rec-arts.scarecrow ?

Paul Fawcett:
> The reason for posting the original anonymous article was to discredit an
> individual with immunity.

Well, of course.  What's wrong with that?

I think the concern that an99451 raises is legitimate but
overinflated.  Most of the fears that people have brought up (without
moderation we'll drown in noise; moderation is censorship; etc.) seem
to me legitimate but overinflated.

Usenet is not embedded in concrete.  It changes and adapts, as much as
people are willing to.  At this point, apathy takes over.  Problems
can be dealt with as they arise.  No need to spend effort fixing
problems that may never materialize.
--

In article <022...@anon.penet.fi>, an9...@anon.penet.fi writes:
[lots of stuff deleted]
|> i do likewise
|> think his sending art directing to posters rather than posting their
|> requests as it appears he intends to do to be further evidence of a tendency 
|> to self-promotion. this of itself is enough for me to vote against this
|> proposed arrangement. finally, what i have said is rather evident to
|> those who suffered under moderators with a sense of self-promotion, but i 
|> will make a prediction that not long after the rec group is formed, we will
|> find that the scarecrow will be featured in the traditional press in an
|> article on the ascii art form -- watch for it -- it's happened before.
|> 
|> in general, it is a bad idea to moderate any arts-oriented news group 
|> but IMHO it is a particularly bad idea in this case. 

Actually, I think Scarecrow is one of the best posters to alt.ascii-art.
He tries to let newbies (sp?) know that he has archived many of the
previous posts to this group.  Hopefully, this reduces reposts of the 
same art over and over again since newbies tend to request the same
types of art as has been requested in the past.

I could care less whether Scarecrow is into self-promotion.  The fact
is that he provides a needed service for this group.  Considering his
past performance in this reguard, I would think he would make a fine
moderator.

Jeff
--
  ,------------------------------------------------------------------.
  | Jef...@sdrc.com | The above opinions | First things first, |
  | SDRC                  | are my own and do  | but not necessarily |
  | 2000 Eastman Drive    | not reflect the    | in that order.      |
  | Milford OH 45150-2789 | opinions of SDRC.  |      -- Doctor Who  |
  `------------------------------------------------------------------'

In article <FLE...@dictionopolis.cse.psu.edu>,
Felix Lee <fle...@cse.psu.edu> wrote:
>an99451:
>>will make a prediction that not long after the rec group is formed, we will
>>find that the scarecrow will be featured in the traditional press in an
>>article on the ascii art form -- watch for it -- it's happened before.
>
>Adam Kendall:
>>Wanna tell everyone where this has happened before?
>
>Two examples off the top of my head.  Howard Rheingold, the creator
>and original moderator of sci.virtual-worlds, has published several
>books on virtual reality.  Brad Templeton, the creator and original
>moderator of rec.humor.funny, has published several collections based
>on it.

So there are people out in the world that use the material of others
and turn a rpofit.  I don't exactly see where Scarecrow fits in.  From
what I have seen from all his collections he breaks his neck to find
the name of the original artist so credit can made to that artist.

>I find stuff like this pretty innocuous.  If Scarecrow wants to spend
>the time to put together an ascii-art book, good for him.  Getting the
>copyright clearances may be more trouble than it's worth though.
>(Hmm, I'm not sure how Brad Templeton managed it.)

If Scarecrow would publish a book I would be the first to buy it (besides
maybe his immediate family but then they would have the unfair advantage
of knowing when it was due out in stores).  I think that Scarecrow would
write a book based on mainly his own material and then if need be ASK
for the premissions of the artists before outting anything of that sort
in print.  It really sounds to me that you are very untrusting of 
Scarecrow though I fail to find any reason to be so. 

-- 
:::::~~:::::~~~~::::::~~:::::~~:::~~::::::::::::::M:Adam:Kendall::::::::::::::
::::~::~::::~:::~::::~::~::::~:~:~:~:::::::::::::Computer:Science:::::::::::::
:::~~~~~~:::~:::~:::~~~~~~:::~::~::~:::::::::::::Ohio:University::::::::::::::
:::~::::~:::~~~~::::~::::~:::~:::::~:::::::mke...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu::::::

Adam Kendall:
> It really sounds to me that you are very untrusting of
>Scarecrow though I fail to find any reason to be so.

