The Soft Wreck is here -- HOORAH ! !

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:04:40 GMT, patrick conroy <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan
>Welchel) wrote:
>
>>
>>
>
><Snip of incendiary drivel.>
>
>Ya' know Sue - if I can call you "Sue". I had planned on popping over
>to see what this new forum would be like. I had hoped that there
>would be something of value there.
>
Everyone who can should use X-no-archive.<g>

On 22 Oct 2004 17:41:18 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I don't think so. They probably want to ban ads in the wreck and isolate
>those posts in a marketplace group, which is pretty common in
>reorganizations

That's actually not such a bad idea. It's been done in the
rec.bicycling.* groups, and it works well.

If you're looking to buy or sell something, there's plenty of ads
there.

Barry

Gee "Susan", a half truth is better than a straight out lie all the time
isn't it.

Let's see, if I were a troll trying to destroy the group, and had been
continually unsuccessful in the past, what would I do? Divide and conquer?
Yes, that might work, let's try to dilute the wreck if we can't destroy it
openly. Even better, we can hide behind a puritanical approach.

You must be so proud. The trojan horse approach won't work. More comments
below.

Your statements and approach simply do not match those of a Christian,
caring, couple.

--
Greg


"Susan Welchel" wrote in message ...
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking.

Thereby implying that current users do not have respectable values. Since
you openly imply this, why post this drivel here? It can't be to recruit
members, you obviously won't find any here with the values you seek. So, an
open troll.

> The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.


Again, if we don't apply then we are not "decent"? This is not a christian
attitude is it?


> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
> we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
> woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
> reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
> group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
> goods and services related to woodworking.


Divide and conquer - clearly an attempt to 'water down' the wreck.


> If anyone is interested in
> joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
> Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
> Thank you for your support.
>
> Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

"Dave Balderstone" wrote in message ...
> In article , Greg Millen wrote:
>> Your statements and approach simply do not match those of a Christian,
>> caring, couple.
>
> They're not a Christian, caring, couple.
>
> In the event their new group gets created, I'll enjoy lurking and
> watching it being totally overrun by spam, porn merchants, netkooks,
> and other assorted garbage.
>
> Pity they didn't have the courage to go with the moderated group, and
> instead had to rely on faked votes and ballot-box stuffing to get what
> they wanted.


Agreed Dave, I responded on that issue in news.groups.

--

Greg

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:10:58 -0500, "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Wow nothing like a public gloat. Congrats on your efforts. You wanted out of the wreck so leave already.
>Puff

Yep, I know what I'd say to my 8 year old for gloating over a win --- But
then he's still young and needs that kind of training so he doesn't act
like that when he's an adult.

>
>"Susan Welchel" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>> associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
>> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>> of their NSP.
>>
>> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
>> we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
>> woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
>> reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
>> group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
>> goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
>> joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
>> Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>>
>> Thank you for your support.
>>
>> Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan Welchel)
wrote:

>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen.

Yeah, examining the votes looks like election day after in Chicago.

> Now,
>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum,

Bit judgmental there, ain't we sweetie?

> and
>they will not be stuck with the politics,

i.e, if you are looking for a real shop atmosphere, forget it, we're all
about "serious" topics only. How many times do you think you are going to
be answering, "what kind of finish should I be putting on a cutting board?"


> filth, and drivel that are

Funny you associate filth with general philosophical discussions and one
person's drivel is another person's "what kind of saw should I buy?".

>associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week.

Holding my breath now.

> All decent
>woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>of their NSP.
>

Back to judgmental again I see. You have no idea of the moral leanings
of many of us who post to the wreck -- even some of us who may post on more
than just woodworking topics. Your judgmentalism, along with the idea that
by forming a group with "moral standards" you do more harm than good.
Enforcement of your views will only impose a secular righteousness that may
cause more long-term harm because you will make people feel good about
themselves by "being good" without knowing why they would want to behave
that way. One does not make Christians by making people conform to some
moral code, one plants the seeds of Christianity by showing people the need
for a Savior, those people then start living a moral life because they want
to, not because they are being forced to live that kind of life.
Motivating by the law is only temporarily effective.


>Given the overwhelming success of the proposal,

Yep, overwhelming. Chicago, Daly, "vote early, vote often"

> we have decided that
>we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
>woodworking community in the near future.

I can hardly wait.

> This will be a multi-group
>reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
>group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
>goods and services related to woodworking.

Oh great, a split the group proponent with enough knowledge to be
dangerous.

> If anyone is interested in
>joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
>Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>

Yeah, please commence holding your breath in anticipation of my rushing
out to join this noble cause. That's right, keep holding it, just a little
longer .....




>Thank you for your support.
>

Oh yeah. Aside from creating a few new newsgroups that are either going
to gather dust or confuse newcomers I sure can't see what you are going to
accomplish. Being unmoderated, you will have no way of keeping trolls like
Man in the Doorway or Puppy Wizard from disrupting your tidy little
newsgroup. Your "ban" on cross-posting to the rec.ww newsgroup seems
geared toward keeping newcomers from learning that other sources of
information (and some pretty savvy,experienced woodworkers) exists
elsewhere. Are you perhaps afraid that the knowledge base that exists on
rec.ww might overwhelm your tidy little group and newcomers might realize
that more experience resides elsewhere?





>Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:38:46 -0600, Dave Balderstone
<dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote:

>In article <1098504332.3JcuqrRsEmS4ECWEz+sTJQ@teranews>, Mark & Juanita
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Oh great, a split the group proponent with enough knowledge to be
>> dangerous.
>
>I don't think they'll be able to pull off this type of fraud again. If
>the voting system that allowed this one doesn't change, it will be
>simple enough for some enterprising soul to stack things on the NO side
>of the vote the same way the YES side was stacked this time.
>
>You'd be surprised how many members of the "Spumoni" family gather
>nightly to discuss newsgroup creation and how the family bloc is going
>to vote.
>

Sounds like a cold, but sweet family. ;-)

>djb

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:36:30 GMT, skeezics <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan
>Welchel) wrote:
>
>>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>>they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>>associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>>the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
>>woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>>of their NSP.
>>
>>Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
>>we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
>>woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
>>reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
>>group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
>>goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
>>joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
>>Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>>
>>Thank you for your support.
>>
>>Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel
>
>umm.... didnt anybody notice they havent been back to respond?
>
>skeez

Anxiously checking their ISP in anticipation of the new group I would
imagine. :-) [Nah, she really didn't take my advice about holding her
breath, did she?]

> Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking.

Yawn. There's other really good woodworking forums on the web, and the nice
thing about them is they don't have your uppity holier than thou attitude.

Here's hoping that once you have your forum up and running you'll stop being
a hypocrite and will no longer spam this forum with off topic posts.

>> Here's hoping that once you have your forum up and running you'll stop
>> being a hypocrite and will no longer spam this forum with off topic
>> posts.
>
> I would say that an announcement to propose new woodworking groups and
> reorganize the wreck is on topic here. She could have spared us the gloat,
> however.

I wonder if the new (and most likely boring) forum will consider proposals
to create new woodworking groups with more filth and drivel to be on-topic
posts?

Howdy!

In article <[email protected]>,
Susan Welchel <[email protected]> wrote:
>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
>woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>of their NSP.
>
>Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
>we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
>woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
>reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
>group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
>goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
>joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
>Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
>Thank you for your support.

Ummm...right. Where were you when serious questions were posed in
news.groups? You simply blew them off. You never did answer the really
key question: "What makes rec.woodworking.bowdlerized distinct from
rec.woodworking?" You drew no functional line, nor did you infer one
from the types of posts that appear in rec.woodworking.

You grossly overstate the "problem" in the wreck.

You give the appearance of not acting in good faith. You dismiss your
critics with an airy wave of the hands.

No. This was a travesty.
>
>Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

...partners in crime...

yours,
Michael

--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
[email protected] | White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/wwap/

Susan Welchel wrote:

> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.
>
> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
> we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
> woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
> reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
> group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
> goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
> joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
> Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
> Thank you for your support.
>
> Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel
Those names can't be all real...damn..looks like you signed up the
world's supply of Stromboli's....I particularly like "Alfredo
Stromboli"! Get fuckin' real!

I can buy stromboli's at the pizza shop right where I work

Philski

Greg Millen <[email protected]> says...
>
>I have taken some time to validate names and email, even
>searching Google to see who has posted to rec.woodworking
>before. Results are:
>
>NO Votes - verified 60 out of 93
>
>YES Votes - checked the first 50, only TWO could be verified. I am willing
>to send my results to anyone willing to review them.
>
>Even IF the 'people' (I suspect a 'person') behind these names has a valid
>email domain, why do they have the opportunity to negatively influence a
>group they never have, and never will, interacted with?
>
>I believe the CFV is invalid and should be canceled.

If we assume that the percentage of verifiable addresses is the same
for the YES and NO populations, this is strong statistical evidence
that the result is incorrect.

So let's look at that assumption; at first glance it would appear to
be false (news groupies vs. woodworkers could very well differ in
this respect). The way to correct for that would be to do the same
analysis on some votes from before the present troubles, and thus
derive an expected verifiable / non-verifiable ratio for the YES
and NO population. If the preliminary results show what I think
they will show, they could be fleshed out with a larger sample and
presented to the NAN moderators.

Richard Henry <[email protected]> says...
>
>"Woodchuck Bill" <[email protected]> wrote...
>
>> They actually swayed the result for the creation of
>> comp.os.linux.xbox, which passed because of the Stromboli
>> votes. The group now exists, but it is dead as a teak board.
>
>What servers carry it?

The two largest ISPs (uni-berlin.de and supernews) carry it,
and it has five to ten posts per day about Linux on Xbox.
I call that a success.

