Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Woodchuck Bill, Oct 24, 2004.

  1. "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in
    news::

    >> That is a lie. Not a single vote has been ruled as "invalid" by the
    >> NAN team.

    >
    > You have the cart before the horse Bill. There is a 5 day period for
    > discussion and then NAN may take up the case. Don't you remember the
    > sequence from Full Metal Jacket?


    In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    votes.

    Here is the *official* challenge, with proof..


    http://makeashorterlink.com/?E28824999

    Message-ID: <>


    The original RESULT..


    http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q19813999

    Message-ID: <>


    The revised RESULT..


    http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1A823999

    Message-ID: <>


    In the original RESULT, the group failed. There were 2 challenges
    made..to the Full Metal Jacket "no" votes, and to the Stromboli "yes"
    votes. In the end, the FMJ votes were thrown out, and the Stromboli
    votes were upheld by the NAN team. The group passed, solely due to the
    Stromboli block of votes.

    Not a single vote has been properly challenged for the RPD reorg vote,
    with any offered proof of invalidity. The losing side cries "voter
    fraud" on almost every CFV, and nothing is ever reversed without
    compelling evidence of voter fraud. Unfamiliarity of a voter name is not
    grounds for voiding a vote, as there is no previous posting requirement
    for voters. In order for this result to be invalidated, you would need to
    come up with a list of roughly 250+ invalid votes, and offer proof why
    you purport *each* of them to be invalid, above and beyond the claim
    that you do not 'recognize' the names.

    The RPD reorg vote will stand, and the new groups will be created within
    the next few days.

    --
    Bill
     
    Woodchuck Bill, Oct 24, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Woodchuck Bill

    Matt Ion Guest

    Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    Just one question...

    WHO the **** cares?!?!


    Woodchuck Bill wrote:

    > "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >
    >>>That is a lie. Not a single vote has been ruled as "invalid" by the
    >>>NAN team.

    >>
    >>You have the cart before the horse Bill. There is a 5 day period for
    >>discussion and then NAN may take up the case. Don't you remember the
    >>sequence from Full Metal Jacket?

    >
    >
    > In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    > votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    > votes.
    >
    > Here is the *official* challenge, with proof..
    >
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?E28824999
    >
    > Message-ID: <>
    >
    >
    > The original RESULT..
    >
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q19813999
    >
    > Message-ID: <>
    >
    >
    > The revised RESULT..
    >
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1A823999
    >
    > Message-ID: <>
    >
    >
    > In the original RESULT, the group failed. There were 2 challenges
    > made..to the Full Metal Jacket "no" votes, and to the Stromboli "yes"
    > votes. In the end, the FMJ votes were thrown out, and the Stromboli
    > votes were upheld by the NAN team. The group passed, solely due to the
    > Stromboli block of votes.
    >
    > Not a single vote has been properly challenged for the RPD reorg vote,
    > with any offered proof of invalidity. The losing side cries "voter
    > fraud" on almost every CFV, and nothing is ever reversed without
    > compelling evidence of voter fraud. Unfamiliarity of a voter name is not
    > grounds for voiding a vote, as there is no previous posting requirement
    > for voters. In order for this result to be invalidated, you would need to
    > come up with a list of roughly 250+ invalid votes, and offer proof why
    > you purport *each* of them to be invalid, above and beyond the claim
    > that you do not 'recognize' the names.
    >
    > The RPD reorg vote will stand, and the new groups will be created within
    > the next few days.
    >
     
    Matt Ion, Oct 24, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Re: Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    Matt Ion <> wrote in
    news:eek:QIed.10298$%k.1888@pd7tw2no:

    > Just one question...
    >
    > WHO the **** cares?!?!


    Obviously not you, but some people apparently do, so please ignore what you
    don't want to read and let others carry on as they desire.

    --
    Bill
     
    Woodchuck Bill, Oct 24, 2004
    #3
  4. Woodchuck Bill

    dj_nme Guest

    Woodchuck Bill wrote:
    > "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >
    >>>That is a lie. Not a single vote has been ruled as "invalid" by the
    >>>NAN team.

    >>
    >>You have the cart before the horse Bill. There is a 5 day period for
    >>discussion and then NAN may take up the case. Don't you remember the
    >>sequence from Full Metal Jacket?

