> Look up the word approbrium. Your thinking, as well as your attitude
> here is third grade level. I didn't call you a name earlier, but that
> was my mistake. Asshole. Schmuck. Dickbreath....and most of all,
> moron.
>
> Don't bother to reply, the only was to deal with shit like you is to
> place your posts where they will never see my computer screen.
>
> Annika. You have more going for you than to put yourself in
> accordance with this slimeball, even if you DO agree on one topic with
> him you shouldn't reveal it.
Don't you think you're overreacting a bit on my comment? Give me a
break. Quite a few people have agreed with my opinion on this.
Several intelligent people I might add, so you're insulting them with
the "third grade level" comment as well as me. (not that I care)
With all the crap follows around here, for my comments on a meaningless
topic to get under your skin that badly is quite sad.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 08:43:00
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> Bobby Knight wrote:
>
>>On 24 Sep 2006 11:41:15 -0700, "Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>There are a particular set of "social skills" that are defined for the
>>>>Usenet. When you violate them, and then follow that up with such an
>>>>arrogant disregard for others in your "justification", then you deserve
>>>>all the approbrium you get.
>>>>
>>>>William Clark
>>>
>>>Wow, I'd hate to see how you feel about jaywalking. The death penalty?
>>
>>Look up the word approbrium. Your thinking, as well as your attitude
>>here is third grade level. I didn't call you a name earlier, but that
>>was my mistake. Asshole. Schmuck. Dickbreath....and most of all,
>>moron.
>>
>>Don't bother to reply, the only was to deal with shit like you is to
>>place your posts where they will never see my computer screen.
>>
>>Annika. You have more going for you than to put yourself in
>>accordance with this slimeball, even if you DO agree on one topic with
>>him you shouldn't reveal it.
>
>
> Don't you think you're overreacting a bit on my comment? Give me a
> break. Quite a few people have agreed with my opinion on this.
Quite a few? I'd say that a very few have supported you, and the
majority have been vocal in identifying what they see (my
interpretation) as a very self-centered approach on your part.
> Several intelligent people I might add,
I guess I missed that. Perhaps you could list all the intelligent
people who are agreeing with you on this topic, that is, that it's just
fine to be intentionally inconsiderate of others?
> so you're insulting them with
> the "third grade level" comment as well as me. (not that I care)
Well, it's not clear yet if anyone's been insulted. What is the list of
these intelligent people, so we can see if in fact your characterization
of them has merit?
> With all the crap follows around here, for my comments on a meaningless
> topic to get under your skin that badly is quite sad.
Meaningless? Why, then, did you comment on it?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2005 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2005/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 08:35:07
From: Bert Robbins
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
>
> With all the crap follows around here, for my comments on a meaningless
> topic to get under your skin that badly is quite sad.
>
I think you have that backwards. It appears that every other person here
is getting under your skin and you just can't let the subject drop.
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 05:24:35
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Mike Dalecki wrote:
> Big_Fan wrote:
> >>well, maybe...but you see, the difference between you and I is that I
> >>don't care what you think of me...you obviously care plenty what
> >>everyone around here thinks of you. How many posts today? 20+ or there
> >>abouts? In which you are defending your Usenet honor so we will all
> >>think better of you??
> >>
> >>nah, ain't gonna happen
> >
> >
> > Yes, I'm defending my honor. That's what it is.
> >
> > I care more about what is right than what people think of me.
> >
>
> We know. Except you're not right.
At best it's an outdated expectations of usegroups from the early 90's.
At worst it's an unrealistic expectation. Even as vocal as I have
been on it, even I realize that it's an opinion and a very grey area,
so stating right and wrong definitively on this incorrect. I should
have said "I care more aobut what I believe is right.....".
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 08:39:20
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
>>Big_Fan wrote:
>>
>>>>well, maybe...but you see, the difference between you and I is that I
>>>>don't care what you think of me...you obviously care plenty what
>>>>everyone around here thinks of you. How many posts today? 20+ or there
>>>>abouts? In which you are defending your Usenet honor so we will all
>>>>think better of you??
>>>>
>>>>nah, ain't gonna happen
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, I'm defending my honor. That's what it is.