No, no.  *I'm* not untrusting of Scarecrow.  I voted yes for r.a.a
(though, as Colin Douthwaite says, I can always change my vote :).  It
just bothers me that people seem to be jumping on an99451 mainly for
being anonymous.  I'm just defending their right to be anonymous, and
their right to question Scarecrow's suitability as moderator.

I don't think it was vicious character assassination, any more than I
think people who distrust U.S. President Clinton's character are being
disloyal.  Being a moderator is rather like holding a public office
(except you don't get paid).  The concern that an99451 raised is not
groundless; there's a long record of problems with moderators in
general.  I vaguely remember hearing about recent problems with
soc.religion.islam, which I think is why alt.religion.islam was
created in February.

I think Scarecrow will do a fine job, but even if this is all a plot
by Scarecrow's Committee to Assure Rec.arts.ascii Eventually
Captivates Readers Over the World, it's no big deal.  We can always
retreat to alt.ascii-art.

(An obAscii.  I'm running out of vaguely presentable stuff in my
scratch pad.  Gotta go make some more...

     ,odOO"bo,
   ,dOOOP'dOOOb,
  ,O3OP'dOO3OO33,
  P",ad33O333O3Ob
  ?833O338333P",d
  `88383838P,d38'
   `Y8888P,d88P'
     `"?8,8P"'
--

In article <022...@anon.penet.fi> an9...@anon.penet.fi writes:
>
>i am anonymous in this post because i expect to post non-anonymously later
>so i think that if i wish fair treatment i better be anonymous. so those 
>idealists among you who have never been harassed, stalked, persecuted, 
>raped, or shot at kindly keep quiet about us cowardly anonymous posters
>and don't commit the ad hominum fallacy of arguing against the poster
>instead of her ideas.

Sounds pretty scared, huh?  
Maybe we've got crows posting on a.a-a?
    
<9'
( )
=m=

-- 
.adBBba. Ba.   A             "W"""""b   ,B B.    B         Richard Kirk
"'B  ,B" _`S"b B.Bb .dBb .B dBBb.   B .A"  _"B. JB.aPb     ra...@crosfield.co.uk
  BaP"  .B B .JB? B B. B.BBV B  B   BK.    B  BP'BCdP'     
 .B `~VaP' VBP B  B? VB?' B  `bd'   B "~aaBP  B  B "Vbaa   0442-343361

an9...@anon.penet.fi wrote:


> in general, it is a bad idea to moderate any arts-oriented news 
> group but IMHO it is a particularly bad idea in this case.  

Thank heaven for the people of Finland. They appear to have as 
respect for freedom as any place on planet earth.

Bye,

Paul Fawcett (pau...@manor.demon.co.uk) wrote:




: In article <022...@anon.penet.fi> an9...@anon.penet.fi  writes:

: > i am anonymous in this post because i expect to post non-anonymously later
: > so i think that if i wish fair treatment i better be anonymous. so those 
: > idealists among you who have never been harassed, stalked, persecuted, 
: > raped, or shot at kindly keep quiet about us cowardly anonymous posters
: > and don't commit the ad hominum fallacy of arguing against the poster
: > instead of her ideas.


>Anonymous votes are not eligible, so shut the fuck up, you nameless geek!  

Paul, did you really have to post that ?  It's rather sad and does 
not help your cause.

( You wouldn't be allowed to say it in a moderated newsgroup and you 
  may well complain if someone else posted it here. )

Paul Fawcett (pau...@manor.demon.co.uk) wrote:


> The primary and premeditated intention was electoral character 
> assassination.

How do you know what the primary intention of this person was ?


> Hopefully pointing this out will accelerate the demise of their 
> views from the discussion

Well you chose a quite unfortunate way of pointing things out. 

And just why should those views be removed from the discussion ?

Are you thinking that ALT.ASCII-ART should be _CENSORED_ now so that 
everything that upsets you can be filtered out ?  

Ever heard of Killfiles ?

Bye,

Troy Fore (tfo...@st6000.sct.edu) wrote:
: On Thu, 19 May 1994 02:17:10 UTC, an9...@anon.penet.fi wrote:
: > i have less concern about the censorship problem presented by moderation
: > than i do the problem of self-promotion regarding any arts news group.
: > based on several months lurking in this group, it seems to me that
: > the scarecrow is heavily into self-promotion.  my god the man offers
: > more of his select collections of ascii art than you find in the contents 
: > of some ftp sites.  add to this both the size and number of his sigs and i 
: > think it would be fair to say his ego is far from microscopic. 


