New recumbent newsgroup

Can anyone who is genuinely interested in there being a new recumbent newsgroup plese contact me via my website link below and if the response
is high enough I will go through the motions of setting one up, it will be a moderated group so that the problems of this one are not repeated.

--

Buck

Give a little person a little power and create a big problem.

http://www.catrike.co.uk

Buck wrote:
Can anyone who is genuinely interested in there being a new recumbent newsgroup plese contact me via my website link below and if the response
is high enough I will go through the motions of setting one up, it will be a moderated group so that the problems of this one are not repeated.

--

Buck

Give a little person a little power and create a big problem.

http://www.catrike.co.uk

Buck, whereas I concur with your sentiment, a moderated recumbent forum
already exists ... BROL.

Jim McNamara

Buck wrote:
Can anyone who is genuinely interested in there being a new recumbent newsgroup plese contact me via my website link below and if the response
is high enough I will go through the motions of setting one up, it will be a moderated group so that the problems of this one are not repeated.


I agree with Jim, BROL is my remedy when I need a recumbent fix. I am
not even sure why I still bother with this NG.

Ken
--
The bicycle is just as good company as most husbands and, when it gets
old and shabby, a woman can dispose of it and get a new one without
shocking the entire community. ~Ann Strong

Ken C. M. wrote:
:: Buck wrote:
::: Can anyone who is genuinely interested in there being a new
::: recumbent newsgroup plese contact me via my website link below and
::: if the response is high enough I will go through the motions of
::: setting one up, it will be a moderated group so that the problems
::: of this one are not repeated.
:::
::
:: I agree with Jim, BROL is my remedy when I need a recumbent fix. I am
:: not even sure why I still bother with this NG.
::

I find the browser interface to be somewhat chunky though it does have its
advantages at times.

Roger Zoul wrote:
Ken C. M. wrote:
:: Buck wrote:
::: Can anyone who is genuinely interested in there being a new
::: recumbent newsgroup plese contact me via my website link below and
::: if the response is high enough I will go through the motions of
::: setting one up, it will be a moderated group so that the problems
::: of this one are not repeated.
:::
::
:: I agree with Jim, BROL is my remedy when I need a recumbent fix. I am
:: not even sure why I still bother with this NG.
::

I find the browser interface to be somewhat chunky though it does have its
advantages at times.


I guess it depend on the browser and the computer. Well the main
advantage is that it's moderated so there are many more posts that
actually have something to do with recumbent cycling. This NG is very
lucky if it gets an average of two real posts a day over a 7 day period.
Filters work good, I wouldn't even know about the garbage posts if
people didn't reply to them.

Ken
--
The bicycle is just as good company as most husbands and, when it gets
old and shabby, a woman can dispose of it and get a new one without
shocking the entire community. ~Ann Strong

Hey guys -

Ken wrote:

I am not even sure why I still bother with this NG.

I apologize to Buck, the original poster, for posting
this to the group rather than replying via off-group
email as requested, but I thought what I have to say on
the topic might be of interest to other folks as well.

I think most of us who still harbor some hope for ARBR
do so because we understand the potential value of an
OPEN internet forum. As long as one remains reasonably
functional and uncluttered - and oddly enough, some do -
it can be one of the most interesting and FUN venues for
enthusiasts to exchange info and amuse each other.

As I have said before, BROL has done a great job for
several years, and has quite clearly become THE dominant
platform for recumbent discussion. I read it almost
everyday, and I use it for most of my posts now, along
with the IHPVA Trikes list. I sincerely hope and expect
that BROL's messageboard will be with us for years to
come.

But, honestly, there are no guarantees for how long BROL
will last, whether it will remain free to post and/or
read, or even whether its moderator(s) will maintain
the impressively light, even-handed touch they've shown
to date. There are numerous other groups, mail lists,
forums and such already in place for 'bent folks, with
scopes ranging from a single bike or manufacturer to
wide open. Since they're sorta hard to find, typically,
most of these are pretty obscure and have minimal
participation. What would be the point of yet another?