>>>
>>>I care more about what is right than what people think of me.
>>>
>>
>>We know. Except you're not right.
>
>
> At best it's an outdated expectations of usegroups from the early 90's.
That's not what this is about, and it's amazing you can't see that.
You said (paraphrasing) that you would do what you want, and it didn't
matter if it hurt others' enjoyment.
That makes you inconsiderate, if that is in fact your stance here. This
has nothing to do with "outdated expectations;" it has everything to do
with trying to be considerate of others.
> At worst it's an unrealistic expectation.
That isn't what this is about, and you know it.
> Even as vocal as I have
> been on it, even I realize that it's an opinion and a very grey area,
> so stating right and wrong definitively on this incorrect. I should
> have said "I care more aobut what I believe is right.....".
So you believe it's just fine to be inconsiderate? Because, my friend,
that's the way it's playing out here.
Is that in fact your position, or have I misread you?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2005 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2005/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 13:55:51
From: William A. T. Clark
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
In article <1159187075.616384.112770@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com >,
"Big_Fan" <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
> > Big_Fan wrote:
> > >>well, maybe...but you see, the difference between you and I is that I
> > >>don't care what you think of me...you obviously care plenty what
> > >>everyone around here thinks of you. How many posts today? 20+ or there
> > >>abouts? In which you are defending your Usenet honor so we will all
> > >>think better of you??
> > >>
> > >>nah, ain't gonna happen
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, I'm defending my honor. That's what it is.
> > >
> > > I care more about what is right than what people think of me.
> > >
> >
> > We know. Except you're not right.
>
> At best it's an outdated expectations of usegroups from the early 90's.
> At worst it's an unrealistic expectation. Even as vocal as I have
> been on it, even I realize that it's an opinion and a very grey area,
> so stating right and wrong definitively on this incorrect. I should
> have said "I care more aobut what I believe is right.....".
In other words, your personal view of the world trumps everyone else's -
even if they are unanimously of a different opinion.
How very Generation X.
William Clark
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 19:13:07
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> So you believe it's just fine to be inconsiderate? Because, my friend,
> that's the way it's playing out here.
>
> Is that in fact your position, or have I misread you?
I'm never intentionally inconsiderate, but that's the point of debate
here. I don't think that the act (while I don't perform it that I know
of) is inconsiderate. At best I consider this disagreement similar to
a debate about whether the toiler paper roll should hang down near the
wall or away from it. The responses to my opinion make me thing that
it's similar to me calling your mother a bad name.
And even if I considered the act (of posting spoilers) to be
inconsiderate, I would rate it about 1 on the scale of 1 to 10. I
certainly wouldn't consider it worthy of getting called names, etc.
Btw, which do you consider more inconsiderate. The act of posting
spoilers or calling someone names because they don't have a problem
with people posting spoilers?
That reminds me (as I'm rambling), what about responding to a thread
that has spoilers but no spoiler warning? I've read several posts from
people who have raked me over the coals on this issue posting in a
thread like that.
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 02:25:31
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan <bigpufan@aol.com > wrote:
: Btw, which do you consider more inconsiderate. The act of posting
: spoilers or calling someone names because they don't have a problem
: with people posting spoilers?
Posting spoilers. I've been called every name imaginable, that's
never hurt me once. My Saturday afternoon was marred by the 10-6
thread, though.
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 19:12:04
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> So you believe it's just fine to be inconsiderate? Because, my friend,
> that's the way it's playing out here.
>
> Is that in fact your position, or have I misread you?
I'm never intentionally inconsiderate, but that's the point of debate
here. I don't think that the act (while I don't perform it that I know
of) is inconsiderate. At best I consider this disagreement similar to
a debate about whether the toiler paper roll should hang down near the
wall or away from it. The responses to my opinion make me thing that
it's similar to me calling your mother a bad name.
And even if I considered the act (of posting spoilers) to be
inconsiderate, I would rate it about 1 on the scale of 1 to 10. I
certainly wouldn't consider it worthy of getting called names, etc.
