From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Bruce Norman promises to drop RFD for rec.games.frp.campaign
Summary: time to keep promises made
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:18:28 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Newt World Order

Recently Bruce Norman made two promises in a publicly posted note to
withdraw his proposal for his pet newsgroup rec.games.frp.campaign if I
could produce certain evidence. Here are the promises, in full context.

In article <BxMJDK.LsH@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca writes:
> In article <1992Nov12.105551.1@wharton.upenn.edu> millerl@wharton.upenn.edu writes:
>>In article <BxKtJC.F46@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca writes:
>>> Technically, the only question he asked in there was "Are you out of your mind."
>>> I also responded to his statement "but you say that no campaigns are
>>> discussed in rec.games.frp.*" which was more of a lie than a question.
>>
>>It wasn't a lie, it was a quote from your previous note. Just because
>>you edited it out of this note doesn't mean you didn't write it. Damn
>>it, Bruce, you must think we're really stupid!
>>
> Find the original quote, post it, and I hereby sware I will immediately
> withdraw from news.groups and forget my proposal.  You are either
> misremembering, or fabricating.

And later in the same article...

>>Oh, I guess it's hard to keep up with the latest version of the charter
>>when every single charter you post has the same subject line, and the
>>only official RFD you have posted was the one with five topics and
>>included ongoing campaign posts from players as one of the acceptable
>>topics (Now you claim that player moves were *never* part of the
>>proposal).
>
> Stop putting words in my mouth.  I never said that.  Once again, provide
> any proof of that quote and I will drop my proposal immediately.

Now for the proof. I will include Bruce's entire posts to avoid his
inevitable charges of editing or distorting the facts.

Bruce, here's a copy of your note, including the Nov 2 update of the
RFD, in which you said that campaign discussion does not go on in
rec.games.frp.*. Look for the section where you list acceptable topics,
and I quote so you can find it, "You have completely ignored everything
I listed as the topics which would be acceptable for posting in
Rec.games.frp.campaign.  These include the following." Note that #5 (-
Discussion of Campaigns. Once again, no.) states explicitly that you
have seen no campaign discussion in rec.games.frp.*. Also note that #4
in the same list (- Player Responses to Moves. Nada yet again.) states
explicitly that player moves are accepted by the charter of
rec.games.frp.campaign.

| Path: netnews.upenn.edu!jvnc.net!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watmath!undergrad.math.waterloo.edu!cbnorman
| From: cbnorman@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu
| Newsgroups: news.groups
| Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.frp.campaign
| Message-ID: <Bx6600.K72@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>
| Date: 4 Nov 92 02:09:32 GMT
| References: <Bx5I8x.9M3@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> <1992Nov3.202729.3626@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
| Organization: University of Waterloo
| Lines: 82
|
| >In article <> cbnorman@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu writes:
| >>>COMPLETED moves (i.e., DM-written summaries) can ALREADY be posted to
| >>>rec.games.frp.archives, and it's moderated.  What new ideas would this
| >>>group, rec.games.frp.campaign, bring forth?
| >>>
| >>>(hint: none)
| >>
| >>See the revised summary.  I've included it below incase you've missed it.
| >
| >[revised summary deleted]
| >
| >I don't know what to say, other than, you're wrong.
| >
| >Adventurers (now up to Chapter 70) is an ONGOING AD&D campaign, where
| >every week or two, the DM posts another chapter.  This works almost
| >*exactly* like you want it to.
| >
| You have completely ignored everything I listed as the topics which would
| be acceptable for posting in Rec.games.frp.campaign.  These include the following.
|
|   - FAQ (including many things NOT on the rec.games.frp.archives FAQ)
|   - Campaign moves (these are posted currently in rec.games.frp.archive
|     by some people.  How many might I ask? Are there eight or more campaigns
|     going on in rec.games.frp.archive?)
|   - GM Move updates.  Certainly haven't seen any of these.
|   - Player Responses to Moves.  Nada yet again.
|   - Discussion of Campaigns.  Once again, no.
|
| >Just because the group is called rec.games.frp.archives DOESN'T mean
| >it's only meant for "finished, complete stories".
| >
| A point of difference in opinion between you and me which you cling to as
| justification for your dislike of the group.  Even if (for argument's sake)
| ongoing campaign posts are classified as archives, that doesn't change
| the other four points lack of representation.
|
| They deserve to be together in one centralized group.
|
| >And remember, FidoNet is nowhere near the size of the Usenet, and the
| >readership here consists almost exclusively of college students and
| >college-educated adults, many of whom would resent any moderatorship
| >based on "quality of writing".  [elitist snobbery comment deleted]
| >
| The only reason I raised this entire "sufficient quality" issue is because
| others were complaining that campaigns, such as are run in e-mail, are not
| of interest to the general reading public.  I felt it necessary to include
| some charter which would insure that any posts would be of interest to the
| general reading public.  I'm not expecting Ernest Hemmingway to start
| composing campaigns, all I'm asking is that writers be prepared to present
| their campaigns in a ledgible, readable, enjoyable format for all.  What's
| wrong with that?
|
| If they don't want to do that, then they shouldn't be posting moves publicly
| for the enjoyment of all, they should be writing them in e-mail.
|
| >Get it through your head.  Run your PBeM's by email, and if you think
| >the rest of the world wants to read the move: number it, date it, and
| >send it to rec.games.frp.archives.  With the other "fluff"*.
| >
| I have tried to remain polite in your constant insults and insinuations.
| I will do my best to do so.  I suggest that if you really have a problem
| with this group you try discussing it properly, which would include
| the following.
|
|     1. Try not to fling childish insults when you can't think of anything
|        better to say.
|     2. Don't grab one fact, and present it as if it were the only
|        argument for the creation of rec.games.frp.campaign.  Your
|        message to me implied that the only purpose for
|        rec.games.frp.campaign was for the regular posting of campaign
|        moves.  This was just after you had read my complete
|        proposal.
|
| Or did you bother? Perhaps you're confident (read arrogant) enough that
| you didn't believe you needed to?
|
|
| --
| | * * * * The Chicken has Vomited * * * * * |      /|                          |
| | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * |  \`o.@'   Ack! Ack! Thbbbpppt!   |
| | Fighting the restriction of personal      |  =(___)=                         |
| | freedom by the illogical morals of others |     U     "Bill and Opus in '92" |


