Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group? - Linux

This is a discussion on Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group? - Linux ; On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:43:59 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote: > Why not simply filter? Is there anybody here who can't? Are there > people here who are married to a newsreader that can't handle deleting > users who annoy ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 119

Thread: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

  1. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:43:59 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote:

    > Why not simply filter? Is there anybody here who can't? Are there
    > people here who are married to a newsreader that can't handle deleting
    > users who annoy them?


    Even when you filter the fools, their crap still spills over into the thread
    when someone quotes them in their followup. I shouldn't have to kill an
    entire thread because of trolls.

  2. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:37:49 +0000, William Poaster wrote:

    > Seems like the trolls are squealing already. ;-)


    Failing that, a moderated message board.

  3. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 22:11:40 +0100, Clogwog wrote:

    > No,


    [snip]

    Yes.

  4. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    7 wrote:
    > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>
    >>> A Moderated newsgroup is almost impossible to troll.

    >>
    >> Yes, you should. It's a great idea. I'll help in any way I
    >> can. I'm serious.

    >
    > What even if it said WINDUMMY products, services and Appil
    > Crap cannot be mentioned by reference or by comparison?
    >
    > That it should be strictly Linux advocacy and nothing else?
    >
    > Even worse situation would be if
    >
    > comp.os.linux.advocacy
    > comp.os.linux.troll
    > comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    >
    > were set up and the newsgroup charters were updated.
    >
    > The trolls will by rules written into the newsgroup charter be
    > forced to congregate in the troll group. Not a band thing. Its
    > a great idea. I'll help any way I can. I'm serious.


    Of course, there could not be a

    comp.os.linux.troll.moderated

    Trolls are un-moderatable.

    --
    HPT
    Quando omni flunkus moritati
    (If all else fails, play dead)
    - "Red" Green

  5. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    Clogwog (Rick Mathers) wrote:

    > Don't let the door hit you in the arse on your way out!


    Don't worry, when you leave, we'll make sure of that!

    --
    HPT
    Quando omni flunkus moritati
    (If all else fails, play dead)
    - "Red" Green

  6. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    Tattoo Vampire wrote:
    > Sinister Midget wrote:
    >
    >> Why not simply filter? Is there anybody here who can't? Are
    >> there people here who are married to a newsreader that can't
    >> handle deleting users who annoy them?

    >
    > Even when you filter the fools, their crap still spills over
    > into the thread when someone quotes them in their followup. I
    > shouldn't have to kill an entire thread because of trolls.


    It is more than that. It spills over into Internet searches and
    clutters up the entire Internet. It is just as spoken of in:

    http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/

    Subject: 5.1 Ignore them and they will go away.

    [...]

    uk.local.yorkshire contained this telling sentence.
    > Most people like the countryside, but not everyone is willing
    > to tread shin deep through pig sh*t to get to a meadow.
    --
    HPT
    Quando omni flunkus moritati
    (If all else fails, play dead)
    - "Red" Green

  7. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 10:49:25 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > William Poaster wrote:
    >> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>
    >>> I found this bit of text in:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killf..._troll_faq.htm
    >>>
    >>>
    Subject: 5.3 A moderated newsgroup
    >>>
    >>> A Moderated newsgroup is almost impossible to troll. [...]
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> There is some overhead involved. It would require
    >>> organising, advertising, straw poll, voting, establishment
    >>> and resources (dedicated server and management staff).
    >>>
    >>> Perhaps it is time to start comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    >>> group? Your thoughts?

    >>
    >> I agree, & it's one of the reasons I like mailing lists.
    >>
    >> Seems like the trolls are squealing already. ;-)

    >
    > We haven't heard the last of it! :-)
    >
    > Per the Hyphenologist link:
    >
    >
    > Subject: 5.1 Ignore them and they will go away.
    >
    > [...]
    >
    > uk.local.yorkshire contained this telling sentence.
    >> Most people like the countryside, but not everyone is willing
    >> to tread shin deep through pig **** to get to a meadow.