Btw, which do you consider more inconsiderate. The act of posting
spoilers or calling someone names because they don't have a problem
with people posting spoilers?
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 18:31:04
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
>
> Actually, I just felt like arguing. I think I argued with Bret for
> about two months back in '94 on whether the US Amateur is a major.
It was a Major then and it's still a Major now.
Dumbass!
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:48:27
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Chris Bellomy wrote:
> annika1980 <annika1980@aol.com> wrote:
> :
> : Mike Dalecki wrote:
> :> So I'll ask you: Do you think it's good to be inconsiderate? Is that
> :> your stance here?
> :
> : Well, give me an example of being inconsiderate.
> : I maintain that omitting "SPOILER" in the header is not one.
>
> What about posting spoilers in the header itself?
Like the many posts over the last 3 days that have them?
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:46:56
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
> > With all the crap follows around here, for my comments on a meaningless
> > topic to get under your skin that badly is quite sad.
> >
>
> I think you have that backwards. It appears that every other person here
> is getting under your skin and you just can't let the subject drop.
Actually, I just felt like arguing. I think I argued with Bret for
about two months back in '94 on whether the US Amateur is a major.
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:45:37
From: Big_Fan
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
>
> This isn't about netiquette; it's about someone intentionally trying to
> screw up others' enjoyment. How could it be simpler?
>
> Answer: It couldn't.
No, it is about netiquette. I said that I wouldn't intentionally do it.
I don't believe I have done it in the past and I don't plan on doing
it. BUT, if I do unintentionally do it, I don't think it's that big of
a deal, just like the many posts in the last two days that have
referred to the results of the Ryder Cup in their subject line.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 21:31:52
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Big_Fan wrote:
>>This isn't about netiquette; it's about someone intentionally trying to
>>screw up others' enjoyment. How could it be simpler?
>>
>>Answer: It couldn't.
>
>
> No, it is about netiquette. I said that I wouldn't intentionally do it.
> I don't believe I have done it in the past and I don't plan on doing
> it. BUT, if I do unintentionally do it, I don't think it's that big of
> a deal, just like the many posts in the last two days that have
> referred to the results of the Ryder Cup in their subject line.
>
I'll buy that. The whole idea--which emanated from your commentary
early in this thread--was whether you'd do that intentionally since
someone who doens't want to know should avoid RSG.
That was the whole point--not that people shouldn't discuss it, but that
the considerate thing to do is to not include results in the subject line.
That was all
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:24:15
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
Mike Dalecki wrote:
> So I'll ask you: Do you think it's good to be inconsiderate? Is that
> your stance here?
Well, give me an example of being inconsiderate.
I maintain that omitting "SPOILER" in the header is not one.
As far as online behavior goes, I've always been closer to the
"Anything goes" camp than the "Let's worry about what someone else
thinks" group. However, I'll draw the line at some things, such as
posting personal info about someone or threatening to call someone's
employer.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 21:42:07
From: Chris Bellomy
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
annika1980 <annika1980@aol.com > wrote:
:
: Mike Dalecki wrote:
: > So I'll ask you: Do you think it's good to be inconsiderate? Is that
: > your stance here?
:
: Well, give me an example of being inconsiderate.
: I maintain that omitting "SPOILER" in the header is not one.
What about posting spoilers in the header itself?
--
Chris Bellomy
C-List Charter Member
http://clist.org/
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 16:28:43
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Warning - I will be discussing Ryder Cup results real-time.
|
annika1980 wrote:
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
>>So I'll ask you: Do you think it's good to be inconsiderate? Is that
>>your stance here?
>
>
> Well, give me an example of being inconsiderate.
> I maintain that omitting "SPOILER" in the header is not one.
Doing it accidentally or without knowing better? Not inconsiderate.
Doing it on purpose when it takes no extra effort to do otherwise?
Inconsiderate.
>
> As far as online behavior goes, I've always been closer to the
> "Anything goes" camp than the "Let's worry about what someone else
> thinks" group. However, I'll draw the line at some things, such as
> posting personal info about someone or threatening to call someone's
> employer.
>
I know you do. But i don't agree it's inconsiderate; I think it's much
more than that.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
