TdF aus.bicycle nettiquite

Blah wrote:
It'd be nice if I could - but it's interesting that people are only
arguing about their "right" to spoil people's enjoyment; they're not
actually doing it. Strange...
That's my two cents, read you after 6.30 tomorrow. Cheers.



Well, it seems we have two distinct points of view on this - yay team.


I don't think it's a "'right'to spoil people's enjoyment": much like 5
y.o.s and potty, sometimes we're so excited, it just comes bursting out
But seriously, why should we care when any particular TV channel
deigns to give us a few minutes of actual race coverage, arbitrarily
chopped up by some unknown, unnamed editor somewhere, with no sense of
continuity, no sense of the flow of things, just whatever spectacular
fits into about 15 actual minutes of camera footage of guys on bikes.
They have to buy it off the French networks, and buy Mike, Paul, Phil et
al's gobtime, I suppose.

If we lived in Europe, we'd get it on several channels, for as long as
we wanted, as it happened. I don't see why SBS's cut-and-shut
editorialising has to rule what we all write about when we've got the
chance to, which, for me, is in the mornings before tootling off to talk
about Shrek and giraffes and bunny wabbits and Milo and basic human
kindness to youngsters too young to know what a derailleur is. Not that
I don't enjoy work . . .

Spoiler space seems to be what Buffy fans use to bitch about the
characters, in my limited experience. I much prefer if people can
moderate their own net usage, rather than us have to steer round
sensitive topics. "Whatever you do, don't mention the war!" Why not just
avoid likely threads before 6pm? or 10.20 pm tonight.

Goody!



M"Gotta love Bike Ed"H



--

"mfhor" wrote in message


[...]

Spoiler space seems to be what Buffy fans use to bitch about the
characters, in my limited experience. I much prefer if people can
moderate their own net usage, rather than us have to steer round
sensitive topics. "Whatever you do, don't mention the war!" Why not
just avoid likely threads before 6pm? or 10.20 pm tonight.

I repeat: nobody is asking anyone to not discuss anything. You don't have
to steer around anything. You can discuss what you like when you like. All
you are being asked to do is buffer what you write according to accepted
Usenet practice in these situations so it won't catch out anybody who
doesn't want to see it yet. And you're too bloody selfish even for that
modicum of consideration towards others. God help the kids in your care.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

mfhor wrote in message ...
Blah wrote:


I don't think it's a "'right'to spoil people's enjoyment": much like 5
y.o.s and potty, sometimes we're so excited, it just comes bursting out
But seriously, why should we care when any particular TV channel
deigns to give us a few minutes of actual race coverage, arbitrarily
chopped up by some unknown, unnamed editor somewhere, with no sense of
continuity, no sense of the flow of things, just whatever spectacular
fits into about 15 actual minutes of camera footage of guys on bikes.
They have to buy it off the French networks, and buy Mike, Paul, Phil et
al's gobtime, I suppose.

Read back a few months - that ignorant prat Tomalaris and SBS' dodgy
approach to anything without a soccer ball involved have certainly
been a source of my ire for a few years.


I much prefer if people can
moderate their own net usage, rather than us have to steer round
sensitive topics. "Whatever you do, don't mention the war!" Why not just
avoid likely threads before 6pm? or 10.20 pm tonight.

Did you read my post? Exactly what I do is avoid the NG before 6.30
(6.24; love to get 1/2 an hour of coverage, but oh well). I don't
think anyone wants people to 'steer around' topics, just title them
something like 'TdF Stage 5' rather than 'Stuie wins TdF Stage 5'. I
think we're arguing (are we? hope not) semantics - nobody has blown it
before I've experienced (big word, but it's as close as I'll get until
long service leave some time around 2010) the race for myself.

Staying up tonight? I know I am - I bet they leave us hanging for at
least the 35min to 11pm before they go live. That's my optimistic
side, of course... they couldn't have a whole hour of crapping on,
could they?
Cheers.

"Marty Wallace" writes:

"? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}" wrote in message
...
"Marty Wallace" writes:
[...]
Well said!

I don't wish to sound rude but could you please trim down your replies?
[...]
You do sound rude.
My reply consisted of only two words.

Sorry I wasn't quite clear, I ment trip the quotes in your replies.
You don't have to include the whole of what the person said, just
enough to remind us what the person was saying.

--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.

Drs wrote:
[B I repeat: nobody is asking anyone to not discuss anything. You don't
have to steer around anything. You can discuss what you like when you
like. All you are being asked to do is buffer what you write according
to accepted Usenet practice in these situations so it won't catch out
anybody who doesn't want to see it yet. And you're too bloody selfish
even for that modicum of consideration towards others. God help the kids
in your care.




"bloody selfish" ???

