gln@arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) (11/26/88)
In article <1067@etive.ed.ac.uk>, jha@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Jamie Andrews) writes: > forward those to Trish. The wording of the statement again: > "Posters to soc.culture.celtic should avoid > discussing the present political situation in > Northern Ireland, due to the high volume of > irresolvable debate it generates." > --Jamie. This is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. So just exactly how are you intending to enforce this stupid proposition - hit squads?? I have no intentions of ceasing to post anything of a Celtic nature whether or not a group of readers do not like it. How about we vote on some other equally foolish propositions? Say, "No more discussions regarding limiting the areas of Celtic Culture that can be posted to an open, free newsgroup." Yeah I know a silly concept this freedom of speech..... "high volume of irresolvable debate it generates" ????? This is NOT high volume - relative to the extremely few posts that used to come in - yes it is high volume - but relative to 80+% of the groups on the net it is trivial. As to irresolvable debates, well anyone who enters this discussion with the idea of altering anyone's views or solving any of the problems is an idiot. The whole idea is to attempt to clarify points of view and explain opinions, as well as share information. There is nothing wrong with irresolvable debates - otherwise you'd better see about getting rid of about half of the groups on the net - I feel fairly confident that in most any group, there is a discussion that can fall into the 'irresolvable' category. I for one, have no intentions of casting a vote in this totally childlike, foolish poll. Pass any propositons you like and then stick em where the sun don't shine because I (and I would hope others) will simply ignore them. gln
jha@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Jamie Andrews) (11/28/88)
In article <8074@megaron.arizona.edu> gln@arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes: > I for one, have no intentions of casting a vote in this totally childlike, >foolish poll. Pass any propositons you like and then stick em where the sun >don't shine because I (and I would hope others) will simply ignore them. Gee whiz, I could a swore that one of the first votes I got from North America (which I indulgently recorded, even though I originally requested that people there not send me any) was from one Gary L. Newell, gln@arizona.edu. In case there are any people out there who are a little dazed by this all, and can't quite imagine what Gary's vote message said, well, it said "NO NO NO NO no no no". Do you have a split personality, Gary? Or do you care to deny that you sent me a vote? Or is your blood sugar just a little low today? --Jamie.
gln@arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) (12/01/88)
In article <1101@etive.ed.ac.uk>, jha@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Jamie Andrews) writes: > Do you have a split personality, Gary? Or do you care to > deny that you sent me a vote? Or is your blood sugar just a > little low today? > --Jamie. I thought it was a joke Jamie - It wasn't until I saw your second posting, about having a NA mailing site that I realized you were serious - so you can withdraw my vote, and continue with your childish games. have fun kiddies... gln
wcs@skep2.ATT.COM (Bill.Stewart.[ho95c]) (12/01/88)
In article <8074@megaron.arizona.edu> gln@arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes: > > avoid discussing .... political ... Northern Ireland ... > This is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. So just exactly how are > you intending to enforce this stupid proposition - hit squads?? It is not stupid, nor is it unprecedented, and one enforces it by periodically asking people to be courteous. It generally works. Net.abortion was created to get the abortion discussion out of *.women, *.religion.*, and other newsgroups, because pro-free-choice and anti-babymurdering people have differences as irreconcilable as the sides of the Ireland issues, but people still want to have civilized discussions about other topics in the various groups. I've generally stopped reading soc.culture.celtic because it's become a forum for political flames, and it's hard to find any remaining discussion about linguisitics or bagpipes or history in among the flames. If we create a talk.politics.ireland, the political discussion can go there and the non-political discussion can stay in soc.culture.celtic. So if anyone needs an adminsitrator to create a newsgroup after the voting is over, I'm available. -- # Thanks; # Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs 2G218 Holmdel NJ 201-949-0705 ho95c.att.com!wcs # # One Bell System - it works!
