🚀 go-pugleaf

In Newsgroup balt.config, Jim Jagielski (jim@jaguNET.com) wrote:
>)Adam Levin <alevin@ari.net> writes:
>)>If you can't provide a
>)>pointer to the existing guidelines, please stop your claims that these
>)>guidelines haven't been followed. If these guidelines that you are so
>)>hell-bent on protecting exist, SURELY they must be posted somewhere? Come
>)>on guys, It's time to put up or shut up.

>)>I agree that there should be guidelines and I support the enforcement of
>)>them ONCE THEY HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED.

>)I, for one, am going to stop wasting my breath.  I've tried many times to
>)make my point, which, for some reason, you simply refuse to try and
>)understand.

>)Certainly, even without STRICT WRITTEN guidelines, you MUST have been
>)aware that creating a Usenet group with No Vote and No Interest AT ALL
>)was _at least questionable_! You yourself stated that you did exhaustive
>)research into what was required in creating Usenet groups... I find it
>)hard to believe that it left you with the impression that creating
>)one based on a proposal that generated NO interest was perfecting 100%
>)acceptable.


	You know, I see no reason why it wouldn't be. It's obviously an 
inferior, less useful method, but I seriously doubt it'll somehow hurt 
anything.


>)But, no matter what, it seems that we can't win. You wanted written rules,
>)so I compiled the understood guidelines and posted it for comments, giving
>)you and everyone a chance to understand they way it's always understood
>)to be and open the opportunity to change it. Now that you have the guide-
>)lines, you complain that they are too late. No matter what, it's always
>)someone else's fault...


	Now, that's hardly fair.

	You, or someone, I admit it's expired in this spool, have been 
insisting that there weer /already/ rules, /already/ official in some 
fashion.  

	As I said before in a much kinder way, who appionted you as the 
god of balt? Who says you can just sit down and write up the rules, and 
he's supposed to treat them as the same kind of authority that we'd for 
some reason, accept a pre-existing set of documentation to be?


>)Ok... what's done is done. balt.music is created and hopefully it was
>)done correctly. Let's just sweep this away. Now, in the spirit of
>)everyone working together, let's comment on the guidelines. Don't like


	Did that.


>)'em? Let's change 'em (as much as we can). I'm guessing you're proposing

	
	As much as we can? Is there a limit to "our" ability to change 
them? 


>)that anyone can create any balt.* newsgroup at any time for any reason.

>)Mark me down as '-1' for that.


	Mark me as a +1 for it. 

>)Mark me as '+1' for making the guidelines what everyone wants.


	Mark me as a +1 for that as well. No harm in -guidelines- that 
people are -advised- to follow, as long as they're free to try other 
methods if they wish.


--

Words of the Sentient:

Socialize the individual's surplus and you socialize his spirit and
creativeness; you cannot paint the Mona Lisa by assigning one dab of paint to
a thousand painters.        --  Willian F. Buckley, Jr.


        mailto:kaz@upx.net | http://www.kaz.org | telnet://umb.upx.net:22

             See also #Heinlein and #Libertarian on the Undernet...