    >
    >
    > Kill filing is only a partial solution. In a moderated group,
    > only place the trolls would be screaming is outside the forum.
    > They could wallow in their mire there.


    I'm all for that.

    A moderated yahoo group could be set up, & by invitation
    only. I'm already a member of a couple (which have nothing to do with
    computers BTW, although there *are* some linux groups), & it works very
    well.

    --
    Most people are sheep. *
    Microsoft is very effective
    at fleecing the flockers.



  8. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > 7 wrote:
    >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> A Moderated newsgroup is almost impossible to troll.
    >>>
    >>> Yes, you should. It's a great idea. I'll help in any way I
    >>> can. I'm serious.

    >>
    >> What even if it said WINDUMMY products, services and Appil
    >> Crap cannot be mentioned by reference or by comparison?
    >>
    >> That it should be strictly Linux advocacy and nothing else?
    >>
    >> Even worse situation would be if
    >>
    >> comp.os.linux.advocacy
    >> comp.os.linux.troll
    >> comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    >>
    >> were set up and the newsgroup charters were updated.
    >>
    >> The trolls will by rules written into the newsgroup charter be
    >> forced to congregate in the troll group. Not a band thing. Its
    >> a great idea. I'll help any way I can. I'm serious.

    >
    > Of course, there could not be a
    >
    > comp.os.linux.troll.moderated
    >
    > Trolls are un-moderatable.



    You are wrong.
    Spliffing can ease the pain of moderating the un-moderatable.

    There can be a comp.os.linux.troll.moderated
    It will just have to be moderated by the trolls themselves.

    Pope Balmer will allow special dispensation to the troll moderators
    by allowing the troll moderators to troll themselves.


  9. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:58:21 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:

    > I found this bit of text in:
    >
    > http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killf..._troll_faq.htm
    >
    >
    > Subject: 5.3 A moderated newsgroup
    >
    > A Moderated newsgroup is almost impossible to troll.
    >
    > misc.kids a newsgroup for parents and carers for kids,
    > rather than the kids themselves, had trolling problems as
    > recorded in http://www.misckids.org/history.txt
    >
    > >>> The misc.kids.moderated effort began sometime in the

    > summer of 1996, when a regular poster to misc.kids, Roger
    > Hunt, suggested to the newsgroup, as well as others who were
    > former regular posters, that we establish a moderated
    > alternative to misc.kids. This time, unlike previous
    > occasions when this type of suggestion was made, many people
    > seized upon the idea. Misc.kids had suffered several troll
    > invasions; many regular and trusted posters had left; and
    > the level of discourse had declined. Colleen Porter did a
    > straw poll on some issues related to creating a new
    > newsgroup and got 199 responses. Those responses have been
    > thoughtfully considered throughout this creation process and
    > form the basis for much of what appears in the RFD. <<<
    >
    > Towards the end of 1997 misc.kids.moderated was created
    > see: http://www.misckids.org/
    >
    > After the creation of misc.kids.moderated the level of
    > _destructive_ trolling of misc.kids fell drastically. At
    > the time of writing, misc.kids.moderated is a small but
    > thriving newsgroup, also misc.kids is a large newsgroup, but
    > riven by On Topic disputes. On a superficial examination it
    > could be concluded that the creation of mkm was a waste of
    > time and effort, because mk now has only minor problems. On
    > a deeper examination, it could be concluded that the
    > existence of mkm protects mk from the worst of the outright
    > trolling, presumably because in the case of drastic
    > problems, subscribers could move to mkm.
    >
    > Pro:
    >
    > It works and is a traditional usenet method of solving the
    > problems of troublesome newsgroups.
    >
    > Con:
    >
    > It requires a permanently on line machine. It requires a
    > moderbot to handle much of the work. It requires a team of
    > moderators ideally about six to handle posts which the
    > moderbot does not approve. It requires a very well written
    > charter, with specific moderation guidelines, otherwise
    > the moderators will end up accepting or rejecting posts on
    > personal preference. The Trolls will try to become
    > moderators, and cause mayhem. Changing from a non moderated
    > to a moderated newsgroup is *extremely* difficult. A new
    > newsgroup with the same name but .moderated would normally
    > have to be created. This would need an RFD and vote in the
    > uk.* hierarchy, if that is where the newsgroup is to be
    > situated.
    >
    >
    > There is some overhead involved. It would require organising,
    > advertising, straw poll, voting, establishment and resources
    > (dedicated server and management staff).
    >
    > Perhaps it is time to start comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    > group? Your thoughts?


