🚀 go-pugleaf

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.

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
>

"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.



: 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

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

"tmorgen@nonewsguy.com" <Tom Morgengill> wrote in message
news:k4rrku0u88rocv1qe7ojcue7pv9kp6orr4@4ax.com...
: 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?

As listed before by Henrietta in the link to the us.* charter there seems to
be precedence for a hierarchy charter to lay down an overall plan for the
hierarchy - which is why the charter I listed is vague - it covers
appropriate places for advertising, etiquette, and guidelines for posting.
What in particular in the purposed charter would not be appropriate for any
group in co* ?

Of course there are charters for some groups in the hierarchy, but not all.
Overall guidelines are a good place to start.  Perhaps you could list your
objection, in particular, so we could discuss it.

-Kingfish



---

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/2/2002

On Sun, 04 Aug 2002 21:12:26 -0600, "tmorgen@nonewsguy.com" <Tom
Morgengill> wrote:

>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? 
>
I just posted an apology of sorts regarding my inquiries into protocol
of the state newsgroups.  Apparently, you can do whatever you wish,
however I strongly urge the consideration of what is practical and
what is impossible, as well as what can cause more problems then
they might be intended to solve.  My comments regarding the blanket
use of the word "ad" should be a consideration in any charter unless
the admin has a lot of time to spend with the users. 
Regards and best wishes,
Ted

>
>>
>>: 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