Death to RSC.

"Charlie" > wrote in message
...
>
> When I first started on web based boards I thought they were horrible.
> Now I find them far better than usenet. The interface is much better,
> the moderation gets rid of the dheads, photos are easily posted, sticky
> topics, sub sections, yada yada.
>

Sometimes the moderation gets rid of everyone but the dickheads.
Moderation is completely dependent on the moderator. Moderation can also
often amount to a moderator being a rude arse sticking his nose into a
conversation that's none of his business. When it becomes a territorial,
dictator thing where you need to be a clone of the modertor (minus the
power, of course - many suffer from the mentality that it's ok for them to
have a cock and balls so long as no one else does), that becomes a worthless
forum.

Photos are good, but there's nothing stopping someone puting up a link
here.

Byron Forbes wrote:

> Sometimes the moderation gets rid of everyone but the dickheads.
> Moderation is completely dependent on the moderator. Moderation can also
> often amount to a moderator being a rude arse sticking his nose into a
> conversation that's none of his business. When it becomes a territorial,
> dictator thing where you need to be a clone of the modertor (minus the
> power, of course - many suffer from the mentality that it's ok for them to
> have a cock and balls so long as no one else does), that becomes a worthless
> forum.
>
> Photos are good, but there's nothing stopping someone puting up a link
> here.

I'm not trying to convert anyone, just putting forward a point of view.
There are benefits to web forums, but the only real benefit I see to
usenet is download speed, and that's pretty much a non issue with
broadband.

Charlie

In article >,
(Charlie) wrote:

> but the only real benefit I see to
> usenet is download speed,

Depends how you use newsgroups. I download all new messages to all
the groups I belong to and read them in "offline" mode. That means
you (a) don't miss something because it was in a thread you didn't
check (b) can filter out people/threads which annoy you (though I
very rarely do this) (c) can glance at every message quickly, only
reading the stuff that interests you thoroughly.

I guess that's an extension to (a) really, but it's a huge factor in
the usenet equation for me. Doing the same thing in forums is a
*much* more clumsy and time consuming affair.

Andrew McP

Uwe Schürkamp wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 07:41 +0100 (BST), Andrew MacPherson wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>>(Don Scurlock) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Plowing through multiple web
>>>forums is way too tedious.
>>
>>I've said before in similar discussions that I wish some clever
>>person would come up with a "newsreader" for multiple forums. You'd
>>think it'd be possible, but I guess if it was simple someone would
>>have done it by now.
>>
>>Andrew McP
>
>
> Well, some forums offer RSS syndications which you could then add to
> your firefox bookmarks or whatever, but that's nowhere near newsreader
> functionality.
>
> cheers, uwe
>
Another option would be to just subscribe to the groups and have all the
posts emailed to you. Write a rule to dump them in a folder and then
you'd have pure text grouped by subject.

I don't know if RSC offers email notification like that, but the SimBin
forum does. Only thing is it just sends you the first post and then you
have to go to the site and subscribe to the thread if you want to
receive the replies via email (at least that's as far as I've gotten
with it).

Russell

"Byron Forbes" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Charlie" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> When I first started on web based boards I thought they were horrible.
>> Now I find them far better than usenet. The interface is much better,
>> the moderation gets rid of the dheads, photos are easily posted, sticky
>> topics, sub sections, yada yada.
>>
>
> Sometimes the moderation gets rid of everyone but the dickheads.
> Moderation is completely dependent on the moderator. Moderation can also
> often amount to a moderator being a rude arse sticking his nose into a
> conversation that's none of his business. When it becomes a territorial,
> dictator thing where you need to be a clone of the modertor (minus the
> power, of course - many suffer from the mentality that it's ok for them to
> have a cock and balls so long as no one else does), that becomes a
> worthless forum.
>
> Photos are good, but there's nothing stopping someone puting up a link
> here.
A fine description of RSC Byron - and, since this is the 2nd time I find
myself agreeing with one of your posts, it's clear that therapy is now in
order ...

(Andrew MacPherson) wrote in
ddress_disguised:

> In article >,
> (Don Scurlock) wrote:
>
>> Plowing through multiple web
>> forums is way too tedious.
>
> I've said before in similar discussions that I wish some clever
> person would come up with a "newsreader" for multiple forums. You'd
> think it'd be possible, but I guess if it was simple someone would
> have done it by now.
>
> Andrew McP

I have tried it. Not a "newsreader" (no point doing yet another newsreader,
there're few good existing ones), but a proxy that was converting web-based
forums into NNTP feed. It is not particularly difficult, just a matter of
parsing web pages. Unfortunately, your average forum is full of bugs and
errors, so you have to write your own custom parser for each forum working
around those bugs. And what's even worse, forums seem to be in a state of
constant rebugging (rebugging is a process of replacing old bugs with a new
ones). Altogether, it does not seem to be a worthwhile task. At least until
the quality of web forums improves.

Alex.

In article 9>,
(alexti) wrote:

> I have tried it.

Well done for trying. I suspected that even without bugs the
multiple forum formats would make it a difficult project.

Andrew McP

"alex martini" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Byron Forbes" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Charlie" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> When I first started on web based boards I thought they were horrible.
>>> Now I find them far better than usenet. The interface is much better,
>>> the moderation gets rid of the dheads, photos are easily posted, sticky
>>> topics, sub sections, yada yada.
>>>
>>
>> Sometimes the moderation gets rid of everyone but the dickheads.
>> Moderation is completely dependent on the moderator. Moderation can also
>> often amount to a moderator being a rude arse sticking his nose into a
>> conversation that's none of his business. When it becomes a territorial,
>> dictator thing where you need to be a clone of the modertor (minus the
>> power, of course - many suffer from the mentality that it's ok for them
>> to have a cock and balls so long as no one else does), that becomes a
>> worthless forum.
>>
>> Photos are good, but there's nothing stopping someone puting up a link
>> here.
> A fine description of RSC Byron - and, since this is the 2nd time I find
> myself agreeing with one of your posts, it's clear that therapy is now in
> order ...
>

I'll book you an apointment with doctor Todt - he'll tell you what you
want to hear!

"Charlie" > wrote in message
...
> Byron Forbes wrote:
>
>> Sometimes the moderation gets rid of everyone but the dickheads.
>> Moderation is completely dependent on the moderator. Moderation can also
>> often amount to a moderator being a rude arse sticking his nose into a
>> conversation that's none of his business. When it becomes a territorial,
>> dictator thing where you need to be a clone of the modertor (minus the
>> power, of course - many suffer from the mentality that it's ok for them
>> to
>> have a cock and balls so long as no one else does), that becomes a
>> worthless
>> forum.
>>
>> Photos are good, but there's nothing stopping someone puting up a link
>> here.
>
> I'm not trying to convert anyone, just putting forward a point of view.
> There are benefits to web forums, but the only real benefit I see to
> usenet is download speed, and that's pretty much a non issue with
> broadband.
>

The only thing I miss in here is a few good emoticons.

Anyone know if emoticons for usenet is a possibility or maybe even in
the works?

> Hey Byron - I got banned from RSC but am still alive here - does that me a survivor? ;-)

Why where you banned?

Personally I quit RSC because of their policy of pubicly attaching warning
label to their members. I got a warning for posting a link to a video that
one of the moderators claimed was copywrighted, when in fact the video was
public domain. When I explained that this false accuastion was the
equivalent of defamation of character, the moderators at RSC got all nervous
and asked me to re-agree to their policies, which I refused to do and I
quit RSC instead, asking them to delete all my posts, which they did.

As far as I know RSC is the only forum that pubicly adds warning labels
to it's members.