Curious -- Why Do You Continue To Stay With ARBR

Joe Keenan Wrote:
I'm curious why folks stay with this newsgroup given that any thread
is immediately subject to contamination. (I'm being kind) Yup, I'm a
"usta be" and just stopped in to see if things had changed in a few
months.

Slow Joe Recumbo
Why not ask the question in its purist form? Why add to it" that given
any thread is immediatly subject to contamination".If in fact you could
be a little more honest with yourself you would realise that maybe you
are part of the problem.Better go back to the brol swimming pool where
all the waters are knee deep and no sharks to bite you.


--
nget

nget wrote:
.Better go back to the brol swimming pool where all the waters are
knee deep and no sharks to bite you.

Some people (let's call them "Group #1") enjoy being argumentative,
abrasive, obnoxious, and otherwise confrontive. They think any
discussion that happens without confrontation is boring and not
worth while. Rather than finding a place where like-minded people
can argue with each other, they prefer to take over existing groups
and force them into their mold.

Some people ("Group #2") prefer to engage in conversation and civil
exchange without abuse, name-calling, insults, and other confrontive
behavior. They prefer to discuss the topic they're interested in
rather than engaging in arguments and character assassination.

I believe Group #2 vastly outnumbers Group #1. But Group #1
delights in destroying places where other people had useful
conversations.

A year or two ago, ARBR contained almost exclusively people in Group
#2. We had many fun and productive conversations, and everyone
seemed to enjoy the group.

In the last year or two, a few people in Group #1 have roosted in
ARBR. They have made it their crusade to impose their style onto
many/most posts.

Most people in Group #2 find confrontive posts annoying and
distracting. Many discussions veer off from the intended topic to
an argument about one thing or another. Many of these Group #2
people have decided ARBR is no longer a fun place to talk about
recumbents, so they've moved to places like BROL that exclude
insulting and abusive posters. Since the Group #1 types choose not
to have their confrontive arguments in a place that welcomes
confrontive arguments, but prefer to take over and destroy
nonconfrontive environments, the Group #2 types are forced to go
somewhere that excludes Group #1. It's like people who live in a
nice neighborhood who have to move because a bunch of thugs and
hoods takes over the place, breaking windows and destroying
property. Group #1 is the cyberspace equivalent of those thugs and
hoods.

nget, if you want to call places like BROL "wading pools," you go
right ahead. I imagine gangbangers think of nice neighborhoods as
"wading pools" and themselves as "sharks" too. When actually
they're just cheap crooks.

It's a shame you "sharks" think it's so much fun to **** and **** in
the ARBR pool. You're just fouling something nice and ruining it
for the vast majority of people who prefer not to wallow in their
own filth.

"Kurt Fischer" wrote in message
...
Joe Keenan wrote:

I'm curious why folks stay with this newsgroup given that any thread
is immediately subject to contamination.

1. Reading and writing via a proper newsreader is for me far more
comfortable than via any browser

2. I prefer to be my own moderator who decides what I'm able to write
and to read. It's not only freedom of speech, it's also freedom of
choice.

3. It's simply one alternative to all the other boards and groups I'm
reading and I'm not intending to give it up completely.

4. If you don't expose yourself to the downs of a group, you can't enjoy
the ups entirely. ;-)

Kurt, who likes diversitiy not only in bicycles


Gee Kurt - you are allowing your brain moderate the group for you. You must
have a really cool brain.

It must be hard programming a brain for self moderation - so few others seem
to be able to do it. Congratulations.

why don't we admit to it that "ED asshole DOLAN and a couple other assholes has
made this board not as attractive as it used to be for some people.
and IMO if we ALL want this board to better we should all, including myself,
should stick to recumbent and bicycle topics only. lets forget about all of the
OT'S and other nonrelated ****.
OK
that means you Mr. Dolan and you also Mr. Sherman.
lets stop it NOW, OK!

Gary Fritz Wrote:
nget wrote:
.Better go back to the brol swimming pool where all the waters are
knee deep and no sharks to bite you.

Some people (let's call them "Group #1") enjoy being argumentative,
abrasive, obnoxious, and otherwise confrontive. They think any
discussion that happens without confrontation is boring and not
worth while. Rather than finding a place where like-minded people
can argue with each other, they prefer to take over existing groups
and force them into their mold.

Some people ("Group #2") prefer to engage in conversation and civil
exchange without abuse, name-calling, insults, and other confrontive
behavior. They prefer to discuss the topic they're interested in
rather than engaging in arguments and character assassination.

I believe Group #2 vastly outnumbers Group #1. But Group #1
delights in destroying places where other people had useful
conversations.

A year or two ago, ARBR contained almost exclusively people in Group
#2. We had many fun and productive conversations, and everyone
seemed to enjoy the group.

In the last year or two, a few people in Group #1 have roosted in
ARBR. They have made it their crusade to impose their style onto
many/most posts.

