OOOPS! ( Intentional), was :Request for Information

[Mike Connor]

>and why you don´t post much any more?
>
>Cheers!
>
>GT

If you don´t mind, I will post a copy of my reply to you on ROFF. It may be
useful to somebody else with similar questions.

ROFF, as well as other groups, may well serve any number of functions,
which may be useful to somebody. Even if some stuff is restricted to
perverts, querulants, flamers, political nutcases, soapbox jockeys, and the
like.

Much way well not be useful to you, but there is nothing you can do about
it. ROFF is an unmoderated group, this means that anybody with access to
the group, and the will to do so, can post anything he likes without let or
restraint, as long as his or her ISP ( Internet Service Provider) allows it.
Most ISP´s have restrictions of varying nature and degree, some enforce them
( by cancelling or restricting the offending subscriber´s access if they
receive complaints, which must not necessarily be justified). This is more
or less indiscriminate depending upon where you live and which providers you
have access to. Some are fair, some are not. Some subscribers have found
ways and means to circumvent such restrictions,( this is not hard to do if
you wish to), and make a constant nuisance of themselves. They are most
likely disturbed or obsessed in some manner, as most "normal" people would
not go to such lengths merely to annoy others.

This is not "free speech" in the real sense. Normally, most people
"Subscribe" to such a newsgroup simply by clicking on the relevant box next
to the newsgroup name in a list provided by the ISP´s newsserver. Not
everybody has access to every group. This depends entirely on what the ISP
concerned offers. In most cases the newsgroup is then downloaded to the
subscribers PC upon request.

It is not "free" in a financial sense either, as you do pay for the service
in some way. The system of payment varies considerably, as does the price,
and the ease and speed of access. Where I live for instance, I have to pay
for "online time", at a relatively low speed, and it is expensive. In other
places ( notably the USA), flat rate telephone subscriptions are common, and
quite cheap in comparison. As a rough guide, I have heard of people with
more or less unlimited internet access for 15$ per month. If I use a
newsgroup regularly, then my rate is at least ten times that, and is also
heavily dependent on the volume of material I download, as this in turn
controls how much online time I have to pay for. This is one reason that
some people get more incensed about SPAM and general bull**** than others.
These things always cost somebody money, indeed some providers would quite
cheerfully bring in the death penalty for spammers! Others are less
discriminating, and some even seem to make a policy of allowing it.

This is also a fairly major reason why I no longer do much on the internet,
it is simply too expensive for me. There are other equally relevant reasons.
Approximately 40% of the software on my computer is there purely to prevent
online attacks of one form or another, this also costs time and money. I
have to update it, spend time using it, etc etc. I no longer use my machine
commercially, and have to pay the full amount from a modest fixed income. I
would rather eat reasonably well, than pay for bull**** and spam on ROFF, or
anywhere else for that matter.

Most of my stuff is on various websites which specialise in fishing. You
will find most of it simply by searching for my name on Google or a similar
search engine. I no longer keep track of it, this too costs time and money
which I do not have. Also the reason why I don´t write much anymore, it is
too expensive. Nobody wants to pay for it, although they all want articles.

More or less the final reason in this grade of relevance, is that I don´t
fish much anymore. It is also too expensive, the fishing I have access to
locally is poor, despite the price, and since my wife died, I can´t be
bothered with it much anyway. Therefore I have considerably less incentive
to discuss it, or to write about it.

ROFF ( and other groups, although I have never subscribed to any other
newsgroups apart from ROFFT the fly-tying group, and so my experience is
severely limited) definitely fulfills some social functions, and some
contributors also interact socially and quite amicably in person, apart from
their involvement here. One may also obtain excellent information and advice
here, one must of course be capable of differentiating between such, and the
rubbish. This is most difficult for beginners, ( either to fishing or to
usenet). It is rare that anybody here will deliberately provide false
information on fishing, but opinions differ considerably, as do locations,
knowledge, experience, etc etc. This must be taken into account when asking
questions, or attempting to implement solutions which are offered. Usually,
the information you are looking for will turn up if you ask the right
questions, you merely need to sift it out as required. This is not easy, but
still a lot easier than trying to discover such knowledge for yourself on
the stream. More than a few people here have a lifetime of experience, and a
wealth of knowledge which they are prepared to share. In time, you will get
to know who you can generally rely on.

For pure fishing information, you would be better served with websites,
subscription lists, or boards which specialise in it. These are all
moderated, restricted, and usually well policed. They need the traffic, as
their advertising revenue etc depends on it, and they don´t want to annoy
their patrons or their customers. On a list for instance, if you annoy
somebody, then you will likely simply be removed from the list immediately,
the same goes for boards on websites. There is no such thing as "free
speech" here, as you have no recourse.

