 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Hyundai Cars / December 2006Looks like the Signal / Noise ratio is threatening the usefulness of this newsgroup
One has to wonder why some people can not find their own NG to post in. I would hate to have to unsubscribe from here, but it is precisely one of the reasons I started the Driver's & Believers (moderated) mailing list. Best Regards Wayne Moses <wmoses@houston.rr.com> Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:53:13 -0600 One has to wonder why some people can not find their own NG to post in. I would hate to have to unsubscribe from here, but it is precisely one of the reasons I started the Driver's & Believers (moderated) mailing list. Good lord - this is one of the better newsgroups for signal to noise ratio. My thoughts on people like you who come in and make a big deal out of "I'd hate to unsubscribe from this group" is... don't let the door hit you.... I'm sorry this group is not up to your personal demands for what a usenet group should be, but it is far better than most. If you can't tolerate a little of what other people post, then you probably should go build yourself the perfect newsgroup. I'm not surprised that you built yourself a moderated list. Everything is up to your standards there, right? But then it must not be because you still have the need to hang out in usenet. Just chill a bit Wayne. It's not bad here. There is more useful information here than anywhere else and the OT stuff is pretty minimal here. You've fit in up to this point, so what is the purpose for this thread?  Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net MM> Just chill a bit Wayne. It's not bad here. There is more useful MM> information here than anywhere else and the OT stuff is pretty minimal MM> here. You've fit in up to this point, so what is the purpose for this MM> thread? Mike, The first part of your post can be read as pretty obnoxious and negative. I do not recall attacking you so I see no need for your tone. On the other hand the latter part of your post is far more positive in and of itself. However because it followed the first part I saw it as condescending, and thus also negative. Rather than respond in kind I will respectfully answer your quoted question. I agree that there is useful information on this NG - that is why I am reluctant to unsubscribe. As to my hanging out on USENET - I will let you know that I was on it before John Q. Public was granted Internet access. Back then we had to pay for newsgroup access and the more OT posts the more we had to pay for garbage. Maybe that was before your time 'netting. I am glad that you saw me as fitting in up to this point - that certainly has helped quell this strange feeling in my gut and warmth to my ears on reading your post. Suffice it to say that my comment was an effort to drop a hint to whomever is posting all the MI5 nonsense to this NG. One might wonder as to the reason for your response. Best Regards Wayne Moses <wmoses@houston.rr.com> Thu, 30 Nov 2006 18:47:14 -0600 > I agree that there is useful information on this NG - that is why I am > reluctant to unsubscribe. As to my hanging out on USENET - I will let you > know that I was on it before John Q. Public was granted Internet access. > Back then we had to pay for newsgroup access and the more OT posts the more > we had to pay for garbage. Maybe that was before your time 'netting. Who charged for usenet access? I've used usenet since the mid 70s and I've never seen any charge for it. Some service providers charged for access, but I've never seen a charge for usenet itself. > I am glad that you saw me as fitting in up to this point - that certainly > has helped quell this strange feeling in my gut and warmth to my ears on > reading your post. > > Suffice it to say that my comment was an effort to drop a hint to whomever > is posting all the MI5 nonsense to this NG. You must not follow many newsgroups. I follow 4 fairly actively and thus know that these MI5 posts are hitting a lot of newsgroups, not just this one. Matt MW> Who charged for usenet access? I've used usenet since the mid 70s and MW> I've never seen any charge for it. Some service providers charged for MW> access, but I've never seen a charge for usenet itself. Fidonet is one system that, as a point, I used to have to pay for bandwidth. Also if you had an offline newsreader and had to pay for access time in which you downloaded newsgroup bundles, that would be an extra cost. MW> You must not follow many newsgroups. I follow 4 fairly actively and MW> thus know that these MI5 posts are hitting a lot of newsgroups, not MW> just this one. I follow 3 at the moment and am well aware of the MI5 posts are not limited to just this one. I am just as sick of them there as here. Best Regards Wayne Moses <wmoses@houston.rr.com> Thu, 30 Nov 2006 19:46:46 -0600 I follow 3 at the moment and am well aware of the MI5 posts are not limited to just this one. I am just as sick of them there as here. Which makes your post today even more foolish. Did you post to all three of those newsgroups that you were going to unsubscribe because of the signal to noise level? Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net Hey Wayne, I suggest you go astroturf your private kingdome elsewhere. Or, to put it bluntly FOAD if you don't like it here. ;-) > MW> Who charged for usenet access? I've used usenet since the mid 70s and > MW> I've never seen any charge for it. Some service providers charged for [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >=== Posted with Qusnetsoft NewsReader 3.3 Reply to message from "Mike Marlow" <mmarlow@alltel.net> (Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:25:20) about "Re: Looks like the Signal / Noise ratio is threatening the usefulness of this newsgroup": MM> Just chill a bit Wayne. It's not bad here. There is more useful MM> information here than anywhere else and the OT stuff is pretty minimal MM> here. You've fit in up to this point, so what is the purpose for this MM> thread? Mike, The first part of your post can be read as pretty obnoxious and negative. I do not recall attacking you so I see no need for your tone. I simply responded to a person who saw fit to come into a forum and complain about the participants. Frankly Wayne, I found your tone to be obnoxious. On the other hand the latter part of your post is far more positive in and of itself. However because it followed the first part I saw it as condescending, and thus also negative. See it as you see fit. I think you've made it clear that you are a rather demanding person who prefers that the world revolves according to your dictates and as such I really don't care what you think. I offered you that this is a good group, that you had established something of a fit in the group before today's diatribe, and if that's something you elect to see as condescending, then go for it. Rather than respond in kind I will respectfully answer your quoted question. I agree that there is useful information on this NG - that is why I am reluctant to unsubscribe. As to my hanging out on USENET - I will let you know that I was on it before John Q. Public was granted Internet access. Back then we had to pay for newsgroup access and the more OT posts the more we had to pay for garbage. Maybe that was before your time 'netting. Not likely Wayne. I've been on the next since 1984. I don't know what your time on the net, or mine has to do with anything though. The only thing I can see is that you think that is somehow important... I am glad that you saw me as fitting in up to this point - that certainly has helped quell this strange feeling in my gut and warmth to my ears on reading your post. ?????? Suffice it to say that my comment was an effort to drop a hint to whomever is posting all the MI5 nonsense to this NG. If you've really been around the net that long Wayne, then you'd know that this stuff happens once in a while and it is the childish pranks of individuals not even associated with the group. That makes your earlier post even more foolish. One might wonder as to the reason for your response. Nothing more than a response to an arrogant post from someone who just had to tell an entire newsgroup how much they were bothering him. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net Mike, MM> Reply to message from "Mike Marlow" <mmarlow@alltel.net> (Thu, 30 MM> Nov 2006 MM> 17:25:20) about "Re: Looks like the Signal / Noise ratio is MM> threatening the MM> usefulness of this newsgroup": MM> I simply responded to a person who saw fit to come into a forum and MM> complain about the participants. Frankly Wayne, I found your tone MM> to be obnoxious. Then we are on the same page. MM> See it as you see fit. I think you've made it clear that you are a MM> rather demanding person who prefers that the world revolves MM> according to your dictates and as such I really don't care what you MM> think. Likewise. MM> I offered you that this is a good group, that you had MM> established something of a fit in the group before today's diatribe, MM> and if that's something you elect to see as condescending, then go MM> for it. Thank you again. MM> Not likely Wayne. I've been on the next since 1984. I don't know MM> what your time on the net, or mine has to do with anything though. Then re-read my post to Matt, who raised a similar question, albeit in a more positive way. Anyway, as most here would agree ... this thread has been blown way out of proportion, and needs to be wound down. I will do my part in this regard. If you took the time to see my posts in the past, you would note that I have spoken about Hyundais which I have owned since 1989. I have learned much from this newsgroup on that topic, and from various other fora on