🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 05 May 1997 11:17:50 GMT, Keld Rosenkrantz wrote:

(snip)
>Advertising on Usenet is a frequently misunderstood subject. The
>purpose
>of this message is to explain some Usenet conventions regarding
>advertising to new users and, hopefully, spare everyone involved a lot
>of needless worry. 
>
Ja misforst�elser er der �benbart. Enten hos mig og mine meningsf�ller
(jeg har diskutteret dette med flere internet-brugere), eller hos dig
og dine meningsf�ller.

(snip)

>How to advertise on Usenet 
>--------------------------
>
>There *are* acceptable ways to advertise in Usenet newsgroups.
>
>1. The on-topic notice
>
>If you have a product or a message that is specifically related to a
>particular Usenet newsgroup, and you want to let people know about it,
>it's *usually* all right to post *one* notice about it. 
>
>Note the word "notice."  A notice is a brief mention of the product
>with information about how interested persons can find out more.  It's not
>a sales pitch.  It's not an advertisement.  It's not a "BUY BUY BUY"
>sort of message.  It's a notice. 
>
Det er pr�cis hvad jeg mener at jeg netop har gjort. Bragt en kort
"notice" med en henvisning til en Web-side.

Her er hvad jeg postede:

"Vi har samlet lidt interessant information om noget af det nyeste og
mest revolutionerende indenfor kampen mod cancer.

Pr�v at se p� siderne under www.bellcom.dk/vip/life "

Meget kortere og hype-free kan det vel vanskeligt g�res.

>You are encouraged to make such postings one-time-only.  When your
>polite informational notice starts getting posted every week, people are
>going to start getting irked at you. 
>
>You are also *strongly* encouraged to keep such postings hype-free.
>What often works very well is to post information about your services or
>product and include a contact address, World Wide Web site, or phone
>number for people to use to get more information. 
>
>For example, if you want to post a notice about your immigration law
>services, you could post a message to alt.visa.us or the various
>misc.immigration.* newsgroups, where you'd find a large population of
>people interested in that or related subjects. Posting the same ad to
>rec.sport.football.college would *not* be appropriate because
>rec.sport.football.college has nothing to do with immigration law,
>visas, or becoming a citizen of another country.

Da jeg tidligere er blevet kritiseret og fors�gt latterliggjort for
mine synspunkter, fordi det angiveligt var _indlysende_ at denne
(ovenn�vnte) form for posting jo var rettet til dk.loppemarked og
lign. bringer jeg her et afsnit i samme artikel, som netop drejer sig
om den form for postings p� s�rlige grupper.

Netop det forhold, at der er tale om to forskellige afsnit, der
omtaler hver deres form for "accepteret" posting af advertisements p�
internettet, st�tter jo min forst�else af reglernes indhold.
>
>2. *.forsale and *.marketplace newsgroups
>
>There are many newsgroups directly involved in selling.  You can
>generally
>spot them by the word "forsale" or "marketplace" in their names. 
>
>For example, rec.games.board.marketplace is a newsgroup where people
>post
>for-sale and want-to-buy notices about board games they want to buy or
>sell. 
>
>Similarly, the misc.forsale.* hierarchy is full of newsgroups for
>buying
>and selling various computers, monitors, printers, devices, and so
>forth,
>as well as misc.forsale.non-computer.*, for selling stuff that's not
>computer-related.  However, the misc.forsale.* policy is rather
>resistant
>to *commercial* ads -- the hierarchy is intended as a place to post
>classified-style ads.  
>
(snip)

Jeg h�ber at du kan se, at jeg ikke blot fors�ger at v�re st�dig og
ikek vil lytte til fornuft, men jeg _kan_ simpelthen ikke se at jeg
skulle have uret i min fortolkning.

Det er ikke for at v�re arrogant el. lign, men jeg f�ler at det er
passende at bem�rke, at jeg er jurist af uddannelse, med en ganske
stor erfaring i at "fortolke" kontrakter, regler og bestemmelser.

P� trods af min absolutte tro p� at jeg har ret i min forst�else af
reglernes rette fortolkning og indhold; er jeg dog villig til at lade
mig overbevise, s�fremt etablerede, generelt accepterede autoriteter
indenfor internettet, udtaler at jeg uomtvisteligt har uret i min
forst�else af reglernes rette indhold.

Misforst� mig ikke. Der er ikke tale om grundl�s mistro, men hvis jeg
skal "overgive" mig uden overbevisende argumenter, �nsker jeg en
udtalelese fra en uomtvistelig kapacitet, s�som een af de personer
(hos DK-net eller andre) der rent faktisk sidder med Usenet som sit
ansvarsomr�de.

Erik Gravgaard