Yes I do remember it, and from my view point, it's is not totaly correct.
What do you mean? It's exactly what you said.
Like I said before:
Unless I am really careful, and know my mood is bad, I am a fish that is
hooked by " Troll Bait ".
I said " Troll Bait ", because that is how I perceive some of it, the bait
used by trolls to start a " fight ", " to cause tempers to flair ", Flame
bait is much the same, as far as I perceive it, but then again that how our
lives are shaped, by perceptions that we have.
There's a basic error in this. Please read what you've written there
again. You ascribe your perceptions to others' intentions. Saying
something is "Troll Bait" means that those posting it are trolls and
intend it as bait, and you actually say that. But that's not the
case, you simply cannot blame them for the effect it might have on
you and say they intended it. You think they sent it directly to you
and only to you? It's a mailing list, Greg, it has 3,000 members, not
just you! Are you going to treat anything you disagree with as a
direct and deliberate personal attack on you? Not here you won't.
It is still true, I have learned a few new things, but, it does not mean
that I would not prefer to spend more time talking about biofuels, and less
on politics.
That's just fine, but you're going a lot further than that. To fit in
with your preferences, just yours, one member out of 3,000, you're
asking that the way the list is run should be changed and that a
longstanding tradition repeatedly supported by the majority of the
membership for good and oft-stated reasons should be abandoned. And
all so that you don't get cross by reading stuff that isn't directed
specifically at you and that nobody is forcing you to read. And
that's not at all just fine.
If I was totaly consistent, I would refuse to even bother with any political
discussion,
That is your prerogative. It's not your prerogative to demand that it
be stopped just for your sake. Nor is your definition, "political",
anything more than a subjective labelling. In practice it would be
impossible to apply it, and we've been through that here before too.
for that manner, I might even leave the list if it was that big
a deal.
A big deal to whom? The list? You and everyone else can stay or
leave, at your own discretion.
Now, if you're going to insist on demanding that the "Open
discussions" policy be dropped on your account and that discussions
be restricted to exclude posts that you personally perceive as "Troll
Bait", that is a different matter. That would be (and probably
already is) a deliberate flouting of a well-established list rule
that you're very familiar with and have yourself supported in the
past. And that can have only one consequence.
I don't have a lot of faith in your perceiving that clear distinction
right now.
Another thing is that you've dubbed people trolls who are not trolls.
Do you think that's acceptable? It's not acceptable.
I have no doubt that some people on the list would be happy if I
was to leave ( at least that is my perception ).
Hm, I'm not putting a lot of faith in your perceptions right now. You
have no basis for saying that, at least not outside of your
perceptions. There's nothing that anyone has posted here that
supports it. You think people are still harbouring some sort of
grudge over the F9/11 mess, more than two months later? Forget it.
Yes, I change, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse, that is
part of the nature of being Bi-Polar. That is part of who I am. If the
list can not accept me for who I am and what positive things I can sometimes
offer, I am sorry, not just from me to the list, but the fact that some
people who claim to be " enlightened " and better than Greg H. are in fact,
no better than my self.
Who has claimed to be " enlightened " and better than Greg H.? You're
imagining things.
Try this on Greg: frankly, you're whining. Can the list accept you
for what you are or not? Maybe the point is that you're failing to
accept the list for what it is. It's a community, where, once again,
your rights end where those of others begin. This community will not
change to fit in with every changing whim and foible of Greg H. any
more than the city you live in will. If you're saying it's Greg H. or
the list, and I think you might be, then don't be surprised if the
list fails to be sacrificed for the sake of Greg H.
Politics and the bickering that generally goes with them, tends to bring
out the worst in me. Doesn't mean I don't learn a thing or two, and it
does not mean I like it, when it brings the worst of me out. That is why
I " prefer " it was not a part of the day to day discussions, because it
tends to bring out the worst in me ( when I am at my worst, mood wise ).
So we must all shape up to Greg's mood swings - in advance. I see.
( more below )
> >From: "Greg and April" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:19:16 -0700
> >Subject: Re: [biofuel] Re: Behind the Great Divide
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >Many people on the list, see the war as a, result or by-product of the
oil
> >issue, and so to them it would be on-topic. For example, " Bush wants to
> >invade Iraq for the oil ", to some people, this is the truth, and to them
it
> >would retard the developement of BioDiesel as a viable option for the
> >average consumer. As a result of some of these discusions ( which I
tried
> >to stay out of at first ), I learned a few things. It does not mean I
totaly
> >change my stance on the issue, but, I am a little more aware.
