From: robi@bacchus.esa.oz.au (Robi Karp)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics
Subject: Re: Graphic Novels and comics for Sale (long)
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:32:48 GMT
	<1992Jul28.071942.9349@sol.UVic.CA>
Reply-To: robi@bacchus.esa.oz.au
Organization: Expert Solutions Australia


>>>>>>>> In article <1992Jul28.071942.9349@sol.UVic.CA>
>>>>>>>> jcowling@ophelia.UVic.CA (Scowling Jim Cowling) writes:

Jim> i.    It is stupid to use UseNet without learning about it first.
Jim> ii.   Part of this learning process includes learning about FAQs
Jim>       and where they can be found.  (I believe the appropriate
Jim>       message in this case is a "Welcome to r.a.c." kind of
Jim>       thing, but whatever)
Jim> iii.  The Rec.arts.comics FAQ makes it clear than for-sale
Jim>       messages are NOT to be posted on r.a.c.

Did you read Dave's message ? He has been a part of rac for a while,
silent but here. He does not get a chance to keep up to date on a
daily basis, which I can relate to, it's a matter of priorities you
know. He's posted here before without trouble, and, to quote him:

Dave> This was the observation that I was making in my post:  that
Dave> there is no fixed set of rules for the Net as a whole, and that
Dave> it is difficult for a casual partipant to keep up with the
Dave> changing rules and protocols of any individual bboard; that it
Dave> is wrong to assume mistakes are made maliciously in all cases;
Dave> and that a better policy would be to politely state what the
Dave> "netiquette" is on a first offense.  Otherwise, acrimony and
Dave> alienation are spread for their own sake.  "Flaming" typically
Dave> ends discussion without resolution or understanding; it doesn't
Dave> promote either.

I've got to admit, I agree with your first two points, people _should_
learn the rules before they post. This isn't such a case, Dave knew
the rules and the rules changed. So he should keep up to date ? Well,
perhaps, but ask yourself this: Would you prefer R.A.C.* to be made up
of a small elitist group of of people, which, almost by definition,
will stagnate, or, like myself, would you like this to be a newsgroup
which promotes freedom of speech, independent thought and allows
individuals to post without fear of:

    a)    being laughed at 'cos they asked a stupid question
    b)    being flamed 'cos they didn't do it the right way

Now I'm not saying this _does_ happen here, I'm suggesting that it's a
direction we could take. Not everyone can keep with the latest fiddley
rules about where to post, and we _do_ want everyone's opinion etc in
this group, that's what keeps us alive. If someone does something
once, it should be considered a mistake, I know that I've made plenty.
I don't think that flaming is a fair action, rather, some reprimanding
e-mail perhaps would be appropriate. If someone posts a car forsale
add in RAC or someone _continuously_ posts to the wrong RAC* group,
well, that's a different matter and some form of action should be
taken.

I really think that we should think before we type. Being at the other
end of the world from someone, who we will probably never see. is not
a reason to say things which we wouldn't say face to face. Let's try
to keep RAC* the open minded wonderful place it has always been, and
not bog it down with self appointed net.police that are only too happy
to send people to the electric chair for a parking infringement.

	- Robi
--
INTERNET: robi@bacchus.esa.oz.au     "But Calvin is no kind and loving god!
ACSnet  : robi@bacchus.esa.oz         He's one of the _old_ gods! He demands
Tel     : (+61) (3) 819 4554          sacrifice!"
Fax     : (+61) (3) 819 5580