The advantages of ARBR have historically been that:

l. It's part of Usenet and fairly easy to find for a
newby who knows nothing whatever about what resources
exist on the net for recumbent cycling;

2. Being part of Usenet, it requires no special effort
from anyone to keep it up and running; and

3. It is OPEN, with absolutely minimal restrictions,
so it essentially provides a platform for anyone to
say his piece and be sure that someone will read it
without censorship.

That last bit is, of course, the potentially fatal flaw
for ARBR! Most sincere posters will not return after
they've been sniped or callously harangued here. The
more of them who stop posting, leaving a (seriously
psychotic?) idiot who's bullheadedly made it his own
selfish goal to run up his message count with no regard
whatever for pertinence, courtesy, or even the way he's
regarded by the readers, the more horrible the signal-
to-noise ratio becomes for the group. Seeing that,
fewer folks are likely to think that another look is
worth their time, or at least not nearly as often.

At this point, and (FINALLY!) getting to a straight
answer to Buck's proposal, I would be very amenable to
any suggestion for a moderated Usenet group to discuss
recumbents, and will even help anyone who's willing to
'bell the cat' (set up the approvals and do all the
day-to-work of screening and maintenance once the new
group is in operation).

A partial solution to our problem might be a concerted
effort to persuade most of the folks who have a hard
time dealing with the unpleasantness of a hyperactive
TROLL on a completely open forum to use one of the more
'controlled' doorways to the Usenet group - e.g.,
Cycling Forums. They now filter out our most annoying
and prolific off-topic poster, but even there a reader
will pick up some of the broad spectrum SPAM that
Google Groups filters from their top page and archives.
If this idea resonates with a lot of folks interested
in ARBR, it would be fairly simple to post a weekly
reminder which would be broadcast to the whole wide
span of ARBR on Usenet.

Do I have any enthusiasm or interest for yet another
new private or Google-style newsgroup or mail list?
Not unless I could be convinced that it could address
the challenges of becoming known, attracting solid
participation, and giving the 'bent community some
confidence that it will have long-term 'legs', once
its originator really sees how much work is involved.

Regards,
Wayne

32GO wrote:
Hey guys -

Ken wrote:

I am not even sure why I still bother with this NG.

I apologize to Buck, the original poster, for posting
this to the group rather than replying via off-group
email as requested, but I thought what I have to say on
the topic might be of interest to other folks as well.

I think most of us who still harbor some hope for ARBR
do so because we understand the potential value of an
OPEN internet forum. As long as one remains reasonably
functional and uncluttered - and oddly enough, some do -
it can be one of the most interesting and FUN venues for
enthusiasts to exchange info and amuse each other.

As I have said before, BROL has done a great job for
several years, and has quite clearly become THE dominant
platform for recumbent discussion. I read it almost
everyday, and I use it for most of my posts now, along
with the IHPVA Trikes list. I sincerely hope and expect
that BROL's messageboard will be with us for years to
come.

But, honestly, there are no guarantees for how long BROL
will last, whether it will remain free to post and/or
read, or even whether its moderator(s) will maintain
the impressively light, even-handed touch they've shown
to date. There are numerous other groups, mail lists,
forums and such already in place for 'bent folks, with
scopes ranging from a single bike or manufacturer to
wide open. Since they're sorta hard to find, typically,
most of these are pretty obscure and have minimal
participation. What would be the point of yet another?

The advantages of ARBR have historically been that:

l. It's part of Usenet and fairly easy to find for a
newby who knows nothing whatever about what resources
exist on the net for recumbent cycling;

2. Being part of Usenet, it requires no special effort
from anyone to keep it up and running; and

3. It is OPEN, with absolutely minimal restrictions,
so it essentially provides a platform for anyone to
say his piece and be sure that someone will read it
without censorship.

That last bit is, of course, the potentially fatal flaw
for ARBR! Most sincere posters will not return after
they've been sniped or callously harangued here. The
more of them who stop posting, leaving a (seriously
psychotic?) idiot who's bullheadedly made it his own
selfish goal to run up his message count with no regard
whatever for pertinence, courtesy, or even the way he's
regarded by the readers, the more horrible the signal-
to-noise ratio becomes for the group. Seeing that,
fewer folks are likely to think that another look is
worth their time, or at least not nearly as often.

