Re: PROPOSAL: alt.comp.retro-computing

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 22:07:08 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <[email protected]> did
make me awaken from my chaotic existentialism when they didst announce:

>OldbieOne <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>. . . 
>
>>Never in my days on USENET (and I've been back and forth for literally
>>decades) was a foreign language group used to deny an English language
>>group.
>
>My ghod you are stupid. alt.config is for proposal discussion, not for
>approval nor denial. 

Missed my sarcasm, eh? Maybe you're not so smart after all, lol!!!!

>ou don't want there to be any proposal discussion
>since you can't take criticism of the fact that you aren't going to try
>to find an audience and haven't posted on the topic yourself.

Critique is different from snark. But it seems you're unable to respond to
anyone with constructive commentary without the snark. There's no need for it
anymore, it's not the eternal september! 

Although, I did just see you responding to someone in the hilarously named ES
groups.....

>You don't need my help to deny you a newsgroup of your very own. You'll
>succeed in that by yourself.

Exactly. But the attitute you responded to the proposal made it seem that you
would like people to believe that you have that power....

And THAT is why I have taken an equal tone in my responses to you, my dude.

>>And I've created several groups in the past under the alt.*
>>heirarchy as well as others.
>
>Speaking of massive egos, the proponent sends the newgroup message but
>DOES NOT create the newsgroup. That's what the News administrator does.
>Any moron can send a newgroup message; 10s of thousands have done so.
>It's not an act of creation.

You clearly didn't comprehend that which you had just read....nowhere did I
claim or imply that making a proposal NEEDED a vote or anyone's consent, nor did
I claim or imply that sending a proposal for a group would result in the
creation of said groups, you numpty! LOL!!

I used to be a news admin prior to the shakedown in the mid 2000's..... I was
clear in my statement:

"I have created several groups under the alt.* hierarchy and others over the
years"


>You can't force any News administrator to create a newsgroup and you
>can't force anyone to post to it. That's why a proponent needs to find
>the audience for the proposed group. A potential user of the group has
>to be the one to request its creation from his News administrator.

Most of the alt.* groups we created for users on my service, we didn't even
bother having them post proposals for. There seemed little point in involving
the children who liked to pick apart everything. Rather than instructing them to

post proposals, we used to simply use our judgement as to whether or not the
group would be a worthy addition. Of course we had red lines, and if what we
were being asked would have crossed those, we'd just suggest they make a post.

I recently came back to USENET after more than a decade away from it, and
thought that things may have changed, and coming from a user perspective, I
thought I'd try and play nice. I see that nothing has changed, and actually
gotten worse. 

>>I've just never met an asshole like you in alt.config before.
>
>And yet you knew exactly who I was. It's a bizarre thing to lie about.

A quick search told me all I needed to know about you that I didn't know before.
You know, searching is easy.. I'm no n00b. It's right in my sig ;) 

Serious question: have you ever just tried to be nice instead of snarky?

You might actually like it. It's not a weakness, my dude








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