Mon, Nov 29, 2004, 8:27pm (EST-3) (NAN=A0Team)
burbled:
snip My apologies for leaving people in suspense for so long as to
what had happened. In retrospect, an announcement that the revote was on
hold while other options were being discussed was in order.

Gods above, you're good, you make it sound almost like someone
actually cared. "Leaving people in suspense". Yeah, I could hardly
stand it. ROTFLMAO




JOAT
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind dont
matter, and those who matter dont mind.
- Dr Seuss

"J T" wrote in message
...
Gods above, you're good, you make it sound almost like someone
actually cared. "Leaving people in suspense". Yeah, I could hardly
stand it. ROTFLMAO

I kind of snickered at the serious, original posting, then roared when I
read your reply.

Before internet, I operated a bulletin board with fidonet discussion groups.
We learned over the years to just ride out a few storms in an active group,
rather than go off and create a new one. The new one and any group with
large, active participation is going to have problems from time to time.
This group has proven that its vital and lasting. The worst thing in the
world would be to try to kill it. Its a good thing just like it is - warts
and all.

Bob

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:27:01 -0800, NAN Team
wrote:

After further consideration, the proponents of rec.woodworking.all-ages
have elected to withdraw their proposal rather than seek a revote. There
will not be a revote, and no newsgroup will be created.

Thankyou Susan and Vito. I sincerely think this is the best result
for the newsgroup and its users. I appreciate your action in making
this decision.


Now, how about showing up in the group and talking about some
woodworking ? It's a good group, you'd be very welcome.

"Bob" wrote in
nk.net:


"J T" wrote in message
...
Gods above, you're good, you make it sound almost like someone
actually cared. "Leaving people in suspense". Yeah, I could hardly
stand it. ROTFLMAO

I kind of snickered at the serious, original posting, then roared when
I read your reply.

Before internet, I operated a bulletin board with fidonet discussion
groups. We learned over the years to just ride out a few storms in an
active group, rather than go off and create a new one. The new one
and any group with large, active participation is going to have
problems from time to time. This group has proven that its vital and
lasting. The worst thing in the world would be to try to kill it.
Its a good thing just like it is - warts and all.

Despite JOAT's flamage, there were many people who were *very* interested
in the outcome of this vote. Some of those people were rec.woodworking
regulars, some were news.groups regulars. Some people fell into both
categories. In the end, the proponents did the right thing. If you read the
"concession speech" they posted to news.groups, you'll see that their
proposed all-ages woodworking group will still be created in another
hierarchy, but not in rec.*. I wish them well. I only suggest that they go
back to the original plan of moderating the group, or else it might not
serve their intended purpose.

--
Bill

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:36:33 +0000, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:27:01 -0800, NAN Team
wrote:

After further consideration, the proponents of rec.woodworking.all-ages
have elected to withdraw their proposal rather than seek a revote. There
will not be a revote, and no newsgroup will be created.

Thankyou Susan and Vito. I sincerely think this is the best result
for the newsgroup and its users. I appreciate your action in making
this decision.


Now, how about showing up in the group and talking about some
woodworking ? It's a good group, you'd be very welcome.


they won't. people sometimes say **** here....

snipped 4 BW

they won't. people sometimes say **** here....

Gasp!

s wrote:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:36:33 +0000, Andy Dingley
After further consideration, the proponents of rec.woodworking.all-ages
have elected to withdraw their proposal rather than seek a revote. There
will not be a revote, and no newsgroup will be created.

Thankyou Susan and Vito. I sincerely think this is the best result
for the newsgroup and its users. I appreciate your action in making
this decision.


Now, how about showing up in the group and talking about some
woodworking ? It's a good group, you'd be very welcome.


they won't. people sometimes say **** here....


Who does that?




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:36:33 +0000, Andy Dingley
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:27:01 -0800, NAN Team
wrote:

After further consideration, the proponents of rec.woodworking.all-ages
have elected to withdraw their proposal rather than seek a revote.
There
will not be a revote, and no newsgroup will be created.