Hyundais. I don't have the time to sift nor do I enjoy sifting through tons of nonsense posts that are woefully off topic. Many times the posts are made by bots and other times they are made directly by people. That is where I was coming from and where I continue to come from. Regards, Wayne Mose > MM> Not likely Wayne. I've been on the next since 1984. I don't know > MM> what your time on the net, or mine has to do with anything though. > > Then re-read my post to Matt, who raised a similar question, albeit in a > more positive way. Similar question? No question was raised Wayne. You were being challenged for a statement you made about your longevity on the net. You were simply asked what that mattered. > If you took the time to see my posts in the past, you would note that I have > spoken about Hyundais which I have owned since 1989. I have learned much > from this newsgroup on that topic, and from various other fora on Hyundais. You refered to my acknowledgment of your previous participation as condescending. Clearly, I did in fact take the time to read your posts in the past. You sir are a crank, and a self-indulging one at that. > I don't have the time to sift nor do I enjoy sifting through tons of nonsense > posts that are woefully off topic. Many times the posts are made by bots > and other times they are made directly by people. > That is where I was coming from and where I continue to come from. Well, I would think that someone who has been on the net as long as you claim to have been would have 1) understood the nature of periodic spam, and 2) have mastered the fine art of ignoring threads he was not interested in. You do know how to block threads, don't you? You made a public address to this group. That address earned you a reply and an invitation to proceed as you had threatened to do. It also earned you an invitation to hang in despite the nonsense stuff that has been plastered throughout usenet for the past week. That is where I was coming from and where I continue to come from. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net Reply to message from "Mike Marlow" <mmarlow@alltel.net> (Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:25:20) about "Re: Looks like the Signal / Noise ratio is threatening the usefulness of this newsgroup": MM> Just chill a bit Wayne. It's not bad here. There is more useful MM> information here than anywhere else and the OT stuff is pretty minimal MM> here. You've fit in up to this point, so what is the purpose for this MM> thread? Mike, The first part of your post can be read as pretty obnoxious and negative. I do not recall attacking you so I see no need for your tone. We'll, that's the reaction you can expect what you post what could reasonably be considered SPAM. I don't think he came anywhere close to attacking you. After all, the sole intent of your post was to advertise the existance of your mailing list. Unless the list is restricted to discussions about Hyundai vehicles, any mention of it is simply "noise", which you have established that you don't deal well with. On the other hand the latter part of your post is far more positive in and of itself. However because it followed the first part I saw it as condescending, and thus also negative. Obviously, you cannot take constructive critisism. I see nothing wrong, or inaccurate with the statements he made. Rather than respond in kind I will respectfully answer your quoted question. I agree that there is useful information on this NG - that is why I am reluctant to unsubscribe. As to my hanging out on USENET - I will let you know that I was on it before John Q. Public was granted Internet access. Back then we had to pay for newsgroup access and the more OT posts the more we had to pay for garbage. Maybe that was before your time 'netting. Goody for you. I was there too, while the 'net was nothin' but text, and the endless search for FTP servers. I tend to believe that there's alot more long timers here in the intelligent groups, than you think. I am glad that you saw me as fitting in up to this point - that certainly has helped quell this strange feeling in my gut and warmth to my ears on reading your post. Suffice it to say that my comment was an effort to drop a hint to whomever is posting all the MI5 nonsense to this NG. There's no one to drop a hint to. In case you didn't realize it, that's all robot generated. Just pure "noise". Not the fault of thism or any other group. I know, your listserve is personally moderated, so while you are looking at your responses to you posts, you are sure to filter out all "noise". One might wonder as to the reason for your response. Basically, I think he wanted to call it to your attention that you need to chill out. The vast majority of posts here are directly related to hyundais, or vehicles in general. This thread is not, so you can go ahead, and tag it as "noise". Best