> You are obviously confusing creativity and eager participation with 
> egomania.  He offers more collections of his art *BECAUSE* he has 
> drawn more art.  He offers more creative suggestions and a FAQ 
> *BECAUSE* he is so experienced in art.  It is this experience, 
> creativity, friendliness, willingness to help, and eagerness to 
> participate that QUALIFIES him as a good moderator.  


Absolute Piffle !


         __                        ___________________________________
       _( _)_                     /      We know Bob is great,        \
      ( _) ( )            _____  |     but do you have to say it      |
     (_)    (_)          @@@@@@@ |    every day on alt.arts-ascii     |
   __/     . |          @@@  .|_  \ __________________________________/
 /    \  --\_) _________@@(    _) |/                  | |         |
|   /\  \__/)-/_______(@@@@__-/                       | |        |'
|--|**|\__ --|        (___)   \___ /\  ##             !_!-v----v-"
|*****|__ |____________| \    |  /    \##    __--"""i i""""""""""i
 \*(#####)  ||      ||    \___|____/\__##   !_______! !__________!


> Those people complaining about the effect r.a-a would have 
> on this group forget that THEY (and we) are the participators of 
> this group, and if it declines it is THEIR (and our) fault.

"THEY" will only be at fault if "THEY" allow a MODERATED group to be 
established without challenge. Apathy is responsible for the 
development of many undesirable events.  

Knockers of alt.ascii-art are simply damaging it - but they do have 
every right to do so - it is free and open - and they won't be 
allowed to do much knocking in a moderated group. If they think 
there will be no need to do so there they are entitled to dream on.  

A MODERATED mainstream ascii-art group _will_ affect this group to 
its detriment. Do not let the proponents mislead you into believing 
otherwise. 

If some users are dissatisfied with this existing newsgroup there is 
no guarantee that they will not become dissatisfied also with their 
wonderful new moderated group. Then where do you think they might go 
to express their discontent ?  

I regret to say that the effect on ALT.ascii-art will be all 
negative. 

From the postings of proponents I am persuaded, that although they 
have participated here, they care little about what happens to this 
newsgroup in the future.  

Their talent and reputation as ascii-artists is irrelevant to this 
issue and there certainly has been plenty of exhortation, "name-
dropping" and "back-slapping" in the moderationists' campaign.  

Is it therefore surprising that "Ms Anonymous of Finland" has formed 
an impression that promotion and election of a net.personality is 
involved ?  She may just be right - I admit to being somewhat 
perturbed about the emphasis repeatedly given to the personal 
qualities of the moderator(s) and the use of the GIF picture of 
"Bob" in the vote promotion pictures.  

How can you or anyone know how a person will perform after election ?  

Politicians promise everything before elections and politicians can 
be removed. Not so with a newsgroup moderator. 

Once elected, you cannot remove a Newsgroup Moderator unless there 
is provision in the Newsgroup Charter and no such provision has been 
written into the rec.arts.ascii (MODERATED) charter - although it 
could have been had those who drafted it so wished.  

Bye,

In article <Col...@equinox.gen.nz>
           Col...@equinox.gen.nz "Colin Douthwaite" writes:

> Paul Fawcett (pau...@manor.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> 
> 
> > The primary and premeditated intention was electoral character 
> > assassination.
> 
> How do you know what the primary intention of this person was ?
> 
> 
> > Hopefully pointing this out will accelerate the demise of their 
> > views from the discussion
> 
> Well you chose a quite unfortunate way of pointing things out. 
> 
> And just why should those views be removed from the discussion ?
> 
> Are you thinking that ALT.ASCII-ART should be _CENSORED_ now so that 
> everything that upsets you can be filtered out ?  



Colin, if you want to quote from an article, try and keep it in context.
You have an unfortunate habit of misinterpreting these 'sound bites' you
like so much. I know it is difficult for you, but give them some thought
first. Is it a lack of comprehension on your part, or a device you are
using in your NO campaign? Either way, you would be better advised to
leave the argument to your sad, anonymous bedfellow, who strangely could
almost be your alter ego, then again perhaps not, their command of the
English language is distinctly more advanced than your own.


Paul.

