Re: [Epic] Food, Off-Topic Threads and Childishness - a Public Rebuke

From: Thomas Lee Denney <seether_at_...>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 03:50:33 -0500

YEAH! What Richard said! hehe

At 11:53 PM 7/9/97 +0100, you wrote:
>> --Ken Taborek oberon_at_... wrote:
>> >Nyeah, nyeah.
>>
>> Obviously you don't have a life, or you would see the necessity of
>> limiting the subject matter to the game. Then again, it's my choice to
>> unsubscribe when children like yourself publicly saying " Nyeah - Nyeah"
>
>You will be sorely missed. In the 5 months or so I've been on the list,
>I've seen exactly two posts from you: the first was whining about other
>people's off-topic posts, and the second was a further can of petrol
>thrown needlessly onto the fire. On the other hand, Ken has posted
>frquently - sometimes off-topic, but regularly with pertinant
>information about the game of Epic40k. I would listen to your
>complaints if you really had a better use of the bandwidth - clearly you
>do not.
>
>Ken posted a slightly larger message than you have credited him with
>above. To selectively quote from his post in this way does him a
>disservice, effectively misrepresenting his views. He told you to
>lighten up first. A comment I have no trouble at all endorsing
>wholeheartedly. I also take issue with the way in which you have
>insulted a valued member of this list. Whether this upset Ken is not
>now the issue - you have upset _me_ by making such unpleasant, and
>frankly petty remarks.
>
>> and going on for hours about food from some has-been island, start to
>> dominate the list.
>
>You are now sinking to racist comments. Either make them in a
>light-hearted manner like the rest of us (and accept that it is all part
>of the off-topic banter that goes on here) or desist henceforth. I take
>great offence at what you have said here - your post was clearly meant
>to be taken seriously, from the tone set by the rest of your post.
>
>This was a feeble-minded attempt to start a flame-war by you - nothing
>more. If you were really concerned with off-topic threads, you either
>haven't been paying attention to nature of the the traffic on this list
>or could not think of a constructive way to bring the list back in a
>direction more to your liking. I usually take matches away from
>children - if you choose to un-sub, I'm pleased that you've chosen to
>put the matches out of your reach.
>
> Try that BS on the Warhammer 40k list and see what
>> happens.
>
>I DON'T CARE what happens on the WH40k list. It's a foreign country -
>they do things differently there. (Friends of mine will now applaud my
>self-restraint for saying nothing derogatory about that game.)
>
> Go private when you want to discuss the weather, time , color of
>> the sky, angels on a pinhead, etc. It just makes sense if the subject
>> doesn't apply to everyone. Of course, this message was written for the
>> benefit of everyone else - you obviously feel it's your right to
>> selfishly "clog up the drain". And respond personally, please - we're
>> wasting enough bandwidth.
>
>Oh yes, you've managed that quite nicely. I note with dismay that you
>felt unable from the start to follow your own advice.
>>
>> Tim Brown
>>
>Richard
>
>I wrote this as a personal rebuke, to be sent via private e-mail.
>However, now that I have reflected on the matter, I have decided to cc a
>copy to the list. I apologise to anyone else that thinks this is a
>waste of bandwidth, but what is implicit in Mr. Brown's posts is that we
>have all been doing this wrong - we shouldn't post messages for the fun
>of it, that amuse us or others, or inform in areas of interest outside
>the GW product set. I believe, like others, that the unmoderated nature
>of this mailing list gives it its special atmosphere - I like to think
>that I am posting my messages not to an anonymous list, but to a group
>of my friends, and we can share a smile or a laugh from time to time.
>It would appear that there is at least one person out there who does not
>wish to be friendly. But that is OK, as he probably has a real life
>(insert large emoticon representing sarcasm).
>
>I was also extremely unhappy about the unwarranted attack on Great
>Britain and Ken Taborek, and while GB is big enough not to notice Mr.
>Brown's attack, I feel that Ken deserves public support against such
>petty and personal attacks. Many of the regular contributors (and note
>that word "contributors" well, Mr. Brown) will at some stage have fallen
>foul of the standards Mr. Brown aims to set for us all; I would like to
>think that the list is a friendly enough place both to accept
>light-hearted, off-topic posts, and to support a valued member when he
>comes under personal attack for holding views most, if not all, of us
>share.
>
>I agreed with everything Lemm and others have said in reply to the same
>message quoted above, but felt that these posts did not go far enough to
>put our Mr. Brown in his place (which, according to his own standards,
>must be somewhere in or very near to the nursery).
>
>Richard (whose surname is Dewsbery, if anyone wants to get really
>serious and start making complaints to participants' ISPs)
>
>
Received on Thu Jul 10 1997 - 08:50:33 UTC