Accepted Usenet practice seems to be whatever you deem it to be, so I'll
just continue to discuss what I think is newsworthy, and you can
continue to receive whatever the cheeseheads at SBS filter, in their
inordinate and unfathomable wisdom, down to whoever's still got their
head in the sand at 6pm next day.

You are abusive and rude. Your manners would not be tolerated in any
forum except this.

I find that people who are afraid of the world attempt to regulate
what (and how) others say and think by bureaucratic and systemic
strictures. If you want to limit your view of the world (i.e. delay
your knowledge of a thing already in the public domain) then the onus
is on you. You can self-censor, but don't try and do it to anyone
else, because I, and all the rest of us iconoclasts, will call you an
anal retentive control-freak hyper-bureaucrat, whether you deserve it
or not in any particular instance.

I teach my kids to go to the toilet when they need to, and not get all
uptight by holding it in. I believe prunes are very good for this. You
should try some.

M "bound up by the weather, not selfrighteousness"H



--

mfhor wrote:
"bloody selfish" ???
[snip]
I teach my kids to go to the toilet when they need to, and not get all
uptight by holding it in. I believe prunes are very good for this. You
should try some.
M "bound up by the weather, not selfrighteousness"H



Yes, yes, yes alright. Drs might be grating, but if we all just put
"spoiler" in the subject line, we'll all get along a bit better! It
costs nothing, but it is worth a bit of peace! (please)

Ritch



--

"? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}" wrote in message
...
"Marty Wallace" writes:

"? the Platypus {aka David Formosa}" wrote in
message
...
"Marty Wallace" writes:
[...]
Well said!

I don't wish to sound rude but could you please trim down your
replies?
[...]
You do sound rude.
My reply consisted of only two words.

Sorry I wasn't quite clear, I ment trip the quotes in your replies.
You don't have to include the whole of what the person said, just
enough to remind us what the person was saying.

--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.

And what was the person saying?

Marty

"mfhor" wrote in message

Drs wrote:
[B I repeat: nobody is asking anyone to not discuss anything. You
don't have to steer around anything. You can discuss what you
like when you like. All you are being asked to do is buffer what
you write according to accepted Usenet practice in these
situations so it won't catch out anybody who doesn't want to see
it yet. And you're too bloody selfish even for that modicum of
consideration towards others. God help the kids in your care.

"bloody selfish" ???

Yes, you are.

Accepted Usenet practice seems to be whatever you deem it to be, so

You are wrong. Everything I have said on matters of Usenet etiquette is
exactly to the contrary of that.

I'll just continue to discuss what I think is newsworthy, and you can
continue to receive whatever the cheeseheads at SBS filter, in their
inordinate and unfathomable wisdom, down to whoever's still got their
head in the sand at 6pm next day.

Then do it on your web forum and not in here. This is Usenet and you are
simply being asked to do things the Usenet way.

You are abusive and rude. Your manners would not be tolerated in any
forum except this.

Strawman. This is about you, not me.

I find that people who are afraid of the world attempt to regulate
what (and how) others say and think by bureaucratic and systemic

Strawman. Nobody is trying to regulate what you say. You are merely being
asked to show others a modicum of consideration and all you can do is expend
time and effort on spurious arguments trying to justify your right to be
selfish and obnoxious.

strictures. If you want to limit your view of the world (i.e. delay
your knowledge of a thing already in the public domain) then the onus
is on you. You can self-censor, but don't try and do it to anyone
else, because I, and all the rest of us iconoclasts, will call you an
anal retentive control-freak hyper-bureaucrat, whether you deserve it
or not in any particular instance.

I teach my kids to go to the toilet when they need to, and not get all
uptight by holding it in. I believe prunes are very good for this. You
should try some.

God help the kids in your care.

--

A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

mfhor writes:

[...]

Accepted Usenet practice seems to be whatever you deem it to be,

His staments of accepted Usenet practice are consistent with Usenet
practice in other enviroments. I could quote FAQ's on the subject but
I expect that would do you no good since you clearly dislike any sort
of structure.

so I'll just continue to discuss what I think is newsworthy,

I don't think anyone has any objections to this. Just include spoiler
space or indercate the stage in the subject line.

[...]

I find that people who are afraid of the world attempt to regulate
what (and how) others say and think by bureaucratic and systemic
strictures.

All cultures seek to regulare human interaction in some form or
anouther. Usenet culture is the set of behavours expected from
usenetters. We could go down the role of free form structure less
communication, but then very little gets communicated.

--
Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See
http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more.
Free the Memes.

mfhor wrote in message

I find that people who are afraid of the world attempt to regulate
what (and how) others say and think by bureaucratic and systemic
strictures. If you want to limit your view of the world (i.e. delay
your knowledge of a thing already in the public domain) then the onus
is on you.

Now you're just being weird. Afraid of the world? Limit our view of
the world? Gee, I just thought we wanted to enjoy a bike race. Oh
well, at least you're getting some use out of that Arts degree...