In article <Col...@equinox.gen.nz>
           Col...@equinox.gen.nz "Colin Douthwaite" writes:

> Paul Fawcett (pau...@manor.demon.co.uk) wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> : In article <022...@anon.penet.fi> an9...@anon.penet.fi  writes:
> 
> : > i am anonymous in this post because i expect to post non-anonymously later
> : > so i think that if i wish fair treatment i better be anonymous. so those 
> : > idealists among you who have never been harassed, stalked, persecuted, 
> : > raped, or shot at kindly keep quiet about us cowardly anonymous posters
> : > and don't commit the ad hominum fallacy of arguing against the poster
> : > instead of her ideas.
> 
> 
> >Anonymous votes are not eligible, so shut the fuck up, you nameless geek!  
> 
> Paul, did you really have to post that ?  It's rather sad and does 
> not help your cause.


Colin,

The sad thing is that the 'NO to r.a.a' movement have decided to conduct
part of their campaign from behind a veil of anonymity. Although exactly
who 'they' are is open to question, except to say, yourself and
anon99451 appear to speak with a uncannily similar viewpoint, one could
almost believe they were the same person.

My apologies go out to those of a sensitive disposition for the
expletives, but as your previous attempts to comprehend a more
intellectually sophisticated argument have been a demonstrably inept, on
this occasion the necessity for an unambiguous statement may have been
vindicated.


Paul.

Colin Douthwaite:
>Thank heaven for the people of Finland.

Finland is the site of the anonymous-mail server, not necessarily the
place where an99451 is actually located.
--

In article <769...@manor.demon.co.uk>, Paul Fawcett wrote:

: In article <Col...@equinox.gen.nz>
:            Col...@equinox.gen.nz "Colin Douthwaite" writes:

: > Paul Fawcett (pau...@manor.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: > [lots of stuff]
: > 
: [lots of stuff]

[lots of stuff]

Hey guys - would you care to move this to e-mail? (Sorry if you already
have...)

--
					 	     |       |
                             _ _	           --+-- | --+--
Beware the        |\__/|  .~    ~.     Rob Pomeroy   | --+-- |  Won by
killer squirrels  /o=o'`./      .'     u2i...@keele.ac.uk |   |   One.
will get yo      {o__,   \    {    			 |
           o       / .  . )    \       (c)   /~~~~/  ()  /~~~~~\ 
           o       `-` '-' \    }      1993 /__ \~  /~~\ \__() / 
            u     .(   _(   )_.'       /~\  ___\ \  |  | ____| | 
             :.  '---.~_ _ _|          \_/ /______\ |__| \_____/
              :.

u2i...@cc.keele.ac.uk (THE Rob) writes:

>Come on men!  Prove your manhood!  Prove you have those extra qualities that
> it
>takes to be a man!  Not boorish, loutishness, but sensitivity, and care.  If
>you want to call me a wussie for saying these things, that's your prerogative,
>but don't bother, unless you're man enough to say it to my face.

I fail to understand why anyone should have to prove anything such as
'his manhood'.  I prefer to be just another number on this network, and
don't bother to care what the world shoud think of it.

  Soeren
-- 
Send money by fax to +49-55-1487-719
                                             "one planet is all you get."

In article <022...@anon.penet.fi> an9...@anon.penet.fi 
(What a beautiful name!) wrote:
: i am anonymous in this post because i expect to post non-anonymously later
: so i think that if i wish fair treatment i better be anonymous. so those 
: idealists among you who have never been harassed, stalked, persecuted, 
: raped, or shot at kindly keep quiet about us cowardly anonymous posters
: and don't commit the ad hominum fallacy of arguing against the poster
: instead of her ideas.

OK, so the film has already started and I'm still looking for my seat.

I don't mind anyone using the privilege of anonymous posts. Hell, I changed
my E-mail / Post name for a similar reason. However, the privilege (no its
not a right) to use the anonymous system should not be abused. So far you're
posts have been reasonable, but I'm uneasy watching someone claiming to be
afraid of being persecuted (by E-mail?) and then setting out to attack
somebody else's credentials whilst hiding behind an anonymous id.

I just thought I ought to mention that if I really wanted to, I could find
out your real userID. Granted, it is _very_ difficult. But it's not totally
impossible either. Don't believe me? Write a letter to alt.hackers and ask
them, I bet you'll be surprised at the answer. This isn't to scare you, but
to make you realise that the anonymous id isn't a license to say whatever
you want just because nobody knows where it came from.

Use the anonymous id to defend yourself, not to attack others.


                                                      DR J