Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> " BOB" > wrote in
> :
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>> (Dan Abel) wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> In article >, Wayne Boatwright
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (Dan Abel) wrote in news:dabel-0212041315270001@ssu-
>>>>> 64en129.sonoma.edu:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's the same way on this newsgroup. A regular says something
>>>>>> obnoxious, and maybe it will be ignored because of the previous
>>>>>> valuable things they have posted. A newcomer posts the same thing,
>>>>>> and since that is all we have to judge them on, we dump on them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Dan, I can agree to a point, but when a regular continually posts
>>>>> obnoxious, smutty, degrading things, especially when it's about
>>>>> another poster, it should _not_ be overlooked. Alas, here in RFC, is
>>>>> is. Luckily, kill files and score files can eliminate their presence
>>>>> forever.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You've totally lost me, Wayne. What is the difference between
>>>> "overlooking" and using a kill file? Aren't you "overlooking" someone
>>>> when you killfile them?
>>>
>>> It may make no difference to you, Dan, but it does to me. It even
>>> infuriates me to see the name of particular posters. With kill and
>>> score files, I can avoid ever seeing any evidence that they exist in
>>> this or any other newsgroup.
>>>
>>> When I said posters like this should not be overlooked, in the same
>>> breath I realized that as long as the majority of posters accept their
>>> behavior there is no hope of "eliminating" them. Offensive posters
>>> can, in effect, be eliminated from a newsgroup by totally ignoring and
>>> never supporting a word they say. When the offender realizes that no
>>> one will ever respond to their rages and rants, they will usually
>>> disappear on their own. Obviously, this will never happen here.
>>>
>>>> I may not have answered Jim correctly. I don't have killfile
>>>> capability, so I just ignore certain obnoxious posters. That doesn't
>>>> mean that I condone their actions, it just means that I realize that I
>>>> can do nothing about them. If Jim is upset because we haven't gotten
>>>> ridden of certain obnoxious posters, it's because there isn't anything
>>>> we can do. There's no law against being nasty on a newsgroup.
>>>
>>> I wasn't suggesting that you answered Jim incorrectly, but we obviously
>>> have different views on how we would react. If I had a relative who
>>> consistly behaved boorishly, they would no longer be welcome in my home
>>> and I would avoid going where I knew they would be present. It's my
>>> problem if I can't deal with people like that, but it's also my choice
>>> whether or not I have to suffer their presence.
>>>
>>> In this newsgroup there are exactly two posters who reside permanently
>>> in my killfile. It has spared me the aggravation of even seeing their
>>> name.
>>>
>>> If none of this makes sense to you, that's okay. It doesn't have to.
>>> It makes perfect sense to me, and it works.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>> Who is "Jim" and where did he get into this thread?
>
> LOL I dunno. That's who Dan said he answered.
>
> --
> Wayne in Phoenix
>
> *If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it.
> *A mind is a terrible thing to lose.
That's exactly why *I* didn't trim a thing. (didn't want to lose attributions)
I think "Dan" neads to read more closely.
Dan's answer seems to be directed to "Mama2EandJ", the OP, but it is in a
response to J.J.'s post (Gal Called J.J.) .
Maybe that's why J.J. had to change *HER* screen name, 'cuz people like "Dan"
still are gender-confused with the "J.J." name.
BOB
thinks people kinda lose credibility when they can't quote properly