Fly-by-Night CC wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Mike M <mikem14.mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Forgive me if I get this wrong as I'm a lurker. They have created a
>>new group in the hope that they won't have to decide what threads to
>>read and not read. This group shouldn't even worry about it. You
>>have the experience, knowledge and contacts. I will wade thru a lot
>>of bandwidth if good information is there.
>
>
> Hey Mike.
>
> They're deluding themselves as well as insulting fine participants here.
> An unmoderated group has no chance in hell of maintaining any level of
> sanitized content. When the alt.troll groups hit them they'll be pretty
> much sunk - the reason the wreck doesn't dry up and blow away when it's
> targeted is that it's so heavily used and supported by regulars that it
> just keeps plodding along through the muck and comes out the other side.
>
> Don't be a stranger, Mike. Jump in, experience the melee, see where the
> wreckians take you and enjoy the ride.
>
You meant a Moderated group dint ya?

Philski

Ba r r y wrote:

>I am truly amazed by common thinking in news.groups.

I am truly amazed at your failure to grasp elementary concepts
of proof and falsifiability

>1.) There is no evidence that the Strombolis don't exist. Therefore,
>the votes are genuine and legal. I'm looking for some evidence that
>Easter Bunny dosen't exist, can anyone help me? <G>

I'm looking for some evidence that Greenland doesn't exist...
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof. If you say that
you saw a bird in your back yard, I would ask anyone questioning
your claim to offer some proof. If you say that you saw a unicorn
in your back yard, I would ask you to offer some proof.

>2.) They know for sure that spam bots NEVER harvest addresses from
>message bodies or sigs, as they apparently have seen the workings of
>every one of them.

Your use of "NEVER" in all caps is a claim that you fabricated in
order to make your argument look better. That's called a straw
man argument. If you had bothered to ask, you would have been told
about the many experiments various people have done where they put
newly created email addresses in the body and other newly created
email addresses in the headers and then waited for some spam at each
address.

>3.) A well-known and respected poster to a long established group who
>emails voters is no different from a garden variety spammer. God
>forbid that he insults some Perl scripts! If I cared about the
>results, I would actually look forward to someone trying to verify the
>results!

Spam is spam, no matter who you are or what your motive is. There is
also a scaling issue; what if a bunch of us start emailing everyone who
votes?

>I'm sure the creator of the Strombolis enjoys sharing his hilarious
>escapades with off-line folks, as the cabal over there has no idea
>they are the laughingstock of the online world.

That isn't a logical argument, just an insult.

>Apparently, the regulars of n.g live in a totally black and white, cut
>and dried world, where there are no pranksters, and intuition and
>common sense have no place. I think they all used to work at the UN.

Another insult.

"When anyone resorts to personal attacks, it is almost always
because they are losing an argument." -The Happy Heretic

>This also demonstrates to me that Usenet really is becoming
>irrelevant, and is simply a place for anonymous attacks and trolls.

Don't let the door hit you on the arse on your way out.

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:29:57 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Then what is the point of it?

Ask the Strombolis

Bill Cole <[email protected]> wrote:

> The
> more the Stromboli's vote, the more clear it is that they are not
> participating in the process as it is intended to be used, even if they
> really were 20-some-odd unique individuals, each actually voting on
> their own.

*snort* You owe me a keyboard!

--
Kathy - read reviews of other newsgroups in news:news.groups.reviews
Good Net Keeping Seal of Approval at <http://www.gnksa.org/>
OE-quotefix can fix OE:
<http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/>

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:34:20 -0500, Joe Wells <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Is there, realistically, anything that can be done about the travesty
>currently before us? I'm actually nauseous over this.
>

OK, you're just taking this *way* too seriously.

Susan Welchel gloats:

>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
>woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>of their NSP.

Don't drool on yourself, sweetie. The group is unmoderated according to its
charter, so once it's created, your 'team' is out of work. Considering the
number of nasty trolls who voted for the group, I don't envy the people who
have to set up filters.

Charlie Self
"When we are planning for posterity, we ought to remember that virtue is not
hereditary." Thomas Paine

On 24 Oct, in article
<[email protected]> [email protected]
"Woodchuck Bill" wrote:

> Charles <[email protected]> wrote in news:231020042041105749%[email protected]:
>
> >> What servers carry it?
> >
> > Giganews
>
> Google groups
>
> Individual.net
>
> (comp.os.linux.xbox)

Demon (there, they seem to have had 124 posts: the oldest is dated Wed,
15 Sep 2004 10:59:28 +0100, and the newest 25 Oct 2004 10:35:21 -0700).

--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} [email protected]
"I don't use Linux. I prefer to use an OS supported by a large multi-
national vendor, with a good office suite, excellent network/internet
software and decent hardware support."

Joe Wells <[email protected]> writes:
>I can point out obvious (to me) invalid votes, but if the NAN folks don't
>agree, then I'm just wasting my time.

If you don't even bother to point them out, then the NAN folks don't
have the _opportunity_ to agree with you.

If they are going to disregard your claims out-of-hand, then yes, you would
be wasting your time in formulating them. But if they are going to consider
them seriously, as I believe they would if the claims are made seriously and
soberly, then that's about all that I think you can reasonably ask of anyone,
and I don't think you would be wasting your time.

In article <[email protected]>, Susan
Welchel <[email protected]> wrote:

> The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week.


That remains to be seen.

In article <1098491287.q8tjJ2suZQjK+qgrd9D8lA@teranews>, Greg Millen
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Your statements and approach simply do not match those of a Christian,
> caring, couple.

They're not a Christian, caring, couple.

In the event their new group gets created, I'll enjoy lurking and
watching it being totally overrun by spam, porn merchants, netkooks,
and other assorted garbage.

Pity they didn't have the courage to go with the moderated group, and
instead had to rely on faked votes and ballot-box stuffing to get what
they wanted.

In article <1098504332.3JcuqrRsEmS4ECWEz+sTJQ@teranews>, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Oh great, a split the group proponent with enough knowledge to be
> dangerous.

I don't think they'll be able to pull off this type of fraud again. If
the voting system that allowed this one doesn't change, it will be
simple enough for some enterprising soul to stack things on the NO side
of the vote the same way the YES side was stacked this time.

You'd be surprised how many members of the "Spumoni" family gather
nightly to discuss newsgroup creation and how the family bloc is going
to vote.

djb

In article <221020042238463798%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca>, Dave
Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote:

> You'd be surprised how many members of the "Spumoni" family gather
> nightly to discuss newsgroup creation and how the family bloc is going
> to vote.

In fact, even if the family split 50/50, I'd think 300 YES and 300 NO
votes would probably kill any proposal by weight of the numbers.

They could probably just do a simple vote around the table, then use a
script of some kind to issue the necessary ballots.

Amazing things, computers.

djb

In article <1098508051.QN+S1cRAPSabWNeUaBIrRQ@teranews>, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:

> Sounds like a cold, but sweet family. ;-)

They can be a bit chunky, but they're great company after a good meal.

And the kids love 'em.

It certainly looks like it. More fool The Powers That Be to be so
easily used.
I'm not sure it matters though. This group has withstood every type of
wringing out in the many years it's been around. It will survive this
too. There have been such splits in Usenet history. You see the
resulting empty newsgroups all over the place. It's just a waste of
bandwidth. It's not fatal to the people who hang out here.



GregP <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Maybe the group name should be changed to
> rec.stromboli.all.ages

In article <[email protected]>, Joe Wells
<[email protected]> wrote:

> A Usenet voting arms race. Do the news.groupies see how fucked up this is
> yet?

I think it's indisputable that many do. The questions now are (IMO):

-- what gets done to fix the problem

-- what's the timeframe to fix it

-- is a suspension of the RFD/CFV process while the fix is being worked
on appropriate

djb

In article <[email protected]>, Woodchuck Bill
<[email protected]> wrote:

> The voice of NAN has spoken. The group will be created.

Lock and load, folks. The rules now say that massive vote-loading on
CFVs is allowed and will be respected as legitimate. The Spumoni family
(all 800, and you wouldn't believe how many are gestating!) is having a
meeting this weekend to discuss how to deal with the situation.

I'd sugggest that anyone who is interested in this subscribe to
news.groups and follow the bouncing ball. It's going to be very
interesting (in a geeky, non-woodworking sort of way).

OBWW: Gotta run, I think the shellac on daughter's coat rack is just
about dry. (At the lumberyard to buy some poly glue a couple of hours
ago. Cell rings. SWMBO sez "Get some coat hooks. I can't walk in
(daughter's) room and I want something on the wall to hang up the
backpacks, coats, bike helmet, etc, etc, etc..." Sez I, "Yes, dear.")

In article <zfBed.14985$SW3.2876@fed1read01>, Richard Henry
<[email protected]> wrote:

> What servers carry it?

Giganews

--
Charles

In article <[email protected]>, Greg G. wrote:

>
> What is that? The 18 advertizing pop-ups behind this link?

At this point, I'll post the email Susan sent me on September 14 (while
the moderated RFD was still underway. I sure hope Vito can deal with
his manic depression, his fragility and his naivity. Beyond that, I
offer my best wishes to Susan in dealing with her own personal demons.

Mental illness is a serious matter that no one should make light of.

Vito, you have my best wishes. I'm sure you face some serious problems.
I know the name of one of them.


--------------------------------------

From: [email protected]
Subject: Mr. Balderstone
Date: September 14, 2004 8:22:10 PM GMT-06:00
To: [email protected]

Hello there, Mr. Balderstone.

I am writing because you seem to be the most vocal opponent of our
proposal. You probably noticed that Vito has left some posts unanswered
in the RFD. He already stated that he would not reply directly to
attack-posts in the newsgroups. He has no intentions of getting into
flame wars that he canÕt win, because those who flame will never listen
to reason.

