Archive-name: rec-autos/part1  [most recent changes, 15 March 1993: addition of alt.autos.karting -- rpw]                 === Welcome to Rec.Autos.* ===  This article is sent out automatically each month, and contains a general description of the purpose of each of the automotive newsgroups, and some suggested guidelines for discussions.  The keywords `Monthly Posting' will always appear to make killing this article easy for users of newsreaders with kill facilities.  This article is posted to all autos groups, but followups are directed only to rec.autos.  If you don't understand what this means, ask your system administrator for help, or at least for copies of the newuser documentation.  Failing that, please subscribe to the newsgroup news.announce.newusers and read the documentation provided there.  Introduction to the Rec.Autos newsgroup hierarchy:  rec.autos.tech  is intended for technical discussions of automobiles, their design, construction, diagnosis, and service.  Other discussions are largely inappropriate, especially For Sale ads.  rec.autos.sport  is intended for discussion of legal, organized competition involving automobiles.  Technical discussions are appropriate insofar as they apply to competition vehicles.  Discussion from either of two viewpoints, spectator and participant, is encouraged.  Arguments about sports cars are largely inappropriate, as are most other discussions.  For Sale ads are inappropriate unless they are for competition vehicles and/or equipment. Discussions of illegal events are marginal; one should probably avoid advocating breaking the law.  (remember, the FBI reads Usenet!)  rec.autos.driving  is intended for discussions related to the driving of automobiles. Also, if you must discuss 55 vs. 65, or radar detectors, or <insert your pet driving peeve> boneheads, do it here.  rec.autos.vw  is intended for discussion of issues related to the use and ownership of automobiles manufactured by Volkswagen (this includes VWs, Audis, Seats, etc.)  It was created on the grounds that the info-vw mailing list was very successful.  It should not be presumed from the existence of this group that it is appropriate to create many groups to cover many different marques; groups specific to individual marques should only be created on demonstration of sufficient interest, via some avenue such as a mailing list.  rec.audio.car  is not properly part of the rec.autos.* hierarchy.  it is, however, the correct place for discussion of automotive audio equipment, and so is mentioned here.  rec.autos.antique  is intended for the discussion of older cars (usually more than 25 years old, although this is not a hard-and-fast rule.)  alt.hotrod  is not part of the hierarchy, but also of potential interest to the rec.autos reader.  it is gatewayed to the moderated hotrod mailing list, and is for serious discussion of modifying and developing performance vehicles.  alt.autos.rod-n-custom  also not part of the `official' hierarchy; devoted to that peculiar American hobby of customizing older cars.  alt.autos.karting  for the discussion of the popular motorsport and hobby, karting.  rec.autos  is intended to capture discussion on all other automotive topics.   Crossposting:  Crossposting occurs when more than one newsgroup name is included on the Newsgroups: line in the article header; such articles will appear in all of the newsgroups listed.  Crossposting is one of the most misunderstood and misused facilities on Usenet.  You should only post to a group because you feel an article is appropriate; you should NEVER crosspost just to reach a particular audience.  This distinction is subtle, but important.  Radar Detector articles, for example, are more-or-less appropriate in rec.autos.  They are almost never appropriate in sci.electronics or rec.ham-radio, and the fact that you might want to reach the audience in sci.electronics or rec.ham-radio is NOT adequate justification for posting to either group.  Crossposting between any or all of the rec.autos.* groups is usually inappropriate; if you find yourself doing so, consider whether or not it is truly advisable, before sending your article.  Consider setting Followup-To: to point to only one newsgroup if you feel you must crosspost.  Crossposting between rec.autos.* and misc.consumers is chancy at best; in particular flame wars over the speed limit in the US and/or the use of radar detectors should NEVER be crossposted between any of these groups.  Most readers of sci.electronics and rec.radio.* couldn't care less about the police radar and radar detector arguments that go on endlessly in rec.autos.  It is an excellent idea to check the Newsgroups: and Followup-to:  lines of articles before posting a followup.  In particular, be wary of posting to misc.test, rec.arts.startrek.*, or talk.bizarre, or any combination of these three.  The life you save may be your own.  Distribution:  There is a field in the header of any news article which allows you to (partially) control where the article goes; it is called the Distribution field.  It may be very useful for many reasons; it should also serve as a reminder that news is a very large and widespread system.  The distribution of rec.autos.* is fairly extensive.  As of this writing,  the Automotive newsgroups are known to reach most of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and some locations in Japan.  With this in mind, I offer the following hints about use of the Distribution: field in your article headers, and on article content.  