In many cases it will not be clear to you why some people are here at all,
some appear to be stupid, or unnecessarily aggressive, ignorant, etc etc.
This is merely a cross-section of people who for the most part have a
general common interest in fishing, and usenet access. Not all are experts,
or fanatics, ( at least not fishing fanatrics!), . Some may not even be
interested in fishing at all!

ROFF is very heavily USA biased, and the endless political discussions take
up a fair amount of bandwidth, as do other subjects which are likely of
little or no interest to anybody outside the USA. There are no other usenet
flyfishing groups of any major interest, or with anything like the traffic,
so you must take it or leave it. Flyfishing and related content is there,
but not as much as you might like. There is a lot of other stuff as well.
Many don´t like it, but they are just as powerless to do anything about it
as you are. The only way to change something over which you have no real
power, is from within, by getting involved, and this is also extremely
difficult. It may also not be even worth the bother. Who cares what people
talk about on ROFF? Only roffians, and if they wanted to change it, they
would long since have done so. Ergo, they do not wish to change it.

Contrary to popular opinion, the internet, or usenet itself, does not exist
in the USA, or indeed in any other country as such. Nor is it owned by any
single or group of entities. It is a large collection of decentralised
servers, scattered all over the globe. Often collectively referred to as
"Cyberspace". There is no way to police it, although some governments try.
In the meantime it represents one of man´s greatest achievements in the
storage and free dissemination of knowledge and information, and is already
responsible for considerable upheaval in all systems and walks of life. Some
maintain it is indeed the last bastion of "free speech", although as
detailed above, this is not the case. Free speech is a right, and there are
no such rights here. You pay for a service, which can be curtailed at will.
It is also volatile in nature, much information is lost daily as there is no
way to store it all, and as much of it is in the hands of commercial private
or political interest, it can be altered, misused, suppressed, or destroyed
at will. The volume alone makes things difficult. Is it a good thing?
Probably. Is it a bad thing? Probably. Like every other human advance it
depends on the humans involved. It can be a battlefield, or a flower garden.
This depends on the seeds, and who sows and nurtures them.

I contributed, or at least followed ROFF for quite some time, I still look
in occasionally, as the fancy takes me, and indeed read most of the posts.
( I only usually skip politics, or obvious personal arguments, spam, and
similar stuff), and the "flaming" is a more or less constant feature. Some
do it more than others, and only a few people refrain entirely from doing
so, mostly seemingly depedent on what annoys them most. I too have done my
share of it in the past, but I no longer do so, as there is no point in it
for me.Sometimes I read flames which are amusing or otherwise entertaining,
or instructive in some way, but mostly I just skim or skip them. Most
especially when they are from long running "battles" between certain
individuals, as they are then extremely unlikely to contain anything of
value, mostly just personal insults and attacks, and are indeed often merely
boring and embarrassing.

While it is probably a mistake to rely on character analyses based on the
posting persona of any particular contributor, most especially based on one
or two posts possibly where one is not aware of the past history or actual
context, it is just as unlikely that somebody who often behaves in a nasty
and ignorant fashion is a nice person, on usenet, or face to face. Indeed,
my own opinion, is that the character displayed here, ( on usenet), is
probably a more accurate representation of some, because people generally
tend to behave in a less controlled manner here, than they would face to
face. Although maybe some are quite as nasty or as nice in person as they
are here, normal social restrictions notwithstanding? I don´t know. Apart
from which, anybody can have a "bad day", when his reactions to various
things do not reflect his normal behaviour.

These reactions vary considerably of course, and are not necessarily
basically "off topic", although this is often the case.

My own reasons for contributing were complex, and difficult to explain in
their entirety, and this is doubtless true of practically all other
contributors. Some salient points for me would be, information,
entertainment, instruction, and a pastime in itself.

Flaming as such does not bother me much, as I have seen so much of it, that
it has practically no impact any more, although it once did. There was a
time when I was personally hurt and annoyed at personal attacks, but I no
longer am, as I have long since realised that the attacks are not "personal"
at all, they are the result of somebody else´s thought processes, usually
somebody I do not know, and will never meet, and often ( actually mostly)
beyond my ability to grasp or deduce, assuming I even wanted to. The same
goes for others. In the majority of cases such insults and attacks merely
display the ignorance and obvious feeling of
inferiority/superiority/obsession/ psychological or psychiatric disposition
or disorder of the person so engaged.