    >
    >
    > In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    > votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    > votes.
    >
    > Here is the *official* challenge, with proof..
    >
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?E28824999
    >
    > Message-ID: <>
    >
    >
    > The original RESULT..
    >
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q19813999
    >
    > Message-ID: <>
    >
    >
    > The revised RESULT..
    >
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1A823999
    >
    > Message-ID: <>
    >
    >
    > In the original RESULT, the group failed. There were 2 challenges
    > made..to the Full Metal Jacket "no" votes, and to the Stromboli "yes"
    > votes. In the end, the FMJ votes were thrown out, and the Stromboli
    > votes were upheld by the NAN team. The group passed, solely due to the
    > Stromboli block of votes.
    >
    > Not a single vote has been properly challenged for the RPD reorg vote,
    > with any offered proof of invalidity. The losing side cries "voter
    > fraud" on almost every CFV, and nothing is ever reversed without
    > compelling evidence of voter fraud. Unfamiliarity of a voter name is not
    > grounds for voiding a vote, as there is no previous posting requirement
    > for voters. In order for this result to be invalidated, you would need to
    > come up with a list of roughly 250+ invalid votes, and offer proof why
    > you purport *each* of them to be invalid, above and beyond the claim
    > that you do not 'recognize' the names.
    >
    > The RPD reorg vote will stand, and the new groups will be created within
    > the next few days.
    >


    To those that like things the way they are, just post as you normaly
    would to the current (apropriate) newsgroup.
    Just killfile the NG creation threads and it will seem just like it was
    before the vote.
    I will do that myself to all three threads that have been clogging up
    RPD for the past few weeks.

    Considering that all digital cameras and accessories are on topic (ad
    will remain on topic) in RPD, it won't make any difference to me.

    The new sub-groups will probably wither due to ISPs not subscribing
    their servers to them anyway (and the resulting lack of posts).

    Have fun complaining either way in this thread, because I will leave you
    to it.
     
    dj_nme, Oct 24, 2004
    #4
  5. Woodchuck Bill

    me Guest

    Re: Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    "Matt Ion" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:QIed.10298$%k.1888@pd7tw2no...
    > Just one question...
    >
    > WHO the **** cares?!?!


    ROTFL! Ahem, now that I've recovered, I like your style Matt but IMHO a
    better question might be, is there an NG for the discussion of NG creation?
    Perhaps that might be a better venue for this sort of thing?

    > Woodchuck Bill wrote:
    >
    > > "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in
    > > news::
    > >
    > >
    > >>>That is a lie. Not a single vote has been ruled as "invalid" by the
    > >>>NAN team.
    > >>
    > >>You have the cart before the horse Bill. There is a 5 day period for
    > >>discussion and then NAN may take up the case. Don't you remember the
    > >>sequence from Full Metal Jacket?

    > >
    > >
    > > In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    > > votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    > > votes.
    > >
    > > Here is the *official* challenge, with proof..
    > >
    > >
    > > http://makeashorterlink.com/?E28824999
    > >
    > > Message-ID: <>
    > >
    > >
    > > The original RESULT..
    > >
    > >
    > > http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q19813999
    > >
    > > Message-ID: <>
    > >
    > >
    > > The revised RESULT..
    > >
    > >
    > > http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1A823999
    > >
    > > Message-ID: <>
    > >
    > >
    > > In the original RESULT, the group failed. There were 2 challenges
    > > made..to the Full Metal Jacket "no" votes, and to the Stromboli "yes"
    > > votes. In the end, the FMJ votes were thrown out, and the Stromboli
    > > votes were upheld by the NAN team. The group passed, solely due to the
    > > Stromboli block of votes.
    > >
    > > Not a single vote has been properly challenged for the RPD reorg vote,
    > > with any offered proof of invalidity. The losing side cries "voter
    > > fraud" on almost every CFV, and nothing is ever reversed without
    > > compelling evidence of voter fraud. Unfamiliarity of a voter name is not
    > > grounds for voiding a vote, as there is no previous posting requirement
    > > for voters. In order for this result to be invalidated, you would need

    to
    > > come up with a list of roughly 250+ invalid votes, and offer proof why
    > > you purport *each* of them to be invalid, above and beyond the claim
    > > that you do not 'recognize' the names.
    > >
    > > The RPD reorg vote will stand, and the new groups will be created within
    > > the next few days.
    > >
     
    me, Oct 24, 2004
    #5
  6. Woodchuck Bill

    me Guest

    Re: Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    "me" <anonymous@_.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Matt Ion" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:QIed.10298$%k.1888@pd7tw2no...
    > > Just one question...
    > >
    > > WHO the **** cares?!?!