You are concerned about our moderation experience? On Usenet, we have
none. IÕve managed a mailing list for disabled people for a year and a
half. Vito helps me with that. He also runs a fairly high-traffic Yahoo
group by himself. You may think that it is more difficult to moderate a
newsgroup, but that is not the case, due to the user-friendly web
interface we would be using. If you visit the STUMP web site, you can
view a demo of this program. Use of this web-based moderation GUI is not
freeÉ.it would cost roughly $400 per year. We would gladly pay this
ourselves. Sure, thereÕd be things we will need to learn Òon the jobÓ,
through a bit of trial and error. But most of it should be pretty
intuitive to us.

Try to see things from our side. Vito is paralyzed from the waist down.
He has very little to do with his time, and it is very frustrating for
him. After the accident, he went through a period of manic depression.
Eventually, he rediscovered his faith in God. This brought new life into
him. Whether or not you believe in God, try to understand how great of a
comfort faith can be to someone in VitoÕs position.

After lurking again in rec.woodworking again for the past year, we
witnessed some very offensive behaviorÉ.the impersonations of posters,
flooding the group with obscene subject lines, the posting of usersÕ
home addresses and dates of birth, an increase in off-topic activity,
and other things we were not comfortable with. I inspired Vito to
propose this newsgroup, and quite frankly, I am beginning to regret it.
Initially, I thought it would be a great activity for himÉfor the two of
us to share. In recent days, Vito has become horrified at the tone in
some of the responses. I really donÕt want to see him slip into his
depression again, especially over this. You may say that it is only
Usenet, but to someone in his position, the Internet is one of his only
hobbies other than woodworkingÉand he takes his Internet communications
to heart. He canÕt do big woodworking projects anymore without my help,
for the most part, due to the loss of the use of his legs. He feels
helpless and insecure in many ways, and I was really hoping this
moderated group would work out, and help fill his time. I donÕt expect
you to care, or to sympathize, but I felt that we should at least let
you hear our side.

Should we withdraw the proposal? Maybe that would be the best solution
for everyone. I canÕt bear to see Vito go through this any longer. He
really is a good, honest man, with a big heart. However, he is a little
naive, and that part of him has grown stronger since the accident. He
really wasnÕt ready for all the attack-posts. I feel terrible at how
this thing played out. Any suggestions for an end-game, where nobody
loses?

Thank you for your time. I hope I havenÕt bored the life out of you.

Susan Welchel

In article <[email protected]>, philski
<[email protected]> wrote:

> You meant a Moderated group dint ya?

There's no moderated group... the vote passed on an unmoderated group
that may or may not be created.

If it is created, it will be unmoderated and the trolls will
undoubtedly descend. I hope poor, naive Vito's mental health can handle
the strain.

djb

Fly-by-Night CC <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Mike M <mikem14.mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> Forgive me if I get this wrong as I'm a lurker. They have created a
>> new group in the hope that they won't have to decide what threads to
>> read and not read. This group shouldn't even worry about it. You
>> have the experience, knowledge and contacts. I will wade thru a lot
>> of bandwidth if good information is there.
>
> Hey Mike.
>
> They're deluding themselves as well as insulting fine participants
> here. An unmoderated group has no chance in hell of maintaining any
> level of sanitized content. When the alt.troll groups hit them they'll
> be pretty much sunk - the reason the wreck doesn't dry up and blow
> away when it's targeted is that it's so heavily used and supported by
> regulars that it just keeps plodding along through the muck and comes
> out the other side.
>
> Don't be a stranger, Mike. Jump in, experience the melee, see where
> the wreckians take you and enjoy the ride.
>

Is it possible the whole thing is a spoof? I'm reading through some of
this stuff, looking at the name (rec.woodworking.all-ages) and the
following popped to mind:

Wreck of Ages cleft for me,
Let me hide myself in thee ...

LD

Mangler, I like your comments (and your nom de bois). Is it
possible/probable that (1) with the new practice of some web-based forums
"appropriating" NG content, (2) the OP's mention of starting some "for
sale" and commercial service NGs, and (3) the ability of the OPs to set up
a forum that "appropriates" the content of this new NG, that: This is all
the start of a move to their establishing a website with ads, etc -- i.e.,
a commercial venture?

All just idle BS, of course. Where's my beer? Oh, beer wench? Where the
&%$# is that unmoderated she-devil? -- Igor

[sorry for the top posting]


On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:14:21 -0400, WoodMangler <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Susan Welchel peered through the cracked lid of her coffin and said:
>
>> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>> associated with rec.woodworking.
>
>Your hatred for this group and its participants couldn't be more clear.
>Why are you still here?
>
>> The NAN moderation team will create
>> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
>> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator of
>> their NSP.
>
>As an obviously "indecent folk", I won't be joining your little morality
>parade.
>
>>
>> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that we
>> will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the woodworking
>> community in the near future.
>
>I hope I'm not the only one around here who finds the overwhelming success
>of your proposal somewhat suspect. A look at the email addresses on the
>voting list makes one wonder.
>I was really taken back by the part of your
>proposal that allows cross posts to any newsgroup EXCEPT rec.ww.
>
>> This will be a multi-group reorganization
>> proposal, which will include a
>> separate marketplace group for selling, auctioning, and announcing
>> personal or commercial goods and services related to woodworking. If
>> anyone is interested in joining the proponent team for the new proposal,
>> please e-mail Vito Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
>As one who believed that you were merely trying to open a new forum, one
>more suited to your belief system, I opted to stay out of the fracas and
>just let you do your thing.
>The wording of your proposal, your arrogant post here, and your stated
>plan to further divide the woodworking online community to suit your
>tastes shows me that your intentions are more malicious than not.
>Your interest doesn't seem to be in woodworking, but in imposing your
>version of morality on others.
>
>>
>> Thank you for your support.
>
>You do not have it. In fact, I must now actively oppose your future
>divisive plans.
>You are arrogant and obnoxious, go back to church and pray for forgiveness.
>
>>
>> Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, Susan Welchel <[email protected]> wrote:
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and

Where exactly have you people been when we were asking you to justify
what you were proposing? Interesting list of "people" voting yes
on your group, by the way. Odd how there are so many unfamiliar
and clearly bogus names.

> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
> we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
> woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
> reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
> group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
> goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
> joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
> Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.

If you don't participate in the conversation _here_, you deserve no
support.

> Thank you for your support.

Show that you deserve it. Talk about it _here_.

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In news.groups Greg Millen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >You haven't allowed for the fact that most 'lurkers' post at least once,
> >have a bad experience, then return to lurking.
>
> No, a good number of lurkers never post. You'll never find any
> records of them, unless they decide to participate in something
> like a Big-8 vote. I wouldn't be surprised if someone managed
> to do a local study and found a 10 to 1 lurker:poster ratio, and
> if the turnover is anywhere near the 50% I've seen in some places,
> then there's a good number of folks that are new enough to not
> want to post yet, but old enough to know the group enough to
> vote. That means it is quite possible that that "most lurkers"
> have never posted, and we would never know about them except the
> one instance of an email and ID that showed up in a RESULT.

For 2 years, I was an involutary lurker because I had read-only access to
Usenet at work. My e-mail still worked just fine.

It wasn't until I got my own PC and went through a number of different ISPs
did I get to actually post anything.

Yowie

Fri, Oct 22, 2004, 7:51am (EDT-3) [email protected]
(Susan=A0Welchel) saw fit to burble:
We would like to thank everyone for making this happen.

No problem. Judging from your comments and attitude, we'll be much
happier with you away from here. Now if you'd just 'stay' away.

Now, woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum,
and they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
associated with rec.woodworking.

Apparently you are saying that no one staying with rec.woodworking
has respectible values. I would like to know who appointed you
qualified to make such judgement calls. Hmmmm? Don't you mean "with
values comparable to your own"? Hmmmm? As a person with "respectable
values", I feel offended by your remark.

The NAN moderation team will create the new group,
rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week.

So, why are you here?

All decent woodworking folk should request the new group from the
administrator of their NSP.

Do you mean "decent woodworking folk" as in people who do decent
woodworking, or decent as morals? By your definition of decent I
presume?

Given the overwhelming success of the proposal,

Spoken like a true politician.

we have decided that we will be submitting another proposal aimed at
improving the woodworking community in the near future.

Improving "what" woodworking community? And just how exactly?
Woodworking skills? Or, "improving" the people doing the woodworking?
You aren't any sort of relaiton to Hitler, are you?

This will be a multi-group reorganization proposal, which will include a
separate marketplace group for selling, auctioning, and announcing
personal or commercial goods and services related to woodworking.

I can but hope you aren't including rec.woodworking, in your plans
for woodworking domination. But, people like you always seem to do
things like that, don't you? For our own good, right?

If anyone is interested in joining the proponent team for the new
proposal, please e-mail Vito Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.

Gods above, how could you even think of such a disgusting thing?
No, no, and Hell no. But, I just noticed. Your e-mail address is on
your post, but you didn't include one for your buddy Vito. Duh! LMAO

Now go away.



JOAT
Eagles can soar ... but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:56:26 GMT, "Bob Schmall" <[email protected]>
calmly ranted:

>
>"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:45:00 +0100, Andy Dingley
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Tom Watson looks wistfully down at his green carnation,
>>>"I wish _I_ had said that", he sighs
>>
>> Hichens on the Wreck?
>
>Loves Me Like a Wreck?

Been a long time since the Wreck was roOooOold.

--
"If the promise of the Declaration of Independence is ever to be fulfilled,
it will be the Libertarian Party which fulfills it. If the Constitution is
ever again treated as what it calls itself "The Supreme Law of the Land"
then it will be the Libertarian Party which forces it to be treated that
way. The Republicans and Democrats won’t do it. So the future of the
Libertarian Party is tied to the future of America. If we go down, it
goes down with us. If America gets itself back onto the right course,
it will be our hands on the tiller." --Michael Badnarik

Susan Welchel wrote:
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.
>
> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
> we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
> woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
> reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
> group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
> goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
> joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
> Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
> Thank you for your support.
>
> Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel
I personally can't F###ing Wait!