gln@arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) (12/02/88)
In article <324@skep2.ATT.COM>, wcs@skep2.ATT.COM (Bill.Stewart.[ho95c]) writes: > > you intending to enforce this stupid proposition - hit squads?? > It is not stupid, nor is it unprecedented, and one enforces it by > periodically asking people to be courteous. It generally works. Speaking of being courteous, why don't some of you folks who dislike the political discussions show a little? Allow those who do enjoy taking part, to do so without the constant whining. > I've generally stopped reading soc.culture.celtic because > it's become a forum for political flames, and it's hard to > find any remaining discussion about linguisitics or bagpipes > or history in among the flames. Please Please Please!!! Tell me what makes it so damn hard??!!?? Perhaps the articles on bagpipes and linguistics are few, because it represents the level of overall interest as opposed to politics. > If we create a > talk.politics.ireland, > the political discussion can go there and the non-political > discussion can stay in soc.culture.celtic. > So if anyone needs an adminsitrator to create a newsgroup > after the voting is over, I'm available. There has already been about a dozen or more postings in support of keeping the political discussions in s.c.c - there have been even more who do not like the discussion but recognize its right to exist here. A few of you however cannot accept that and think that by running your little vote you can somehow control the content of the group to meet YOUR likes and dislikes!! I've heard so much crap about the lack of articles on this or the small amount of articles on that, since the politics started - that is bull - if even half of those of you who have complained like this would take as much time to post an article on these seemingly important topics, then there would not be this supposed problem. Instead however, you run around blaming the CURRENT lack of interest in meat pies or bag pipes, on the fact that there is a political discussion that is on and off in this group. Unbelievable! Take a serious look at the past posting behavior in s.c.c - there never were many articles on bagpipes or meat pies - it is all relative, and if you simply do not like having to skip a few articles from time to time, in order to find out if there are any postings that you like, then goodbye and good riddance!! Everyone has the right to post articles pertaining to any part of present or past Celtic Culture - whether you or a group of others like it or not! How about adding that to your little referendum?? gln
pilar@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Pilar Cocopah) (12/05/88)
In article <324@skep2.ATT.COM> wcs@skep2.UUCP (46323-Bill.Stewart.[ho95c],2G218,x0705,) writes: >I've generally stopped reading soc.culture.celtic because >it's become a forum for political flames, and it's hard to >find any remaining discussion about linguisitics or bagpipes >or history in among the flames. If we create a > talk.politics.ireland, >the political discussion can go there and the non-political >discussion can stay in soc.culture.celtic. i have just started reading soc.culture.celtic but even though i am new here what bill Stesart said makes very good sense i think. some people say that you cannot discuss scotland and ireland and wales without discussing also their politics but culture is more than laws and military actions. if not talk.politics.ireland, how about a more encompassing group such as talk.politics.europe? pilar
wcs@skep2.ATT.COM (Bill.Stewart.[ho95c]) (12/05/88)
In article <8133@megaron.arizona.edu> gln@arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes:
:Speaking of being courteous, why don't some of you folks who dislike the
:political discussions show a little?
As I pointed out, and you quoted later on, I'd stopped reading
s.c.c., so I've *been* polite - I replied when the argument
overflowed into news.misc.
:Please Please Please!!! Tell me what makes it so damn hard??!!?? Perhaps the
:articles on bagpipes and linguistics are few, because it represents the level
:of overall interest as opposed to politics.
They've been drowned out, Gary, or at least had for a while when I
stopped reading it; a couple of political zealots can drown out
anything else, and people who care about Irish politics tend to be
zealots whichever side they're on - there's been a lot of wrong done by
both sides, and reconciliation is a tough thing when both sides would
rather fight. But there are other good discussions that go on; it's
simply hard to find them. Looks like there's about 1/3 non-political
content today.
As another poster pointed out in reply to my article, Jamie's vote was
asking for an end to the political discussion rather than a new
newsgroup to move it to, which I hadn't realized. This is
soc.CULTURE.celtic, after all - shall we create a
talk.politics.ireland?
There's clearly enough volume to justify it.
--
# Thanks;
# Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs 2G218 Holmdel NJ 201-949-0705 ho95c.att.com!wcs
#
# One Bell System - it works!bob@etive.ed.ac.uk (Bob Gray) (12/06/88)
In article <8133@megaron.arizona.edu> gln@arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes: >There has already been about a dozen or more postings in support of >keeping the political discussions in s.c.c - there have been even more who The vast majority of which have come from from one sight, and from one user who signs himself gln. Bob.
hwt@bnr-public.uucp (Henry Troup) (12/06/88)
Why not create rec.music.bagpipes? :-) Henry Troup utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!hwt%bnr-public | BNR is not Bell-Northern Reseach hwt@bnr (BITNET/NETNORTH) | responsible for Ottawa, Canada (613) 765-2337 (Voice) | my opinions
bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan) (12/08/88)
In article <213@bnr-fos.UUCP> hwt@bnr-public.UUCP (Henry Troup) writes: > >Why not create rec.music.bagpipes? :-) Oh, please do!! -- William Swan ..!tikal.Teltone.COM!sigma!bill ====O "Auld Pipers never die, they just blow away!" *\:-)