    >
    > ROTFL! Ahem, now that I've recovered, I like your style Matt but IMHO a
    > better question might be, is there a NG for the discussion of NG creation?


    I answer my own question: news.groups news.announce.newgroups

    > Perhaps that might be a better venue for this sort of thing?
    >
    > > Woodchuck Bill wrote:
    > >
    > > > "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in
    > > > news::
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >>>That is a lie. Not a single vote has been ruled as "invalid" by the
    > > >>>NAN team.
    > > >>
    > > >>You have the cart before the horse Bill. There is a 5 day period for
    > > >>discussion and then NAN may take up the case. Don't you remember the
    > > >>sequence from Full Metal Jacket?
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    > > > votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    > > > votes.
    > > >
    > > > Here is the *official* challenge, with proof..
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > http://makeashorterlink.com/?E28824999
    > > >
    > > > Message-ID: <>
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > The original RESULT..
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q19813999
    > > >
    > > > Message-ID: <>
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > The revised RESULT..
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1A823999
    > > >
    > > > Message-ID: <>
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > In the original RESULT, the group failed. There were 2 challenges
    > > > made..to the Full Metal Jacket "no" votes, and to the Stromboli "yes"
    > > > votes. In the end, the FMJ votes were thrown out, and the Stromboli
    > > > votes were upheld by the NAN team. The group passed, solely due to the
    > > > Stromboli block of votes.
    > > >
    > > > Not a single vote has been properly challenged for the RPD reorg vote,
    > > > with any offered proof of invalidity. The losing side cries "voter
    > > > fraud" on almost every CFV, and nothing is ever reversed without
    > > > compelling evidence of voter fraud. Unfamiliarity of a voter name is

    not
    > > > grounds for voiding a vote, as there is no previous posting

    requirement
    > > > for voters. In order for this result to be invalidated, you would need

    > to
    > > > come up with a list of roughly 250+ invalid votes, and offer proof why
    > > > you purport *each* of them to be invalid, above and beyond the claim
    > > > that you do not 'recognize' the names.
    > > >
    > > > The RPD reorg vote will stand, and the new groups will be created

    within
    > > > the next few days.
    > > >

    >
    >
     
    me, Oct 24, 2004
    #6
  7. Re: Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    "me" <anonymous@_.com> wrote in news::

    > is there a NG for the discussion of NG creation?
    >
    > I answer my own question: news.groups news.announce.newgroups


    You provided an incomplete answer. You forgot to add..

    ...all newsgroups named in the distribution list of the particular proposal
    and/or any other groups thay may be affected by the proposal.

    --
    Bill
     
    Woodchuck Bill, Oct 24, 2004
    #7
  8. Woodchuck Bill

    Alan Browne Guest

    Re: Get a life...

    Matt Ion wrote:

    > Just one question...
    >
    > WHO the **** cares?!?!


    If you don't, then (and using your language) you know what to do.

    --
    -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
    -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
    -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--
     
    Alan Browne, Oct 24, 2004
    #8
  9. Woodchuck Bill

    drwxr-xr-x Guest

    Re: Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    On 24 Oct 2004 07:43:58 GMT, Woodchuck Bill hath writ:
    > Matt Ion <> wrote in
    > news:eek:QIed.10298$%k.1888@pd7tw2no:
    >
    >> Just one question...
    >>
    >> WHO the **** cares?!?!

    >
    > Obviously not you, but some people apparently do, so please ignore what you
    > don't want to read and let others carry on as they desire.