At this point, and (FINALLY!) getting to a straight
answer to Buck's proposal, I would be very amenable to
any suggestion for a moderated Usenet group to discuss
recumbents, and will even help anyone who's willing to
'bell the cat' (set up the approvals and do all the
day-to-work of screening and maintenance once the new
group is in operation).

A partial solution to our problem might be a concerted
effort to persuade most of the folks who have a hard
time dealing with the unpleasantness of a hyperactive
TROLL on a completely open forum to use one of the more
'controlled' doorways to the Usenet group - e.g.,
Cycling Forums. They now filter out our most annoying
and prolific off-topic poster, but even there a reader
will pick up some of the broad spectrum SPAM that
Google Groups filters from their top page and archives.
If this idea resonates with a lot of folks interested
in ARBR, it would be fairly simple to post a weekly
reminder which would be broadcast to the whole wide
span of ARBR on Usenet.

Do I have any enthusiasm or interest for yet another
new private or Google-style newsgroup or mail list?
Not unless I could be convinced that it could address
the challenges of becoming known, attracting solid
participation, and giving the 'bent community some
confidence that it will have long-term 'legs', once
its originator really sees how much work is involved.

Regards,
Wayne

Very nicely said, but no doubt Dolan will kvetch for it not bing in the
form of verse. I too should have apologized for responding publicly,
but like you felt this was a public issue. I'm not sure it the
original poster realize how much work would be entailed but certainly
understand where he's coming from . two recent posters sai it all when
a brief visit sent then packing the reason being that forum has little
to do with recumbents. Eventually the spamer(s) will give it up. Then,
if HEAD Dolan the GRATE were to depart, things would improve
considerably. Wouldn't it be nice if he took his tiresome,
repetitious, recycled rhetoric elsewhere. Here's a suggestion for
Dolan. Ed, could start his own group and call it ...
Dolan.fatuous.recycled.opinions. He could cross-post invitations
throughout cyber-space and see just how few (if any) become members.
That would serve nicely as a barometer of his worthlessness ...just a
thought. - Jim

On 16 Jan 2007 09:30:42 -0800, "32GO" wrote:

Most sincere posters will not return after
they've been sniped or callously harangued here. The
more of them who stop posting, leaving a (seriously
psychotic?) idiot who's bullheadedly made it his own
selfish goal to run up his message count with no regard
whatever for pertinence, courtesy, or even the way he's
regarded by the readers, the more horrible the signal-
to-noise ratio becomes for the group. Seeing that,
fewer folks are likely to think that another look is
worth their time, or at least not nearly as often.

I stick my head in here once in a long while and the real problem is
only peripherally ED. Afterall, it takes three clicks on any one of
the news readers I have available to make him disappear. The core of
the problem is that for a very long time there are no real posts about
recumbents. There is very little about bicycling at all. The people
that complain the loudest are the ones that wash away any chance that
the newsgroup can have a healthy life once you carve away the rotten
portions created by ED and his ilk.

Unfortunately, what I see quoted of ED by others is correct - once you
carve him away, there is no healthy portion left. You can pretty much
read ED or read about him or read responses to him. Those that
remained in this group have made ED into a miniature Jabba the Hutt.

(An aside: this isn't aimed at anyone specifically here and now - this
has been happening from about three months after ED showed up here.)

All you have to do to take back this group is to ignore ED - click on
his name and say 'ignore' or 'killfile', then click any thread that is
about him and say 'mark thread read' and start talking about
recumbents again. If he wants to rant and rave, put him a padded room
with silence. If a newbie shows up and responds to him, send an email
off-line to the newbie - don't even add one response to the thread.

Not that I have anything special to say or think everyone should hike
up the recumbent relevant noise ratio just to drown out ED, but I'd be
glad to hang around to contribute to a healthier RBR. You just won't
see me respond to ED or anyone on an ED-centric thread.