    This sounds like right out of the Politburo headquarters of the FSF! The
    dear leader will not suffer again from bad advocacy. Hey its by design
    baby!

    --
    Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE
    Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist
    crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net


  10. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On 2008-11-01, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    > 7 wrote:
    >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> A Moderated newsgroup is almost impossible to troll.
    >>>
    >>> Yes, you should. It's a great idea. I'll help in any way I
    >>> can. I'm serious.

    >>
    >> What even if it said WINDUMMY products, services and Appil
    >> Crap cannot be mentioned by reference or by comparison?
    >>
    >> That it should be strictly Linux advocacy and nothing else?
    >>
    >> Even worse situation would be if
    >>
    >> comp.os.linux.advocacy
    >> comp.os.linux.troll
    >> comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    >>
    >> were set up and the newsgroup charters were updated.
    >>
    >> The trolls will by rules written into the newsgroup charter be
    >> forced to congregate in the troll group. Not a band thing. Its
    >> a great idea. I'll help any way I can. I'm serious.

    >
    > Of course, there could not be a
    >
    > comp.os.linux.troll.moderated
    >
    > Trolls are un-moderatable.


    Don't you mean "immoderate"?


    For the record, I don't want a moderated group. This is a cesspit, where
    the trolls all gather. While they gather here they aren't off attacking
    other more technical or help groups.

    Let them stay here, thinking they are fighting the "good fight" for
    microsoft.

    That's the big joke, see?

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  11. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 00:02:28 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:

    > On 2008-11-01, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >> 7 wrote:
    >>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
    >>>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> A Moderated newsgroup is almost impossible to troll.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, you should. It's a great idea. I'll help in any way I
    >>>> can. I'm serious.
    >>>
    >>> What even if it said WINDUMMY products, services and Appil
    >>> Crap cannot be mentioned by reference or by comparison?
    >>>
    >>> That it should be strictly Linux advocacy and nothing else?
    >>>
    >>> Even worse situation would be if
    >>>
    >>> comp.os.linux.advocacy
    >>> comp.os.linux.troll
    >>> comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    >>>
    >>> were set up and the newsgroup charters were updated.
    >>>
    >>> The trolls will by rules written into the newsgroup charter be
    >>> forced to congregate in the troll group. Not a band thing. Its
    >>> a great idea. I'll help any way I can. I'm serious.

    >>
    >> Of course, there could not be a
    >>
    >> comp.os.linux.troll.moderated
    >>
    >> Trolls are un-moderatable.

    >
    > Don't you mean "immoderate"?
    >
    >
    > For the record, I don't want a moderated group. This is a cesspit, where
    > the trolls all gather. While they gather here they aren't off attacking
    > other more technical or help groups.


    They often cross post into them.
    Also Quack & "Moshe Flatfish Goldfarb" post their drivel in technical &
    help groups anyway. And some of those groups have their own wintrolls
    which don't post in here.

    > Let them stay here, thinking they are fighting the "good fight" for
    > microsoft.
    >
    > That's the big joke, see?


    --
    Most people are sheep. *
    Microsoft is very effective
    at fleecing the flockers.



