About "the photo groups" for news.groups regulars

"Lisa Horton" wrote

Perhaps elbow bending and good sense don't go together?

*ah!* so you *do* see I'm not connected with the anonymous troll

In article , "Steve Young"
bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet says...
*ah!* so you *do* see I'm not connected with the anonymous troll

No, we still think you're guilty Steve.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

Brian C. Baird wrote in
:

In article , "Steve Young"
bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet says...
*ah!* so you *do* see I'm not connected with the anonymous troll

No, we still think you're guilty Steve.

Brian is correct.


--
"Live fast. Die young." (Nikki Sixx)

-Richard Cockburn

"Steve Young" bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet on 27 Jul 2004 posted

[groups added, follow-up set]

"Lisa Horton" wrote in message
...

For those of you who are regulars in this group and are wondering why
all the fuss about the "photo groups", let me give you some
background.

Last summer, a troll or trolls started attacking the photo
newsgroups, using religion, politics, and sexuality to set us against
each other. The group was going downhill. Along with some others, I
came up with the idea of an activity that might help build a sense of
community, and bring us back together around the one thing we all do
have in common, photography. The project was called the Shoot In, a
sort of non competitive variation on a photo contest.

Its definitely a good idea, are there any other newsgroups for
photography that do this?

for some reason, rec.photo.35mm doesn't seem to have anything like this.

Perhaps this group should go moderated?

Community *is* important to a better user experience.
And *kudos* on your effort toward that

The SI was a roaring success, welcomed by a great many newsgroup
regulars. There were a few who were not enthusiastic, so in response
it was agreed to preface all SI related traffic with [SI], which did
mollify almost all of those who didn't like the SI. In fact, the SI
did help build community, and did help turn the groups attention away
from the trolling.

Why not cure the trolling, so others aren't harassed?

Now, strictly speaking, the SI is not on topic for
rec.photo.equipment.35mm, as that group nominally exists to discuss
35mm photographic equipment.

Ah, so you do agree, there is validity to the fundamentalist's claim.

Does anyone deny that anything not specifically involving recreational
use of 35mm photographic camera equipment is'nt strictly speaking off
topic?

Does your killfilter not work? Do you not have scoring or anything like
that?

However, a number of topics regularly discussed
and generally accepted as appropriate are also strictly speaking, off
topic. Like camera, tripods and the like. In general, the group
doesn't have a problem with topics that are at least related to 35mm
photographic equipment.

And OTOH, as I recall, the charter does not forbid personal hobbyist
'for sale' ads. Some folks say they would rather not see them in the
group. (In fact, this may be an understatement.

Not long after the SI became a success, the troll(s) started
attacking the SI. And Steve Young appeared on the scene, with his
project of modifying existing group charters.

So much for research Lisa, I've been a participant in the photo groups
for nearly six years. Throughout the course, I've witnessed raging
flame wars over the shortcomings of the charter.

charter? Who the hell cares about any charter? any charter is a
toothless unenforcable completely meaningless peice of nothing. A
newsgroup certainly doesn't need a charter to allow members to complain
about spam.

snip

Also this year, an anonymous post in alt.troll invited trolls to
attack the photo groups. The "snuh" brigade appear to have acted on
the invitation, and are now rampaging through the photo groups as
well.


Oh my god no! Not the terrible onslaught of trolls and such?! What can
stop them! Oh, wait, they're totally obvious, so i can just ignore them,
and, oh look, whats this shiny red button that says 'killfile' do?

Seriously, its relatively obvious when a thread or post is a work of
trolling, and killfiles are great. Anyone that doesn't have a newsreader
with decent killfiling and scoring should look into getting one. That
is, if they are having that much trouble pressing the 'delete' key.

Notably, they appear to like and think highly of Steve Young.

Perhaps they see me as fair, unbiased, reasonably read and articulate?
Getting to the crux of the matter, listening *and* *respecting* other
peoples opinion.


What'reyou serious?

So now, in the Summer of 2004, a year after the initial attacks, here
we are. The attacks continue, the RL harassment continues. Quite a
few people in the photo groups believe that Steve Young is involved
in the trolling. None of the group regulars agree with Steve Young
about the charters.

Other than what I've posted, I'm no more involved with it than you,
but it does make for a great story and a common bad guy within the
clique.

As you may have noticed, Steve seems to spend considerable time going
on about some "dog pack". This appears to be his term for the great
majority of newsgroup regulars who disagree with Steve. But I'll
tell you right now, there is no "dog pack" that runs the group.

How, in the world, would ther even be such a thing? THis is -usenet-.
This is an unmoderated newsgroup in usent. People have killfiles and
scoreing filters, and outside of exhanging the text of those files, there
isn't even a way to assert control on a group.

There is, however, like all newsgroups a core group of participants
who do much to encourage the health of the newsgroup. As a
participant of 8 years in the photo groups, I guess I'm in that
group. But we're no cabal, we're not organized, we're just people
with a common interest in photography.

So it has now slipped to; at least "we're no cabal"

Even this is debatable, IMHO

Ok, how is it debateable? HOw are some powerless people who can only
post messages to a newsgroup a cabal? And even if they were, what would
it matter? How does their being in a cabal somehow keep them out of
anyone's personal killfile?

An interest that Steve Young does not appear to share, since he never
posts about photography, just about trolls and charter and things
like that. While he's posting all this off topic stuff, he goes on
and on and on and on about how the photography related SI is off
topic.

