Nuxx:B37be127-7fa3-40b0-877d-f724bee1a5d7@k38g2000yqh.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!k38g2000yqh.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID:  From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.net.news.config,uk.rec.cycling Subject: Re: 2nd RFD: create moderated newsgroup uk.rec.cycling.moderated Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:49:41 -0700 (PDT) References:       Lines: 52 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.156.150.242 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1245829781 4148 127.0.0.1 (24 Jun 2009 07:49:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 07:49:41 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: k38g2000yqh.googlegroups.com; posting-host=81.156.150.242; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.11) Gecko/2009060215 Firefox/3.0.11 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Bytes: 4223 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.net.news.config:53684 uk.rec.cycling:5385

On Jun 24, 12:14 am, chris French  wrote: > In message , Andy Leighton >  writes > > >On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:24:56 +0100, > >         Tom Crispin  wrote: > > >> You are clearly not convinced that urcm will work. As someone who has > >> already abandoned urc you have nothing to lose if the new group does > >> fail - those of us who still enjoy urc do have something to lose. > > >You enjoy the judith, nuxx bar, nully posts? You enjoy Guy taunting > >them from other threads? Doug? I certainly don't. The level of crap > >reached the point of members leaving long ago. If it continues at the > >current level or even increases I cannot see more than a handful of > >sensible posters remaining. > > Indeed, I gave up on urc a while back because of the crap level. I've > been back here a bit more recently, but it's no better, probably worse. > Basically it's not fun anymore. I will give up on it again I imagine, > possibly for good.. > > > People will piss off to web-based fora, > >and the blogosphere. As far as I am concerned a moderated group is > >the last, best hope of a long-term functioning usenet group for UK > >cyclists. > > Yep.

Amazing the way that even when they're talking about "last hopes", the regulars *still* won't even discuss the possibility that those who are more anti-motorist than pro-cyclist are the real problem in URC (especially the ones who lie about being anti-motorist, not to mention everything else), and getting rid of them would make things far more pleasant, depoliticise the group, and also attract a lot more people (at the moment, anyone who sticks up for motorists in *any way* is made to feel very unwelcome, and is either called a "troll" or very reluctantly tolerated, which simply shouldn't happen in a cycling newsgroup). Surely it's worth at least talking about that approach before giving up on the group for good?

Just ask yourself a question: "If Guy Chapman and Spindrift left the group, would it get better overall as a result, or worse?" We all know the answer. Yet Chapman's sycophants rally round and ensure once again that the Dreadful Truth isn't mentioned, lest it offend their Master. Even when they're desperately trying to save their group, they still daren't even mention the one solution that would actually work. They would rather lose their group than risk incurring Chapman's wrath. It's just bizarre. What has Chapman done to earn this "position", and why are they so scared of him: what can he do to them if they "disobey" him?