On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 15:06:05 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 16:07:38 GMT, patrick conroy
calmly ranted:

On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 18:10:02 -0700, Tim Douglass
wrote:

Rec.woodworking.all-ages is *IDENTICAL* to the existing newsgroup.
There is *NO* difference other than the name. It is an ill-advised

Appreciate the food-for-thought. Which is *why* I like this place.

Someone doesn't like the OT chatter so they want to start a new
group and that's "ill-advised"? (NOTE: Buzzword used.)

Not just a new group. An IDENTICAL group, save for the name. There's
no mechanism to and no explanation as to how the new group would
prevent OT chatter. Ill-advised is exactly the right word.

But, why just not let the market decide?
If the new newsgroup sucks, it will wither and die, right?

RIGHT!

Unfortunately, once the new newsgroup is determined to suck and the
traffic withers and dies the mechanism stays forever and irretrievably
in place, taking up cyberspace for no good reason.

Instead, these guys want to stop it from happening even
though they won't be participating.

Why wouldn't you want to prevent that from happening?

I'm amazed at the answers some of these folks are giving in
an attempt to justify their closed-mindedness. I view it as an
additional "channel". Why can't they?

Because it's not. It's essentially a mirror of the wreck. What purpose
does it serve? What function can it perform but to confuse and then
eventually just take up space.

Feh! Children.

Ah, now we're down to ad hominem attacks. That's your "attempt to
justify [your] closed-mindedness." Why not just invoke the feuhrer's
name and get it over with?


- -
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net