Bruce, here's the proof that you said, in the first update of your RFD,
that player moves to PBEM campaigns were not currently in misc and would
be in campaign.

| Path: netnews.upenn.edu!jvnc.net!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watmath!undergrad.math.waterloo.edu!cbnorman
| From: cbnorman@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu
| Newsgroups: news.groups
| Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.frp.campaign
| Message-ID: <Bx5I8x.9M3@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>
| Date: 3 Nov 92 17:36:30 GMT
| References: <Bx2A8D.Gyr@uunet.uu.net> <1992Nov3.021327.27804@news.ysu.edu> <1992Nov3.090430.15146@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
| Organization: University of Waterloo
| Lines: 131
|
| >>   Here';s a voice in favour of the idea.  Congratulations.  I
| >>would be willing to Dm a campaing if wanted.  That
| >>also goes for a PBEM campaign. [...]
| >
| >Uhh... the overhead for any but the most public (DM-written) moves
| >would be MUCH too high to be justified on the Usenet.  Imagine, ten
| >players posting moves to the Net, per game, without any moderation
| >or specific order.
| >
| >What's wrong with email?
| >
|
| See the revised proposition for rec.games.frp.camapaign
| >COMPLETED moves (i.e., DM-written summaries) can ALREADY be posted to
| >rec.games.frp.archives, and it's moderated.  What new ideas would this
| >group, rec.games.frp.campaign, bring forth?
| >
| >(hint: none)
| >
|
| See the revised summary.  I've included it below incase you've missed it.
|
|                       Revised Proposal (November 2, 1992)
|
|                             rec.games.frp.campaign
|
| Proposed Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.campaign
|
| Type: moderated
|
| Charter:
|     The purpose of rec.games.frp.campaign is to provide an area for highly
| dedicated GMs (Game Masters) to run electronic fantasy role playing campaigns
| for the enjoyment of both players and the public at large.  Such games would
| be designed in such as way as to give the games the quality and feel of good
| fiction and/or action adventure movies.  The purpose of .campaign is NOT to
| act as an area for the public posting of e-mail moves for play-by-e-mail
| games.
|     All sanctioned games in rec.games.frp.campaign would have to be of the
| highest quality, and be designed in such a way that they are comprehensible to
| those who are unfamiliar with the rule mechanics of the game in question.
|     Please note that a similar structure to that which is outlined below
| currently exists in the fidonet echo "AD&D".  I have been the moderator of the
| echo for one year, and a participant in the echo for four years.
|
|                             Restrictions on Posting
|
|     Only the following items will be allowed to be posted in
| rec.games.frp.campaign.
|
|     1. FAQ.
|
|     The FAQ will contain (of course) answers to frequently asked questions.
| Initially, it will contain the following information:
|     - The rules and purpose of .rec.games.frp.campaign
|     - A list of current GMs and their e-mail addresses.
|     - A list of which games (if any) have openings for players to join.
|
|     2. Campaign moves.
|
|     A campaign move consists of what can be best described as a scene in a
| movie, or a chapter in a book.  A 'move' will describe the current location
| and environment of the campaign, the actions of the characters (as determined
| by the individual players), and the results of these actions.  A properly
| designed move will be as easy to follow for a complete novice to fantasy role
| playing as it will to an expert.  Once a campaign has terminated, the end
| result should basically be a short story or a book.  In order to insure the
| quality of the postings remains high, GMs will have to apply to the moderator
| before they will be allowed to start a campaign.  This application will
| contain an opening move (an introduction to the campaign).  If the opening
| move is of sufficient quality, the campaign will be sanctioned.
