Re: PROPOSAL: alt.comp.retro-computing

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 18:38:06 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <[email protected]> did
make me awaken from my chaotic existentialism when they didst announce:

>OldbieOne <[email protected]> wrote:
>>On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:30:53 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <[email protected]>:
>>>OldbieOne <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>><snipped>
>
>>>>I specifically did NOT specify it a hardware group because it would
>>>>not be for hardware, but hardware, middleware, and software. The whole
>>>>enchilada. Or in italian, the whole plate of spaghetti and meatballs.
>
>>>Odd that it wasn't in the charter. I have no idea what middleware is
>>>with respect to retrocomputing.
>
>>Does *everything* have to be in a charter, or just a broad outline?
>
>The charter is the proponent's one chance to describe on-topic
>discussion. If the group doesn't fail (and nearly every single new
>newsgroup fails miserably), then on-topic discussion will be determined
>by what the regulars of the newsgroup discuss.
>
>>. . . 
>
>>>>Love the l@m3 attempt at trolling tho, my dude...
>
>>>>Are you like 12?
>
>>>This is alt.*. The proponent can do what he likes. But if you don't care
>>>to have the proposal discussed then don't offer it for discussion
>
>>I care for open and honest discussion, just not your snark
>
>You had better find a different medium of discussion that doesn't have
>snark.
>
>>>There's always a place on Usenet to discuss a topic. The best proponents
>>>are the ones who are well known for discussing the topic among those
>>>already discussing the topic. The best proponents are very well
>>>acquainted with the audience. They perform a proper justification, which
>>>is a count of non-crossposted discussion in which the topic of the
>>>proposed newsgroup is the main topic of the article. It's actual
>>>discussion, not just reposted articles from the Web nor FAQ postings.
>
>>There is no "right" or "wrong" person to form a request where none currently
>>exists. If I'm the wrong person to make a proposal, tell me who's right, and
>>I'll ask them offline. Otherwise, sei solo un iduita flammeggiante.
>
>Any moron can send a newgroup message; 10s of thousands have done so.
>It's just a matter of getting the syntax right.
>
>Being a good proponent is real work, which I've outlined above. A lousy
>proponent is someone not known for posting on topic and unaware of the
>community on Usenet already discussing the topic.
>
>It's alt.*. It's up to you if you want to make the effort.



I didn't realize I was in the presence of such greatness! :O

https://groups.google.com/g/aus.hi-fi/c/ed7QqoXSLr8

You're so vain, I bet you think this newsgroup's about you: 

alt.adam-h-kerman.config

I've done a lot of things in my time, but I've never been a dick to so many
people that they've created a group purely to trash me, my dude. 

Seems quite a lot of admins have chosen to include the group in their feeds
worldwide. Must be nice to have so many friends, eh?

ROFLMAO!

As I just posted in your eponymous group, in the spirit of wishing to offer 
constructive criticism on your behavior, I would like to offer the following
suggestion:

Adam, instead of telling people what they, to your mind, did "wrong", how 
about reframing the discussion like this, for example:

"Hello ____

I see you have made a proposal. Let me help you. If you want a positive result,
you might want to consider adding x or y, maybe re-wording part b to include
this, or exclude that, and possibly adding a section to go over this other
thing.

If you'd like some help with it, feel free to send me an email, or see this
handy-dandy guide here ________ which may be able to help"


Instead of 

"I AM A SNARKY LITTLE BITCH AND WILL SNARK AND MORE SNARK TO TELL YOU WHAT I
THINK YOU DID WRONG HERE AND MORE SNARK AT THE END CAUSE I WANT YOU TO RESPECT
MY SELF-GRANTED AUTHORITY"

Just a thought.

But then again, I don't have my own newsgroup, so.......



--
OldbieOne [TM]
The One Who Tells It Like It is!
Brought to you by RetroPC using
Forte Agent News Reader .99g/32