Advertising allowed?

wrote:
On 09 Mar 2004 13:40:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg

wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 01:54:57 +1100, Dave Proctor
wrote:
[deleted]
Over the years since the adoption of the Charter/FAQ, have you per
Usenet protocol, attempted to have the wording changed?

So there is a Charter/FAQ in effect which has been there since circa
1995. Throughout the years, there has been some rumblings
about
advertising but no-one who favours changes, has done nothing about
going about changing it then bitches if it is enforced.

The Charter/FAQ as it stands and which has not been altered in any
way
since it's adoption clearly states:

The FAQ states:
ALL advertising is inappropriate and should be directed to the group
rec.travel.marketplace.

The Charter states:
All advertising is inappropriate and should be directed to the group
rec.travel.marketplace.

If you want these changed, then you are welcome to set in motion the
necessary Usenet protocol to have these and any other part of the
Charter/FAQ changed.

I take it that you will be doing so in the immediate future?

No. Why should I?
I am happy with the way it reads.

Why are you talking to yourself? (Hint: The "I take it ..." sentence
was *yours*, not mine.)

You and perhaps some others seem to have a problem; so, like I have
said on more than one occasions, anyone who does not agree with it,
is
most welcome to start the proceedings to have it changed.

We don't have any problem with the current status. We do have a
problem with you clinging to a 9-year old charter and implying that
there is some official procedure for changing an old charter.

The Charter is there for a reason and again, you are more than
welcome
to set in motion, any changes you desire.

You seem to be under the impression that we are in some way bound by
a
9-year old charter. I think you are mistaken.

Then, what is the purpose of having a Charter/FAQ?
What was the the purpose of having an initial RFD, CFV etc and
people
passing the vote then?

For (not) *creating* the Newsgroup.

There are numerous groups whose effective charter changed over the
years and nobody really minds.

You state this so please name them.

I already gave some example. I could give more, but those would
(also)
be for the groups which I subscribe to. As you say, there are tens of
thousands of newsgroups, so my list would be very incomplete and
hardly
relevant for others.

Some of these groups are groups where News admins hangs out, so if
anybody would be charter-picky, it would be them.

And "news admins" is??

News adminstrators, i.e. the people who run the News servers which
make up Usenet. Are you that uninformed or just being argumentative?

I note you have posted to Usenet's news.admin.net-abuse.usenet' your
first posting shows a posting date of Dec 2, 1996.
And I quote from one of your posts:
"The point is: For people who understand what (News/)Usenet is,
there
*is* no alternative. *That* will keep it alive." Date: 2000/01/11"

And you point is?

You also seem to think that there is some common (as in frequently
used) procedure for formally changing an existing/old charter. Again
I
think you are mistaken.

For someone who has been around Usenet for so long and has been
posting questions to various newsgroups seeking help, I find it
rather
ironic you ask this question here.

The almighty question is: "what has stopped you from doing such a
search"?
Or, asking a question or two on one or more newsgroups?

What "question"? I don't ask any question (at least not in the above
quoted parts).

If you think there is such a procedure, then kindly point us to it
*and* to
(several, recent) examples of groups for which that procedure was
(successfully) carried out.

Shoot Frank, with all your postings, I thought you would have found
out rather than write that line and been able to tell me [readers]
the
answer.

The (obvious) point is that I don't think that such a procedure
exists, but that you seem to think it does exist. So it is up to you
to
prove its existence. (To prevent the probably upcoming logical
fallacy:
One can not prove that something does not exist, so the burden of
proof
is on the person who thinks that something does exist.)

Do you think I don't have a life and just sit at my computer and
look
at every newsgroup which IIRC now totals in excess of 100,000?
Get real Frank.

May I suggest you look up the word "example" in the dictionary?

Unfortunately several weeks ago, I lost my boomark file then when I
went to reload it from a disk, the disk was 'bad' and I was only
able
to retrieve some 10% of the bookmarks. Researchng the
bookmarks I once had regarding many aspects of Usenet is not a
priority for me as I do have a business and home to run; this being
a
busy time of the year for us.

I did a quick search and was able to find reference to one or two
people having requested information on how to change the Charter/FAQ
and were told that to do so, it would entail going through the same
procedure as setting up a newsgroup i.e. CFD, etc etc.

A rather non-specific cop-out don't you think?

I take it that you will be doing so in the very near future?

Do you mean to tell me in the years since your first archived
posting
in 1996, you have never bothered to read the Usenet FAQ?

"the Usenet FAQ", well that is a new one to me. (Hint: There isn't
one
single "Usenet FAQ", there are tens and probably hundreds of them.)
And,
like I said, one can not prove that something does not exist, so the
burden of proof is (still) on you.

So, to wrap it up, don't bitch at me [or anyone else], "go do it
yourself if your not happy". Simple isn't it...

See above. *You* seem to be the one who is not happy. So the burden
is
on you, not anyone else.

Frank Slootweg (News admin for 20 years)

Firstly, news admin for 20 years? To what does that refer to?
Puffery?

