A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » European Ski Resorts
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old October 25th 03, 04:01 PM
BrritSki
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing



Tony Evans wrote:

vote no every time it's the case and see if that has any effect.

Good idea. That's what I plan to do. Bring it on.
Ads
  #42  
Old October 25th 03, 04:15 PM
Don Aitken
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 16:19:56 +0100, "John Briggs"
wrote:

Dr Zoidberg wrote:
Ian Spare wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:11:30 +0100, Paul Giverin
wrote:

In message , Ian Spare
writes
If you had any interest at all you'd be familiar enough with RSRE to
know that there's only one or two non-English posting per year since
the groups foundation. Since you clearly don't read it then it
rather begs the question how you've reached the conclusion the UK
needs its own group.

I don't think it begs the question at all. The uk.* hierarchy is
independent of any other Usenet hierarchy.

What's the plan then, replicate every newsgroup in the rec hierarchy
to the UK?


Obviously not , but if sufficient people want a uk... group to cover a
particular subject and are prepared to say so then the idea shouldn't be
ruled out automatically just because a non uk group covers a similar
topic.


I would go further: if sufficient people want a uk.* group to cover a
particular subject and are prepared to say so, then the fact a non-uk.*
group covers a similar topic is of no relevance.


The fact that many of the prospective users of the group, all of whom
are entitled to vote, prefer to stay with the group they have got
rather than have two groups would, if true, have considerable
relevance.

The extreme assertions on both sides:

1. If a group exists in another hierarchy, uk.* should leave the
subject alone, and:
2. Nothing outside uk.* ever makes a difference to what happens inside
uk.*

are both absurd. This is a matter to be resolved by vote; that is what
votes are for. Those who believe that the proposal would have a
detrimental effect on a group they read are entitled to vote no. Those
who don't care about that are entitled to vote yes.

--
Don Aitken

Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being
read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".
  #43  
Old October 25th 03, 04:20 PM
John Briggs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing

Don Aitken wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 16:19:56 +0100, "John Briggs"
wrote:

Dr Zoidberg wrote:
Ian Spare wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 14:11:30 +0100, Paul Giverin
wrote:

In message , Ian Spare
writes
If you had any interest at all you'd be familiar enough with RSRE to
know that there's only one or two non-English posting per year since
the groups foundation. Since you clearly don't read it then it
rather begs the question how you've reached the conclusion the UK
needs its own group.

I don't think it begs the question at all. The uk.* hierarchy is
independent of any other Usenet hierarchy.

What's the plan then, replicate every newsgroup in the rec hierarchy
to the UK?

Obviously not , but if sufficient people want a uk... group to cover a
particular subject and are prepared to say so then the idea shouldn't be
ruled out automatically just because a non uk group covers a similar
topic.


I would go further: if sufficient people want a uk.* group to cover a
particular subject and are prepared to say so, then the fact a non-uk.*
group covers a similar topic is of no relevance.


The fact that many of the prospective users of the group, all of whom
are entitled to vote, prefer to stay with the group they have got
rather than have two groups would, if true, have considerable
relevance.

The extreme assertions on both sides:

1. If a group exists in another hierarchy, uk.* should leave the
subject alone, and:
2. Nothing outside uk.* ever makes a difference to what happens inside
uk.*

are both absurd. This is a matter to be resolved by vote; that is what
votes are for. Those who believe that the proposal would have a
detrimental effect on a group they read are entitled to vote no. Those
who don't care about that are entitled to vote yes.


Strictly speaking, those who are not interested in such a group and would
not take part in it, should not vote.
--
John Briggs


  #44  
Old October 25th 03, 05:00 PM
David Off
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing

John Briggs wrote:

Strictly speaking, those who are not interested in such a group and would
not take part in it, should not vote.


So only yes voters should take part in the vote... now I know where
Saddam Hussein's electorial commission have found work!

  #45  
Old October 25th 03, 05:07 PM
Paul Rooney
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:20:27 +0100, "John Briggs"
wrote:



Strictly speaking, those who are not interested in such a group and would
not take part in it, should not vote.


Strictly speaking, that is false.

--
Paul
My Lake District walking site (updated 29th September 2003):
http://paulrooney.netfirms.com

Please sponsor me for the London Marathon at:
http://www.justgiving.com/london2004
  #46  
Old October 25th 03, 05:08 PM
John Briggs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing

David Off wrote:
John Briggs wrote:

Strictly speaking, those who are not interested in such a group and would
not take part in it, should not vote.


So only yes voters should take part in the vote... now I know where
Saddam Hussein's electorial commission have found work!


Well, certainly, if you have no interest in the uk.* hierarchy you should
not be voting "no".
--
John Briggs


  #47  
Old October 25th 03, 05:11 PM
PG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing


"David Mahon" wrote in message
...
In article , Ian Spare
writes

If you had any interest at all you'd be familiar enough with RSRE to
know that there's only one or two non-English posting per year since
the groups foundation. Since you clearly don't read it then it rather
begs the question how you've reached the conclusion the UK needs its
own group.


For all you know, my news server may only provide me with uk.* groups.


Seeing as you have just posted to rsre, that seems rather improbable. No
doubt your news server, along with the vast majority of those available to
UK residents, allow access to rsre and other non-uk. forums.

It's non of uk.*'s concern what is available outside of uk.* (although
it may be of concern to individuals in choosing which way they will
vote).


No one has seriously suggested that it is. Practical objections have been
put forward in the main, and which have been studiously ignored in most
cases.

Pete


  #48  
Old October 25th 03, 05:13 PM
John Briggs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing

Paul Rooney wrote:
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 17:20:27 +0100, "John Briggs"
wrote:



Strictly speaking, those who are not interested in such a group and would
not take part in it, should not vote.


Strictly speaking, that is false.


Only if those voting are "stakeholders" (to use an ugly modern expression)
in the uk.* hierarchy. Otherwise, the point stands - those whose only
interest in the uk.* hierarchy is opposing this particular group for reasons
unconnected with the uk.* hierarchy should not be taking part in the vote.
--
John Briggs


  #49  
Old October 25th 03, 05:15 PM
PG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing


"John Briggs" wrote in message
...
David Off wrote:
John Briggs wrote:

Strictly speaking, those who are not interested in such a group and

would
not take part in it, should not vote.


So only yes voters should take part in the vote... now I know where
Saddam Hussein's electorial commission have found work!


Well, certainly, if you have no interest in the uk.* hierarchy you should
not be voting "no".


Why's that? If someone is interested in preserving rsre from what he may
believe could result in unnecessary duplication and consequent dilution of
posters between groups, he is quite entitled to vote, imo.

Pete


  #50  
Old October 25th 03, 05:15 PM
John Briggs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default RFD: create unmoderated newsgroup uk.rec.skiing

David Mahon wrote:

Anyway, RSRE, by it's own charter's admission, is not an English
language forum. Feel free to try and get that changed.


Charters are usually not changed in the rec.* hierarchy.
--
John Briggs


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.