    Well, what _will_ happen is that folks ignoring nettique will
    now be cross-posting to even _more_ ng's than this thread is.
     
    drwxr-xr-x, Oct 24, 2004
    #9
  10. Woodchuck Bill

    Mike Guest

    Re: Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    "Matt Ion" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:QIed.10298$%k.1888@pd7tw2no...
    > Just one question...
    >
    > WHO the **** cares?!?!
    >
    >

    LOL, you beat me to it Matt
     
    Mike, Oct 24, 2004
    #10
  11. Woodchuck Bill

    Mike McCloud Guest

    "Woodchuck Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns958C1EA0139E1bswr607h4@130.133.1.4...
    > "Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > >> That is a lie. Not a single vote has been ruled as "invalid" by the
    > >> NAN team.

    > >
    > > You have the cart before the horse Bill. There is a 5 day period for
    > > discussion and then NAN may take up the case. Don't you remember the
    > > sequence from Full Metal Jacket?

    >
    > In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    > votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    > votes.



    Don't you have a life?
     
    Mike McCloud, Oct 24, 2004
    #11
  12. Woodchuck Bill

    Mike McCloud Guest

    Re: Get a life... (was: Re: goodbye rec.photo.digital -hello rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?)

    "Woodchuck Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns958C26170FBF1bswr607h4@130.133.1.4...
    > Matt Ion <> wrote in
    > news:eek:QIed.10298$%k.1888@pd7tw2no:
    >
    > > Just one question...
    > >
    > > WHO the **** cares?!?!

    >
    > Obviously not you, but some people apparently do,


    Why?
     
    Mike McCloud, Oct 24, 2004
    #12
  13. Woodchuck Bill

    Mike McCloud Guest

    Re: Get a life...

    "Alan Browne" <> wrote in message
    news:s9Ped.13015$...
    > Matt Ion wrote:
    >
    > > Just one question...
    > >
    > > WHO the **** cares?!?!

    >
    > If you don't, then (and using your language) you know what to do.



    You should reread the header
     
    Mike McCloud, Oct 24, 2004
    #13
  14. Woodchuck Bill

    Matt Ion Guest

    Re: Get a life...

    me wrote:

    > "Matt Ion" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:QIed.10298$%k.1888@pd7tw2no...
    >
    >>Just one question...
    >>
    >>WHO the **** cares?!?!

    >
    >
    > ROTFL! Ahem, now that I've recovered, I like your style Matt but IMHO a
    > better question might be, is there an NG for the discussion of NG creation?
    > Perhaps that might be a better venue for this sort of thing?


    As noted elsewhere, they shoulda created a rec.photo.digital.bitch group...
     
    Matt Ion, Oct 25, 2004
    #14
  15. Woodchuck Bill

    Drifter Guest

    On 24 Oct 2004 06:59:57 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <>
    wrote:

    >"Steve Young" <bowtieATbrightdslDOTnet> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >>> That is a lie. Not a single vote has been ruled as "invalid" by the
    >>> NAN team.

    >>
    >> You have the cart before the horse Bill. There is a 5 day period for
    >> discussion and then NAN may take up the case. Don't you remember the
    >> sequence from Full Metal Jacket?

    >
    >In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    >votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    >votes.

    ---snip---

    Geez I wish I had some idea what the hell all that means.


    Drifter
    "I've been here, I've been there..."
     
    Drifter, Oct 27, 2004
    #15
  16. Woodchuck Bill

    Guest

    Kibo informs me that Drifter <> stated that:

    >On 24 Oct 2004 06:59:57 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <>
    >wrote:

    [...]
    >>In the FMJ case, someone properly challenged a series of *specific*
    >>votes with compelling evidence and a solid reason for voiding those
    >>votes.

    >---snip---
    >
    >Geez I wish I had some idea what the hell all that means.


    Don't worry. If you'd spent 3+ months wrangling over the sordid details
    like some of us did, you'd probably treasure your present ignorance. ;)

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    , Oct 27, 2004
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Thad
    Replies:
    217
    Views:
    2,832
    David Dyer-Bennet
    Sep 8, 2004
  2. Lionel
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    805
    Ken Tough
    Sep 17, 2004
  3. Woodchuck Bill
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    849
  4. Alan Browne

    [NG] news:rec.photo.digital.slr-systems is online

    Alan Browne, Oct 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    60
    Views:
    1,190
    schuetzen - RKBA!
    Nov 4, 2004
  5. Michael A. Covington

    Where is rec.photo.digital.slr-systems?

    Michael A. Covington, Dec 15, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    581
    Randy Howard
    Dec 22, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page