Re: For crying out loud - it's only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
- From: Rod <kc0oeb@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2008 22:12:04 GMT
Yowie wrote:
A John 3:16 Whosoever wrote:On Apr 7, 2:13 pm, "Yowie" <yowie9644.DIESPAM...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Engineer wrote:If I may be so bold...Robert of St Louis wrote:So is this group effectively dead (or would The Light best be servedFuck You David....I am bowing out of this group...you have ruinedAlas, I feel the same way. For a while, I had hope that we could
it and made it the the David Know It All group. I have nothing to
learn from your domination of the group. I plan to find some
sincere folks interest in Quakers instead of being full of
themselves. You can have this group on a silver platter and I will
tell any of my friends ,who might show an interested in FRIENDS,
not to waste their time here listening to your bullshit.
agree to not respond to him or to the crossposted flamewars he
invites here, but it seems that is not to be. The sad irony is
that the same people who stubbornly resist the idea of not replying
(and I am NOT talking about the one wise soul who tried replying
only to non-abusive posts; that was a good idea even if it didn't
work out) -- or who stubbornly resist the idea of not joining in
when David invites some jews and Atheists to do their fighting here
-- are the first to throw up their hands and quit when they see the
fruits of their behavior. Eventually, even the ones such as you
[ Robert of St Louis ] who never add to the abuse get tired of it
and leave, and who can blame you? Even if you stayed, what are
the chances of attracting even one new user who wishes to talk
about quakerism?
if we declared it dead and let it lie?) Do Whiskers, jeb, Ian &
Jenny agree? What about Faith, haven't seen her for a while but
would like to before we part ways (if we do)? Still, if it *is*
Dead, there are other Quaker forums to fall back on (although I'm
not as active there).
Group discernment, please ( if I have the right to ask for it. )
It's only a Usenet Newsgroup, people - not a church, not a meeting
house, not even a "fellowship". If you want to have a moderated
Quaker group, go for it. But to honestly believe that a public,
unmoderated internet forum won't ever be populated by those you don't
want to be around, associate with, or read is just plain ridiculous,
and quite unrealistic.
No, its not a church, or a meeting house or a fellowship, but Usenet groups are often communities of people who have whatever-the-topic-of-the-newsgroup-is in common.
You may think of SRQ as 'just another newsgroup', but it isn't to me, isn't to Engineer, isn't to Whiskers or Jeb, and even to David or Hendry in their own ways. Its something we care about and wish to contunue with as we found some benefit in talking about Quaker issues on a forum that is about the Quaker religion.
Usenet is like talk-radio: don't take it so doggone seriously because
when you get down to the core it's really just entertainment.
Its not *just* entertainment. For some of us - me - it is the closest thing I've got to a Quaker meeting as I can't practically get to one in real life, and has been a wonderful and informative forum to explore the faith in Jesus that I thought I had to give up because I couldn't stand main stream churches and thought (mistakenly) that Wicca was about as good as spirituality got. Its a sounding board, a discussion forum, a place to discuss thoughts, ideas, spiritual events etc etc. Until about a year ago, the discussions - whilst often passionate - were rarely rude, or derogatory, they weren't mono-maniacal and even our 'mission posters' debated fairly well. It was an example of what Quakerism - even on an unmoderated forum - could acheive.
Then the crossposting from other forums started. The crossposters weren't the least bit itnerested in Quakerism or what it said (at least the previous mission posters wished to address Quakerism and the faults they perceivd in it). They were asked to stop crossposting, and the folks who cared about and respected newsgroups and what they can actually acheive - stopped. But there are some who, like hte folks who piss on church doors, didn't give a rat's arse about social norms, about communities, about accepted behaviour and respecting other's wishes, who didn't care about any of the other usenet users who have been using Usenet to form communities and have meaningful, useful discussions & interactions, who had no respect for folks who simply wanted their own small corner of usenet to discuss the topic of the group, who just kept crossposting their excretions as if the whole of Usenet was their own personal urinal. Bigger groups can survive this flood of excretia, as they can keep the signal to noise ratio reasonably high, bt a small group like SRQ just can't keep it up - and thus anyone 'dropping by' sees the majority of crossposting excretia and are turned off, and even regulars get sick of wading though the sewage and leave for more fruitful discussions.
Maybe those of us who have had a long and successful 'career' on Usenet are anachronisms. Those of who value the communities that form in each Usenet group, the different cultures that appear in each newsgroup, built by each poster contributing into something that is bigger than the sum of the postings. Those of us who are excited by the free exchange of ideas on particular subjects through the written forum, who enjoy the ebb and flow of a passionate, heated and yet respectful discussion. Those of us who don't type in txt and still understand (and attempt to keep) netiquette, us old folks.
Perhaps Usenet, because of the lack of respect and udnerstand of what this old backwater part of the internet is, will eventually die as us old fogies become more and more disgusted by "the endless september". But until it does, there are at least two people in this here little old backwater forum on the outer edge of the usenet forums who still give a shit about Usenet in general and SRQ in particular, who know that Usenet can work perfectly well without any moderation, and who are somewhat dissapointed that SRQ couldn't work in that way too.
So yes, I take it seriously. I know Engineer does too. I'd suggest that the other few regular posters here also found more meaning here than "just entertainment". There are much more amusing, entertaining groups on Usenet that SRQ, if you really see it as 'just entertainement' and not something that has at least the potential to be alot more, I wonder why you are posting to a Quaker forum at all. Do you have any interest in Quakerism at all or did you just come here because playing with David (and Rod before him) amused you?
Yowie
Don't let it go Yowie..you have a sweet little gem here, a very nice place to share and learn, though quakerism seems to be absent.
Rod
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Declare it dead and move on?
- From: Yowie
- For crying out loud - it's only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
- From: A John 3:16 Whosoever
- Re: For crying out loud - it's only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
- From: Yowie
- Declare it dead and move on?
- Prev by Date: Re: For crying out loud - it's only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
- Next by Date: Re: For crying out loud - it's only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
- Previous by thread: Re: For crying out loud - it's only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
- Next by thread: Re: For crying out loud - it's only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
