Re: Come on over to "Moderated By An Amateur"!

Guy Macon wrote:
Martin R. "Flamer" Howell wrote:
Guy Macon wrote:

Martin R. Howell wrote:

I just deleted a FEW HUNDRED posts that were older than 30 days and had not been responded to in more than 30 days.
And you think that this is a Good Thing?

Now mind you, it ain't ever gonna receive the acceptance of hard-boiled and hard-core usenet folks. That is fine. If you are happy here and don't care to visit or join Moderated sci.astro.amateur then that is fine too.
Close minded, but fine.
Perhaps you would like to address the fact that you are a single
point of failure, and that posts will be deleted if you get tired
of the project, if you don't like the number of responses, etc.
If I post an answer to a techical question here, it will remain
available for future users. If I post it on your board, it will be deleted and lost forever.

Just don't be surprised who you run into at the forum.
What will surprize me is if your forum still exists on 01 January 2010.
You sir have a post which appears on Moderated sci.astro.amateur in the category, "The Best of Usenet's sci.astro.amateur."

It has not been removed and was responded to by Rod Mollise -- whose response to your post has not been removed either. Of course, you will never know what Rod said in response to your post since you don't read the forum.

On what basis do you assume that I do not read the forum?

Because if you had, you would have not compiled the nice little "breakdown" chart at the end of this response of yours and prefaced with the remark, "you set up TWENTY FOUR forums, half of which have nothing in them:" You would have known that until last week there were nearly 700 posts/replies in the forum and that all of those now empty areas were quite full. I deleted all topics a few days back that had drawn no response for more than 30 days. I did this because it was getting very cluttered in the forum and there was no way to remove this clutter and archive it. I am not google.

I check
it every so often to see if you have made it a success. And I wished
you well until you decided to come here and insult me and other
Usenet users unprovoked.

There are more than a few people that have participated in both usenet sci.astro.amateur and Moderated sci.astro.amateur. I am not insulting anyone, I am merely stating facts. Want an example of an insult that is such and can't be disputed as being one? Take a look at your calling myself a single point of failure. I suspect what may have initially upset you with me had nothing to do with the forum but was my being the first to respond to your "Cleaning optics" topic with words to the effect of, "No Thanks."


BTW, by the above are you implying that my USENET post that you reposted there might be removed because I dare to disagree with you?

Nope. The post and response from Mollise are still up.


By the way, thanks for the kind and compassionate words and feelings you just displayed for the entire world to see.

A classic example of the pot calling the kettle black. You came here -- Usenet -- and started flaming away at us Usenet users, calling us "close minded" for not embracing your website. In response, I gave you several good reasons why I believe Usenet is superior. Was it your expectation that you could come here and flame me and others like me while having your delicate sensibilities shielded from any disagreable responses?

Your website, or job resume, located at http://www.GuyMacon.com which was linked in the signature line of your "cleaning optics" post, indicates that you have no degree and are self taught. It might be good for you to go back and teach yourself a little better spelling skills than the wonderful post to which I am now responding reflects that you possess.


You correctly pointed out the advantage of a web-based forum
("No visits by Islamic posters, No visits by the crazies that spam").

I did not point this out. That was pointed out the original poster of this thread, P. Edward Murray.

Should I sarcasticly whine "By the way, thanks for the
kind and compassionate words and feelings you just displayed for the entire world to see" just because you pointed out a way in
which a web forum is superior to Usenet?

How about addressing the actual content of my post instead of pulling out the flamethrower? You got your panties in a wad because I pointed out that there are ways that a web-based forum is inferior to Usenet

Wrong. I got my "panties in a wad" because you labeled me a single point of failure. You sir, know nothing about me.

, but you didn't say that I was wrong.
Try discussing the following in a calm. rational manner and
without namecalling or personal attacks:

Neither is superior to the other. If you have been hanging around usenet sci.astro.amateur for a couple of years, then you might remember that I started Moderated sci.astro.amateur in response to the many requests that frequently occurred in the usenet group stating the need for a moderated version. I am spending my money and my time to provide just that.



