 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / February 2010Are alt.usage.english participants more pleasant than those of other newsgroups?
It seems to me that, on balance, they are: more polite, more thoughtful than participants of many other newsgroups. Not that this group is without its less-polite, less-thoughtful folk (as with nearly any newsgroup). But for the most part, this does seem to be a mostly-civil, mostly-intelligent lot. I wish that were true of alt.philosophy . One might think that those inclined to philosophical thought would have a similar disposition. But alas, it is not so to the same degree. Incidentally, does anyone participate in other newsgroups in which the quality of the contributions is relatively high? Thanks in advance for anything you might care to share.... -- Brett (in Berkeley, California, USA) http://www.electoralmaps.org/ Pictorial election results for every U.S. Presidential Election from George Washington to Barack Obama. Certainly, with regard to courtesy, it is far above alt.politics.libertarian, sci.lang, and alt.suicide.methods. However, those ngs are far worse afflicted with crackpots & thus provide more temptation. The comp.* & gnu.* ngs I subscribe to stick pretty completely to business and are unfailingly courteous even to people like me who ask ignorant questions. ne.transportation is usually good-humored, except that when a certain tribe of harmless crackpots calling themselves viatologists show up, they are furiously abused. rec.music.folk is now moribund, but when it was lively it was remarkably civil -- rather more so than some parts of www.mudcat.org, which has largely replaced it. alt.books.george-orwell used to be charming as well as lively, but it was done in by one bloody-minded Brit & is now almost dead. alt.quotations seems to offer few opportunities for rudeness.  Signature--- Joe Fineman joe_f@verizon.net ||: And what if I don't, and what if I do? :|| Berkeley Brett set the following eddies spiralling through the space-time continuum: > It seems to me that, on balance, they are: more polite, more > thoughtful than participants of many other newsgroups. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks in advance for anything you might care to share.... This ng, by the very nature of its remit, would tend to attract the more intelligent person. I like to think I'm one of the nice guys anyway, never indulging in flamewars or writing obscenities. Don't know alt.philosophy but I wouldn't be surprised. Some of the scientific groups I contribute to, attract their share of dumb posters, cranks, abusive types and downright trolls, with serious scientific discussion taking a distinct back seat - and even then we have to apply some intelligent filtering to ignore the antirelativists and those who claim humans have lived on earth for 500 megayears or more - but here we seem to be free of it. I have actually dropped out of a few groups where the original subject matter has been lost in the noise of the ongoing slanging matches. Signatureξ:) Proud to be curly Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply Prai Jei skrev: > Don't know alt.philosophy but I wouldn't be surprised. Some of the > scientific groups I contribute to, attract their share of dumb posters, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the original subject matter has been lost in the noise of the ongoing > slanging matches. Maybe the reason is simply that it is not very easy to be a crank/crackpot with language subjects? One can easily provoke with statements about God, politics, climate changes, objects travelling faster than light, moon hoaxes and so on. But one needs to know at least the most basic stuff to argue about language, and aside from spelling - which can release a surprisingly hot debate - the subjects do not seem to awaken the monsters. I would say that the spirit of the Danish and German language groups is pretty much the same as in this one. SignatureBertel, Denmark >Maybe the reason is simply that it is not very easy to be a >crank/crackpot with language subjects? You must have Peter Daniels kill-filed. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida tony cooper skrev: > You must have Peter Daniels kill-filed. I turn off long threads because it takes time to read everything in this group, and I spend most of my reading time in the Danisg group. Maybe that is the reason that I haven't noticed him? SignatureBertel, Denmark > Maybe the reason is simply that it is not very easy to be a > crank/crackpot with language subjects? Coincidentally, I've just started reading Andrew Robinson's _Lost Languages_, a book about undeciphered scripts, and the author quotes Jaques Guy as describing undeciphered scripts as "powerful kook attractors". But we've definitely had our share of cranks and crackpots around here, on purely linguistic subjects. > One can easily provoke with statements about God, politics, climate > changes, objects travelling faster than light, moon hoaxes and so > on. But one needs to know at least the most basic stuff to argue > about language, and aside from spelling - which can release a > surprisingly hot debate - the subjects do not seem to awaken the > monsters. But language debates very often carry a not-very-hidden subtext of "They speak differently and are therefore uneducated/wrong/stupid/ illogical/imperialistic/racist/you name it, and if I'm noticing people talking the way they do, the language is becoming corrupted and the country is going to hell in a handbasket". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |On a scale of one to ten... 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |it sucked. Palo Alto, CA 94304 kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ [...] > I like to think I'm one of the nice guys anyway, never > indulging in flamewars or writing obscenities. > -- > Î*:) Proud to be curly I hope your fuckin' halo won't crush your curly hair. :-) Love, ~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~ Everybody's bête noire Reinhold {Rey} Aman set the following eddies spiralling through the space-time continuum: > [...] >> I like to think I'm one of the nice guys anyway, never [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> > I hope your fuckin' halo won't crush your curly hair. :-) It hasn't done so yet in over fifty years. Signatureξ:) Proud to be curly Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply > It seems to me that, on balance, they are: more polite, more > thoughtful than participants of many other newsgroups. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Thanks in advance for anything you might care to share.... Rec.arts.books used to be a fascinating place to hang out but there seems to be nothing of value going on there these days and the interesting regulars now interact on Facebook as the Prancing Half-Wits. uk.media.radio.archers is full of charming people and one can learn a surprising amount about music and science there. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) > uk.media.radio.archers is full of charming people and one can learn a > surprising amount about music and science there. OT, but on Friday evening at about 7.13 I tried calling my brother for a chat, and was told "call you back in 5 minutes - Phil's dying". This surprised me, since Norman Painting [the actor who played him] died some months ago - I mean longer ago than the normal time lag between recording and transmission. I suppose one of the advantages of radio over television is that a character can be kept in cold storage and then killed off in this way without actually appearing. The almost 60 years for which Norman Painting voiced Young Master Phil is said to be a record for one actor in one continous role. Regards Jonathan >> Incidentally, does anyone participate in other newsgroups in which the >> quality of the contributions is relatively high? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > uk.media.radio.archers is full of charming people and one can learn a > surprising amount about music and science there. It's also partly full of me. SignatureDavid >>> Incidentally, does anyone participate in other newsgroups in which the >>> quality of the contributions is relatively high? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > It's also partly full of me. Indeed, and very charming you are, too (when not chasing a BTN) and other aue people pop in there from time to time. SignatureLaura (emulate St. George for email) >>>> Incidentally, does anyone participate in other newsgroups in which the >>>> quality of the contributions is relatively high? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Indeed, and very charming you are, too (when not chasing a BTN) and > other aue people pop in there from time to time. I was there long before I arrived here. SignatureOnline waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk >It seems to me that, on balance, they are: more polite, more >thoughtful than participants of many other newsgroups. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Thanks in advance for anything you might care to share.... The culture is similar in AUE's non-identical twin alt.english.usage. The, at present low traffic, English language groups alt.possessive.its.has.no.apostrophe and uk.culture.language.english are also civilised. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) On 12 Feb 2010, Berkeley Brett wrote > Incidentally, does anyone participate in other newsgroups in > which the quality of the contributions is relatively high? I read alt.fan.cecil-adams as a non-subject-specific group, although the sheer weight of traffic in there means I inevitably miss potentially good discussions. It also -- for me -- needs some judicious kill-filing for a couple of rabid wingnuts, but other than that it's pretty civilised. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed HVS wrote, in <Xns9D1EE090D970Cwhhvans@news.albasani.net> on Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:04:32 GMT: > On 12 Feb 2010, Berkeley Brett wrote > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > It also -- for me -- needs some judicious kill-filing for a couple of > rabid wingnuts, but other than that it's pretty civilised. Does Xnews support Ignore Subthread? Agent acquired that a couple of releases ago and applied via wingnut filters it improves the reading experience considerably. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE On 14 Feb 2010, Nick Spalding wrote > HVS wrote, in <Xns9D1EE090D970Cwhhvans@news.albasani.net> > on Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:04:32 GMT: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > couple of releases ago and applied via wingnut filters it > improves the reading experience considerably. Now that you mention it, it does after a fashion -- I can score article to "Kill entire thread" or "Kill from here down". I'd not thought of using that to eliminate subthreads that result when people reply to those in my kill-filed, but it's an excellent idea -- I'll give that a go. SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > It seems to me that, on balance, they are: more polite, more > thoughtful than participants of many other newsgroups. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Pictorial election results for every U.S. Presidential Election from > George Washington to Barack Obama. I should say so. There are fora out there that would have flamed you to death for not adhering to their uber-grammarian prescritiveness that would insist on " pleasanter". Yes, which isn't necessarily saying much. > Yes, which isn't necessarily saying much. What is not saying much (apart from your post)? I am not an uber-grammarian by any means,but I do not understand the use of "necessarily". On Feb 14, 1:22 am, "Fred" <r...@parachute.net.nz> wrote: > Yes, which isn't necessarily saying much. What is not saying much (apart from your post)? Yes, alt.usage English users are more pleasant than those of other newsgroups, which might be making a fairly significant statement, but on the other hand, it might be qute insignificant. (To decide which, you should study a variety of other newsgroups.) There you have it. The question in the subject line fully answered, and a translation of my original reply, just for you. I am not an uber-grammarian by any means,but I do not understand the use of "necessarily". >> Yes, which isn't necessarily saying much. > >What is not saying much (apart from your post)? > >I am not an uber-grammarian by any means,but I do not understand the >use of "necessarily". I didn't think Fred's own explanation of his post was particularly helpful. He meant (I think) "yes they are more pleasant than other newsgroup contributors, but since those other contributors can be very unpleasant, this isn't saying much". It would be possible to be quite unpleasant while still remaining more pleasant than many contributors. Regards Jonathan >>> Yes, which isn't necessarily saying much. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > unpleasant, this isn't saying much". It would be possible to be quite > unpleasant while still remaining more pleasant than many contributors. Which would explain the comment 'which isn't saying much'. But it doesn't explain the inclusion of the word 'necesssarily'. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.