🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 04 Aug 2002 17:13:26 -0600, Tom Morgengill
<tmorgen@nonewsguy.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Aug 2002 19:33:45 GMT, harb@nospam.netscape.net (harlan
>bettencourt) wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 04 Aug 2002 08:00:08 -0600, Tom Morgengill
>><tmorgen@nonewsguy.com> wrote:
>>
>>>The Kingfish's suggestion (RFD) is improper.  Anything broken can be
>>>repaired.   Here is an example of this: 
>>>
>>>Kingfish wrote:
>>>
>>>>>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   ?????????
>>>>>
>>>>>---
>>>>>
>>>>>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>>>>>Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/2/2002
>>>>
>>>And Harlan Bettencourt decided to vote anyway....
>>
>>Aw nuts, just say I added my consensus, my discusson is that he made a
>>decent revision we can all live with.
>
>I am not disagreeing with the proposed changes. However any changes
>should be done in accordance with usenet protocol.  See my reply to
>Kingfish. 

I did and I read Henrietta's too. It seems clunky to have a separate
charter for each group when most are pretty similar, ads, discussion,
or politics. The old system had a brief explanation of the purpose for
each group and the general charter, simple looks better to me.

>>>>Yes vote.
>>>
>>>On Sun, 04 Aug 2002 04:04:13 GMT, "Kingfish"
>>><spam_trap_void@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Maraya" <maraya@dimensional.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:3D4C55A2.7262AB32@dimensional.com...
>>>>: [snipped]
>>>>:
>>>>: 1.  What if no one responds to your proposal?  How many people read this
>>>>group?
>>>>: How do you propose to ascertain that you've reached consensus?
>>>>:
>>>>
>>>>feel free to anounce it anywhere.  I have mentioned several times to watch
>>>>co.config to all ngs in co.*
>>>>
>>>This is not usenet protocol. We can't simply make up the rules to suit
>>>our own individual needs.  If the usenet community does not accept a
>>>charter as being reasonable, then to create it is a waste of time.
>>>The proper protocol in itself is important.  Should a complaint be
>>>lodged and this be brought to the attention of the usenet
>>>administrator, you will have little support from that administrator in
>>>enforcing it. 
>>>>
>>>>: 2.  Who gets to be on your proposed committee?  How many people make a
>>>>: committee?  How do we know that all of the people who volunteer aren't
>>>>actually
>>>>: *you?*  We don't even know who you are.
>>>>:
>>>>I purpose no comittee.  That was part of the origonal charter, if such a
>>>>comittee is desired then by consensus here it could be formed.
>>>>
>>>You need to collect your thoughts more accurately. In your original
>>>post (suggestion/RFD) you said:
>>>
>>>>Once a hierarchy committee is formed, the committee is free to
>>>>propose and adopt its own posting rules.
>>>
>>>Now you state that you are proposing no committee? 
>>>This is why there is specific protocol for creating/changing charters.
>>>When creating a charter for a non-moderating newsgroup it is important
>>>to realize that enforcing it is simply not possible.  For that reason,
>>>most non-moderated group charters are written very loosely and the
>>>kill file was created.    
>>
>>The fact is we have a group whose admin resigned but charter
>>continues. Revising it may be a good thing, why get in the way of
>>that?
>
>See the above. What I would like to do is cover all the bases.  You
>and I disagree with what is and what is not an ad.  That's OK too,
>unless we end up flaming the group with our opinions.  An ad, defined
>should be any text that offers a product or service and that should be
>outlined or the group is certain to be flamed with this issue.   .
>Regards,
>Tom 

So if we disagree on that shouldn't we get some common and accepted
definition. Like I said in another post, is it an add if the red cross
solicits funds in a discussion group, what about me? Isn't either
awful close to a chain letter?

So if I look up ad, here's a few possibles I get.

http://www.marketingterms.com/dictionary/text_ad/

"text ad
Definition
Advertisement using text-based hyperlinks.
Information
Text-based ads, although common in email, have been dominated on the
Web by their graphical-based counterparts.
While lacking some of the advantages of graphical ads, text-based ads
have some powerful advantages of their own. They download almost
instantly and are not affected by ad blocking software."

(we might want something on hypertext in it)

http://www.investorwords.com/cgi-bin/getword.cgi?129

"advertising
Description or presentation of a product, idea, or organization, in
order to induce individuals to buy, support, or approve of it. "

(this might cover political solicitations- differnt from opinions)

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=advertisement+

"Main Entry: ad�ver�tise�ment  
Pronunciation: "ad-v&r-'tIz-m&nt; &d-'v&r-t&z-m&nt, -t&-sm&nt
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : the act or process of advertising
2 : a public notice; especially : one published in the press or
broadcast over the air "

(this one don't work - too vague)

http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=advertisement

"ad�ver�tise�ment   Pronunciation Key  (dvr-tzmnt, d-v�rts-, -tz-)
n. 
The act of advertising. 
A notice, such as a poster or a paid announcement in the print,
broadcast, or electronic media, designed to attract public attention
or patronage. 

(that one is pretty good)

advertisement

n : a public promotion of some product or service" 

( less wordy, idea is ok)

So you think we might just put all of these together to come up with a
good definition that don't turn the groups into charity commercial
sites or html link dens?

Give it some thought,

harlan