The RPE35mm charter vs Auction ads, website promos, FS ads & the Shoot-In.

[Crossposted to news.groups,rec.photo.equipment.35mm, followups set to
news.groups only.]

Okay Steve, I've had enough of your moronic claims that Ebay ads are
permitted by the RPE3 charter, & that the Shoot-In isn't.

As usual Steve, you're full of it. Here's the *official*, archived copy
of CFD & charter for the rec.photo.* hierarchy re-org:
ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/rec/rec.photo-reorg2
It includes the charter for the rec.photo hierarchy, which explicitly
states that it covers *every* group in that hierarchy, & the more
specific charters for each of those sub-groups.

And guess what, Steve? - Alan's summary is completely accurate.

If you actually take a break from crossposting peoples personal details
around Usenet for long enough to sit down & read this document, (& yes,
it is the version that won the official *democratic* vote, & yes, it
still stands), you'll find that it *proves* that your nit-picking is
just as moronically wrong as everyone has been telling you for the last
year or so.

First off - Your idiotic claims that auction ads, 'Camera FS' ads &
'Vote for my crappy photo!' ads are on-topic in any of the rec.photo
discussion groups:
The *hierarchy* charter first states that rec.photo.marketplace is the
only place where *non-commercial* ads are on-topic, & makes the
distinction clear by pointing out that *commercial* ads are banned even
there as well. Just that fact alone is enough for anyone with
high-school grasp of the English language to understand that it clearly
bans *all* kinds of ads *or promotions* in the rec.photo.* discussion
groups, & that they may only be posted in the .marketplace groups. Even
in .marketplace, the proponent takes pains to specifically point out
that the ban on commercial ads includes .marketplace as well, making it
very clear to anyone capable of out-thinking a goldfish that commercial
ads are completely banned in the entire hierarchy, & that the only
permissible place for *personal*, photography-related ads is in the
..marketplace.
So we don't need to change the RP3 to ban any of that crap, because
it's *already banned*.

Secondly: Your equally idiotic claims that photography-related
activities like the Shoot-In are so egregiously off-topic that they
should be banned, & can only be made acceptable by changing the charter:
The charter explicitly defines as on-topic literally *anything* related
to 35mm cameras, lenses & bodies. Unlike your insane rantings about
charters, the Shoot-It *does* relate to:
--------
"Aspects of 35mm camera equipment.
This includes 35mm SLR camera bodies and lenses, 35mm point-and-shoot
cameras, 35mm rangefinder cameras, 35mm scale focus cameras and
35mm half-frame cameras."
--------
And as most Shoot-In participants (including myself) use 35mm equipment
for their entries, & generally discuss that equipment in the [SI]
threads in the group, that makes them at least minimally on-topic. OTOH,
the kind of non-photographic drivel with which *you* pollute the photo
groups doesn't even come /that/ close to talk about 35mm camera
equipment, so by your very own arguments *you are more off-topic* than
the Shoot-In that you keep on whining & bleating about - exactly as we
have all been telling you since the first moment you & your foul-mouthed
anonymous alter-ego first started screeching about it.
So it turns out that the RPE3 charter is permissive enough that we no
more need to screw around with the RPE3 charter to 'permit' the Shoot-In
than we do to 'permit' the usual vaguely-camera-related chat about film
types, flash guns, or lighting techniques that's considered perfectly
acceptable within the group.

Additionally, I notice that the rec.photo.equipment.misc charter
*specifically* points out that is intended for discussion of
photographic equipment that is not covered by one of the other equipment
groups, such as tripods, bags, etc, & that such equipment should be
posted there, rather than in RPE3, or any of the other equipment groups.
Logically, this means that discussions of camera bags, tripods, etc are
actually *more* off-topic in RPE3 than the Shoot-In. So, Mr Pot, the
next time you wish to call one of the Shoot-In participants an off-topic
kettle, I suggest that you save up your bile & lay in wait for them to
commit the horrific crime of talking about a tripod or camera bag in
RPE3, rather than moving the thread to RPEM. That way, you'll look
/slightly/ less of a hypocrite than you do when you stamp your little
feet about the Shoot-In offending your oh-so-pure sensibilities.

There's nothing in the charter that specifically authorises deranged,
off-topic blather about creating Utopian Usenet democracies either, but
that sure hasn't stopped you from stinking up the photo groups with it
either, you drooling idiot.

 

Thanks for that link Lionel... I didn't have the original.

Cheers,
Alan

 

Ditto. I don't see anything forbidding the SI in there.

Hey David Dyer-Bennet, damn, you've been around for a long time, dude. I
see that you voted for most of the groups in that proposal. I also see that
they posted all the e-mail addresses without any protection from spammers
back then.

 

E-mail address harvesting, while not entirely a thing of the past, is
way overrated as a "danger' on usenet.

There's a guy or two who are trying to cyber-terrorize the process,
either because they aren't getting their way, they are too inarticulate
to do anything else, or they fear change.

It'll be interesting to see who steps up to counter this type of
blackmail/terrorist tactic.

 

<grin>
I've seen so many tussles over charter issues in the past that I tend to
forget how few Usenet users are actually aware that they can bypass the
usual group FAQs & go straight to the definitive souce.
Don't forget to throw it in Mr Steve 'Organiser' Young's face if he
starts on his bull about ads & the SI.

 

I created a throwaway address a few weeks ago. It's receiveing
some spam already. The harvesting continues, releases of lists
come in waves.

 

Ever since I switched my public e-mail to Yahoo (based on your suggestion,
John, thanks), due to a recent mail-bombing campaign against my previous
address from one of our trolls, I haven't had any spam or virus reach my
inbox. Yahoo has excellent filters...all the crap goes to the junk mail
folder. I used to mangle my old address, now I don't even bother. No need.
No cyberterrorist will prevent me from voting as I choose on any of the
groups, and I hope nobody is actually intimidated by the stupid threats
from these cowards.

 

Oh! I hadn't thought of that! ;-)

But I did add to the page linked in my sig.

 

Addresses are harvested from pretty much everywhere, these days. I can
live with having to filter the hell out on any address that's appeared
on Usenet, & except that I'll sometimes miss a legit email. The thing
that really annoys me is spam to my domain role account addresses
that've been illegally trawled from the domain registry databases.
Filtering them is both difficult & risky, because it's rare to get legit
email to those accounts, but when you do, it's likely to be both time
critical & of major importance.
Oh, & I find that the lag between exposing an email address to Usenet &
getting spam in the account is roughly two weeks.

 

It's happening right now. If you're not seeing it, you're probably just
not reading the appropriate groups.

 

And there's general language that clearly, to me, includes it.

Yep. And I post my email addresses in my messages today, and on my
website, too. Spam is annoying, but nowhere near destroying the
utility of email for me.

 

No question about the latter!

But I was referring to the time when the rubber meets the road to coin a
phrase, when the voting takes place, that is. However, one would be hard
pressed to divine that based on what I posted......

 

Oh, I see. Well, most likely it'll be dealt with afterwards, by
identifying the fake votes & the people posting them.