Most people in Group #2 find confrontive posts annoying and
distracting. Many discussions veer off from the intended topic to
an argument about one thing or another. Many of these Group #2
people have decided ARBR is no longer a fun place to talk about
recumbents, so they've moved to places like BROL that exclude
insulting and abusive posters. Since the Group #1 types choose not
to have their confrontive arguments in a place that welcomes
confrontive arguments, but prefer to take over and destroy
nonconfrontive environments, the Group #2 types are forced to go
somewhere that excludes Group #1. It's like people who live in a
nice neighborhood who have to move because a bunch of thugs and
hoods takes over the place, breaking windows and destroying
property. Group #1 is the cyberspace equivalent of those thugs and
hoods.

nget, if you want to call places like BROL "wading pools," you go
right ahead. I imagine gangbangers think of nice neighborhoods as
"wading pools" and themselves as "sharks" too. When actually
they're just cheap crooks.

It's a shame you "sharks" think it's so much fun to **** and **** in
the ARBR pool. You're just fouling something nice and ruining it
for the vast majority of people who prefer not to wallow in their
own filth.
Group #2 also **** and **** as do group#1 but when they do they call
their **** jelly beans and they **** lemonade.Your idea of nice might
just have a very unpleasant odor to someone else.I prefer not to be
confined to the shallow end of the pool,but I am free to go there if I
wish.If group#2 has a place to go then what is the problem?Are they all
control freaks like you?


--
nget

"Joe Keenan" wrote in message
...
I'm curious why folks stay with this newsgroup given that any thread
is immediately subject to contamination. (I'm being kind) Yup, I'm a
"usta be" and just stopped in to see if things had changed in a few
months.

Slow Joe Recumbo

So why do *you* continue to stay Mr. Joe? Just idle curiosity? Time on
your hands? Nothing else better to do? Can't get arbr out of you system?

What business is it of yours what others choose to do?

This is Usenet. Usenet is what it is and if you can't deal with it then my
advice is to limit yourself to the moderated forums. There are many other
choices so if arbr isn't to your liking why don't you quietly move on and
stop posting here.


..

On 11 Nov 2004 19:44:28 GMT, Gary Fritz wrote
in message :

Some people (let's call them "Group #1") enjoy being argumentative,
abrasive, obnoxious, and otherwise confrontive.

No we don't!

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

I'm sorry, this is ABUSE. If you want ARGUMENTS, it's down the hall.
"Gary Fritz" wrote in message
...
nget wrote:
.Better go back to the brol swimming pool where all the waters are
knee deep and no sharks to bite you.

Some people (let's call them "Group #1") enjoy being argumentative,
abrasive, obnoxious, and otherwise confrontive. They think any
discussion that happens without confrontation is boring and not
worth while. Rather than finding a place where like-minded people
can argue with each other, they prefer to take over existing groups
and force them into their mold.

Some people ("Group #2") prefer to engage in conversation and civil
exchange without abuse, name-calling, insults, and other confrontive
behavior. They prefer to discuss the topic they're interested in
rather than engaging in arguments and character assassination.

I believe Group #2 vastly outnumbers Group #1. But Group #1
delights in destroying places where other people had useful
conversations.

A year or two ago, ARBR contained almost exclusively people in Group
#2. We had many fun and productive conversations, and everyone
seemed to enjoy the group.

In the last year or two, a few people in Group #1 have roosted in
ARBR. They have made it their crusade to impose their style onto
many/most posts.

Most people in Group #2 find confrontive posts annoying and
distracting. Many discussions veer off from the intended topic to
an argument about one thing or another. Many of these Group #2
people have decided ARBR is no longer a fun place to talk about
recumbents, so they've moved to places like BROL that exclude
insulting and abusive posters. Since the Group #1 types choose not
to have their confrontive arguments in a place that welcomes
confrontive arguments, but prefer to take over and destroy
nonconfrontive environments, the Group #2 types are forced to go
somewhere that excludes Group #1. It's like people who live in a
nice neighborhood who have to move because a bunch of thugs and
hoods takes over the place, breaking windows and destroying
property. Group #1 is the cyberspace equivalent of those thugs and
hoods.

nget, if you want to call places like BROL "wading pools," you go
right ahead. I imagine gangbangers think of nice neighborhoods as
"wading pools" and themselves as "sharks" too. When actually
they're just cheap crooks.

It's a shame you "sharks" think it's so much fun to **** and **** in
the ARBR pool. You're just fouling something nice and ruining it
for the vast majority of people who prefer not to wallow in their
own filth.

skip wrote:

Gee Kurt - you are allowing your brain moderate the group for you. You must
have a really cool brain.

No wonder, I'm riding in 0°C here this days, that's 32°F. ;-)


It must be hard programming a brain for self moderation - so few others seem
to be able to do it. Congratulations.

No, I think everyone has ( or at least had ) the ability to do it. But
it takes training. Just as muscles have to be trained for strength and
proper function, that's also true for our brain. And the best training
for our brain is thinking and weighing something. Of course, this will
turn into work eventually, and that's why many folks are happy and
thankful if someone else is willing to do this work, in this case the
moderators.

But usenet after all is about information, and I want my information
first hand and not spoon-fed by others. I'm also over at BROL and at the
moment Bryan seems to block only non-cycling related stuff. That's fine
with me as it helps to find on topic information. But as soon as I'm
getting the impression the moderators over there are trying to filter
out information about recumbents also, I will stay away from there.
Actually I'm hoping this will never be the case, but we have to be
alert.

Kurt

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:24:40 -0800, Joe Keenan wrote:

I'm curious why folks stay with this newsgroup given that any thread
is immediately subject to contamination.

One-click killfiling :-))


Mike