Just a fact. You are the one who is trying to 'educate' us about
(IMO
non-existant) Usenet procedures, so I think it's only fair to give you
an indication of the experience/expertise of your correspondent.
--multiplaza.nl.nu--

wrote:
On 09 Mar 2004 13:40:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg

wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 01:54:57 +1100, Dave Proctor
wrote:
[deleted]
Over the years since the adoption of the Charter/FAQ, have you per
Usenet protocol, attempted to have the wording changed?

So there is a Charter/FAQ in effect which has been there since circa
1995. Throughout the years, there has been some rumblings
about
advertising but no-one who favours changes, has done nothing about
going about changing it then bitches if it is enforced.

The Charter/FAQ as it stands and which has not been altered in any
way
since it's adoption clearly states:

The FAQ states:
ALL advertising is inappropriate and should be directed to the group
rec.travel.marketplace.

The Charter states:
All advertising is inappropriate and should be directed to the group
rec.travel.marketplace.

If you want these changed, then you are welcome to set in motion the
necessary Usenet protocol to have these and any other part of the
Charter/FAQ changed.

I take it that you will be doing so in the immediate future?

No. Why should I?
I am happy with the way it reads.

Why are you talking to yourself? (Hint: The "I take it ..." sentence
was *yours*, not mine.)

You and perhaps some others seem to have a problem; so, like I have
said on more than one occasions, anyone who does not agree with it,
is
most welcome to start the proceedings to have it changed.

We don't have any problem with the current status. We do have a
problem with you clinging to a 9-year old charter and implying that
there is some official procedure for changing an old charter.

The Charter is there for a reason and again, you are more than
welcome
to set in motion, any changes you desire.

You seem to be under the impression that we are in some way bound by
a
9-year old charter. I think you are mistaken.

Then, what is the purpose of having a Charter/FAQ?
What was the the purpose of having an initial RFD, CFV etc and
people
passing the vote then?

For (not) *creating* the Newsgroup.

There are numerous groups whose effective charter changed over the
years and nobody really minds.

You state this so please name them.

I already gave some example. I could give more, but those would
(also)
be for the groups which I subscribe to. As you say, there are tens of
thousands of newsgroups, so my list would be very incomplete and
hardly
relevant for others.

Some of these groups are groups where News admins hangs out, so if
anybody would be charter-picky, it would be them.

And "news admins" is??

News adminstrators, i.e. the people who run the News servers which
make up Usenet. Are you that uninformed or just being argumentative?

I note you have posted to Usenet's news.admin.net-abuse.usenet' your
first posting shows a posting date of Dec 2, 1996.
And I quote from one of your posts:
"The point is: For people who understand what (News/)Usenet is,
there
*is* no alternative. *That* will keep it alive." Date: 2000/01/11"

And you point is?

You also seem to think that there is some common (as in frequently
used) procedure for formally changing an existing/old charter. Again
I
think you are mistaken.

For someone who has been around Usenet for so long and has been
posting questions to various newsgroups seeking help, I find it
rather
ironic you ask this question here.

The almighty question is: "what has stopped you from doing such a
search"?
Or, asking a question or two on one or more newsgroups?

What "question"? I don't ask any question (at least not in the above
quoted parts).

If you think there is such a procedure, then kindly point us to it
*and* to
(several, recent) examples of groups for which that procedure was
(successfully) carried out.

Shoot Frank, with all your postings, I thought you would have found
out rather than write that line and been able to tell me [readers]
the
answer.

The (obvious) point is that I don't think that such a procedure
exists, but that you seem to think it does exist. So it is up to you
to
prove its existence. (To prevent the probably upcoming logical
fallacy:
One can not prove that something does not exist, so the burden of
proof
is on the person who thinks that something does exist.)

Do you think I don't have a life and just sit at my computer and
look
at every newsgroup which IIRC now totals in excess of 100,000?
Get real Frank.

May I suggest you look up the word "example" in the dictionary?

Unfortunately several weeks ago, I lost my boomark file then when I
went to reload it from a disk, the disk was 'bad' and I was only
able
to retrieve some 10% of the bookmarks. Researchng the
bookmarks I once had regarding many aspects of Usenet is not a
priority for me as I do have a business and home to run; this being
a
busy time of the year for us.

I did a quick search and was able to find reference to one or two
people having requested information on how to change the Charter/FAQ
and were told that to do so, it would entail going through the same
procedure as setting up a newsgroup i.e. CFD, etc etc.

A rather non-specific cop-out don't you think?

I take it that you will be doing so in the very near future?

Do you mean to tell me in the years since your first archived
posting
in 1996, you have never bothered to read the Usenet FAQ?

"the Usenet FAQ", well that is a new one to me. (Hint: There isn't
one
single "Usenet FAQ", there are tens and probably hundreds of them.)
And,
like I said, one can not prove that something does not exist, so the
burden of proof is (still) on you.

So, to wrap it up, don't bitch at me [or anyone else], "go do it
yourself if your not happy". Simple isn't it...

See above. *You* seem to be the one who is not happy. So the burden
is
on you, not anyone else.

Frank Slootweg (News admin for 20 years)

Firstly, news admin for 20 years? To what does that refer to?
Puffery?

Just a fact. You are the one who is trying to 'educate' us about
(IMO
non-existant) Usenet procedures, so I think it's only fair to give you
an indication of the experience/expertise of your correspondent.
--multiplaza.nl.nu--