  12. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 01 November 2008 16:52 : \____
    >> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>> ____/ Tattoo Vampire on Saturday 01 November 2008 14:33 : \____
    >>>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:58:21 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:


    >>>>> Perhaps it is time to start comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    >>>>> group? Your thoughts?
    >>>>
    >>>> I think you're right. Assholes like Queeg and Splat make it
    >>>> miserable for the real users here.
    >>>
    >>> I'm in favour. Let's do this. :-)
    >>>

    >> A moderated advocacy group? Really?

    >
    > Counter arguments are one thing. Personal attacks, which were
    > directed at you as well, are another.


    Establishing the rules for moderation, and not crossing the line due to
    personal conflicts is a difficult proposition though. My opinion of who
    is or isn't a Troll may be different to others. People sometimes have a
    disagreement and insult each other; have bad days; post OT funnies, and
    so on. Should they be banned?

    There are some obvious Trolls with absolutely nothing to contribute ...
    such as DooFuS; Dopez; Hardon; Scott "****stick Nudds" Douglas; flatty;
    and creepy stalkers like Smith, but I'm still on the fence with Fuddie,
    who does (or used to) at least try to be reasonable. Recently, he seems
    to have gone completely off the deep end though - his weaseling FUD has
    become ridiculous, as he sprints to defend the Vole from every possible
    criticism in the most desperate and pathetic way. It's embarrassing. It
    is almost as pathetic as watching Jeff Waugh come running to his pal de
    Icaza's rescue every time someone points out what a Microsoft fanboy he
    is (heck, de Icaza admits that himself).

    Then again, some people seem to enjoy jousting with the Trolls. As much
    as I don't want to read a single putrid word it, should we deny others?

    Moderation in a technical group is one thing, but to moderate a group
    whose entire purpose is debate is rather silly, IMHO.

    And remember, it is only because the Trolls/shills/kooks get to let off
    steam in COLA that the other Linux groups don't bear the brunt of their
    frustration. Housing the Trolls is COLA's unwritten responsibility.

    Personally, I'd love to see the Trolls FOAD in a ditch somewhere, but I
    don't own COLA, so it's not up to me, and for the sake of others whom I
    don't speak for - I think we should just leave things as they are.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
    | the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
    | weeks after initial exposure to Lisp." ~ Constantine Vetoshev
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
    01:31:05 up 22 days, 11:26, 3 users, load average: 0.21, 0.08, 0.06

  13. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    Verily I say unto thee, that Sinister Midget spake thusly:
    > On 2008-11-01, Chris Ahlstrom claimed:


    >> Ye gods. The cola.moderated moderator would need psychiatric help
    >> after trying to filter out the filth!

    >
    > Why not simply filter? Is there anybody here who can't? Are there
    > people here who are married to a newsreader that can't handle
    > deleting users who annoy them?


    Exactly.

    Individuals filtering a group is one thing, since they can apply broad
    filtering to kill entire Troll havens like Motzarella, etc., but for a
    moderator to do the same thing would be irresponsible, so he'd have to
    kill the nym-shifters one at a time, which on COLA would probably need
    a whole team of moderators working round the clock.

    I'll pass.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
    | the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
    | weeks after initial exposure to Lisp." ~ Constantine Vetoshev
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
    01:55:03 up 22 days, 11:50, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.04, 0.05

  14. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:29:28 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > ____/ Tattoo Vampire on Saturday 01 November 2008 14:33 : \____
    >
    >> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:58:21 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>
    >>> Perhaps it is time to start comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated
    >>> group? Your thoughts?

    >>
    >> I think you're right. Assholes like Queeg and Splat make it miserable for
    >> the real users here.

    >
    > I'm in favour. Let's do this. :-)
    >


    Of course you are in favor of it Spamowitz.
    Why?
    Because you will be able to SPAM your nonsense without any rebuttal and it
    will all show up in Google, which is what your real motive is.

