«

"Woodchuck Bill" <> wrote

> "Tony" <> wrote

>> Ebay abuse
>>
>> Ebay contact, including SPAM complaints:

> Actually, it is not considered enforceable Usenet spam unless it was
> posted at least 20 times, to different groups. And..Ebay only considers
> Usenet pointers a violation if there is a charter ban in place. This
> post by the OP is totally legal here.

Of course you're right Bill, but I'm real disappointed that you and your
cronies had a chance to take a stand on the charter issue and you snubbed
your noses at us. Now here you are, rubbing our noses in it:

> The four new digital photography groups, OTOH, have explicit bans on
> auction pointers in their charters. This post by the OP would be an
> enforceable violation in any of those groups..as would any signature
> with more than four lines, like yours, Tony.

You shouldn't be so smug about your 'stuffed box' win Bill

Steve Young

"Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in news:4K6dnS41LMaJw-HcRVn-
:

>> Actually, it is not considered enforceable Usenet spam unless it was
>> posted at least 20 times, to different groups. And..Ebay only considers
>> Usenet pointers a violation if there is a charter ban in place. This
>> post by the OP is totally legal here.
>
> Of course you're right Bill, but I'm real disappointed that you and your
> cronies had a chance to take a stand on the charter issue and you snubbed
> your noses at us. Now here you are, rubbing our noses in it:

You heard Russ and Todd. They will not accept proposals to change charters
of existing groups. There is no mechanism for such a change.

You were, OTOH, told that you would have the full backing and support of
NAN if you would like to volunteer your time and money to create and run
such a system. That was your chance. You blew it. You want things to
happen, but you don't want to put in the time and money to do it on your
own..yet, you expect others to volunteer their resources to do what *you*
want done. Stop whining about everyone else's refusal to advance your
agenda. Get off your lazy butt and do something about it.

--
Bill

"Woodchuck Bill" <> wrote

> "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote

(Author missing):
>>> Actually, it is not considered enforceable Usenet spam unless it was
>>> posted at least 20 times, to different groups. And..Ebay only
>>> considers Usenet pointers a violation if there is a charter
>>> ban in place. This post by the OP is totally legal here.

>> Of course you're right Bill, but I'm real disappointed that you and
>> your cronies had a chance to take a stand on the charter issue
>> and you snubbed your noses at us. Now here you are, rubbing
>> our noses in it:

> You heard Russ and Todd. They will not accept proposals to change
> charters of existing groups. There is no mechanism for such a change.

So why didn't you at least echo your support? All you want to do is
finger point and take what you've been able to get. Where does
Woodchuck Bill stand on the issue?

> You were, OTOH, told that you would have the full backing and support of
> NAN if you would like to volunteer your time and money to create and run
> such a system. That was your chance. You blew it.

Bill, I didn't blow anything. NOTHING IS A ONE MAN BAND!
Everything on Usenet needs to grow a consensus of support. Why won't you
help that consensus?

reread your shameful text:
> You want things to
> happen, but you don't want to put in the time and money to do it on your
> own..yet, you expect others to volunteer their resources to do what
> *you* want done. Stop whining about everyone else's refusal to advance
> your agenda. Get off your lazy butt and do something about it.

Dude, I've been way ahead of the pack with the hard work on this.
Don't you now see others talking about the need and desire? It is growing

You are missing the key to all of this Bill. No *one* individual can do
something and ram it down everyone else's throats. You are DAMN *lucky*
there are people who want to clean up the new group voting process. Do
you have any guesses as to why they want to do that? How clued are you?

Steve Young

"Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in news_6dndshN72Y8-HcRVn-
:

>> You heard Russ and Todd. They will not accept proposals to change
>> charters of existing groups. There is no mechanism for such a change.
>

> Where does Woodchuck Bill stand on the issue?

I would support something like that if someone comes forward to create and
maintain such a system. Quite a few of the news groupies have also
expressed support.

