🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 04 Aug 2002 14:12:21 GMT, "Kingfish"
<spam_trap_void@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"Tom Morgengill" <tmorgen@nonewsguy.com> wrote in message
>news:1v9qkuo4132l8jm1kvvrh9t0gqpk79kr16@4ax.com...
>:
>: For a disscussion group charter to be accepted by usenet users and
>: more particularly the news companies, protocol should be followed.
>: There are several problems with your proposed RFD and you need to
>: follow usenet protocol more closely.  The current rules of usenet
>: would seem to apply to most of your suggestions here without any
>: action by the participants.
>:
>: Tom.
>:
>
>this is an rfd.
>
>perhaps you could let us know what you are talking about.
>
And this RFD is being conducted for the purpose of changing to or
clearifing the current charter of which newsgroup? Surely not all of
the co.* groups? 
>
>
>: On Sat, 03 Aug 2002 21:36:58 GMT, "Kingfish"
>: <spam_trap_void@yahoo.com> wrote:
>:
>: >Proposed Revised Posting Rules for the co.* hierarchy 8/03/2002.
>: >If approved by consensus these rules will go into effect 8/18/2002.
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >Please post any additional guidelines that would be appropriate or
>: >opposition to guidelines that do not serve the best interest of the co.*
>: >groups.
>: >
>: >
>: >These newsgroup posting guidelines apply only to the co.* hierarchy, and
>: >will remain in force until such time as a committee is formed to assume
>: >responsibility for the day-to-day affairs of the hierarchy or they are
>: >changed by consensus.
>: >
>: >
>: >Introduction:
>: >
>: >In Usenet tradition, there are generally only two kinds of newsgroups -
>: >moderated and unmoderated.  The difference between the two is that anyone
>: >can post just about anything they want to an unmoderated group, whereas
>: >nobody can post anything to a moderated group without the approval of the
>: >moderator.
>: >
>: >Readers and posters are expected to give their full support to this
>charter
>: >so that the co.* newsgroups don't turn into cesspools of inappropriate
>: >crossposts and flamewars.  But first, they need to know some of the rules
>: >that have been handed down by the original creators of the Usenet
>newsgroups
>: >as well as some that have been added by the current users of the co.*
>: >hierarchy. Here are some of the more important do's and don'ts:
>: >
>: >1. Do not post binaries, HTML, v-cards, or other non-standard stuff in
>the
>: >co.* hierarchy.  Usenet is a plain text medium, which was never intended
>to
>: >be an extension of the World Wide Web. Instead of posting stuff from your
>: >website to a newsgroup, post
>: >a pointer telling people where to find your website, and what they can
>: >expect to see.
>: >
>: >2. Do not advertise in non ads groups.  If a group has "ads" as part of
>it's
>: >name, it is ok to advertise in that group; likewise if a group does not
>have
>: >"ads" in the title of the group, advertising is not permitted in that
>group.
>: >Do not repost ads from others, allow the authors of an ad to decide on
>its
>: >proper placement and do not post Make Money Fast get-rich-quick schemes
>or
>: >chain letters.  Posting ads in non-ads groups will be considered a
>violation
>: >of the co.* hierarchy charter and you will be reported to your ISP or
>: >news-service and you will lose your account.
>: >
>: >
>: >3. Do not crosspost to more than 5 groups, including the co.* group from
>: >which you are posting, and be careful when crossposting to newsgroups in
>: >other hierarchies.  Different hierarchies have different rules and, when
>you
>: >crosspost to another hierarchy, your article is subject to those other
>: >rules.
>: >
>: >4. Check the newsgroups line before responding to an article. If more
>than
>: >five groups are listed, delete the least appropriate group(s) until there
>: >are only five left.  Adjust follow-ups as well, if that appears to be
>: >necessary.  Then, at the top of your article, insert something like the
>: >following note in brackets:
>: >
>: >[newsgroups trimmed -- the co.* hierarchy has a 5G crosspost limit]
>: >
>: >5. Do not post or crosspost to moderated groups unless you have read the
>: >charter and understand the moderation rules.  An article sent to a
>moderated
>: >group will not be posted anywhere until and unless it is approved by the
>: >moderator of the moderated group.