    Folks, ya'll have created a monster and I can't believe you are this
    ignorant.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  15. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    Tattoo Vampire wrote:
    > On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 22:22:56 +0100, Clogwog wrote:
    >
    >> A minor and easily fixable issue, b.t.w.
    >> It shows: Windows user by day, Linux user, windows basher by night!

    >
    > Hey, dumbass - I posted here a few week ago that my dad had sent me a
    > Vista machine he built. Problem?


    HPT insists that was someone stealing your nym.




  16. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 16:37:49 +0000, William Poaster wrote:


    > Seems like the trolls are squealing already. ;-)


    Are you kidding Willy filters?

    We are laughing our asses off.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  17. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    Verily I say unto thee, that Erik Funkenbusch spake thusly:
    > On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:58:21 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:


    >> A Moderated newsgroup is almost impossible to troll.
    >>

    > Yes, you should. It's a great idea. I'll help in any way I can.
    >
    > I'm serious.


    Well if anyone from the Windows side is going to be involved, I think it
    should be you. You've been around longer than most, and most of the time
    you're level headed and resist the urge to engage in ad hominem attacks.
    Your loyalties may be abhorrent to me, and your debating methods dubious
    at best, but in all fairness I don't think that's really relevant to the
    proposition. For some instinctive reason that I can't fathom I think I'd
    actually trust you to act responsibly as a co-moderator of COLA.mod.

    OK, it's a reluctant endorsement, but that's all I got for now.

    My only reservation is: I really don't think COLA should be moderated at
    all, for the reasons stated in my previous post, but if it /does/ happen
    then I have no serious objection to your involvement. I certainly do not
    envy you your task.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | "At the time, I thought C was the most elegant language and Java
    | the most practical one. That point of view lasted for maybe two
    | weeks after initial exposure to Lisp." ~ Constantine Vetoshev
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
    03:11:07 up 22 days, 13:06, 3 users, load average: 0.06, 0.05, 0.00

  18. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On 2008-11-01, Tattoo Vampire claimed:
    > On Sat, 1 Nov 2008 14:43:59 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote:
    >
    >> Why not simply filter? Is there anybody here who can't? Are there
    >> people here who are married to a newsreader that can't handle deleting
    >> users who annoy them?

    >
    > Even when you filter the fools, their crap still spills over into the thread
    > when someone quotes them in their followup. I shouldn't have to kill an
    > entire thread because of trolls.


    I kill the followups if the trolls are annoying enough. Some have
    already reached that stage. Others seem to be in a race to see who can
    be next.

    --
    If Windows is the answer, it must have been a stupid question.

  19. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    On Sun, 02 Nov 2008 01:31:25 +0000, Homer wrote:

    > Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Saturday 01 November 2008 16:52 : \____
    >>> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>> ____/ Tattoo Vampire on Saturday 01 November 2008 14:33 : \____
    >>>>> On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 07:58:21 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:

    >
    >>>>>> Perhaps it is time to start comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated group?
    >>>>>> Your thoughts?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I think you're right. Assholes like Queeg and Splat make it
    >>>>> miserable for the real users here.
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm in favour. Let's do this. :-)
    >>>>
    >>> A moderated advocacy group? Really?

    >>
    >> Counter arguments are one thing. Personal attacks, which were directed
    >> at you as well, are another.

