todd wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

todd wrote:

...

So I'm on topic about 50% of the time. Tim's on topic about 5% of the
time.

I wanted to make sure I wasn't being unfair in adding him to my
killfile :-).

If Tim's posts make you uncomfortable, there's no need to come up with a
public justification. Just killfile him and move on. Why the need to
call
attention to yourself?


There is an old adage "Silence implies consent".

I doubt it's very applicable to a USENET newsgroup, where dozens of topics
are being discussed at a any particular time. Does this mean that I can go
back in the rec.ww archives and if I find a thread you have not posted in I
can assume you consent to the content?

IMHO no, but *I* do not ascribe to the
adage, though I do note that many others
do.

Howver, suppose you find a two threads
that I did participate in. I exited one with
a 'plonk' and the plonked party followed
up with a number of statements that did
not previously appear in the thread.

In the other thread, I simply went away.

In the second case, it is unclear is I assented
to what was written after my exit. In the first
case it appears probable that I never read
the comments.


That I daresay, is
why Mr Blanchard and I contribute to off-topic threads, to prove that
we do not consent to whatever it is that Pat Robertson has told
them to post about this week.

I have no problem with people posting to off-topic threads. What I do have
a problem with is hyprocrites. Here's another old adage: "And why do you
look at the splinter in your brother's eye, and not notice the beam which is
in your own eye?"

Irrelevent.

The distinction between starting off-topic
threads and replying in them is like the
distinction between punching somebody
in the nose and punching somebody in
the nose after he hits you first.

Some of us regard that to be a distinction
without a difference, some of us do not.


Posting a 'plonk' announcement creates a UseNet record that the
author's silence, in the future should not be considered indicative
of consent.

Riiiight. Good thing everyone keeps track of who has plonked whom, just so
we can keep the score up to date. No one cares that someone has been
plonked.


Well I didn't think that up all by myself.
That is basicly what I remember from the
UseNet FAQ. Yes, at one time there was
only one.

--

FF