From: dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Music Group Reorg Disagreement (was Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored)
Date: 17 Nov 92 21:13:17 GMT
Organization: Data Factory Services, Harrisburg, Pa.

In article <MJP.92Nov9173819@prudence.hplb.hpl.hp.com>, mjp@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Mike Prudence) writes:
>twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>>It was posted to rec.music.synth.  Hence, it was a CFV that somehow
>>affected the readership of rec.music.synth.  Worth at least the two
>>seconds it would take to briefly check over.
> 
>But you are assuming that I know that.  I don't, and I've managed to
>survive nearly four years of net reading without coming up against
>this.

Then you one of 2 problems:

1) You have a News Admin who should be thrashed for not giving you the
   basic info when you started reading news or

2) You should be thrashed if you were given the info and failed to read
   it.

In either case the info was there for you to read and you SHOULD have
had enough interest to see how things operated instead of blindly
assuming you needed to do nothing. 

What groups have you been reading for the last 4 years anyhow?

>Nowhere and nowhen has anyone said to me that a CFV in a
>newsgroup I read, with a subject line that does not mention that
>newsgroup, has any relevance to that newsgroup at all.

So you, and everyone else bellyaching here, basically want to be led
around by the hand and SHOWN everything you need to know... spoon fed I
assume? 

I wonder how all the people who have read news before you came along
ever managed. 

>The other thing I assumed, obviously wrongly, is that a renaming of
>rec.music.synth is something so unneeded, unthinkable and unlikely
>that a large noise would be made about it *in that group*.  I did not
>expect to find it buried at the end of a crosspost about creation of some
>other groups.  Hence my analogy that....
>
>  If my car is broken, I fix it.  If it isn't, I leave well alone.

1) Never assume
2) Never assume
3) Never assume

>I don't think people like me should be called 'apathetic' or 'lazy'
>because we can't find time to keep abreast of everything that goes on
                       ^^^^ TAKE
>over the net.

You mean like how the net operates and other mundane junk like that?
Sorry. Someone shoulda told you... YOU are the net along with everyone
else who uses it. 

> In this case, the renaming was not made explicit in the affected
> group.

It was if you bothered to read the posting. You didn't. Sorry. Votes
over. Decision made. That's the net me boyo. 

> To my simplistic mind, this alone should be enough for a group
> of good intentioned individuals, who desire to make such a renaming
> decision based on the wishes of as many people as possible, take
> another vote.  Whether it is allowed by the guidelines or not.  There
> has clearly been a mistake.  Common sense says we should at least try
> and make sure the decision previously voted on is the right one.

I don't think Clinton was TRULY the choice of the majority. Let's have
another election to validate or invalidate the first. What can it hurt? 
Common sense says we should make sure the decision previously voted on
was the right one. 

> Is that so difficult ?

Understanding why a few loud people want to ignore the rules that govern
the way things are done is difficult.  CHANGE the rules if you don't
like them.  Ignoring them is the Wrong Thing To Do [tm]. Change them and
in the mean time use them to overturn the first vote with another. 

-- 
 ...uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave -or-                       |  Dave Ratcliffe  |
 frackit!dave@uunet.UU.NET -or- dave@frackit.uucp -or-   |  Sys. <*> Admin. |
 vogon1!compnect!frackit!dave@psuvax1.psu.edu            | Harrisburg,  Pa. |