    >
    > Establishing the rules for moderation, and not crossing the line due to
    > personal conflicts is a difficult proposition though. My opinion of who
    > is or isn't a Troll may be different to others. People sometimes have a
    > disagreement and insult each other; have bad days; post OT funnies, and
    > so on. Should they be banned?
    >
    > There are some obvious Trolls with absolutely nothing to contribute ...
    > such as DooFuS; Dopez; Hardon; Scott "****stick Nudds" Douglas; flatty;
    > and creepy stalkers like Smith, but I'm still on the fence with Fuddie,
    > who does (or used to) at least try to be reasonable. Recently, he seems
    > to have gone completely off the deep end though - his weaseling FUD has
    > become ridiculous, as he sprints to defend the Vole from every possible
    > criticism in the most desperate and pathetic way. It's embarrassing. It
    > is almost as pathetic as watching Jeff Waugh come running to his pal de
    > Icaza's rescue every time someone points out what a Microsoft fanboy he
    > is (heck, de Icaza admits that himself).
    >
    > Then again, some people seem to enjoy jousting with the Trolls. As much
    > as I don't want to read a single putrid word it, should we deny others?
    >
    > Moderation in a technical group is one thing, but to moderate a group
    > whose entire purpose is debate is rather silly, IMHO.
    >
    > And remember, it is only because the Trolls/shills/kooks get to let off
    > steam in COLA that the other Linux groups don't bear the brunt of their
    > frustration. Housing the Trolls is COLA's unwritten responsibility.
    >
    > Personally, I'd love to see the Trolls FOAD in a ditch somewhere, but I
    > don't own COLA, so it's not up to me, and for the sake of others whom I
    > don't speak for - I think we should just leave things as they are.



    I'm with Homer on this one.

    Personally I like hassling the Trolls, it's the main reason I joined COLA
    in the first place. It was no different in 1996 when I started *reading*
    COLA. It's in my nature, I like confrontations.

    I didn't *dare* write one single post for 12 months when I joined because
    in those days Alexander Viro was guarding the bridge to COLA and he could
    deliver such heavy duty kicks to Troll arse, that hardly any Cola Trolls
    had any arses left...

    They were just grist for his mill. He chewed them up, spat he them out
    and laughed heartily afterwards.

    Anyone is free to start a moderated newsgroup for Linux advocates *only*,
    but leave the Trolls here on COLA, otherwise they will just pester other
    Linux newsgroups (more then they do now) just as Homer says.

    If anyone feels the Troll pressure is too great, just take a holiday for
    a while, COLA and Linux will survive just fine while you're gone.

    In any event, Roy S is doing a great job, his news posts are just
    drowning out the Trolls, and the quality of Linux Advocates here has
    never been better in my opinion. You Linux advocates just RULE!

    I think COLA is shiny and in tip top condition.

    And finally, the Wintrolls won't be here forever because Microsoft won't
    be here forever. I can't say the same for the Trolls, who in general are
    an antisocial lot. The Trolls are a blight everywhere.

    I think we should just leave things as they are, that's my one person
    vote.

    Cheers
    Terry





    --
    Linux full time, on the desktop, since August 1997

  20. Re: Perhaps it is time to start a moderated group?

    "High Plains Thumper" schreef in bericht
    news:490c8eea$0$17067$6e1ede2f@read.cnntp.org...
    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >> Tattoo Vampire on Saturday :
    >>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Perhaps it is time to start
    >>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy.moderated group? Your thoughts?
    >>>
    >>> I think you're right. Assholes like Queeg and Splat make it
    >>> miserable for the real users here.

    >>
    >> I'm in favour. Let's do this. :-)

    >
    > We could have as the charter,
    >
    > [proposed quote]


    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    +
    + C.O.L.A. Newcomer FAQ and Primer
    + Edition: 23 - 10/24/07
    + Group: comp.os.linux.advocacy
    +
    + Copyright (c) 2002-2006 Linux Reality Team
    +
    + PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS:
    +
    + http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
    +
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Welcome to comp.os.linux.advocacy, otherwise known as cola.
    This FAQ will try to address most of the issues regarding Linux and
    this group. Unlike the other FAQs, this one will try to be as
    realistic as possible. If you want the straight information from
    real people, continue reading. If you would like to be told what
    you want to hear, or read a bunch of misinformation that you will
    regret later as you find things don't work as they should, feel free
    to read one of the other "FAQS" in here.

    OK, on to the info! ADDED NEW SECTION BELOW!

    Here's a list of some frequently asked and answered question here
    and elsewhere that you may find useful in your quest to try linux.
    Read these carefully before you decide to invest time in Linux, you
    may find that you have better things you can do instead.