You need to do better with your history Lisa.
Even in regards to it being off-topic

Who cares if there is off topic traffic here? Every newsgroup has tons
of off topic traffic. Any newsgroup that has traffic as relevant to it
as the Shoot-In is to this newsgroup would be benefiting from it.

snip

"Steve Young" bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet on 27 Jul 2004 posted

[groups added, follow-up set]

"Lisa Horton" wrote in message
...

For those of you who are regulars in this group and are wondering why
all the fuss about the "photo groups", let me give you some
background.

Last summer, a troll or trolls started attacking the photo
newsgroups, using religion, politics, and sexuality to set us against
each other. The group was going downhill. Along with some others, I
came up with the idea of an activity that might help build a sense of
community, and bring us back together around the one thing we all do
have in common, photography. The project was called the Shoot In, a
sort of non competitive variation on a photo contest.

Its definitely a good idea, are there any other newsgroups for
photography that do this?

for some reason, rec.photo.35mm doesn't seem to have anything like this.

Perhaps this group should go moderated?

Community *is* important to a better user experience.
And *kudos* on your effort toward that

The SI was a roaring success, welcomed by a great many newsgroup
regulars. There were a few who were not enthusiastic, so in response
it was agreed to preface all SI related traffic with [SI], which did
mollify almost all of those who didn't like the SI. In fact, the SI
did help build community, and did help turn the groups attention away
from the trolling.

Why not cure the trolling, so others aren't harassed?

Now, strictly speaking, the SI is not on topic for
rec.photo.equipment.35mm, as that group nominally exists to discuss
35mm photographic equipment.

Ah, so you do agree, there is validity to the fundamentalist's claim.

Does anyone deny that anything not specifically involving recreational
use of 35mm photographic camera equipment is'nt strictly speaking off
topic?

Does your killfilter not work? Do you not have scoring or anything like
that?

However, a number of topics regularly discussed
and generally accepted as appropriate are also strictly speaking, off
topic. Like camera, tripods and the like. In general, the group
doesn't have a problem with topics that are at least related to 35mm
photographic equipment.

And OTOH, as I recall, the charter does not forbid personal hobbyist
'for sale' ads. Some folks say they would rather not see them in the
group. (In fact, this may be an understatement.

Not long after the SI became a success, the troll(s) started
attacking the SI. And Steve Young appeared on the scene, with his
project of modifying existing group charters.

So much for research Lisa, I've been a participant in the photo groups
for nearly six years. Throughout the course, I've witnessed raging
flame wars over the shortcomings of the charter.

charter? Who the hell cares about any charter? any charter is a
toothless unenforcable completely meaningless peice of nothing. A
newsgroup certainly doesn't need a charter to allow members to complain
about spam.

snip

Also this year, an anonymous post in alt.troll invited trolls to
attack the photo groups. The "snuh" brigade appear to have acted on
the invitation, and are now rampaging through the photo groups as
well.


Oh my god no! Not the terrible onslaught of trolls and such?! What can
stop them! Oh, wait, they're totally obvious, so i can just ignore them,
and, oh look, whats this shiny red button that says 'killfile' do?

Seriously, its relatively obvious when a thread or post is a work of
trolling, and killfiles are great. Anyone that doesn't have a newsreader
with decent killfiling and scoring should look into getting one. That
is, if they are having that much trouble pressing the 'delete' key.

Notably, they appear to like and think highly of Steve Young.

Perhaps they see me as fair, unbiased, reasonably read and articulate?
Getting to the crux of the matter, listening *and* *respecting* other
peoples opinion.


What'reyou serious?

So now, in the Summer of 2004, a year after the initial attacks, here
we are. The attacks continue, the RL harassment continues. Quite a
few people in the photo groups believe that Steve Young is involved
in the trolling. None of the group regulars agree with Steve Young
about the charters.

Other than what I've posted, I'm no more involved with it than you,
but it does make for a great story and a common bad guy within the
clique.

As you may have noticed, Steve seems to spend considerable time going
on about some "dog pack". This appears to be his term for the great
majority of newsgroup regulars who disagree with Steve. But I'll
tell you right now, there is no "dog pack" that runs the group.

How, in the world, would ther even be such a thing? THis is -usenet-.
This is an unmoderated newsgroup in usent. People have killfiles and
scoreing filters, and outside of exhanging the text of those files, there
isn't even a way to assert control on a group.

There is, however, like all newsgroups a core group of participants
who do much to encourage the health of the newsgroup. As a
participant of 8 years in the photo groups, I guess I'm in that
group. But we're no cabal, we're not organized, we're just people
with a common interest in photography.

So it has now slipped to; at least "we're no cabal"

Even this is debatable, IMHO

Ok, how is it debateable? HOw are some powerless people who can only
post messages to a newsgroup a cabal? And even if they were, what would
it matter? How does their being in a cabal somehow keep them out of
anyone's personal killfile?

An interest that Steve Young does not appear to share, since he never
posts about photography, just about trolls and charter and things
like that. While he's posting all this off topic stuff, he goes on
and on and on and on about how the photography related SI is off
topic.

You need to do better with your history Lisa.
Even in regards to it being off-topic

Who cares if there is off topic traffic here? Every newsgroup has tons
of off topic traffic. Any newsgroup that has traffic as relevant to it
as the Shoot-In is to this newsgroup would be benefiting from it.

snip