Thankyou Susan and Vito. I sincerely think this is the best result
for the newsgroup and its users. I appreciate your action in making
this decision.


Now, how about showing up in the group and talking about some
woodworking ? It's a good group, you'd be very welcome.


they won't. people sometimes say **** here....

No ****?

Tue, Nov 30, 2004, 2:14pm (EST+5) (Woodchuck=A0Bill)
says:
Despite JOAT's flamage, snip

Nah, maybe a warm fuzzy feeling, but he's not smoking. LOL

I don't care if he gets his off-spring group or not. I didn't vote
for it, and didn't vote against it. Just wish he'd quit beating it,
either way.



JOAT
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind dont
matter, and those who matter dont mind.
- Dr Seuss

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:05:39 GMT, "Mortimer Schnerd, RN"
wrote:

wrote:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:36:33 +0000, Andy Dingley
After further consideration, the proponents of rec.woodworking.all-ages
have elected to withdraw their proposal rather than seek a revote. There
will not be a revote, and no newsgroup will be created.

Thankyou Susan and Vito. I sincerely think this is the best result
for the newsgroup and its users. I appreciate your action in making
this decision.


Now, how about showing up in the group and talking about some
woodworking ? It's a good group, you'd be very welcome.


they won't. people sometimes say **** here....


Who does that?


http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q=****&safe=images&as_ugroup=rec.woodwor king&lr=&num=100&hl=en

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:45:13 -0700, s wrote:


they won't. people sometimes say **** here....


They do not.

They do say, fuque them.



Regards,
Tom.

"People funny. Life a funny thing." Sonny Liston

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On 30 Nov 2004 14:14:54 GMT, Woodchuck Bill
wrote:

[snip]
Despite JOAT's flamage, there were many people who were *very* interested
in the outcome of this vote. Some of those people were rec.woodworking
regulars, some were news.groups regulars. Some people fell into both
categories. In the end, the proponents did the right thing. If you read the
"concession speech" they posted to news.groups, you'll see that their
proposed all-ages woodworking group will still be created in another
hierarchy, but not in rec.*. I wish them well. I only suggest that they go
back to the original plan of moderating the group, or else it might not
serve their intended purpose.

I agree. However, the problem is that they did not consider a
compromise. They originally proposed manual moderation. Then they
proposed no moderation. The compromise was robomoderation, which
works reasonably well at keeping out dirty words.

I think that they should consider robomoderation.

- - Bob McClenon

Robert McClenon wrote in
:

On 30 Nov 2004 14:14:54 GMT, Woodchuck Bill
wrote:

[snip]
Despite JOAT's flamage, there were many people who were *very*
interested in the outcome of this vote. Some of those people were
rec.woodworking regulars, some were news.groups regulars. Some people
fell into both categories. In the end, the proponents did the right
thing. If you read the "concession speech" they posted to news.groups,
you'll see that their proposed all-ages woodworking group will still
be created in another hierarchy, but not in rec.*. I wish them well. I
only suggest that they go back to the original plan of moderating the
group, or else it might not serve their intended purpose.

I agree. However, the problem is that they did not consider a
compromise. They originally proposed manual moderation. Then they
proposed no moderation. The compromise was robomoderation, which
works reasonably well at keeping out dirty words.

I think that they should consider robomoderation.

I meant moderation in general, which could be either robo or manual..or a
hybrid of both.

--
Bill

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:45:13 -0700, s vaguely proposed
a theory
.......and in reply I say!:


Balls!

they won't. people sometimes say **** here....

On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 04:47:27 GMT, Robert McClenon wrote:

I agree. However, the problem is that they did not consider a
compromise. They originally proposed manual moderation. Then they
proposed no moderation. The compromise was robomoderation, which
works reasonably well at keeping out dirty words.

I think that they should consider robomoderation.

I think they should come here (the Wreck) and introduce themselves,
and explain what they're actually up to, participate in a conversation,
and explain why they want our support.