    SECTION ONE - INSTALLATION
    --------------------------

    1.1 Q: I heard linux was easy to install, is it?
    A: That depends on what distro you try. Most of them will have
    trouble detecting all your hardware. Most new hardware devices
    are not supported. If your lucky you might be able to find
    something that someone threw together on the net. But that's
    after spending a couple hours searching and probably won't take
    advantage of your hardware to it's fullest capability.

    1.2 Q: Once I get it installed, then what?
    A: Then you get the joy of making sure everything is configured
    right. Plan on a minimum of two hours per device to get it to
    work. That's if the device is even supported.

    1.3 Q: What happens if I'm in the middle of an install and the
    installation freezes or just stops?
    A: You get to reboot and start all over again. This happens
    every so often with Linux. It seems like it's buggy install
    routines or something. Ain't Linux grand?

    1.4 Q: What's the deal?! I installed Linux and it took up almost 2GB
    hard drive space!
    A: The Linux distros usually install a LOT of never-used programs
    on the default install. You can pick and choose what you want,
    but good luck figuring out what programs are needed and what is
    useless, obscure tools. Linux usually installs stuff like 10
    different editors, 12 different mail clients, and so on.

    (more to come...)

    SECTION TWO - CONFIGURATION
    ---------------------------

    2.1 Q: What's with all these cryptic files?
    A: All of Linux is configured with cryptic text files. Some of
    the more user-friendly distros have configuration utilities
    that claim to do it for you, but success with these works
    sometimes and other times don't, so sometimes you have to
    edit them by hand. With Linux's spotty reliability in UI
    programming, you might as well get used to it.

    2.2 Q: What is killall, HUP, ls, cat, rm, which, etc and why are
    these programs telling me to do them? Arggg!!
    A: These are command line programs that do things within the
    system. It's what makes Linux a powerful OS for those that
    are experienced with it. But it's also what makes it a pain
    in the arse to use and inefficient as a desktop system. Who
    wants to type all the time when they can just click?!

    (more to come...)

    SECTION THREE - APPLICATIONS
    ----------------------------

    3.1 Q: Where can I get some programs to run on linux?
    A: Good question. Because Linux doesn't have a large user base
    on the desktop,(I think it's about 0.24%, less than 1%)
    companies that make software won't write their programs for
    Linux. There's a lot of community created programs out there,
    and some are fairly good, but those are few and far between.
    Most of the Linux software that tries to mimic it's windows
    counterpart is substandard. It's usually slow and buggy and
    early in development.

    3.2 Q: I tried to install an RPM but I got 'failed dependencies', what
    is that?
    A: That's Linux's version of DLL hell. Different versions and
    distros use different libraries. So unlike windows where
    programs will run on many different versions, Linux programs
    will fail if they're not made for your specific version.

    3.3 Q: What is compiling and configure, make and make install? And
    what is a makefile?
    A: This is a way to build the programs from the source code
    under Linux. When the question above fails, you can always
    build it yourself. The advantage is that it works most of
    the time. The disadvantage is that it takes forever to build
    large programs, you need to know some cryptic commands and
    you have to do all this on a command line. Unlike Windows
    where you just double click and you are done.

    3.4 Q: Can I go to my local store to buy any Linux applications?
    A: Not really. You can buy Linux itself at various stores. But
    not too many commercial companies make applications for Linux,
    there's no profit in it with 0.24% of the desktop market.

    (more to come...)

    SECTION FOUR - SPEED ISSUES
    ---------------------------

    4.1 Q: Why is Linux so slow?
    A: Linux is built on the technology of the old UNIX OS's. Even
    the graphical user interface of Linux is a separate program that
    is the same type they used back in the older UNIX days. So
    working with old technology will give you the old technology
    responsiveness. Also, a lot of the GUI's, although nice to look
    at, are still not mature. Using them is slow and sluggish
    compared to, say, Windows.