>: >
>: >6.  Do not quote an entire message just to respond to one point. It is
>: >better to quote only the part you are responding to, and to cut
>everything
>: >else from your response.  Also, be careful when making attributions as to
>: >who made the statement you are responding to.  Most software will insert
>the
>: >attribution lines for you, but you should always check to be sure they
>are
>: >correct. Other people will be upset if you make a mistake and put words
>: >in their mouth.
>: >
>: >7.  Set your line width at no more than 75 characters.  This allows an
>: >additional five spaces for the quote marks in follow-ups so that other
>: >posters don't have to reformat your articles in order to send a readable
>: >reply.
>: >
>: >8. Do not SHOUT at people by posting in ALL CAPS, even if you are really
>: >angry.  Use asterisks (*) or underlines (_) instead to emphasize words or
>: >phrases. It is easier to read "I am really angry with you" than it is to
>: >read "I AM REALLY ANGRY WITH
>: >YOU."
>: >
>: >9. Do not post articles in other people's names, not even in jest.
>Forgery
>: >is taken quite seriously in Usenet, and you could lose your account.
>: >
>: >10.  Do not post private email in the newsgroups without permission from
>: >your correspondent.  When people see their email spread around, they tend
>to
>: >quickly lose faith in the person who spread it. If by chance you _do_
>: >accidentally post email to a newsgroup, be sure to apologize right away.
>: >
>: >
>: >
>: >11. "Flood Attacks" or posting mass groups of messages pushes other posts
>: >off of various news servers and amounts to a Denial of Service to other
>: >messages in a group.  Violators will be reported to their ISP and/or
>: >newsgroup/news-service provider.
>: >
>: >
>: >12. Beware of heated conversations.  Sometimes they turn into flamewars,
>: >which are often very hard to stop.  If you see a flamewar brewing, try
>not
>: >to get involved.  If you find yourself in strong disagreement with
>another
>: >poster, ask yourself if it is worth it to
>: >respond.  If your response is likely to start or continue a flamewar, it
>: >might be best to _not_ respond rather than add fuel to the fire. There is
>no
>: >rule that says you must respond to every article.
>: >
>: >Cancellation Policy:
>: >
>: >Certain articles may be subject to cancellation, including but not
>limited
>: >to: Make-Money-Fast chain letters and pyramid schemes; binaries in
>: >non-binary groups; and advertising in groups not designated for
>advertising
>: >with ".ads" as part of its' name and "flooding".  The best way to avoid
>such
>: >cancellations is to not post these types of articles and to not "spam" in
>: >Usenet.
>: >
>: >Third-party cancels will be issued for blatant violations of the posting
>: >guidelines found in the paragraph above.
>: >
>: >If a poster or service provider feels a cancel was unfair, an appeal may
>be
>: >posted for discussion in co.config.  The decision will be made by
>consensus
>: >of the group in co.config, and apologies will be made to anyone who can
>show
>: >that a cancel was unfair.
>: >
>: >Suspected forgeries will be reported directly to the originating site.
>: >
>: >Unauthorized use of registered domains will be reported directly to the
>: >domain whose name is apparently being misused.
>: >
>: >Amendments:
>: >
>: >These rules may not be amended without full RFD discussion in co.config.
>: >Any person may post an RFD suggesting amendments to these rules.  The
>: >procedure to be followed will be the same as for a newsgroup proposal --
>two
>: >weeks minimum discussion, possibly extended twice, and then (hopefully) a
>: >decision will be made by consensus without the need for conducting any
>: >votes. Once a hierarchy committee is formed, the committee is free to
>: >propose and adopt its own posting rules.
>: >
>: >Approved by consensus in co.config on   (currently under discussion as of
>: >8/3/2002)
>: >
>: >
>: >---
>: >
>: >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>: >Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/2/2002
>: >
>:
>
>
>---
>
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/3/2002