1) Please take care not to send for-sale ads about clapped out Ford Mavericks in New Jersey to France or California; i doubt that anyone in either place will care, except for my girlfriend, who for some strange reason likes Mavericks (but only 4-door Mavericks, at that.)  2) When posting technical questions, please include the market for which your car was manufactured.  For example, there are a number of differences between a European-market Ford Escort and a US-market Escort.  Likewise, all 1750cc and early 2000cc Alfa Romeos reached the US with Spica Fuel injection; European market cars usually got carbs (often Webers).  These differences can be important to your readers; make your situation clear. Failure to do so can lead to pointless flame wars and a significant spread of misinformation.  3) Be careful about your capacities and specifications when posting; in the US we get a mix of Metric and English system values, whereas Europe is almost entirely on the Metric system.  A future edition of this monthly posting will contain a list of commonly-used abbreviations that may not be known in some places that rec.autos reaches; this cuts both ways so let us not be parochial about it.  4) Use the Distribution: field to limit where your article goes, when possible.  Within North America, the values na (north america), can (canada), and usa may be used.  in addition, the two-letter state abbreviations of the US are supported in some cases; e.g. if i wanted to send an article only to New York and New Jersey, i could put "ny,nj" in a Distribution field.  note that multiple, comma-separated values are legal.  these distribution fields vary widely, however, so you should check with your local sysadmin to find out what is likely to be supported in your area.  The Dangers of Overgeneralization:  To amplify a warning from the distribution section of this article: Be wary of making foolish assumptions about all cars, tires, etc.  What is true for a 1973 Buick with a 455cid engine may be quite utterly wrong for a 1976 Honda with a 1200cc engine.  Headlight laws in Sweden are decidedly different from those in Idaho.  The Need for Adequate Specification:  When you ask a question, please give a reasonable amount of information; e.g., if you have a question about your Honda, please specify year, model, engine size, etc.  Otherwise, most answers to your question may be quite useless.   Concerning Lemons:  At one time or another, every auto manufacturer has manufactured a lemon or two; even Honda admits to this.  Please don't waste everyone's time by announcing to the world that your `brand x' automobile is terrible, so all `brand x' automobiles are terrible, so no one should ever buy a car from the `brand x' company.  Such articles are worse than useless, because they cause substantial wasted bandwidth while carrying little or no useful information.   Concerning Flames:  As much as we might wish it, a flame-free newsgroup is something that most likely will never occur.  Here are some guidelines for flames and how to deal with them (a list of flame-prone topics follows in the next section of this posting):  If you post something truly obnoxious and inflammatory, don't imagine for a minute that including the words `No Flames' will work.  It won't, and you'll get exactly what you deserve.  If you're going to flame, you're more likely to get away with it if you can cite a fact or maybe a well-known reference.  No one is likely to believe bald, unsupported assertions.  Be careful about who you choose to insult.  Consider not insulting anyone.   Asking the Question:  It is a bad idea to post a question and end it with a phrase like `Please send email, I don't read this group'.  It is a much better idea to end the question with `Please send email, if there is sufficient interest I'll summarize the results in a later posting.  I may miss posted responses to this request'.  Answering the Question:  If someone wants to hop up their Yugo, don't tell them to get a Mustang. Either be silent, or give them useful advice.  If someone wants advice on defending a speeding ticket, don't tell them to obey the law next time -- it's offensive, presumes guilt which is not proven, and doesn't directly address the original question.  In general, don't post in order to see your words in print, and don't post in order to enjoy feeling smug and self-righteous.   Stale and/or Inflammatory Topics:  Certain topics are considered stale by `old timers'; while discussion of them is certainly ok, and new, factual information is welcome, ravings about them are extremely tiresome, and may get the person who posts them ignored altogether.  Some topics are naturally inflammatory; it is difficult if not impossible to have meaningful discussion of them.  Some of these topics include the following:  1)  the 55mph speed limit in the US: Pro and Con  2)  discussions about the morality and legality of the sale and usage of     radar detectors.  3)  discussions over which radar detector is best.  4)  discussions over what is a sports car (this is one reason why     rec.autos.sport is not a `sports car' group -- everyone would argue     about what constitutes a `sports car'.)  5)  disputes over whether or not US Federal law protects the driver's     right to own and operate a radar detector  6)  `Buy American' discussions  7)  `clever' bumper stickers and personalized license plates  8)  <insert nationality here> cars are terrible  9)  What kind of car did Maxwell Smart drive?       [when I have a complete, accurate answer it will be added to the           commonly-asked questions article which is also posted monthly.           Until then, please don't waste bandwidth on this topic. -- rpw]    Please direct comments and suggestions about this article to:       welty@cabot.balltown.cma.com