Philski

Dave Balderstone wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, Joe Wells
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > A Usenet voting arms race. Do the news.groupies see how fucked up this is
> > yet?
>
> I think it's indisputable that many do. The questions now are (IMO):
>
> -- what gets done to fix the problem
>
> -- what's the timeframe to fix it
>
> -- is a suspension of the RFD/CFV process while the fix is being worked
> on appropriate

The answer to the last is, not until a specific fix is proposed.

--
This account is subject to a persistent MS Blaster and SWEN attack.
I think I've got the problem resolved, but, if you E-mail me
and it bounces, a second try might work.
However, please reply in newsgroup.

Maybe they just have better manners than folks here?

"Andy Dingley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:36:30 GMT, skeezics <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >umm.... didnt anybody notice they havent been back to respond?
>
> We don't deserve a response, because we're rude and unworthy.
>

J T wrote:
> Apparently you are saying that no one staying with rec.woodworking
> has respectible values. I would like to know who appointed you
> qualified to make such judgement calls.

Well, it's the free speech thing. She's perfectly allowed,
qualified and entitled to make judgement calls. I (and you)
are similarly allowed to IGNORE THE HELL out of her judgement calls.

Freedom is a fine thing.

BugBear

What a load of self-righteous dung. Take yourself, your attitudes and
your postings and leave already. This group is one of the better on
usenet, and whatever motivates your clique of moralistic pantywaist
bedwetters, take that with you to your "new and improved" group and
stop bothering us. The wreck wasn't broke but you tried to fix it,
and used a flawed "voting" to validate your "soft" and "respectable"
alternative. Don't you have some cookies to bake?

Mutt


[email protected] (Susan Welchel) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.
>
<snip>

Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

Andy: Maybe I wasn't clear, I couldn't care less about their new
group, nor about voting for or against it as from my perspective the
wreck ain't broke, and all I want is for them to cut out their
moralistic whinings and insulting superior "Hoorah!!" attitudes and
leave already.

Mutt

Andy Dingley <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 25 Oct 2004 06:38:39 -0700, [email protected] (Mutt) wrote:
>
> >The wreck wasn't broke but you tried to fix it,
> >and used a flawed "voting" to validate your "soft" and "respectable"
> >alternative.
>
> So why didn't _you_ vote against it?
>
> It's too late to complain about it now, when you did nothing in the
> first place.

Duh!

Say what?

Have fun!


"Susan Welchel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.
>
> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
> we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
> woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
> reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
> group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
> goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
> joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
> Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
> Thank you for your support.
>
> Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

I have taken some time to validate names and email, even searching Google to
see who has posted to rec.woodworking before. Results are:

NO Votes - verified 60 out of 93

YES Votes - checked the first 50, only TWO could be verified. I am willing
to send my results to anyone willing to review them.

Even IF the 'people' (I suspect a 'person') behind these names has a valid
email domain, why do they have the opportunity to negatively influence a
group they never have, and never will, interacted with?

I believe the CFV is invalid and should be cancelled.

--
Greg


"Joe Wells" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:38:46 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
>
>> I don't think they'll be able to pull off this type of fraud again. If
>> the
>> voting system that allowed this one doesn't change, it will be simple
>> enough for some enterprising soul to stack things on the NO side of the
>> vote the same way the YES side was stacked this time.
>
> Is there, realistically, anything that can be done about the travesty
> currently before us? I'm actually nauseous over this.
>
> I took the posted e-mail addresses and plowed through the domains to see
> what I could see. A little sed, a little nslookup and ...
>
> Among the Yes votes, and utterly absurd 44 votes came via mailserver
> sitemail.everyone.net. This MX is a know spammer and is currently listed
> on a couple of RBLs. The fine, upstanding, and news-group obsessed
> Stromboli family weighed in with 22. zzn.com came at us with 16 obviously
> legit subdomains like FuckMeJesus.zzn.com. 10 votes came from domains that
> no longer return any MX record at all.
>
> Here's my advice to the folks at news.groups: Stop. Just stop. You are
> now, officially, a laughing stock. Stop creating any new groups until you
> get your house in order. Clearly the CFVs can be manipulated at
> will. You no longer have a legitimate methodology for determining which
> groups to create and which are trash. Until you do, there is no point in
> creating a bigger mess.
>
> --
> Joe Wells
>

AMF

I am truly amazed by common thinking in news.groups.

1.) There is no evidence that the Strombolis don't exist. Therefore,
the votes are genuine and legal. I'm looking for some evidence that
Easter Bunny dosen't exist, can anyone help me? <G>

2.) They know for sure that spam bots NEVER harvest addresses from
message bodies or sigs, as they apparently have seen the workings of
every one of them.

3.) A well-known and respected poster to a long established group who
emails voters is no different from a garden variety spammer. God
forbid that he insults some Perl scripts! If I cared about the
results, I would actually look forward to someone trying to verify the
results!

I'm sure the creator of the Strombolis enjoys sharing his hilarious
escapades with off-line folks, as the cabal over there has no idea
they are the laughingstock of the online world.

Apparently, the regulars of n.g live in a totally black and white, cut
and dried world, where there are no pranksters, and intuition and
common sense have no place. I think they all used to work at the UN.
This also demonstrates to me that Usenet really is becoming
irrelevant, and is simply a place for anonymous attacks and trolls.

Barry

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 07:18:22 GMT, Lobby Dosser
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Wreck of Ages cleft for me,
>Let me hide myself in thee ...

Tom Watson looks wistfully down at his green carnation,
"I wish _I_ had said that", he sighs.

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:19:48 GMT, Ba r r y
<[email protected]> wrote to news.groups:

>I am truly amazed by common thinking in news.groups.

Perhaps you'd like to provide some examples of common thinking in
news.groups, then - you've only goven one so far, and most people appear
to agree that it's a reasonable condition on the use of the lists in
question.


>1.) There is no evidence that the Strombolis don't exist. Therefore,
>the votes are genuine and legal. I'm looking for some evidence that
>Easter Bunny dosen't exist, can anyone help me? <G>

So far, the stromboli votes haven't made a difference. The NAN team and
the UVV team have made it quite clear that they don't have the time or
the personnel to investigate something that doesn't matter. If and when
these votes *do* matter to an outcome, then they'll be investigated if
someone complains. If you want them investigated earlier than that,
perhaps you should volunteer to do the investigating, because everybody
else is busy with things that do make a difference.

(As for the non-existance of the Easter Bunny, study up on relativity
theory. That's the only hint I'm giving you.)


>2.) They know for sure that spam bots NEVER harvest addresses from
>message bodies or sigs, as they apparently have seen the workings of
>every one of them.

Nobody other than yourself has used the word "never" in this context.


>3.) A well-known and respected poster to a long established group who
>emails voters is no different from a garden variety spammer. God
>forbid that he insults some Perl scripts! If I cared about the
>results, I would actually look forward to someone trying to verify the
>results!

Maybe you look forward to dozens of people e-mailing you at the same
time, asking you the same question, but most other people prefer not to
be spammed with the same question asked repeatedly.

The ACK process during the voting period, while not perfect, is
currently an acceptable verification of votes. The UVV team is working
at putting a better system in place (which, BTW, is why they don't have
time to chase after the stromboli votes).

The results lists are clearly labelled as "not a mailing list", "not to
be used as a mailing list", or both. The definition of spam doesn't
include anything about the subject matter of the spam, just the amount
sent. Bandwidth usage is the issue. If you e-mail everyone on a list
and those people didn't ask you to e-mail then, then you *are* a
spammer, no matter what you're e-mailing them about.


>I'm sure the creator of the Strombolis enjoys sharing his hilarious
>escapades with off-line folks, as the cabal over there has no idea
>they are the laughingstock of the online world.

That would be because they aren't a laughingstock, except possibly among
people who don't understand what they do.


>Apparently, the regulars of n.g live in a totally black and white, cut
>and dried world, where there are no pranksters, and intuition and
>common sense have no place.

Apparently, you missed seeing the rec.crafts.scrapbooks discussion
earlier this year, or the rec.music.white-power discussion a few years
back. Intuition and common sense have a very important place in this
process.

> I think they all used to work at the UN.

In most of the world, that's a compliment.

>This also demonstrates to me that Usenet really is becoming
>irrelevant, and is simply a place for anonymous attacks and trolls.

This is a serious question and I'd appreciate a serious reply: If you
truly believe that, why are you still here?

--
Rob Kelk robkelk -at- jksrv -dot- com
"We used to joke about the Death of Usenet; I would say that has
happened. What it was is dead, yet what it now is still serves a
unique purpose." - Gene Ward Smith, in news.groups, 30 April 2004

On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan
Welchel) wrote:

>
>

<Snip of incendiary drivel.>

Ya' know Sue - if I can call you "Sue". I had planned on popping over
to see what this new forum would be like. I had hoped that there
would be something of value there.

Congratulations on showing your true colors. Good job on chasing off
one prospective participant! You'll be a helluva moderator.

If you have any sense of introspection and humility, you'll re-read
your post and apologize to this group.


>
>Thank you for your support.

cram it.

Forgive me if I get this wrong as I'm a lurker. They have created a
new group in the hope that they won't have to decide what threads to
read and not read. This group shouldn't even worry about it. You
have the experience, knowledge and contacts. I will wade thru a lot
of bandwidth if good information is there.

MikeM




On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan
Welchel) wrote:

>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
>woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>of their NSP.
>
>Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
>we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
>woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
>reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
>group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
>goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
>joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
>Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
>Thank you for your support.
>
>Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

On 24 Oct 2004 17:45:36 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:


>Then the Satanism group must be a hit, as it has even more posts on average
>per day of existence. If the "soft wreck" averages 5-10 woodworking posts a
>day, compared to 300+ per day like rec.woodworking, you will consider that
>a success too?


Will it have a chance?

The issue of stuffing the ballot box might never be addressed. But if
it is, better to do it now on woodworking that wait for the kooks
group or even later.