|
|     3. GM Move updates
|
|     These will contain brief statements of actions being taken by characters,
| in other words prefaces to upcoming moves.  The purpose will be to keep the
| net informed of what actions are taking place, and to promote role-playing
| interaction between players.  These will be posted only if the GM considers it
| necessary.
|
|     4. Player responses to moves.
|
|     In general, all player responses will be made in e-mail.  Players who
| demonstrate the ability to post responses which are as interesting, and as
| well written as the moves to which they are responding, may request permission
| to publicly post their replies to posted moves.  The justification for this is
| that some players can post very interesting responses and actions which are
| too long for the GM to incorporate into the move except as brief notes.  These
| responses, however, can be worthy of posting on their own.  They also tend to
| promote role-playing interaction between players, and add an additional
| feeling of reality to the campaign.
|
|     5. Discussion of Campaigns
|
|     Controlled discussion of campaigns (both within the newsgroup and in real
| life gaming) will be allowed.  All posts will have to be approved by the
| moderator, and will have to be of interest to the net in general.
|
|                          Justification for Uniqueness
|
|     1. rec.games.frp.archives
|
|     An ongoing campaign can not be classified as an 'archive' in any sense.
| Once a campaign is concluded, but not before, its reposting in
| rec.games.frp.archive is justified.  In addition, the contents of the FAQ as
| outlined above, GM Move updates, high-quality Player responses to moves, and
| discussion of campaigns, are totally unsuitable for posting in .archives, but
| will be necessary for the running of high quality, enjoyable for all,
| electronic campaigns.
|
|     2. Rec.games.frp.campaign should not be in a writing newsgroup because...
|
|     The GM move postings in .campaign, though similar in quality and content
| to science fiction/fantasy writings, are not standalone stories until the
| termination of the campaign.  Since the direction the story will take will be
| in part controlled by players, each who has control over a major character in
| the story, it can not be truly compared to a work of fiction where the action
| of all characters is controlled by the writer.  More importantly, though all
| game mechanics are hidden from the reader, the fact remains that the campaigns
| in rec.games.frp.campaign are controlled and influenced by fantasy role
| playing game rules.  Thus, its place in the rec.games.frp hierchy is
| justified.
|
| send any questions, comments, to cbnorman@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca.
| This proposal will continue to be updated.
|
| --
| ----------------------cbnorman@undergrad math uwaterloo ca----------------------
| | * * * * The Chicken has Vomited * * * * * |      /|                          |
| | * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * |  \`o.@'   Ack! Ack! Thbbbpppt!   |
| | Fighting the restriction of personal      |  =(___)=                         |

So Bruce, you made some pretty strong claims. First, in order to justify
your pet newsgroup you claimed that there wasn't any campaign discussion
in rgf.*, and now you angrily deny making that claim, stating: "Find the
original quote, post it, and I hereby sware I will immediately withdraw
from news.groups and forget my proposal.  You are either misremembering,
or fabricating." Next, when I brought up that you stated that player
moves will be part of the newsgroup you denied it again, with this
ultimatum: "Stop putting words in my mouth.  I never said that.  Once
again, provide any proof of that quote and I will drop my proposal
immediately."

Well, Bruce, it's time to fess up. It's time to forget your proposal and
drop it immediately, just as you wrote.

--
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
Newsgroups: news.groups