Curtis L. Russell
Who posted here long before ED found RBR

Curtis L. Russell wrote:
On 16 Jan 2007 09:30:42 -0800, "32GO" wrote:

Most sincere posters will not return after
they've been sniped or callously harangued here. The
more of them who stop posting, leaving a (seriously
psychotic?) idiot who's bullheadedly made it his own
selfish goal to run up his message count with no regard
whatever for pertinence, courtesy, or even the way he's
regarded by the readers, the more horrible the signal-
to-noise ratio becomes for the group. Seeing that,
fewer folks are likely to think that another look is
worth their time, or at least not nearly as often.

I stick my head in here once in a long while and the real problem is
only peripherally ED. Afterall, it takes three clicks on any one of
the news readers I have available to make him disappear. The core of
the problem is that for a very long time there are no real posts about
recumbents. There is very little about bicycling at all. The people
that complain the loudest are the ones that wash away any chance that
the newsgroup can have a healthy life once you carve away the rotten
portions created by ED and his ilk.

Unfortunately, what I see quoted of ED by others is correct - once you
carve him away, there is no healthy portion left. You can pretty much
read ED or read about him or read responses to him. Those that
remained in this group have made ED into a miniature Jabba the Hutt.

(An aside: this isn't aimed at anyone specifically here and now - this
has been happening from about three months after ED showed up here.)

All you have to do to take back this group is to ignore ED - click on
his name and say 'ignore' or 'killfile', then click any thread that is
about him and say 'mark thread read' and start talking about
recumbents again. If he wants to rant and rave, put him a padded room
with silence. If a newbie shows up and responds to him, send an email
off-line to the newbie - don't even add one response to the thread.

Not that I have anything special to say or think everyone should hike
up the recumbent relevant noise ratio just to drown out ED, but I'd be
glad to hang around to contribute to a healthier RBR. You just won't
see me respond to ED or anyone on an ED-centric thread.

Curtis,

Makes perfectly good sense to me. With what Wayne said and what you
added, I feel that most the bases were covered ... and well too. I
think your advise is sound and I have given like advice myself at
times. I feel that I have somewhat contributed to the problem by
taking Ed on. It is rather a waste of time and only serves to give him
the attention he craves and encourages his bad behavior. I should be
calling it quits with him soon. I too would like to see this group
return to a semblance of normality ... call it decorum in the forum.
Like you observed though, more recumbent content is required for the
forum to live up to its original design intent. Who knows, perhaps some
of those who vacated to BROL might even pay a return visit when the
word gets out.

Jim

Curtis L. Russell
Who posted here long before ED found RBR

Curtis wrote:

the real problem is only peripherally ED...

It's very pleasant to see reasonable discussion here.
I understand what Curtis is saying, and respect his
perspective, even though I'm not in total agreement.
As I reread my post, which was already way too long,
I sort of flinched when I noticed that my comments
were based on a web-centric interface to ARBR and
largely ignored folks who do use newsreaders.

Curtis's input comes from the other extreme, of course,
and his suggestions may be a valid approach for some
(would-be?) participants here. However, given the extent
to which Usenet has been integrated into the much more
popular world of http, I think it's pretty likely that
a sizable segment of folks today who read and post to
Usenet groups have never fired up and set up a real
newsreader interface.

For those guys, there's no simple way to avoid the TROLL,
unless it is, as I mentioned, to find a web-based portal
and archive that does the filtering for you. The great
offense of our resident TROLL, I think, is the hostility
he has shown to on-topic posters. Most folks who post
here are interested in the replies to their messages,
and he has alienated way too many posters, along with
other potential participants who don't wish to be cursed
or ridiculed simply because they'd like to ask a question
or tell some other people who might care about a neat
recumbent experience.

So... I believe that the TROLL is not so peripheral
as Curtis (and other newsreader users) may regard him.
It's not just his grossly overdone volume of off-topic
posts (which still vastly outnumber the total quantity
of replies he gets from ALL other posters); IMHO he's
also the primary reason that recumbent riders opt to
post at BROL rather than here. And that lack of real,
interesting, on-topic messages impacts even the guys
like Curtis who visit us by newsreader.

Regards,
Wayne