XPost: alt.config, alt.bbs.enthral   
   From: spot@tioat.net   
      
   Brian Mailman wrote:   
   > Kelb tal-Fenek wrote:   
   >> Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>> Kelb tal-Fenek  wrote:   
   >>>>Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>>>>Kelb tal-Fenek  wrote:   
   >>>>>>Peter J Ross wrote:   
   >>>>>>>Brian Mailman  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>>>>You sent two more newgroup messages, this time with correct syntax on   
   >>>>>>>>>the required headers.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>>>Our work here is done.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>>There might be a possibility of retro-chartering, if the proponent is   
   >>>>>>>still interested.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>Whatever, stupid. The charter for that newsgroup shall be determined   
   >>>>>>by the active subscribers... and no one else. Period.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>Uh, no. The active posters (subscribers would include lurkers) deterine   
   >>>>>what's topical. The charter is the author's alone.   
   >>>   
   >>>>It's nice to know you have a sense of humor. So, yes, even lurkers   
   >>>>own the charter of a newsgroup they subscribe to. Or did I mistake   
   >>>>ignorance for humor? No, it must be humor. You know and should now   
   >>>>acknowledge that in the alt groups, which are not administered by   
   >>>>bambies or controlled by net.good-ol-boy, a newsgroup charter is a   
   >>>>dynamic thing and shall be determined by the active posters... and   
   >>>>lurkers... to a particular newsgroup... and no one else. Period.   
   >>>   
   >>> What you just wrote is completely stupid.   
   >>   
   >> You three wise men, Adam, Peter and Brian, need to let this go.   
   >   
   > You might want to re-read what's actually been written, rather than   
   > stirring shit and then claiming we're doing it.   
      
   Kind of arrogant there, Brian. If I don't agree with what is going   
   on then I need to re-fucking-read everything; is that what you're   
   saying? Sounds like it so fuck you and your little dog too.   
      
   Here's something that hasn't been discussed. There was another   
   newgroup sent around the same time as the one we are discussing and   
   the resident rmgrouper let it slide. There was no discussion in   
   alt.config or a justification. Nothing said. Now, the one where the   
   proponent decides to talk about it in alt.config is fucking   
   nitpicked to death here. Why is this?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)