> >
> >This list, is like anyother, some of the info will be of use to some but
not
> >to others. I scan the subject line, and some of the info., and if it is
no
> >use, or I don't want to be apart of it, I deleat it, and most of the
other
> >items with that subject. If on the other hand, It is of intrest, I save
it
> >for future reference, and I make a point to check all others with that
same
> >subject, saving the useful info, delegating things like the "Thank you"
and
> >"Your welcome" post.
> >
> >Greg H.
This was written when I was in one of my neutral to better moods ( not to
mention before I had a spell checker ), and still holds true today. I keep
things of interest, and delegate those that are not.
But like someone else said, " What I want and what the list wants is
sometimes two different things, and something that I am willing to " agree
to disagree " on. Does not mean I like it, or that I agree with it, it is
just personal preference, and please correct me if I am wrong, but, being
able to say what ones personal preferences are, seems to be a viable subject
for this list.
Saying what your personal preferences are is just fine. Demanding
that an entire community must act accordingly is not just fine, nor
is insulting people by calling them trolls when they're not.
Does this make more sense?
It gives me more information.
I think you're going to behave now just like you behaved in the F9/11
thread, like a dog with a bone, refusing to let it go, concerned only
with yourself, heedless of the destructive effect you might be having
on the list itself. And it was destructive.
If you try to do that I'll stop you.
If you now take this matter of demanding an end to "political"
discussion any further then you must expect the inevitable result.
You've certainly had a really undue amount of warning.
I also think you're going to be a dog with a bone with this message
as well, along with the open discussions issue, and I won't allow
that either. You can take it offlist if you like, but a response
isn't guaranteed.
Instead I'll just refer you now once again to this:
> And Greg, please beware - there's a rule about it, and it gets
> enforced, and recently was.
> http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000028.html
>
> See:
> http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000005.html
>
> Also, please be careful - the message that sparked all this off was
> flame-bait, and he knew it, but "troll-bait"? Are you quite sure of
> that? Are you sure you're not providing it yourself?
>
> I think you should consider what happened in July with the infamous
> Fahrenheit 9/11 thread.
>
> Maybe you'd like to have another look at the moderator's message that
> ended that.
> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/36631/
>
> Actually I think quite a lot of people should.
>
> It has a lot to do with the original message in this thread:
> http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000008.html
> [Biofuel] Using an email discussion list
>
> And with this one again:
> http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000007.html
> [Biofuel] PLEASE READ - moderator's message
Along with the offlist correspondence with you that followed the
ending of the F9/11 fiasco.
Best wishes
Keith Addison
List owner
Greg H.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Addison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 17:56
Subject: [Biofuel] PLEASE READ - Moderator's message
This is partly a response to Greg, in the "Using an email discussion
list" thread, which has now become something else. That needs
dealing with, generally, not just for Greg, and so do a few other
things.
First:
I know, and that's why I try and delete them. Sometimes I fail, and
react, when I'm at my worse. Unless I really am careful, and know my mood
is bad, I am a fish that is hooked by " Troll Bait ". Other times it is
only a simple annoyance to the reason I joined the list, and is just
deleted.
Greg H.
You're not very consistent Greg. Remember this?
From: "Greg and April" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:19:16 -0700
Subject: Re: [biofuel] Re: Behind the Great Divide
<snip>
Many people on the list, see the war as a, result or by-product of the oil
issue, and so to them it would be on-topic. For example, " Bush wants to
invade Iraq for the oil ", to some people, this is the truth, and to them it
would retard the developement of BioDiesel as a viable option for the
average consumer. As a result of some of these discusions ( which I tried
to stay out of at first ), I learned a few things. It does not mean I totaly
change my stance on the issue, but, I am a little more aware.
This list, is like anyother, some of the info will be of use to some but not
to others. I scan the subject line, and some of the info., and if it is no
use, or I don't want to be apart of it, I deleat it, and most of the other
items with that subject. If on the other hand, It is of intrest, I save it
for future referance, and I make a point to check all others with that same
subject, saveing the useful info, deleating things like the "Thank you" and
"Your welcome" post.
