Text 17504, 67 rader
Skriven 2007-08-19 17:22:51 av Amy Guskin (3981.babylon5)
     Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Newsgroup back!
===========================
>> On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 12:47:06 -0400, StarFuryG7@aol.com wrote
(in article <1187542026.863519.58680@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>):

>>>> On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 02:05:18 -0400, StarFur...@aol.com wrote
>> 
>> (in article <1187503518.949987.84...@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>):
>> 
>>> No, what you're engaging in here is being a deliberate
>>> condescencing snob <<
> 
> On Aug 19, 9:57 am, Amy Guskin <aisl...@fjordstone.com> wrote:
>> My deepest apologies to everyone here.  It seems as though the move of the
>> server must have caused some technical problem or other, as I am
>> apparently_not_ seeing all of this person's posts in order to moderate them
>> in advance of their appearing here on the newsgroup.  I really, really
>> apologize to you, Rob.  This should _not_ have gotten out.  
> 
>         So Amy, am I therefore understand that his arrogant,
> sarcastic, utterly insulting message in my direction, which was
> deliberate and calculated, and intended to evoke an angry response,
> and which I was responding to there appropriately taking that into
> account, should have shown up without a problem, but my post reacting
> to him in response should _not_ have appeared?
>         Where's your apology to me for what you just said and what you
> just confirmed? <<

You are getting no apology, because none is due.  Add to the list of holes in 
your education the information from the group's moderation FAQ that describes 
what sort of posts will be disallowed on the newsgroup.  From 
http://members.aol.com/rastb5mod/mod-faq.html#Disallowed:

>> Flames are defined as posts which:
	1.	personally insult or hurt one of the members of the newsgroup; or
	2.	make allegations, without corroborating evidence, concerning a 
person/poster in the newsgroup, in a deliberate and repetitive manner 
(resembling a common sense definition of libel/slander, but not specifically 
limited to the legal interpretation of those terms). <<

You and Matt each made one transgression, at which point I warned you both.  
You are the only one who has continued to personally insult members of the 
newsgroup.  Someone disagreeing with you, and informing you that your 
information is not correct, is not "flaming" you.  Saying, "You are incorrect 
about your understanding of Usenet and the Web" is an allowable post.  It is 
not insulting.  You may indeed be insulted by it, but it's not a personal (ad 
hominem) insult.

Everyone who has posted information about the nature of Usenet and the Web, 
besides you, has simply been trying to educate you, because whether you 
believe it or not, your understanding of this is _incorrect_.  Your response 
is to continue to insult people.  That is why you are now (finally, the 
gods/esses bless you, Cheryl!) on hand moderation.

As a side note, it would be very easy for you to go off to one of your other 
online haunts, or to e-mail, or your local coffee shop, and to ask some of 
your own friends about this.  Unless they have a vested interest in letting 
you continue to be deluded, or they have very little technical savy, I'd be 
surprised if you don't know _someone_ who can affirm for you what we are all 
saying, repeatedly.  Heck, go someplace where they _hate_ this newsgroup and 
the people in it, and they'll tell you you're wrong, too.  Guaranteed.

Amy
-- 
"In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over 
again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George 
W. Bush, May 24, 2005
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)