On 25 Oct 2004 06:38:39 -0700, [email protected] (Mutt) wrote:

>Don't you have some cookies to bake?

Kookie?

Maybe it's da Kookie Monster sending out these fake emails.

I've gotten three so far.

They were boring.



Regards,
Tom.

"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

Dan said:

>On Fri 22 Oct 2004 09:51:17a, [email protected] (Susan Welchel)
>wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen.
>
>Just in case anybody hasn't seen it yet:
>http://www.softwreck.shop.ms/

What is that? The 18 advertizing pop-ups behind this link?


Greg G.

On 22 Oct 2004 16:11:34 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>
>patrick conroy <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>The group wil not be moderated. Did you read the proposal?

Admittedly no - she irked me so with her insults that I chose to spit
venom rather than continue.

Up until that post, I think I posted my half-hearted support, or at
worst, indifference to her newsgroup.

JAMZ that's all -- Just Another Misguided Zealot

I'll retract my "cram it" and instead (a) offer her my pity and (b)
say a prayer for her that she gets the help she needs.

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:45:00 +0100, Andy Dingley
<[email protected]> wrote:


>Tom Watson looks wistfully down at his green carnation,
>"I wish _I_ had said that", he sighs

Hichens on the Wreck?

Nah, too well dressed.



Regards,
Tom.

"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On 24 Oct 2004 00:45:19 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]> wrote:

>Charles <[email protected]> wrote in news:231020042041105749%[email protected]:
>
>>> What servers carry it?
>>
>> Giganews
>
>Google groups
>
>Individual.net
>
>(comp.os.linux.xbox)

And those three Usenet servers are responsible for a substantial
fraction of the text Usenet group traffic - at least a quarter of all of
text Usenet, and maybe as much as half of it (I haven't looked at the
numbers lately). Also, individual.net peers directly with the other
servers on the list, so messages made on one server will appear on all
three with only a short delay. With a setup and user-base like that, we
should be seeing some traffic for c.o.l.x if there's any to be seen at
all.

--
Rob Kelk
Personal address (ROT-13): eboxryx -ng- wxfei -qbg- pbz
Any opinions here are mine, not ONAG's.
ott.* newsgroup charters: <http://onag.pinetree.org>

Susan Welchel wrote:
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.


Well, that leaves me out.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

[email protected]
http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

> moderated and unmoderated groups. The "soft wreck" was original proposed
as
> a moderated group, but Vito couldn't handle the flamage and he changed the
> status to unmoderated.
>
Then what is the point of it?

"Paul Ebermann" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Since one expect to vote NO mainly the people who
> think the new group has a negative impact on a given
> group (rec.woodworking in this case) and to vote YES
> mainly the people who like to read the new group, it
> does not wonder, that the last ones mainly don't
> participate in rec.woodworking, but the former
> ones do.


You haven't allowed for the fact that most 'lurkers' post at least once,
have a bad experience, then return to lurking. I found very limited evidence
of this in the 50 I sampled. I found more than 60% in the other group.
Perhaps you are correct, IMHO the numbers don't make sense or present a
reasonable distribution.

--

Greg

"Susan Welchel" babbled

> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking.

If you are so offended by politics, filth and drivel, you obviously don't
watch the news, read newpapers or live in the real world.

And rec.woodworking is one of the MELLOWIST newsgroups I have seen on
usenet.

And if you think that people are here for "politics, filth and drivel", you
are mentally retarded.

I wonder how much real talent is going over to the censored site. We have
freedom of speech in this country and your new ng is apparently designed to
take that away in terms of woodworking discussions.


> The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.
>

Decent woodworking folks??

Does that mean I have to put on clothes to use the censored newsgroup?

I can't wear my fishnet stockings and bustier?

Susan Welchel wrote:
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking.

Good, all the dull people who can't deal with the real world
in one spot.

I think that all of the 'stool' threads lately finally pushed them over the
edge. ;-)

P.

"Puff Griffis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Wow nothing like a public gloat. Congrats on your efforts. You wanted out of
the wreck so leave already.
Puff

"Susan Welchel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
'snip'

Good call but her name was Lisa Whelchel.
Puff

"Ron Magen" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
> Puff,
> I 'tuned in' late on this thread, so bear with me.
>=20
> Maybe it's already been mentioned or questioned . . . is this the same =
Susan
> Welchel who played a snooty, teen-aged, privet school, girl on a long =
ago
> sitcom? After that '15 minutes of fame' never heard of her again =
{although
> her co-stars have all been working}until a 2-minute spot on 'Good =
Morning
> America', several weeks ago. She was expounding upon her 'technique' =
of
> disciplining children by putting HOT SAUCE {straight Tabasco, =
etc}directly
> on their tongues. There was no mention of her woodworking or =
mechanical
> abilities.
>=20
> The bottom line . . . if she doesn't like it 'here', and has no =
interest in
> the purpose of the 'Group' or it's subject matter . . . WHAT is she =
DOING
> here ??
>=20
> Regards,
> Ron Magen
> Backyard Boatshop
>=20
>=20
> "Puff Griffis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> Wow nothing like a public gloat. Congrats on your efforts. You wanted =
out of
> the wreck so leave already.
> Puff
>=20
> "Susan Welchel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> > woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> > they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> > associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
> > the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All =
decent
> > woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> > of their NSP.
> >
> > Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
> > we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
> > woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
> > reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
> > group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
> > goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested =
in
> > joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
> > Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
> >
> > Thank you for your support.
> >
> > Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel
>=20
>

"jo4hn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:_Iued.5129$%[email protected]...
> Bob Schmall wrote:
>
>> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:45:00 +0100, Andy Dingley
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Tom Watson looks wistfully down at his green carnation,
>>>>"I wish _I_ had said that", he sighs
>>>
>>>Hichens on the Wreck?
>>
>>
>> Loves Me Like a Wreck?
>>
> Wreck havoc?

Several guys with day jobs.

Doug Winterburn wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:58:56 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:
>
>>The interesting thing to me is that I haven't promoted the web site other
>>than to occasionally provide a woodworking link on the two woodworking
>>groups - and my woodworking pages present fairly mundane stuff.
>>
>>I'm obliged to conclude that the wreck's lurker:poster ratio is a great
>>deal higher than 10:1.
>
> Unless you've specified no robots in your robots.txt file, many search
> engines will be scanning your entire site, giving you a distorted view if
> you don't look at the sources of hits.

Agreed. If it's safe to make the assumption that the robots begin
with the root directory; and that /only/ robots (unlikely) pull
up the index.html page, then we can subtract 2084 "tours" of the
site and subtract some smaller number of unique visitors.

Still, it's a lot more visitors than I ever expected. Sure hope
they're all finding whatever it was they wanted...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto, Iowa USA

Lobby Dosser wrote:

[snip]
> Wreck of Ages cleft for me,
> Let me hide myself in thee ...
>
> LD
Sweet. Sleep on.

patrick conroy <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Congratulations on showing your true colors. Good job on chasing off
> one prospective participant! You'll be a helluva moderator.

The group wil not be moderated. Did you read the proposal?

--
Bill

"mp" <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> Here's hoping that once you have your forum up and running you'll stop
> being a hypocrite and will no longer spam this forum with off topic
> posts.

I would say that an announcement to propose new woodworking groups and
reorganize the wreck is on topic here. She could have spared us the gloat,
however.

--
Bill

igor <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>>The group wil not be moderated. Did you read the proposal?
>
> Then why did OP say this:
> "The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages ..."?

The NAN moderation team is Russ Allbery (big boss) and Todd McComb (first
mate). They create all new newsgroups for the Big-8 hierarchy, for both
moderated and unmoderated groups. The "soft wreck" was original proposed as
a moderated group, but Vito couldn't handle the flamage and he changed the
status to unmoderated.

--
Bill

igor <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Is it
> possible/probable that (1) with the new practice of some web-based
> forums "appropriating" NG content, (2) the OP's mention of starting
> some "for sale" and commercial service NGs, and (3) the ability of the
> OPs to set up a forum that "appropriates" the content of this new NG,
> that: This is all the start of a move to their establishing a website
> with ads, etc -- i.e., a commercial venture?

I don't think so. They probably want to ban ads in the wreck and isolate
those posts in a marketplace group, which is pretty common in
reorganizations. If they aren't just blowing smoke, we shall soon find out.
I'm curious what other woodworking groups they plan to propose.

--
Bill

Dave Balderstone <dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca> wrote in
news:221020040901034117%dave@N_O_T_T_H_I_S.balderstone.ca:

>> The NAN moderation team will create
>> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week.
>
>
> That remains to be seen.
>

The only person with the power to veto a result and change the outcome is
Russ Allbery. He is away on vacation for some weeks, and he expressed that
he wants nothing to do with Usenet during that time. Chances are that the
result will stand and the control message for the new group will be issued
by Todd in about four days. Timing is on Vito's side here.

--
Bill

Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> The fine, upstanding, and news-group obsessed
> Stromboli family weighed in with 22.

Actually there were 27 Stromboli votes for this CFV. It is the stated
position of the NAN moderation team that those people exist, and that their
votes should count. They have survived several other
challenges/investigations in the past. They actually swayed the result for
the creation of comp.os.linux.xbox, which passed because of the Stromboli
votes. The group now exists, but it is dead as a teak board.

--
Bill

Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>> Just because the initial RESULT states that the group passed doesn't
>> mean that it will be created.
>
> I'm aware of that, but what needs to be done to demonstrate voting
> irregularities to the satisfaction of the NAN team? What are *their*
> criteria for getting votes disallowed? I can point out obvious (to me)
> invalid votes, but if the NAN folks don't agree, then I'm just wasting
> my time.

I'll point you to a vote challenge that lead to a change in the RESULT..

http://makeashorterlink.com/?E28824999

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

The original RESULT..

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q19813999

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

The revised RESULT..

http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1A823999

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

In the original RESULT, the group failed. There were 2 challenges made..to
the Full Metal Jacket "no" votes, and to the Stromboli "yes" votes. In the
end, the FMJ votes were thrown out, and the Stroboli votes were upheld. The
group passed, solely due to the Stromboli block of votes.

--
Bill

GregP <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>>Klaas <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> Yes. We are now in the post-RESULT discussion period where the
>>> RESULT is subject to public scrutiny and irregularities can be
>>> pointed out.
>>
>>
>>Well, we should mention the following YES, which seem suspicious
>>
>>alfredo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Alfredo
>>Stromboli art [at] stromboli.uni.cc
>> Arturo Stromboli bruno [at] stromboli.uni.cc
>> Bruno Stromboli...
>
>
> Maybe the group name should be changed to
> rec.stromboli.all.ages
>

The Stromboli family votes on every proposal..not just this one. They have
survived several challenges/investigations, and their votes were always
upheld by the NAN team.

--
Bill

Bill Cole <[email protected]> wrote in news:bill-
[email protected]:

>> The fine, upstanding, and news-group obsessed
>> Stromboli family weighed in with 22.
>
> 23, I think...

27

See my post "Stromboli Report"

--
Bill

Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>>> The fine, upstanding, and news-group obsessed Stromboli family weighed
>>> in with 22.
>>
>> 23, I think...
>
> I still count only 22 Yes votes, but we're splitting hairs here...

Why are you only counting the "yes" votes? If we're going to throw out the
Stromboli votes (I have been in favor of throwing out Stromboli votes for
months) then let's throw them *all* out.

--
Bill

Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>> and it may take some time for that to happen given that
>> Russ is on vacation.
>
> Has it been determined that the control message will wait until he is
> back? There was some confusion on this issue.

Russ Allbery wrote..

"I wanted to let everyone know that I'm heading out on
vacation tomorrow and will be gone until November 2nd. I don't intend to
look at anything related to news.groups or Usenet in general while I'm
gone.

Any questions or problems related to news.announce.newgroups should be
directed to newgroups-request at isc.org; Todd and Brian can take care of
everything."

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

He said Todd and Brian can take care of *everything*.

--
Bill

[email protected] (Todd Michel McComb) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Bill Cole <[email protected]> wrote:
>>The results depend on the deliberate judgment of the NAN team. That
>>deliberation is apparently not complete.
>
> We are unlikely to throw out this vote. We do remain suspicious
> of various recent events surrounding voting, however, and are
> continuing to look into that, broadly speaking.
>
> Barring some other revelation -- and I'm using "other" generously,
> since there hasn't been one -- the group will be created on schedule.
>
> I suggest that those of you who feel that this group will somehow
> destroy something take a few deep breaths, go back to the group you
> _do_ like, and ignore this one just as you presumably ignore a
> thousand or more other current groups. If it turns out that no one
> wants to use it, it'll become our problem, and somehow I think you'll
> all survive. As the saying goes, "It's only USENET."
>
> Todd McComb
> [email protected]

The voice of NAN has spoken. The group will be created.


--
Bill

Charles <[email protected]> wrote in news:231020042041105749%[email protected]:

>> What servers carry it?
>
> Giganews

Google groups

Individual.net

(comp.os.linux.xbox)

--
Bill

On Fri 22 Oct 2004 09:51:17a, [email protected] (Susan Welchel)
wrote in news:[email protected]:

> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen.

Just in case anybody hasn't seen it yet:
http://www.softwreck.shop.ms/

On Sun 24 Oct 2004 07:12:06a, skeezics <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 02:54:58 -0000, Dan <[email protected]> wrote:

>>Just in case anybody hasn't seen it yet:
>>http://www.softwreck.shop.ms/
>
> couldnt find it through all the popups! hope the new group is more
> profetionally mannaged than the website! lol....
>

Um. Did I mention I've got the popup blocker on by default?

Sorry about that. I should have noticed the little icon telling me that
Firefox had blocked popups. But I didn't. I'll be more careful next time.

Okay, I've tried to read everything about this issue that I can, and I
haven't yet found a post that tells me why this is a Bad Thing.

Everything I know about newsgroups tells me that the most likely scenario
is that the group gets created, enjoys a short honeymoon period, then
traffic dies off to nothing and the moderators forget about it so no posts
ever make it through. Every now and then someone posts a "Hey, what's this
woodworking.all-ages group? How come it's dead?" to this group, which
generates another "Oh, that's Vito and Susan. They're dumb." thread.

What's so bad about that?

Dan <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Everything I know about newsgroups tells me that the most likely
> scenario is that the group gets created, enjoys a short honeymoon
> period, then traffic dies off to nothing and the moderators forget
> about it so no posts ever make it through.

The group will be unmoderated.

--
Bill

Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>>> They actually swayed the result for the creation of
>>> comp.os.linux.xbox, which passed because of the Stromboli
>>> votes. The group now exists, but it is dead as a teak board.
>>
>>What servers carry it?
>
> The two largest ISPs (uni-berlin.de and supernews) carry it,

Yes, I know. I have posted to it a few times, and I didn't get very helpful
answers, other than a pointer to a web page.

> and it has five to ten posts per day about Linux on Xbox.
> I call that a success.

Then the Satanism group must be a hit, as it has even more posts on average
per day of existence. If the "soft wreck" averages 5-10 woodworking posts a
day, compared to 300+ per day like rec.woodworking, you will consider that
a success too?

--
Bill

[email protected] (Mutt) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Andy: Maybe I wasn't clear, I couldn't care less about their new
> group, nor about voting for or against it as from my perspective the
> wreck ain't broke, and all I want is for them to cut out their
> moralistic whinings and insulting superior "Hoorah!!" attitudes and
> leave already.
>

Her gloat may have been premature. The RESULT is under review, and the
group passage may be voided. We will know by Nov 12, which also happens to
be the last day of voting for the talk.kookology proposal.

--
Bill

Morris Dovey <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I'm obliged to conclude that the wreck's lurker:poster ratio is a
> great deal higher than 10:1.

I've been a power lurker and infrequent poster to rec.woodworking for
almost four years now. I'll vouch for that.

--
Bill

Ba r r y <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I'm looking for some evidence that
> Easter Bunny dosen't exist, can anyone help me?

If you can't put up hard evidence that there is no Easter Bunny, Santa
Claus, Sea Monster, The Grinch, or Stay-Puffed Marshmallow Man then they
(and there extended families of 20 or more) have the right to vote on as
many CFVs in a row as they wish, with confidence that their votes will be
upheld after all challenges. :-)

--
Bill

Rob Kelk <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> So far, the stromboli votes haven't made a difference.

That is not true. Did you follow comp.os.linux.xbox?

C.O.L.X. passed *only because* of the Stromboli votes.


http://makeashorterlink.com/?E28824999

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

The original RESULT..

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q19813999

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

The revised RESULT..

http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1A823999

Message-ID: <[email protected]>

In the original RESULT, the group failed. There were 2 challenges
made..to the Full Metal Jacket "no" votes, and to the Stromboli "yes"
votes. In the end, the FMJ votes were thrown out, and the Stromboli
votes were upheld. The group passed, solely due to the Stromboli block
of votes.



--
Bill

Rob Kelk <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> So far, the stromboli votes haven't made a difference. The NAN team and
> the UVV team have made it quite clear that they don't have the time or
> the personnel to investigate something that doesn't matter. If and when
> these votes *do* matter to an outcome, then they'll be investigated if
> someone complains.

They *have* been investigated when their votes *did* matter, and the NAN
team ruled that it was their official position that the family exists, and
that their votes would count..passing the comp.os.linux.xbox proposal. I
was one of the people to complain. Guy Macon was another, and there were
more. Nothing happened.

--
Bill

Bob Schmall wrote:

> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:45:00 +0100, Andy Dingley
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Tom Watson looks wistfully down at his green carnation,
>>>"I wish _I_ had said that", he sighs
>>
>>Hichens on the Wreck?
>
>
> Loves Me Like a Wreck?
>
Wreck havoc?

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:36:30 GMT, skeezics <[email protected]> wrote:

>umm.... didnt anybody notice they havent been back to respond?

We don't deserve a response, because we're rude and unworthy.

On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan
Welchel) wrote:

>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>associated with rec.woodworking.

The only guaranteed certainty with your group is that one of the first
10 subscribers is going to be Puppy Wizard.

Yep, you're f*cked.

Might as well start writing your next CFV. :)

Michael Baglio

On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan
Welchel) wrote:

>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
>woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>of their NSP.
>
>Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
>we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
>woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
>reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
>group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
>goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
>joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
>Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
>Thank you for your support.
>
>Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

umm.... didnt anybody notice they havent been back to respond?

skeez

On 25 Oct 2004 06:38:39 -0700, [email protected] (Mutt) wrote:

>The wreck wasn't broke but you tried to fix it,
>and used a flawed "voting" to validate your "soft" and "respectable"
>alternative.

So why didn't _you_ vote against it?

It's too late to complain about it now, when you did nothing in the
first place.

In article <[email protected]>,
Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]> wrote:

> GregP <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> >>Klaas <[email protected]> writes:
> >>
> >>> Yes. We are now in the post-RESULT discussion period where the
> >>> RESULT is subject to public scrutiny and irregularities can be
> >>> pointed out.
> >>
> >>
> >>Well, we should mention the following YES, which seem suspicious
> >>
> >>alfredo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Alfredo
> >>Stromboli art [at] stromboli.uni.cc
> >> Arturo Stromboli bruno [at] stromboli.uni.cc
> >> Bruno Stromboli...
> >
> >
> > Maybe the group name should be changed to
> > rec.stromboli.all.ages
> >
>
> The Stromboli family votes on every proposal..not just this one. They have
> survived several challenges/investigations, and their votes were always
> upheld by the NAN team.

Precedent of that sort is meaningless. The Big 8 has always been run
with reason and common sense trumping legalistic procedural rules. The
more the Stromboli's vote, the more clear it is that they are not
participating in the process as it is intended to be used, even if they
really were 20-some-odd unique individuals, each actually voting on
their own.

--
Now where did I hide that website...

In article <[email protected]>,
Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 01:30:41 -0700, Klaas wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:38:46 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
> >>
> >> > I don't think they'll be able to pull off this type of fraud again. If
> >> > the voting system that allowed this one doesn't change, it will be
> >> > simple enough for some enterprising soul to stack things on the NO
> >> > side of the vote the same way the YES side was stacked this time.
> >>
> >> Is there, realistically, anything that can be done about the travesty
> >> currently before us?
> >
> > Yes. We are now in the post-RESULT discussion period where the RESULT is
> > subject to public scrutiny and irregularities can be pointed out.
> >
> > Just because the initial RESULT states that the group passed doesn't mean
> > that it will be created.
>
> I'm aware of that, but what needs to be done to demonstrate voting
> irregularities to the satisfaction of the NAN team? What are *their*
> criteria for getting votes disallowed? I can point out obvious (to me)
> invalid votes, but if the NAN folks don't agree, then I'm just wasting my
> time.

Yep. Welcome to Usenet.

You are also perfectly free to run your own news server and manage the
groups on it in any way you please without reference to the NAN mod
team's view of the Big 8.

You are also perfectly free to lobby the operator of whatever news
server you use to ignore the NAN mod team.

I think that even if Russ & Co. make the mistake of accepting this vote
and the r.p.d vote, it would be childish, unwise, and
counter-utilitarian to ignore them on all matters at all times in the
future. I don't have a fix for the voting process that I think won't be
subject to the same class of vandals operating in different ways, so I
don't see the fact that the always-vulnerable voting system is finally
being targeted with a little skill as grounds for abandoning the rest of
the system or the people running it.

--
Now where did I hide that website...

In article <[email protected]>,
Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:38:46 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
>
> > I don't think they'll be able to pull off this type of fraud again. If the
> > voting system that allowed this one doesn't change, it will be simple
> > enough for some enterprising soul to stack things on the NO side of the
> > vote the same way the YES side was stacked this time.
>
> Is there, realistically, anything that can be done about the travesty
> currently before us? I'm actually nauseous over this.
>
> I took the posted e-mail addresses and plowed through the domains to see
> what I could see. A little sed, a little nslookup and ...
>
> Among the Yes votes, and utterly absurd 44 votes came via mailserver
> sitemail.everyone.net. This MX is a know spammer and is currently listed
> on a couple of RBLs.

That is a bit misleading. The reason everyone.net has chronic spam
issues is the same reason it *might* be a useful too for group voting
fraud or *might* be the mail handler for many addresses used in a vote
legitimately: they provide extremely cheap email outsourcing. In fact,
there are not many other companies competing with them for the segment
of the market they serve with their personal email offering. In
addition, they offer cheap email outsourcing on a larger scale for
businesses and ISP's. I don't find it particularly shocking that a lot
of people voting in a group poll get their mail via everyone.net.

I'm not a particular fan of everyone.net, but it is a gross
oversimplification to look at them as

> The fine, upstanding, and news-group obsessed
> Stromboli family weighed in with 22.

23, I think...

Anyone who believes that the Strombolis are the big family who this year
all developed a sudden shared interest in newsgroups is a fool. There's
no credible evidence that this 'family' is anything more than an online
invention of someone who finds it amusing to play with the voting
system.

> zzn.com came at us with 16 obviously
> legit subdomains like FuckMeJesus.zzn.com. 10 votes came from domains that
> no longer return any MX record at all.

That's a serious bad sign.

> Here's my advice to the folks at news.groups: Stop. Just stop. You are
> now, officially, a laughing stock. Stop creating any new groups until you
> get your house in order. Clearly the CFVs can be manipulated at
> will. You no longer have a legitimate methodology for determining which
> groups to create and which are trash. Until you do, there is no point in
> creating a bigger mess.

I would tend to agree with you, except for the fact that this is not yet
a settled issue. The vote has not been sanctioned and accepted, and it
could easily be that the NAN moderation team will eventually toss it out
*AS IS THEIR PREROGATIVE* and it may take some time for that to happen
given that Russ is on vacation.

If the newgroup messages are sent for this group or the r.p.d farce
based on the results now available, I can say with absolute certainty
that I will ignore them for my news server and will stop feeding the
regular checkgroup messages to my server. Big 8 group management has
been shaky for a long time, and has been dodging bullets a few times
every year since the mid 90's. It looks now like at least the Stromboli
perpetrator and probably others are taking aim at the process seriously
with an intent to kill it and they will succeed one way or the other.
The better way of death would be a replacement process that is
significantly harder to game.

--
Clues for the blacklisted: <http://www.scconsult.com/bill/dnsblhelp.html>
Current Peeve: "This page was written to render correctly in any standards
compliant browser" on pages with hundreds of HTML errors.

In article <[email protected]>,
Joe Wells <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 12:11:14 -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
[...]
> > Anyone who believes that the Strombolis are the big family who this year
> > all developed a sudden shared interest in newsgroups is a fool. There's no
> > credible evidence that this 'family' is anything more than an online
> > invention of someone who finds it amusing to play with the voting system.
>
> And the NAN team continues to allow it to happen.

I think you misinterpret the role and actions of the NAN team.

(hint: they have not acted at all on this vote and they do not control
the voting mechanisms. )

[...]
> > I would tend to agree with you, except for the fact that this is not yet a
> > settled issue. The vote has not been sanctioned and accepted, and it could
> > easily be that the NAN moderation team will eventually toss it out *AS IS
> > THEIR PREROGATIVE*
>
> Yes, but *what criteria* will they use to make that determination?

Historically there have been no overriding objective criteria for
tossing out individual votes or entire polls. That's a good thing.

The results depend on the deliberate judgment of the NAN team. That
deliberation is apparently not complete. After they've made their
judgment, the relevance of it will depend on how much attention news
admins are still paying to them.

[...]> > and it may take some time for that to happen given that
> > Russ is on vacation.
>
> Has it been determined that the control message will wait until he is
> back? There was some confusion on this issue.

I don't think that has been stated by anyone in a position to know.

--
Now where did I hide that website...

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:24:27 -0700, "mp" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> Here's hoping that once you have your forum up and running you'll stop
>>> being a hypocrite and will no longer spam this forum with off topic
>>> posts.
>>
>> I would say that an announcement to propose new woodworking groups and
>> reorganize the wreck is on topic here. She could have spared us the gloat,
>> however.
>
>I wonder if the new (and most likely boring) forum will consider proposals
>to create new woodworking groups with more filth and drivel to be on-topic
>posts?

Doubt it. Just another dust-filled spam catcher- these spin-off
groups always are.

"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nadaspam*@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Kmaed.514231$8_6.489087@attbi_s04...

>
> Decent woodworking folks??
>
> Does that mean I have to put on clothes to use the censored newsgroup?
>
> I can't wear my fishnet stockings and bustier?

It's OK here, but PLEAAASE not in ABPW.

Klaas <[email protected]> writes:

> Yes. We are now in the post-RESULT discussion period where the RESULT
> is subject to public scrutiny and irregularities can be pointed out.


Well, we should mention the following YES, which seem suspicious

alfredo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Alfredo Stromboli
art [at] stromboli.uni.cc Arturo Stromboli
bruno [at] stromboli.uni.cc Bruno Stromboli
cira [at] stromboli.uni.cc Cira Stromboli
enrico [at] stromboli.uni.cc Enrico Stromboli
enzo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Enzo Stromboli Senior
frankie [at] stromboli.uni.cc Frankie Stromboli
gina [at] stromboli.uni.cc Gina Stromboli
hugo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Hugo Stromboli
joey [at] stromboli.uni.cc Joey Stromboli
junior [at] stromboli.uni.cc Enzo Stromboli Junior
leo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Leo Stromboli
lino [at] stromboli.uni.cc Lino Stromboli
marco [at] stromboli.uni.cc Marco Stromboli
mario [at] stromboli.uni.cc Mario Stromboli
mauro [at] stromboli.uni.cc Mauro Stromboli
rob [at] stromboli.uni.cc Roberto Stromboli
rosa [at] stromboli.uni.cc Rosa Stromboli
rosario [at] stromboli.uni.cc Rosario Stromboli
santa [at] stromboli.uni.cc Santa Stromboli
tony [at] stromboli.uni.cc Tony Stromboli
vincenzo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Vincenzo Stromboli
g [at] stromboli.uni.cc Giorgio Stromboli
jada [at] stromboli.uni.cc Jada Stromboli
mona [at] stromboli.uni.cc Mona Stromboli
e [at] stromboli.uni.cc Elisabetta Stromboli
olivia [at] stromboli.uni.cc Olivia Stromboli

--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

"Greg Millen" skribis:

> I have taken some time to validate names and email, even searching Google to
> see who has posted to rec.woodworking before. Results are:
>
> NO Votes - verified 60 out of 93
>
> YES Votes - checked the first 50, only TWO could be verified. I am willing
> to send my results to anyone willing to review them.

Since one expect to vote NO mainly the people who
think the new group has a negative impact on a given
group (rec.woodworking in this case) and to vote YES
mainly the people who like to read the new group, it
does not wonder, that the last ones mainly don't
participate in rec.woodworking, but the former
ones do.


Paul

Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]> writes:

> Why are you only counting the "yes" votes? If we're going to throw out the
> Stromboli votes (I have been in favor of throwing out Stromboli votes for
> months) then let's throw them *all* out.

Of the stromboli votes:
2 Abstain
3 No
22 Yes

The 22 yes votes are by:
alfredo art bruno cira enrico enzo frankie gina hugo joey junior leo
lino marco mario mauro rob rosa rosario santa tony vincenzo


--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

I'd like to see the full headers of all of the stromboli e-mail
messages that votes.