Greg H.
What has been consistent is the way the list as a whole has stuck to
its guns over this issue of "political" posts, "off-topic" posts,
etc etc. And why.
This is from another list member, a few days before that post from you:
To whom it may concern:
I am leaving this "news group" because it is anything but a news group about
biofuel. I was hoping to learn a lot, but unfortunately it takes too long
to sort through the unrelated emails. Does anyone know of a good discussion
group where they stick to the subject matter and actually discuss producing
biofuels and alternate energy sources. If so please let me know. I would
love to get involved.
And, in his next post:
I wanted to learn about making my own biofuel and
alternative energy sources. The ironic thing is... I want to learn these
things BECAUSE... of the politics you keep discussing.
And then:
You are right. I am getting good info. I'll just keep sorting through. : )
Thanks.
It reminds me of something I posted when we moved here, on "The
Natural Life Cycle of Mailing Lists":
>4. Community (lots of threads, some more relevant than others;
lots of information and advice is exchanged; experts help other
experts as well as less experienced colleagues; friendships develop;
people tease each other; newcomers are welcomed with generosity and
patience; everyone -- newbie and expert alike -- feels comfortable
asking questions, suggesting answers, and sharing opinions).
>
>5. Discomfort with diversity (the number of messages increases
dramatically; not every thread is fascinating to every reader;
people start complaining about the signal-to-noise ratio; person 1
threatens to quit if *other* people don't limit discussion to person
1's pet topic; person 2 agrees with person 1; person 3 tells 1 & 2
to lighten up; more bandwidth is wasted complaining about off-topic
threads than is used for the threads themselves; everyone gets
annoyed).
>
><snip>
>
>6b. Maturity (a few people quit in a huff; the rest of the
participants stay near stage 4, with stage 5 popping up briefly
every few weeks; many people wear out their second or third 'delete'
key, but the list lives contentedly ever after).
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000007.html
[Biofuel] PLEASE READ - moderator's message
These need posting again too:
>Here are a couple of recent views on it:
>
>"Frankly, I don't know how to separate biofuels from politics.
Politicians enact the rules that determine if biofuels are legal,
and if legal what standards must be met for sale, and if available
for sale, how they will be taxed. Politicians determine what
subsidies will be provided to the petrochemical industry, and big
biofuels, and what obstacles will be put in front of small biofuels
producers. Biofuels are not going to be produced, marketed or used
in a vacuum. The relative prices of fossil fuels relative to
biofuels where they can be used interchangeably is going to be a
huge factor in the mass acceptance of biofuels. When you recognize
the degree of inter-mingling between corporatism and governments
(especially senior governments), and the agenda of the current power
elite, biofuels are a clear threat and that makes them political.
There are people who embrace biofuels specifically because they see
them as a means to reduce dependence on foreign (i.e. Middle East)
oil, or reduce the number of people sacrificed in oil wars, or
because it is better for the environment. That's political. My
initial interest in biodiesel was the diversion of waste vegetable
oil from our local landfill. Definitely political. I want to see the
implications of my interest in biofuels, good, bad and indifferent
so I am making informed choices, whether those implications are
environmental, financial, social or political."
>
>And:
>
>"It's the tangential and improbable off topics which have
subsequently proved to be veritable lodestones of information, and
not merely on biofuels. Besides, man does not live by bread alone
and, at least for me, reading the list is a continual liberal
education, daily broadening horizons and bringing different
viewpoints into my ken."
And Greg, please beware - there's a rule about it, and it gets
enforced, and recently was.
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000028.html
See:
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000005.html
Also, please be careful - the message that sparked all this off was
flame-bait, and he knew it, but "troll-bait"? Are you quite sure of
that? Are you sure you're not providing it yourself?
I think you should consider what happened in July with the infamous
Fahrenheit 9/11 thread.
Maybe you'd like to have another look at the moderator's message
that ended that.
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/36631/
Actually I think quite a lot of people should.
It has a lot to do with the original message in this thread:
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000008.html
[Biofuel] Using an email discussion list
And with this one again:
http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000007.html
[Biofuel] PLEASE READ - moderator's message
<snip>
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