Regards Wayne Moses <wmoses@houston.rr.com> Thu, 30 Nov 2006 18:47:14 -0600 Bob, B> We'll, that's the reaction you can expect what you post what could B> reasonably be considered SPAM. Have you ever replied to a spammer and got a reply? So if someone posts something that they are free to ventilate and that you don't agree with it is spam? Is your reply spam also? B> I don't think he came anywhere close B> to attacking you. After all, the sole intent of your post was to B> advertise the existance of your mailing list. And you know this because I posted a URL or otherwise advertised it how? So are all our mentions of Hyundais here advertisements for Hyundai? B> Obviously, you cannot take constructive critisism. I see nothing B> wrong, or inaccurate with the statements he made. Good for you. I am sure that he can speak for himself, and he has shown this clearly. B> Goody for you. I was there too, while the 'net was nothin' but text, B> and the endless search for FTP servers. One thing we have in common. B> The vast majority of posts here are directly B> related to hyundais, or vehicles in general. This thread is not, so B> you can go ahead, and tag it as "noise". I never intended for it to develop into a thread, but some people can't just read and hit the "Next" button. I intend to let it die on the vine. Regards, Wayne Mose > I never intended for it to develop into a thread, but some people can't just > read and hit the "Next" button. This is precious Wayne. You started this entire thread simply because you could not do this very thing yourself with respect to obvious bot generated spam. > I intend to let it die on the vine. You should have culled this one before it ever became a vine. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net Strange...here's a guy who complains about postings that don't belong in this newsgroup, and even "threatens" to leave it (God forbid, Wayne! No! Please stay!), while at the same time creates a post that doesn't belong in this newsgroup. If he keeps it up, he'll get so upset by his own postings that he'll force himself to unsubscribe! One has to wonder why some people can not find their own NG to post in. I would hate to have to unsubscribe from here, but it is precisely one of the reasons I started the Driver's & Believers (moderated) mailing list. Best Regards Wayne Moses <wmoses@houston.rr.com> Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:53:13 -0600 > One has to wonder why some people can not find their own NG to post in. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Best Regards > Wayne Moses <wmoses@houston.rr.com> Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:53:13 -0600 With all due respect Wayne, it appears that you just contributed to the noise. If you're referring to the MI5 crap, it takes all of 2-3 seconds to highlight it all and hit the "K" key to kill all the threads at once. Sure, it's annoying that morons like this spam unrelated newsgroups, but it's no problem to get rid of it. If it really bothers you, your browser should allow you to create a simple filter that will delete all of it automatically. Unfortunately, there are no laws prohibiting the mentally ill from using Usenet. BN> With all due respect Wayne, it appears that you just contributed to BN> the noise. Brian, you are absolutely right of course. I had no idea that so many people here would have taken such a tack with their responses. BN> If you're referring to the MI5 crap, it takes all of 2-3 seconds to BN> highlight it all and hit the "K" key to kill all the threads at once. Again you are right on both counts. However, when I made that original post I was responding on a pocket pc, and using an NNTP program without any form of kill or filtering feature. It downloads all the headers and messages wirelessly so I waste time and battery. BN> Unfortunately, there are no laws prohibiting the mentally ill from BN> using Usenet. Agreed. I guess we can all get back to talking about Hyundais. Best Regards Wayne Moses <wmoses@houston.rr.com> Sun, 03 Dec 2006 18:40:24 -0600 > Brian, you are absolutely right of course. I had no idea that so many > people here would have taken such a tack with their responses. All right folks, move it along - nothing to see here. It's all in the past Wayne. Good things come to those who just fergitaboutit and move forward. Signature-Mike- mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net > BN> If you're referring to the MI5 crap, it takes all of 2-3 seconds to > BN> highlight it all and hit the "K" key to kill all the threads at once. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > downloads all the headers and messages wirelessly so I waste time and > battery. That's what you get for being so "tech-y". ;-) Seriously, that would be aggravating. Fortunately, it looks like the dumbass has moved on. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.