Also - I'd like to see evidence that any of these people have posted
to any newsgroup. A quick search shows that this domain only shows up
in newsgroup votes, or as spam targets. Otherwise they don't exist.

I can easily create a thousand sock puppets on my home machine, all with
the same domain. I can ACK any e-mail to these fictitious addresses.

What evidence exists that these are real people?


--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

"Greg Millen" skribis:
> "Paul Ebermann" <[email protected]> wrote [...]
>
> > Since one expect to vote NO mainly the people who
> > think the new group has a negative impact on a given
> > group (rec.woodworking in this case) and to vote YES
> > mainly the people who like to read the new group, it
> > does not wonder, that the last ones mainly don't
> > participate in rec.woodworking, but the former
> > ones do.
>
> You haven't allowed for the fact that most 'lurkers' post at least once,
> have a bad experience, then return to lurking.

Have you any evidence for your "fact"?

_I_ don't know anything about the lurkers of
the groups I'm reading (and posting to).

One could decide to rest lurking by seeing the
"bad experience" of others.

> I found very limited evidence
> of this in the 50 I sampled. I found more than 60% in the other group.

Yes - there won't be a independant distibution,
as I sayed above.

> Perhaps you are correct, IMHO the numbers don't make sense or present a
> reasonable distribution.

As I don't know what a "reasonable distribution" should be,
I can't comment on this.


Note: I don't say there was no ballot-stuffing,
I only say your statistics don't give evidence
for it.


Paul

"Jimi" <[email protected]> writes:

>> What evidence exists that these are real people?
>
> One Stromboli said they do and that was enough to make their votes count.

So I can create a thousand sock puppets on a single IP address, and
vote any way I want to?

Okay.

--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.

In news.groups Greg Millen <[email protected]> wrote:

>You haven't allowed for the fact that most 'lurkers' post at least once,
>have a bad experience, then return to lurking.

No, a good number of lurkers never post. You'll never find any
records of them, unless they decide to participate in something
like a Big-8 vote. I wouldn't be surprised if someone managed
to do a local study and found a 10 to 1 lurker:poster ratio, and
if the turnover is anywhere near the 50% I've seen in some places,
then there's a good number of folks that are new enough to not
want to post yet, but old enough to know the group enough to
vote. That means it is quite possible that that "most lurkers"
have never posted, and we would never know about them except the
one instance of an email and ID that showed up in a RESULT.

ru

--
My standard proposals rant:
Quality, usefulness, merit, or non-newsgroups popularity of a topic
is more or less irrelevant in creating a new Big-8 newsgroup.
Usenet popularity is the primary consideration.

In news.groups Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]> wrote:
>Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:


>> and it has five to ten posts per day about Linux on Xbox.
>> I call that a success.

>Then the Satanism group must be a hit, as it has even more posts on average
>per day of existence. If the "soft wreck" averages 5-10 woodworking posts a
>day, compared to 300+ per day like rec.woodworking, you will consider that
>a success too?

There tends to be different standards for tech and sci groups. I'd say
the Xbox group is doing OK, but I wouldn't say it was a hit. On the
other hand, my impression is that 10/day for a tech group is considered
quite acceptable. For comparison, a rec.* group that was doing OK, to
me, would be running at 20-30/day, and lively at 50/day.

ru

--
My standard proposals rant:
Quality, usefulness, merit, or non-newsgroups popularity of a topic
is more or less irrelevant in creating a new Big-8 newsgroup.
Usenet popularity is the primary consideration.

"Morris Dovey" skribis:
> Doug Winterburn wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:58:56 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:
> >
> >>The interesting thing to me is that I haven't promoted the web site other
> >>than to occasionally provide a woodworking link on the two woodworking
> >>groups - and my woodworking pages present fairly mundane stuff.

Are you sure there aren't other websites now linking to your site?
Are you sure it can't be found via google?

> >>I'm obliged to conclude that the wreck's lurker:poster ratio is a great
> >>deal higher than 10:1.
> >
> > Unless you've specified no robots in your robots.txt file, many search
> > engines will be scanning your entire site, giving you a distorted view if
> > you don't look at the sources of hits.
>
> Agreed. If it's safe to make the assumption that the robots begin
> with the root directory;

Robots may also simply follow links from outside.



Paul

In article <[email protected]>,
Rob Kelk <[email protected]> wrote:
>So far, the stromboli votes haven't made a difference.

This is not true.
--
Ken Arromdee / arromdee_AT_rahul.net / http://www.rahul.net/arromdee

"They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright
brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." --Carl Sagan

"Susan Welchel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen. Now,
> woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
> they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
> associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
> the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week. All decent
> woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
> of their NSP.
>
> Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
> we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
> woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
> reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
> group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
> goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
> joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
> Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.

Sounds boring

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 02:54:58 -0000, Dan <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Fri 22 Oct 2004 09:51:17a, [email protected] (Susan Welchel)
>wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> We would like to thank everyone for making this happen.
>
>Just in case anybody hasn't seen it yet:
>http://www.softwreck.shop.ms/

couldnt find it through all the popups! hope the new group is more
profetionally mannaged than the website! lol....



skeez

"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:45:00 +0100, Andy Dingley
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>Tom Watson looks wistfully down at his green carnation,
>>"I wish _I_ had said that", he sighs
>
> Hichens on the Wreck?

Loves Me Like a Wreck?

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:43:29 GMT, "Ron Magen" <[email protected]>
vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email


>The bottom line . . . if she doesn't like it 'here', and has no interest in
>the purpose of the 'Group' or it's subject matter . . . WHAT is she DOING
>here ??

AS far as I can see from past messages, notnig except organise other
groups and preach.
*****************************************************
Have you noticed that people always run from what
they _need_ toward what they want?????

On 24 Oct 2004 17:45:36 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Guy Macon <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>>>> They actually swayed the result for the creation of
>>>> comp.os.linux.xbox, which passed because of the Stromboli
>>>> votes. The group now exists, but it is dead as a teak board.
>>>
>>>What servers carry it?
>>
>> The two largest ISPs (uni-berlin.de and supernews) carry it,
>
>Yes, I know. I have posted to it a few times, and I didn't get very helpful
>answers, other than a pointer to a web page.
>
>> and it has five to ten posts per day about Linux on Xbox.
>> I call that a success.
>
>Then the Satanism group must be a hit, as it has even more posts on average
>per day of existence. If the "soft wreck" averages 5-10 woodworking posts a
>day, compared to 300+ per day like rec.woodworking, you will consider that
>a success too?

I would. I just doubt it's going to happen.

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:29:57 GMT, "toller" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>> moderated and unmoderated groups. The "soft wreck" was original proposed
>as
>> a moderated group, but Vito couldn't handle the flamage and he changed the
>> status to unmoderated.
>>
>Then what is the point of it?
>
Stupid clueless people.
The village idiot Susan and the other stooge thinks they can moderate the group
via the netkop route.
In other words they will report OT posts to the 'offenders' NSP.

On 23 Oct 2004 11:12:01 GMT, Bruce Barnett
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Klaas <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Yes. We are now in the post-RESULT discussion period where the RESULT
>> is subject to public scrutiny and irregularities can be pointed out.
>
>
>Well, we should mention the following YES, which seem suspicious
>
>alfredo [at] stromboli.uni.cc Alfredo Stromboli
>art [at] stromboli.uni.cc Arturo Stromboli
>bruno [at] stromboli.uni.cc Bruno Stromboli...


Maybe the group name should be changed to
rec.stromboli.all.ages

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 00:34:20 -0500, Joe Wells <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 22:38:46 -0600, Dave Balderstone wrote:
>
>> I don't think they'll be able to pull off this type of fraud again. If the
>> voting system that allowed this one doesn't change, it will be simple
>> enough for some enterprising soul to stack things on the NO side of the
>> vote the same way the YES side was stacked this time.
>
>Is there, realistically, anything that can be done about the travesty
>currently before us? I'm actually nauseous over this.
>

<snip>

When you are using the Internet eventually you learn to ignore things
that don't matter. There's email garbage I don't read, websites I do
not visit, and postings I do not read. I cannot possibly read all
posts in rec.woodworking, and I won't be reading all-ages. As long as
rec.woodworking is not going away, I have no concern. All I can say
to the creators of all-ages, have fun.

> >> What evidence exists that these are real people?
> >
> > One Stromboli said they do and that was enough to make their votes
count.
>
> So I can create a thousand sock puppets on a single IP address, and
> vote any way I want to?

Yup - the technical phrase for this is "doing a Stromboli" :-)


Jimi

On 22 Oct 2004 07:51:17 -0700, [email protected] (Susan
Welchel) vaguely proposed a theory
......and in reply I say!:

remove ns from my header address to reply via email

Amazing. This is the only post I can find from you at all here!

What a lot of self-righteous pap!

>We would like to thank everyone for making this happen.

Well, that's silly. I know that I for one had nothing to do with it.

>Now,
>woodworkers with respectable values will have an on-topic forum, and
>they will not be stuck with the politics, filth, and drivel that are
>associated with rec.woodworking. The NAN moderation team will create
>the new group, rec.woodworking.all-ages, in about one week.

HAH! All-ages. Have you heard nine-year-olds talking in the street
these days? Not much politics, probably! <G>

>All decent
>woodworking folk should request the new group from the administrator
>of their NSP.

Yes SIRRR!ight now, SIR! How high SIR?

>
>Given the overwhelming success of the proposal, we have decided that
>we will be submitting another proposal aimed at improving the
>woodworking community in the near future. This will be a multi-group
>reorganization proposal, which will include a separate marketplace
>group for selling, auctioning, and announcing personal or commercial
>goods and services related to woodworking. If anyone is interested in
>joining the proponent team for the new proposal, please e-mail Vito
>Kuhn or Susan Welchel for consideration.
>
>Thank you for your support.
>
>Vito Kuhn and Susan Welchel

*****************************************************
Have you noticed that people always run from what
they _need_ toward what they want?????