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

Reasons why Web-based replacements for Usenet are inferior to Usenet:

Web-based replacements for Usenet keep coming and going. Someone
sets up a new one, gets bored or tired of the hard work, abandons
the forum, and it either goes dark, is frozen with no way to post,
or becomes a pit of spam. You can claim that your Web-based replacement for Usenet will be different, but all the other webmasters started out with good intentions too.

Web-based replacements for Usenet are too easy to start, which
means that there are too many web-based replacements for Usenet
and not enough users. Usenet has sci.* groups (hard to create
and mostly popular) and alt.* groups (easy to create and mostly unpopular). Usenet also has moderated newsgroups, thus taking away the one advantage you have claimed for your web-based Usenet replacement.

Web-based replacements for Usenet usually overcomplicate things.
In your case, you didn't actually try to set up a web-based
replacement for sci.astro.amateur. you set up TWENTY FOUR
forums, half of which have nothing in them:
Lounge 33 Posts 13 Topics
Topics of Interest 19 Posts 18 Topics
Refractors 0 Posts 0 Topics
Reflectors 0 Posts 0 Topics
Catadioptrics 0 Posts 0 Topics
Moon Matters 14 Posts 7 Topics
Tech Talk 0 Posts 0 Topics
A Polling Place 9 Posts 3 Topics
NASA TV 1 Posts 1 Topics
Deep Sky Observations 1 Posts 1 Topics
Solar System Observations 0 Posts 0 Topics
Images & Imaging 19 Posts 10 Topics
Previews & Reviews 3 posts 1 topics
Telescopes 0 Posts 0 Topics
Frequently updated astro News 1 Posts 1 Topics
Link Your Personal Website Here 0 Posts 0 Topics
Link Other Astronomy Websites Here 0 Posts 0 Topics
Link Supplier/Vendor Sites Here 0 Posts 0 Topics
Enter With Trepidation 69 Posts 5 Topics
Jokes 2 Posts 2 Topics
Politics 0 Posts 0 Topics
Creativity 0 Posts 0 Topics
Astro-software 6 Posts 3 Topics
Computer Issues 0 Posts 0 Topics

Web-based replacements for Usenet usually ignore what works
and istead try to reinvent the wheel. There *IS* a web-based forum that is sucessful and which can support an astonomy discussion: http://science.slashdot.org/

Don't flame people if you can't take being flamed back.


Oh, I can take plenty. Such is the nature of usenet. Now have a nice day and know that I am through with this petty argument and am going to move on now. I do look forward to seeing you again on one of your "many" visits to Moderated sci.astro.amateur from which you have made such keen observations.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: [OT] Silly (copyright?) claim by "Galen". (was: Is it safe to use a strangers WiFi cha
    ... >> There's sites which steal, yes steal, the usenet posts and insert ... >> Please note that if you're reading this in a browser and the domain ... > So are you talking about forum software that implements a gateway to ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: [OT] Silly (copyright?) claim by "Galen". (was: Is it safe to use a strangers WiFi cha
    ... > the posts that are being included on those sites have indeed been taken ... > Just for the record - this isn't what you might term usenet in the normal ... So are you talking about forum software that implements a gateway to Usenet ... to include newsgroups posts in the forum's message list? ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: For crying out loud - its only a Usenet Newsgroup, folks!
    ... it and made it the the David Know It All group. ... No, its not a church, or a meeting house or a fellowship, but Usenet groups are often communities of people who have ... Its something we care about and wish to contunue with as we found some benefit in talking about Quaker issues on a forum that is about the Quaker religion. ... It was an example of what Quakerism - even on an unmoderated forum - could acheive. ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Re: Terse and unhelpful MVP response
    ... I am using the Office forum Home page to access the relevant application ... could address the issue and got the terse response from Milly MVP. ... generate crappy results and are crippled regarding Usenet features available ... quoted posts to make it impossible to see their hierarchy when they gateway ...
    (microsoft.public.outlook.general)
  • Re: un écart ?
    ... >Votre post témoigne d'une méconnaissance de Usenet assez abyssale. ... >des Belges, des Suisses et des Canadiens. ... >Et parler autre chose que le français sur un forum fr* c'est comme ...
    (soc.culture.occitan)