    (more to come...)

    SECTION FIVE - CONSISTENCY
    --------------------------

    5.1 Q: Why are the windows different looking?
    A: Since Linux isn't built by one company, group or have any
    governing body, programs and interfaces can vary dramatically.
    You can have everything from the nice look of KDE, to something
    as ugly as TK and everything in between. You'll usually see some
    varying UI stile in Linux.

    5.2 Q: Should I buy Suse Linux?
    A: No. They make it difficult to get it for free. All the other
    distros provide free ISO's to download. Suse is the only one
    that doesn't provide them but instead has a FTP install that's
    hard to get to work. Why should they make it easy? The more
    people that can't get the download to work have to spend $80
    or more for the boxed set. And on top of all that although
    it might have a few more user friendly tools, it's still the
    same base Linux system that's in development and that all the
    other distros are using. In other words, they're all on about
    the same level of struggling to catch up to Windows, so you're
    not going to find any earth-shattering features in one compared
    to another.

    (more to come...)

    SECTION SIX - LINUX COMMUNITY
    -----------------------------

    6.1 Q: What is RTFM?!
    A: This is an acronym for Read The Fuc*ing Manual. This is a common
    answer you'll get when asking for help in the Linux community.
    It's meant to make you feel inadequate while boating the Linux
    persons ego at the same time. See, Linux enthusiasts consider
    themselves to be guru like and above helping out the simple
    newbie. You have to earn your respect by spending countless
    hours becoming a kernel hacker before you're worthy of getting
    any help.

    6.2 Q: Why does everyone think they are better than you when
    using Linux?
    A: Same as above. When people use Linux they believe since it
    takes a little more knowledge to use Linux, they are technically
    superior, and see themselves as an elite group that doesn't have
    time for the pathetic little Windows people.

    (more to come...)

    SECTION SEVEN - LINUX ADVOCACY, HELPING OR HURTING?
    ---------------------------------------------------

    7.1 Q: Everyone in here says linux is perfect, why would they say that
    if it isn't?
    A: We really don't know. Maybe they've used Linux so long that
    they've gotten used to it. Some of these people haven't used
    Windows in years so they are comparing Linux to the
    last windows they used, maybe Windows 3.1 or 95.

    7.2 Q: Why does everyone call you a troll when you ask something that
    questions linux?
    A: Most of the people here in C.O.L.A. think of Linux more like a
    religion than an OS. They mostly are MS haters and feel that
    Linux is the greatest thing to ever hit computing. So when
    someone questions Linux it's like questioning their belief
    system. Instead of looking at it with some logic and
    reasonable judgment, they will lash out at you can't claim your
    are a troll or a paid MS supporter.

    7.3 Q: Why does everyone you if you question Linux?
    A: Fairly similar to above, Linux advocates can not argue their
    point rationally. So to make it look like you are under them
    or you are not worth it, and at the same time find an easy
    way out of having to prove themselves, they will you.

    (more to come...)
    SECTION EIGHT - LINUX EVANGELISM, ZEALOTS
    -----------------------------------------

    8.1 Q: There are some people that call this FAQ lies and seem to treat
    it like it's a conspiracy against them, and post all sorts of links
    to anti-microsoft articles. Why are they reacting so strongly?
    A: The people that are reacting so strongly are most likely the
    Linux extremists that believe everything negitive that is said about
    Linux comes from Microsoft. Like many cult-like groups, the people
    that belong to them don't have the ability to see things rationally
    or outside of their view. If someone replies to the FAQ, or
    anything questioning a non-favorable view on Linux, that seems a
    little "over the edge", do a google search on the person
    (http://groups.google.com/) and look at his/her posting history
    then decide for yourself if the person is credible or not.

    (more to come...)
    -----------------------------------------
    PLEASE VISIT:

    http://tinyurl.com/ysrz8u

    http://tinyurl.com/ysrz8u

    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast