From: mwgertz+@cs.cmu.edu (Matthew Gertz)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: R.A.S.* NETIQUETTE LIST (9/1/92 version) -- PLEASE READ!
Summary: How to protect spoilers and avoid flamewars
Keywords: spoilers, etiquette, flamewars
Date: 1 Sep 92 13:55:45 GMT
Organization: Dept. of ECE, The Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon


			REC.ARTS.STARTREK.* NETIQUETTE
			       (net etiquette)
			  a semi-monthly posted list

			Last updated August 15, 1992.

  	   List maintained by Matt Gertz (mwgertz+@cs.cmu.edu)

========================================================================

PURPOSE:  To introduce new readers of rec.arts.startrek to the etiquette
and conventions of this newsgroup.  To give old readers a bit of a 
reminder about how things work in rec.arts.startrek.*.  To discuss the 
protection of SPOILER information.  New readers are urged to read this 
post.  

========================================================================

Changes from 8/15/92 version:  Removal of the listing of available r.a.s.*
	lists section (the actual list is now too big, and these are
	more properly covered in Hackman's monthly posts).

[Matt's notes:  Folks, this is not rec.arts.babylon-5.*.  I think the
show sounds neat, too, but please let's talk about it on the proper 
newsgroup.

Speaking of proper newsgroups:  as continually mentioned, r.a.s.current
is for discussion of current and upcoming episodes, whereas r.a.s.misc
is for discussion of previous episodes, broad ideas and concepts related
to Star Trek, and everythig else that doesn't fall into r.a.s.tech and
r.a.s.fandom.

Three weeks until the new season starts... let's make sure that all
rumors are spoiler-protected!]

========================================================================

REC.ARTS.STARTREK[.misc,.current,.tech,.fandom] (r.a.s.*) are unmoderated
newsgroups. This means that you can basically post whatever you want.
However, many customs have evolved on r.a.s.*. since its conception.
This posting is an attempt to list some of those customs, and some r.a.s.*
taboos.  To paraphrase Heinlein, manners are the lubrication of society.
If you respect the customs of r.a.s.*, then everyone can get the maximum
enjoyment out of this unique way to discuss "Star Trek," "Star Trek" 
movies I - VI, and "Star Trek:  The Next Generation" (all of which are 
collectively referred to as "Star Trek" in this post).

This posting has been prompted for several reasons, lack of adequate 
spoiler protection being the primary motivation.  It is divided into two 
sections.  The first discusses SPOILERS, and the second discusses topics
that, when posted, may launch a major flamewar (A flamewar is what happens
when a conversation degenerates into two or more people calling each other
names).

DISCLAIMER:
The author of this posting does not presume to forbid or declare certain
topics taboo (as if he could!).  Such is *not* the purpose of this list.
Rather, this list was created to attempt to call your attention to subjects
which are likely to go nowhere, and subjects you might respond to and then
later regret having done so.  The opinions about net etiquette implied by
this posting are not necessarily those of the author of this list:  topics
for this list were submitted by readers of r.a.s.* (acknowledged at the end
of this list).  Those topics which were submitted with any degree of 
repetition or frequency were then incorporated into this list by the author.

If you are new to the net, and to r.a.s.* in particular, you are urged to
read this posting.  It is also recommended that you read the postings in
news.announce.newusers and news.newusers.questions, which will answer a lot
of the questions that you have.

Great care will be taken to keep this posting updated.  Your comments are
very much appreciated; it's not logical to pretend that this list has the
last and best word on net ettiquette.  Please send comments and suggestions
to:

			mwgertz+@cs.cmu.edu

The current plan calls for this netiquette article to be posted twice a
month, plus during other special occasions (for instance, a week before the
season opener, season finale, and any Star Trek movie release dates).

Abbreviations used in this post:

ST:TOS or just TOS	Star Trek (the original series)
ST:TNG or just TNG	Star Trek:  The Next Generation
ST:TAS or just TAS	Star Trek (the animated series)
ST:TFS or just TFS	Star Trek (the film series)

ST:TMP, STII:TWOK, 	The six films in ST:TFS
STIII:TSFS, STIV:TVH, 
STV:TFF, STVI:TUC

IMHO			In My Honest/Humble Opinion
:-) or 8^)		"Smiley faces" to indicate humor or sarcasm.
Control-L		Character which causes some newsreader programs to
			pause and wait for the reader to hit the spacebar
			to continue.  ASCII value 12 (014,0x0C).

r.a.s.*			All of the newsgroups under the rec.arts.startrek
			node.



****************************
Part 1:  Concerning SPOILERS
****************************

This section contains answers to the following questions about SPOILERS.
By charter, spoilers about new episodes should only be posted to
r.a.s.current or, if technical in nature, to r.a.s.tech.  Please do not
post such spoilers to r.a.s.misc or r.a.s.fandom.  To learn more about
spoilers, read on:

A.  "What is a 'spoiler?'"
B.  "Where should they be posted?"
C.  "Can old episodes be spoiled?"
D.  "I put the word 'SPOILER' in my subject line.  Is that good enough?"
E.  "Well, then, how do I protect spoiler information?" (Control-L, etc.)
F.  "Can I put the Control-L anywhere?" (No.)
G.  "I absolutely can't get this Control-L thing to work.  What can I do?".
H.  "Do I need to protect spoilers in r.a.s.current?" (Yes.)
I.  "What about using rot13?" (Some people can't read rot13.


A.  "What is a 'spoiler?'"

A spoiler is information about an episode or movie which gives away some
part of the plot.  For instance, the statement:

	 "Yeah, I really liked the part where Lwaxana Troi was
	  eaten by Worf after she called him 'Mr. Woof.'"

is a spoiler, whereas

	"I really liked the music in this episode." 

is not.  (Note:  All "spoilers" in this posting are ficticious, by the 
way.)  It is considered very bad manners to spoil an episode or movie for
anyone else.  It's an important thing to think about because ST:TNG is 
syndicated.  Other people on the net might not see the episode until 
perhaps two weeks after you do (or even several months, if they missed it
the first time around), so it's unfortunately very easy to spoil episodes
for them.


B.  "Where should they be posted?"

Since spoilers are current, obviously there are many of them on rec.arts.
startrek.current.  Furthermore, discussions of new technology shown in a
recent episode are often discussed in rec.arts.startrek.tech.

rec.arts.startrek.misc is really for the discussion of non-current episodes
and other aspects of Star Trek, and so spoilers really don't belong there.
If your discussion does reference a current episode, it's best to move
the discussion over to .current.

Spoilers do not really belong in rec.arts.startrek.fandom either.  Although
advance info on upcoming episodes and movies is often to be found at
conventions and other establishments of fandom, such information really
belongs on .current when made available to your fellow r.a.s.*'ers.


C.  "They're showing season 4 episodes right now.  Does that mean that
info about season 2 is okay to spoil?"

Opinion is divided on this.  Other countries, such as the United Kingdom and
France, are several seasons behind us, and so may have not seen those
episodes yet.  Also, other people in the USA and Canada may have missed that
episode, and haven't caught it in re-runs yet.  The consensus is that
protecting spoilers for previous seasons is optional, but we suggest that
you may wish to consider limiting distribution of the post to (for instance,
North America) if folk in other countries might not have seen it yet.
Discussion of older episodes is generally done on r.a.s.misc.


D.  "I put the word 'SPOILER' in my subject line.  Is that good enough?"

Unfortunately not.  Certain newsreader programs, such as rn, not only 
display the subject line but also the first 15 or so lines of text in 
the message.  Certain words in your text may be very visible to readers, 
no matter how fast they move to the next message, words such as "killed,"
"Tasha Yar," etc.  By all means, please *DO* put "SPOILERS" in the subject
line, but also add other spoiler protection.


E.  "Well, then, how do I protect spoiler information?"

To protect spoiler information, here are several things you can do (and 
are urged to do) to protect spoiler information.  First, make sure you 
are posting to the appropriate newsgroup (generally r.a.s.current or 
r.a.s.tech).  Next, choose an appropriate subject line.  Include the 
episode/movie name, "*SPOILERS*", and the main subject (if necessary), (in 
no particular order) like so:

	Subj: "Redemption" (*SPOILERS*) My review of the episode.

On the other hand, avoid subject lines like the one that follows:

	Subj:  Hey guys, do you think that Riker is really dead?

(If you are replying to a message with the word "SPOILERS" in the subject
line, but remove the spoilers from the quoted message, then add a 
"*SPOILERS REMOVED*" or something similar so that no one will be scared 
away... after all, we want to read what you have to say!)

Second (optional), set your distribution appropriately.  For instance, if
this is the latest episode, then you might not wish to post your message
to (for instance) England, where they won't have seen the episode for two 
more years.  This is really up to you; there are folk overseas who don't
mind having the new episodes spoiled for them, but others do.  If you 
adequately protect your text, then this won't be much of a problem.

You can limit distribution to North America by adding this line to the header
information:

Distribution: na

Finally (and this is *NOT* considered optional by many r.a.s.'ers), you
add the spoiler protector.  This is the infamous Control-L.   Some 
newsreader programs will pause on a Control-L, so that the reader can 
decide if he or she wants to read the spoiler or not.  Upon reading this
message from the net, it will look like a , but it is not simply a 
"^" plus a "L" !!  It looks like two characters, but is only one.  This 
is how you add a Control-L:

Using emacs:  Type "Control" and "Q" at the same time, then "Control" and 
		"L"  You'll see \014, which is the octal representation of
		the character.  (Some people will see a ^L instead.)
Using MicroEmacs:  If Control-Q Control-L doesn't work, try "Esc-X, quote 
		^L" (where the ^L is a "Control" and "L" typed at the same 
		time).  You must put a space after quote, as it completes
		the command "quote-character." (thanks to Mike Rosen and 
		"The Technicolor Throw-up" (yeccch! 8^))
Using vi:     Type "Control" and "L" at the same time in insert mode.  
		(Some versions of vi require that you type "Control" and 
		"V" at the same time, then "Control" and "L".)  You'll 
		see a ^L.
Using TPU:    Type "Control" and "L" at the same time.  (Unfortunately, if
		you are using TPU, you are probably also using VMSNEWS to, 
		to read the posts on r.a.s.  John Whelan tells me VMSNEWS
		doesn't respond to Control-L's, and Mike Kelsey tells me 
		that VM/CMS machines in general won't respond to them.)
Using JOVE:  If Control-Q Control-L doesn't work, try Control-^, Control-L.
		If that doesn't work, then try Esc-X/Meta-X "quoted-insert"
		and then Control-L (similar to MicroEmacs, above).  (Thanks
		to Alan Coopersmith for this tip!)
Using HP/Apollo display manager:  Press the "Mark" key, type "x", press the
		"Cmd" key, type "s/x/@f/"  This will replace the "x" with
		the form feed character @f (^L).  (Thanks Dave Sp.!)
Other editors:  I don't know.  I sure would like to, so send me mail!  In
		general, the ASCII character code 12 (014,0x0C) must be
		added.
Other options:  Create a file containing only the ASCII code 12 in it and
		insert in your messages wherever you need a Control-L.  To
		create this file, you can download this message to your
		machine, and cut away everything except the Control-L
		in the following line:

   The Control-L is between the two quotation marks on this line: ""

	Adding one Control-L at the beginning is sufficient.  Adding 
more than one can be annoying to the readers who keep on having to hit 
the space-bar to get to the meat of the conversation.


F.  "Can I put the Control-L anywhere?"

No.  It *must* be the first character on the line.  That means that if 
you are replaying to a message, and your editor puts a ">" or some other
character in front of the quoted text, you must remove the ones in front
of the Control-L's, or they won't work for people who use rn (though nn 
users don't have this problem).

So, here's an example of a spoilerproof message:

=============
From: spock@sehlat.vsa.vul
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: "The Dolphin" (*SPOILERS*) Wesley's date
Distribution: na

Spoilers ahead, so press the space bar to continue, or 'n' to avoid them:



I found the part where Wesley fell in love with the alien princess, 
Flipper, to be most illogical.

--Spock
=============

On the other hand, this next person who responded forgot to remove the
">" from in front of the Control-L, so now it won't work (of course, for
those of you using VM/CMS machines, it doesn't work anyway -- darn that
VMSNEWS!):

=============
From: troi@feel.great.pain.anguish
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: "The Dolphin" (*SPOILERS*) Wesley's date
Distribution: na

In <123ABCcomewithme>, spock@sehlat.vsa.vul writes:
>Spoilers ahead, so press the space bar to continue, or 'n' to avoid them:
>
>
>
>I found the part where Wesley fell in love with the alien princess,
>Flipper, to be most illogical.
>
>--Spock

I thought it was beautiful, Wesley coming to terms with a forbidden love.
Rumor has it that you know something about this yourself, Spock... 8^)

--Deanna
=============

"Deanna" has just made a lot of people unhappy!


G.  "I absolutely can't get this Control-L thing to work.  What can I do?"

If you can't get it to work for some reason, or if you can't tell if it's
working, then add a spoiler warning and 25 or so carriage returns in front
of the spoiler.  This is the best thing to do if (as some people claim)
your posting program strips out control characters.  Remember, it never 
hurts to add blank lines if you're unsure of whether or not it's working!


H.  "Do I need to protect spoilers in r.a.s.current?"

Yes.  Remember that many episodes can be considered current, due to lags
in receiving TNG around the country.  One person might have just seen
episode 12 of the new season, while another just saw episode 13.  
Discussions of episode 13 might spoil the plot for the former r.a.s.*'er,
and therefore spoiler protection is advised *even when posting to
.current.*

Spoilers will also appear on r.a.s.tech, and should be protected.
Spoilers really don't belong on r.a.s.misc or r.a.s.fandom, but if you
feel you absolutely *must*, then please protect them.


I.  "What about using rot13?"

The responses on the net to this question so far seem to be that this 
would cause more problems than those caused by Control-L protection. 
"rot13" is an encryption process by which "a" -> "n", "b -> o", "z" -> 
"l" and so forth.  Each character is rotated 13 characters.  Some news-
reader programs have a means for encrypting and decrypting rot13, others
do not.  For those that don't, the post would most likely have to be 
downloaded and run through a (admittedly trivial) decryption program.
This would be a hassle for those who are not programmers and those who 
wish to speed through posts.  While rot13 would indeed protect spoilers,
to many people they would effectively be unreadable.


*****************************************
Part 2:  Flame starters and other topics:
*****************************************

Here follow some topics which are certain to get people irate.  If that's
what you want to do, fine, but be forewarned.  Also included are
self-defeating questions, which end up with no answers.  (Certain
questions from the FAQL also appear here, due to their inflammatory nature.
In these cases, the reader is referred to the FAQL.)  Finally, there are
some helpful hints about posting and replying which will make your postings
easier to read and reference.

DISCLAIMER:
Again, this is not to be interpreted as a "must/must not" list.  Rather,
it just calls to your attention topics which tend to irk people.  The
author of this list does not necessarily subscribe to any of the ideas
or opinions which might be implied by this following section, nor does
he necessarily feel that any of the topics listed before should be avoided.


A.  "Does anyone have an episode list?"  (The episode guide.)
B.  "How many times has 'x' done 'y?' Where can I get 'z'?"  (The FAQL.)
C.  Flaming the review writers.
D.  Flaming the new guy/gal on the block.
E.  "Could you send me a copy, too?"
F.  "I need information on 'x.' Could you please post the answer?"
G.  "I already said that."
H.  "So-and-so said in message number 7987..."
I.  God/Jesus/Buddha (etc.)
J.  Homosexuality and other controversial social issues.
K.  Spelling, margins, and correct English.  SHOUTING!  Gender-inclusive
    language.
L.  Replying to messages.
M.  Racism/sexism/WASPism.
N.  "Hey, Trekkies!  Get a life!"
O.  "I'm an authority on <...>," and rumors.
P.  Signature files.
Q.  GIF files.
R.  "I'm offended."
S.  "Shatner argued for <x> in episode <y>..."
T.  "Smiley faces," "IMHO."
U.  ST:TOS vs. ST:TNG.
V.  "Canon" vs. "non-canon."
W.  "Quit posting all of these posts about <whatever>."
X.  A brief final note on flamewars (alt.flame).
Y.  Using '*' as the entry in the 'Subject:' line. (Please don't!)
Z.  Subject lines.
AA. "When's the next Star Wars movie coming out?"
AB. Crossposting.  Posting to the correct r.a.s.* group.


A.  "Does anyone have a list of the episodes from this season?" "Can you
give a synopsis of..." etc.

(This following section is taken nearly verbatim from Mark Holtz -- thanks,
Mark!) (And also from Tim Lynch -- also thanks!)

Mike "Vidiot" Brown (brown@vidiot.UUCP) maintains the ST:TNG Program
Guide.  It's available via anonymous FTP and UUCP (it's also for sale
through the mail).  He also gets up-to-date information from Paramount,
and posts the press releases and air schedule to the net.  This qualifies
as a "Frequently Asked Question," but it is added here as well, since
this question pops up a few times a week to many people's irritation.  To
get it via ftp, check out site ftp.cs.montana.edu.  For more info, read
the FAQL (see below).

Mark Holtz (mholtz@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US) maintains the Star Trek TOS/TAS List
of Lists and Star Trek TNG List of Lists.  These lists give out various
tidbits of information, as well as an up to date schedule of all Trek
episodes with a brief synopsis.  Do NOT e-mail Mark Holtz asking for a
copy of the lists. He has only a *VERY* limited amount of disk space
available to him, being that he calls from a public access system, and
cannot keep a copy on-line after posting.  You will instead receive 
information on where you can FTP, use e-mail server, or download from a
publicly-accessible BBS system. DO e-mail Mark Holtz if you have a
suggestion or correction to make to the list of lists.

Other lists are maintained on r.a.s.*.  Otto Heuer maintains a list of the 
lists, the posters, and when the lists are posted.  (The e-mail addresses
of poster's are only ever given so that you can help update information,
*not* to request copies -- those of us who post the lists do not have
the time or patience to e-mail them to everyone on the net.)  Archives exist 
on the net so that you can get copies.  To be honest, I'm not sure of which 
sites the lists are at now.  Check out the monthly posting of the FAQL 
for details.


B.  "How many times has <insert ST character name> said (or done)..."
"Where can I get ST parodies..."  "How do I submit scripts..."

These are FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions.  Otto "Hack-Man" Heuer
(hackman@pnet51.orb.mn.org) puts out the FAQL (Frequently Asked Questions
List) every month.  This answers a lot of questions, and is 99% accurate
8^)  It also explains abbreviations like "IMHO" "BTW" and so forth.
This list exists because many questions are asked with an irritating
frequency.  If it's a trivia question, check the FAQL first.  All of the
people who put out these lists work hard at them, and understandably get
upset when these lists are ignored.


C.  Flaming the review writers.

Several r.a.s.*'ers put out a review or synopsis on every episode
(including, but not limited to, Atsushi Kanamori and Tim Lynch).  It does 
no good to flame them over "having the gall" to dicate what is "good" and
"bad."  First of all, they wear asbestos underwear; secondly, the rest of
us like 'em too much, and they know it.  Flaming the well-entrenched 
personalities because they post reviews will get you nowhere.  Disagreeing
with all opinions *in* the reviews, though, is an r.a.s.* favorite sport!

In a related topic, flaming people who appear (to you) to consider
themselves "gods of r.a.s.*," "gods of Star Trek tech fandom," etc., will
also get you nowhere.  Such people are not insecure enough to be bothered
by such posts.  If you *do* have a private beef with someone on the net,
there's always e-mail...


D.  Flaming the new guy/gal on the block.

New people will make netiquette mistakes.  It's a fact of life.  We
suggest that you don't flame them across the newsgroup; just e-mail them
a nice note welcoming them to r.a.s.* and explain what custom they missed.
Remember when *you* were new to the net...?  


E.  "Me, too!"

Every now and then someone will ask the net for a certain program or file.
Other people will then respond to this, saying, "Me, too!"  "Me, three," ad
nauseam.  This is self-defeating.  Due to net time-lags, the original post
may have reach other parts of the net *days* before it got to you -- the
original poster may have already gotten the file he/she wanted, and is not
going to be looking at the newsgroups solely to find others who want the
information!  One good idea is to send that poster an e-mail note asking
them to forward the file (or whatever) to you when they get it from whom-
ever ends up giving it to them.


F.  "I need information on (whatever).  Please post the answer..."

This will clog the newsgroup with 500 billion wrong answers.  If you are in
search of information (or trivia), we suggest that you request that the info
be e-mailed to you.  Later on, you can summarize the answers and post the
result to r.a.s.*, as we'll all be interested in the (hopefully correct)
answer.  This is especially a good thing to do if you are taking a straw
poll (i.e. "Rate this episode on a scale of 1-10").

Obviously, if you can't receive e-mail (as happens with a few people), then
of course no one can blame you for wanting an answer posted.


G.  "I already said that!"

Because of the net lag time, posts don't show up at the same time
everywhere.  If someone posts an article that is "old news" to you, it may
very well be because of the net lag, which that person can't control.
Please be understanding about this.  The writer of this netiquette post has
encountered a couple net lags which were almost a month long, thanks to
computer down-time.


H.  "So-and-so said in message 7987..."

Your message number is unique to your system, and so is useless to everyone
else.  It is suggested that you give the reference number of the message
instead, which will look something like "In message
<25980030@bilge.ece.cmu.edu.>..."  (If you are replying to a posting, your
posting program will probably do this automatically for you.)


I.  God/Jesus/Buddha (etc.)

Some Star Trek episodes seem to indicate that there is still some large
amount of deity worship in the future, while other episodes seem to indicate
the opposite.  The truth is that they have been very inconsistent about
this, so that arguments about it (*using* *Star Trek* *facts*) are kind of
futile.  For those who wish to argue about deities from a non-Star Trek
point of view, there are other newsgroups which are set up for that very
purpose.


J.  Homosexuality and other controversial social issues.

Some people feel that Star Trek should be "obligated" to introduce
homosexual characters.  Other people are homophobic.  Whatever your
attitude, you're not going to convince anyone else with your views on the
subject via the net, and it's useless to try -- it just turns into a
flamewar.  (But go ahead anyway, if you don't believe this.  Many people on
the net actually *enjoy* flamewars...)

We all love to read other people's opinions.  Well-thought-out discussions
about social issues as relevant to Star Trek episodes, including such
topics as homosexuality, money, socialism/capitalism, are something that
makes r.a.s.* intellectually interesting.  However, if you stand on a
soapbox constructed of your own morals, you're not going to convince anyone.
Please be objective.  The issue of homosexuality (if in fact it is an
issue) isn't going to be solved on r.a.s.* (for those who think it needs to
be "solved").  As with religion, if you want to discuss social issues for
their own sake, and not for Star Trek's, allow us to suggest other news-
groups perhaps more appropriate for it.  And, as always, there is e-mail...


K.  Spelling, margins, and correct English.  SHOUTING!  Gender-inclusive 
    language.

It is easiest to read posts when they are spelled correctly, using correct
English.  Misspelling character names can occasionally lead to confusion
(yes, we know, they have such weird names it's sometimes hard to know how to
spell them.  They're usually listed in the credits, though).  Right-
justifying text often makes it harder to read, so we suggest leaving
it "as is".  It is also suggested that you set your word wrap to less than
80 characters (for instance, 72 is a good round number), since many of us
use 80-column screens to read the posts.  This also makes quotes look much
nicer when you reply to someone's posting, since otherwise line endings 
will have a tendency to wrap around or even go off the screen.

On the other hand, flaming someone because of spelling mistakes or grammar
mistakes is generally considered very bad manners.  Not everyone is E.B.
White, after all.

CAPITALIZING ALL OF YOUR LETTERS IS OFTEN INTERPRETED TO BE SHOUTING
BY MANY R.A.S.* FOLK.  IT IS ALSO MORE DIFFICULT TO READ THAN NORMAL
TYPEFACE, SO WE SUGGEST THAT you use lower-case characters.  And by the
way: asterisks around a word are generally considered to indicate
emphasis-italics ("I can't believe that Spock would do something like
*that* to McCoy!"), whereas underscores usually indicate title-italics 
("I just finished reading _Doctor's_Hors_D'oeuvres_ by Diane Duane, and 
boy am I hungry!").

Society is gradually changing to a more "gender-inclusive" language; i.e.,
"Humanity" vs. "Mankind," "Where No One Has Gone Before" vs. "Where No Man
Has Gone Before," etc.  Complaining about the way someone on r.a.s.* uses
or doesn't use gender-inclusive language has been the subject of major
flamewars, so be forewarned.  Additionally, allow us to point out that
there are appropriate newsgroups for arguing about this subject, and of
course there is e-mail.  (On the other hand, if a character on "Star Trek"
uses terms which bother you, we encourage you to opine!  That's what we're
here for!)


L.  Replying to messages.

When replying to a message, it is generally considered good manners to edit
out all the parts which are not relevant to your response(s).  Nothing is
more frustrating to a reader than to search through 120 lines of quoted
text to find, at the end, a one-line response.  If someone actually wants
to re-read an entire post, they can use the reference number to locate it,
which is its purpose for existence.  

In addition, you should make sure all quotes are attributed to the proper
writer.  If you remove all of a writer's text, make sure you remove his/her
attribution as well.  Otherwise, people get assigned to the wrong opinions,
and bad feelings result.

Finally, it is suggested that you trim down (or delete) the .signatures of
those you are quoting.  After four or five responses to a message, the sigs
at the end can get quite voluminous.


M.  Racism/sexism/WASPism.

Stereotyping on the basis on race, gender, etc., is fodder for flames.  Be 
forewarned.

Where Star Trek is concerned:  yes, the females had to wear mini-skirts.
Yes, the third season of the original season gradually reduced the extras
in the crew to mostly white men and women.  Yes, it could have been done
better.  The facts remain that 1) Star Trek was a pioneer as far as race
relationships and gender roles go, in the 1960's; and 2) It was a quarter
of century ago, and you can't change what was.  Constructive comments and
criticism are all *always* appreciated on r.a.s.*, though, especially in
relation to "The Next Generation" (since it's still in production). Again,
if you just want to argue about races and racism (or whatever) in general,
we suggest discussing it on the appropriate newsgroup.


N.  "Hey, Trekkies!  Get a life!"

Periodically, some bozo on the net (who has probably never read this
newsgroup in his life) posts a really obnoxious comment about us onto
r.a.s.*  The result is like stepping on an ant hill.  For weeks, people
angrily respond to this message.  This is futile.  The person who posted
the original message won't see your response, because he/she doesn't 
actually read the newsgroup (in all likelihood) -- he/she just though it 
would be "cool" to flame some Trekkies (or he/she left him/herself logged
on after leaving the terminal room, and someone else snuck in to use
their account to produce this message of eloquence).  It's best to ignore
folk like this.  It's not their fault that the doctor accidently dropped
them on their head when they were born.  Feel sorry for them instead.


O.  "I'm an authority on <...>," and rumors.

If you are, that's great; we love to hear input "straight from the horse's
mouth."  Be forewarned, though: many of us on the net are authorities about
physics, video, the military, astronomy... we cover a wide range of fields,
so you'll probably get blasted by a real authority if you're not *really*
an authority but try to pass yourself off as one.  (You'll get to know
who's whom in the coming weeks, and what their expertises are.)  Don't 
mistake this -- everyone *still* wants your input no matter who you are,
but if you're not sure about some topic, don't confuse other netters by
asserting yourself as an authority, when in fact you might be incorrect in
your answer.  If you're unsure, it's best to say so.  *Someone* will know
the right answer, and then we'll all learn something new.

The same can be said for rumors.  It's best to substantiate your stories;
otherwise, r.a.s.* becomes adrift with the rumors that half of the cast of
Star Trek have just died, and so forth.  Your mother's sister's husband's
best friend's friend is probably a questionable source, unless your
mother's sister's husband's best friend's friend is a member of the cast,
crew, or a journalist.  8^)


P.  Signature files.

Many posting programs look for a file called ".signature" to append to all
outgoing posts.  People usually put in their names, e-mail addresses, and a
quote or two that they really like.  They are a lot of fun to play with.
On the other hand, it is easy to get carried away.  For instance, a one-line
post followed by a thirteen-line sig is an incredible waste of bandwidth.
On USENET, it is respectfully suggested that people try to keep it down to
reasonable lengths.


Q.  GIF files.

GIF files are files which, when run through a GIF viewer, will cause a
picture to be shown on your PC.  There are lots of Star Trek GIFs.  (See
the FAQL for ftp addresses, and also check out alt.binaries.pictures.misc
for new GIFs.)  Certain r.a.s.* folk are limited in the size of the
posts they can receive, so, if your GIF file is very long, it's often a
good idea to put it on an ftp site, or e-mail it to people(*), or post it
to alt.binaries.pictures.misc, rather than posting it on r.a.s.*.
Furthermore, this will reduce the load on the r.a.s.* net groups, something 
which pleases the system administrators who graciously allow us access
to r.a.s.*

(*)  This will probably annoy your sysadmin, and so is not recommended.


R.  "I'm offended."

If so, send the poster an e-mail message first.  Perhaps you just
misunderstood the post.  No sense in flaming the poster, then finding out
that you missed a sentence, or didn't see the smiley face ":-)" or
whatever.

In general, it's a bad idea to immediately flame back at a poster.  Save
the message, read it again a couple hours later.  Relax.  Drink a nice
hot cup of herbal tea.  Are you still angry?  If not, let it slide.  If
so, you are now at least in a more rational state of mind to properly
respond to the message and point out its (perceived) mistakes.  Flaming
right back at a message can often be embarrassing for *you* if it turns
out that you misunderstood it (or even if you didn't).  Give your blood a
chance to cool down first.

Who was it who said that "more and deadlier wars have been fought over a
simple misunderstanding?"  The writer of this post forgets...


S.  "Shatner argued for <x> in episode <y>..."

A typical response to this goes, "No, he didn't.  His character Captain
Kirk did," so be forewarned.  Confusing actors with their characters often
generates nasty messages.  This is justifiable, in a sense.  For example,
if actor X has a certain political view, but his or her character Y has a
diametrically opposed view, then we do X a discredit every time we equate
his or her views to be the same as Y's -- in some cases, it might actually
and technically be a slander.

On a similar note:  We all like to know what the stars of the show are
up to now -- who doesn't?  However, these stars of "Star Trek" have a right
to their personal lives as well, which have nothing to do with "Star Trek."
It doesn't make sense to flame actor X for the way he/she interacts (or
doesn't interact) with actor Y off the set.  Much of the time, people jump
to conclusions about actor X based on a shockingly small amount of evidence, 
which may be either incorrect or taken out of context.  Please use
discretion when passing judgement on an actor's behavior -- your infor-
mation may be incorrect, out of context, and, at any rate, nobody's busi-
ness but the actor and those he/she directly affects.  Slander (or would
it be libel on a newsgroup?) is an ugly phenomenon.


T.  "Smileys" and "IMHO."

The character combination :-) (and variations thereof) is a smiley face.
When correctly used, it indicates sarcasm or humor.  It is also occasion-
ally (and incorrectly) used to make insecure posters flame-proof when they 
post insults.  Flaming a smileyed comment/insult is often futile ("Hey, I
was just joking.")

When you *are* just joking, it is suggested that you *do* use a smiley.
Humor doesn't carry well over the net.

"IMHO" stands for "In My Humble/Honest Opinion" and is used to indicate
such. If you want to *flame* someone's personal opinions, we suggest that
you take it to e-mail.  r.a.s.* exists so that people can *express* their
opinions about Star Trek.  As always, however, *intelligent* discussion
about opinions (insofar as they are related to "Star Trek") is one of the
best things about r.a.s.*


U.  ST:TOS vs. ST:TNG.

(ST:TOS = the original "Star Trek," while ST:TNG = "Star Trek: The Next
Generation.") As a tongue-in-cheek swipe at either series, this is a fun
topic on r.a.s.*.  As a serious study of the pros and cons of either series,
this is a fun topic on r.a.s.*.  However, when it becomes a flame war, and
when fans of one series start to question the mental state of the fans of
the other series, it's not so much fun for everyone (except those who like
flame wars).  Some of us like TOS better.  Some prefer TNG.  It's almost a
guarantee that *flaming* about it won't change anyone's opinion on the
matter.  


V. "Canon" vs. "non-canon"

"Canon" means that Gene Roddenberry (or his duly appointed representative)
has declared something to be officially part of the "Star Trek" universe.
This includes the TV episodes and the movies, primarily.  "Non-canon" is
everything else (the books, the animated series, comic books, the story you
made up when you were playing "Star Trek" with your friends during recess
back in Kindergarten, etc.)  You can get into some pretty good arguments
with people on the net about whether or not something actually "happened"
in the "Star Trek" universe or not.  Since "Star Trek" is science fiction
(to most of us, anyway), some people have pointed out that arguing about
whether something fictional is "real" or "unreal" involves a lot of null
statements ("Nothing unreal exists" -- from _Star Trek IV: The Voyage
Home_).  Still, can be a lot of fun, when it doesn't degenerate into name
-calling.


W.  "Quit posting all of these posts about <whatever>."

The very nature of this post simply serves to prolong a topic, not speed
its demise.  We suggest the liberal use of KILL files to remove subjects
that you don't wish to see, using e-mail to point out more appropriate
newsgroups for topics which don't belong on r.a.s.*, and changing the
Followup-To: field in your posts to more appropriate newsgroups when the 
subject starts to leave the realm of Star Trek.


X.  A brief final note on flamewars (alt.flame).

There is a net group dedicated to flamewars: alt.flame.  Would-be
flamethrower artists are respectfully directed there.  And as always,
remember that there are real, live people on the other end of the net with
feelings just as strong and real as yours.  If you don't get alt.flame
(and many people don't), then we suggest confining flames to e-mail.


Y.  Using '*' as the entry in the 'Subject:' line. (Please don't!)

Please don't put an '*' (asterisk) as the entry in your 'Subject:' line.
If somebody reading your post decides that they don't wish to read any
followups to your message and therefore pushes 'k' (or whatever their
program uses to kill subjects they don't care about), *every* *single*
*message* would be marked as killed.  This is because '*' is a wild card
and will match any subject.  It is generally considered the height of bad
manners on USENET newsgroups to put an asterisk as the 'Subject:' of a
post.


Z.  Subject lines.

When subject lines don't accurately relate to the matter of a post, readers
get bogged down in reading posts that they aren't particularily interested
in.  We suggest using subject lines that accurately refect the contents of
a post, perhaps preceded by some word identifying it as a particular type
of post.


AA. "When's the next Star Wars movie coming out?"

The r.a.s.* newsgroups are for Star Trek related discussions only.
If you want to talk about something else, then take it to e-mail or
to another more appropriate newsgroup ("Star Wars," for instance, has
its own newsgroup).  Conversations on r.a.s.* are generally considered
appropriate if they in some way involve Star Trek in addition to
any other subject matter.


AB. Crossposting.  Posting to the correct r.a.s.* group.

The rec.arts.startrek newsgroup was split into various subgroups in order
to make certain subject material more accessible to the readers.  Cross-
posting your messages to all of the subgroups defeats this purpose,
and increases bandwidth.  Please post your message only to the appropriate
newsgroup(s).  For instance, someone wanting to sell Star Trek cards
should not post to r.a.s.current or r.a.s.tech.  Someone discussing new
episodes should not post to r.a.s.misc or r.a.s.fandom.  Posting to
the wrong groups will generate more flames than usable responses.

****************

When it all comes down to it, we're all here because we enjoy talking about
"Star Trek."  Much of the above netiquette suggestions boil down to the
following statement:  r.a.s.*'ers aren't the issue.  "Star Trek" is the
issue.  When we make the r.a.s.*'ers the issue instead of "Star Trek," our
conversations are quickly reduced to battles of ego. 

Many thanks to the people who had suggestions for this list, or merely words
of encouragement.  These include, among others:  James P. Callison
<jpcallis@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu>, Mike Kelsey <KELSEY@SLACVM.BITNET> (thanks
for proofing, Mike!), Albert Crosby <acrosby@uafhp.uark.edu>, Dorothy Bowe
<dot@athena.mit.edu> (oh super proof-reader!), Dave Spensley
<davesp@ecs.comm.mot.com>, Cindy Brown
<@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:ICSPROFS@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU>, John Whelan
<YZEY@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>, hackman@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Otto "Hack-Man"
Heuer) (big thanks for the help and encouragement), Andrew Hackard
(andy@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu), Brian A. Cole (tuc%jomby.cs.wisc.edu@cs.wisc.edu),
Tim Lynch (tlynch@juliet.caltech.edu) (the Supreme Summarizer), Mark Holtz
(mholtz@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US) (thanks for the error corrections!),
Michael.Rosen@samba.acs.unc.edu, Alan Coopersmith (alanc@ocf.berkeley.edu),
Jamesena Talbott <jt1v+@andrew.cmu.edu>, Eric Rossing <rossing@cs.hope.edu>,
markl@stat.tamu.edu (Mark A. Lindsay), starpath@bard.MIT.EDU (David E. 
Hollingsworth), chisnall@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (The Technicolour Throw-up),
sharonc@meaddata.com (Sharon Crichton),John G Dobnick<jgd@convex.csd.uwm.edu>,
botteron@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Carol J. Botteron), David Richardson, b645zax@utarlg.
uta.edu,ahernsd@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Sean Ahern),Suman Chakrabarti 
<scstr@orville.psu.edu>,vicki@stout.atd.ucar.EDU (Vicki Holzhauer),
fau@po.CWRU.Edu (Francis A. Uy), romain@shadow.eng.pyramid.com (Romain Kang).

Comments are welcome and appreciated!


-- 
Matt Gertz, mwgertz+@cs.cmu.edu
Dept. of ECE, The Robotics Institute at Carnegie Mellon University.