Russ Allbery and Todd McComb both have full time careers, and on the side
they run NAN. There are only two active votetakers left on the UVV, David E
Smith and Bill Aten. Those four individuals dedicate almost all of their
free time to Usenet community service. Their hands are full, and you can't
blame them for not being able to add another workload to the fire when they
have other things on backlog like Moderator Vacancy Investigions, RFDs,
CFVs, maintaining their servers, etc... How much of a workload do you
expect four volunteers with day jobs to take on, when they are already
*very* far behind?

What is preventing you from voluteering your services?

Have you ever considered that fact that you are pretty much the only person
to ever bring this charter-changing business up? If you feel it is so
important, why aren't you *doing* something about it?

--
Bill

"Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in news_6dndshN72Y8-HcRVn-
:

> Don't you now see others talking about the need and desire?

No.

--
Bill

"Woodchuck Bill" <> wrote

> "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote

>> Don't you now see others talking about the need and desire?

> No.

You are not following things close enough then to be running your mouth
with the things you've been saying about me. I can count a dozen news
groupies that have suggested agreement/support. Try Guy Macon for one.
The process is one by one.

This ring a bell?

From: "Guy Macon" <http://www.guymacon.com>
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.photo.equipment.35mm
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 1:19 AM
Subject: Re: [SI] *Heads up*: Fake SI submissions from [deleted]

> Steve Young <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> says...

>>"Guy Macon" <http://www.guymacon.com> wrote

>>> ... Steve Young, please tell me in plain yes or no language
>>> whether you have forged my email address.

>>I have NOT forged your email address.

>>Steve Young

> Thanks!

> Just to recap for those who haven't been following this, some folks
> have accused Steve Young of certain things, but I have not, because
> I have a moral and ethical duty to not make an accusation without
> evidence - and I haven't seen any. I also would wonder why Steve,
> a proponent of there being a way to modify charters in unmoderated
> groups, would attack me when I am one of the supporters of his idea.

> If anyone disagrees, show me real evidence, not guesses and
> speculation.

"Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in news:__mdnTk3_tCN6uHcRVn-
:

>
>> No.
>
> You are not following things close enough then to be running your mouth
> with the things you've been saying about me. I can count a dozen news
> groupies that have suggested agreement/support. Try Guy Macon for one.
> The process is one by one.

You are twisting my words. I said in the other thread that there are a good
number of news groupies in favor. The problem is that we need a volunteer
to do the word. Are you willing to do it?

--
Bill

"Woodchuck Bill" <> wrote

> "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote

(A missing author) said:
>>> No.

>> You are not following things close enough then to be running your mouth
>> with the things you've been saying about me. I can count a dozen news
>> groupies that have suggested agreement/support. Try Guy Macon for one.
>> The process is one by one.

> You are twisting my words.

Wot!? >> Don't you now see others talking about the need and desire?
> No.

> I said in the other thread that there are a good
> number of news groupies in favor.

cite please

> The problem is that we need a volunteer
> to do the word.

No, it needs a voting system that works first
and then possibly a few new user groups. (*possibly*)

You are *very* *very* lucky on your timing Bill

> Are you willing to do it?

Bill, Bill, Bill, I've been working on this for 4 or 5 years.
Back then, only Helge Nareid and a few foresighted denizens agreed.

Steve Young

"Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in news8SdnQjeO_lxG-HcRVn-
:

>> I said in the other thread that there are a good
>> number of news groupies in favor.
>
> cite please

"I would support something like that if someone comes forward to create and
maintain such a system. Quite a few of the news groupies have also
expressed support."

Message-ID: <Xns958CEE1F68055bswr607h4@130.133.1.4>


--
Bill

"Woodchuck Bill" <> wrote

> "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote

(mysterious author) wrote:
>>> I said in the other thread that there are a good
>>> number of news groupies in favor.

>> cite please

> Message-ID: <Xns958CEE1F68055bswr607h4@130.133.1.4>
Message id or article number Xns958CEE1F68055bswr607h4@130.133.1.4 not
found. No pages were found containing "xns958cee1f68055bswr607h4"
(Prolly too early?)

> "I would support something like that if someone comes forward to create
> and maintain such a system.

Well, just pay attention to the discussions and walk it forward, with any
constructive thoughts you have. No sense trying to hang burden on one.

> Quite a few of the news groupies have also
> expressed support."

yes they have nice to hear some harmony cookin

x