Incorrect information gets my goat more than somewhat, as it can have
extremely deleterious effects on those who actually are trying to obtain
knowledge or advice. Some racist stuff, and a couple of other things also
annoy me, but I have also long since learned that it is much easier to
debunk false information than it is to debunk false ideology, although
neither is easy. Some people merely continue to believe whatever they wish
to believe, irrespective of the facts.

Usenet in general, and ROFF in particular, can be useful and entertaining,
just an expensive/cheap pain in the arse, or a mix in which you must strive
to find a balance depending on your inclinations, time, and wallet. You
pays your money................

In the meantime, I prefer to use what little I have for other things.

TL
MC

[[email protected]]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:45:27 +0200, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>>and why you don´t post much any more?

HOLY ****! Doesn't post MUCH?! Isn't two hundred-plus lines about
Mike's sorry broke ass enough? Thank God you didn't ask what time it
was, or ROFF would be treated to 3000 lines on the history of clocks,
spring manufacturing, the life story of every watchmaker from Bregeut
on, and enough links to make Google rethink their IPO...and every
European reader would have to go scrambling to get financing just to
read the drivel...

>>Cheers!
>>
>>GT
>
>If you don´t mind, I will post a copy of my reply to you on ROFF.

Well, it's a little late now if good ol' "GT" did mind...

>It may be useful to somebody else with similar questions.

Or with a printer, but no toilet paper...

<SNI-I-I-I-PED> a couple of hundred lines about why Mike can't post
much, because of how expensive it is for him do use NGs, and why he'd
rather stuff his pie hole than waste time with the likes of ROFF...
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

>In the meantime, I prefer to use what little I have for other things.

Well, you WILL when you save back up...lessee, at 1 Euro per 20 words,
plus the pomposity surcharge, and the hypocrite tax, I figure after
today, you oughta be back on the Kitty Dee-lite in, oh, about 137
years...

HTH,
Dickie
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[[email protected]]

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:45:27 +0200, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>>and why you don´t post much any more?

HOLY ****! Doesn't post MUCH?! Isn't two hundred-plus lines about
Mike's sorry broke ass enough? Thank God you didn't ask what time it
was, or ROFF would be treated to 3000 lines on the history of clocks,
spring manufacturing, the life story of every watchmaker from Bregeut
on, and enough links to make Google rethink their IPO...and every
European reader would have to go scrambling to get financing just to
read the drivel...

>>Cheers!
>>
>>GT
>
>If you don´t mind, I will post a copy of my reply to you on ROFF.

Well, it's a little late now if good ol' "GT" did mind...

>It may be useful to somebody else with similar questions.

Or with a printer, but no toilet paper...

<SNI-I-I-I-PED> a couple of hundred lines about why Mike can't post
much, because of how expensive it is for him do use NGs, and why he'd
rather stuff his pie hole than waste time with the likes of ROFF...
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

>In the meantime, I prefer to use what little I have for other things.

Well, you WILL when you save back up...lessee, at 1 Euro per 20 words,
plus the pomposity surcharge, and the hypocrite tax, I figure after
today, you oughta be back on the Kitty Dee-lite in, oh, about 137
years...

HTH,
Dickie
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[Padishar Creel]

Mike ,you have always been kind to me and generous. I still use the reel
you sent me out of the kindness of your European heart. I have also enjoyed
your writing including your poetry.

I am sorry to hear that you are not fishing, but I am sadden even more by
your lack of interest in the sport you have obviously loved a great deal. I
too am getting older and I know that day will come will I will not be able
to fish, but I hope I will be able to participate in the sport by tying,
reading, writing, visiting fly fisherpersons, fly clubs and the like.

Roff is a strange place...but you do have a spot here and I, for one, would
like to see you continue to contribute with the nicely researched advice you
give...

Chris



"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
> >and why you don´t post much any more?
> >
> >Cheers!
> >
> >GT
>
> If you don´t mind, I will post a copy of my reply to you on ROFF. It may
be
> useful to somebody else with similar questions.
>
> ROFF, as well as other groups, may well serve any number of functions,
> which may be useful to somebody. Even if some stuff is restricted to
> perverts, querulants, flamers, political nutcases, soapbox jockeys, and
the
> like.
>
> Much way well not be useful to you, but there is nothing you can do about
> it. ROFF is an unmoderated group, this means that anybody with access to
> the group, and the will to do so, can post anything he likes without let
or
> restraint, as long as his or her ISP ( Internet Service Provider) allows
it.
> Most ISP´s have restrictions of varying nature and degree, some enforce
them
> ( by cancelling or restricting the offending subscriber´s access if they
> receive complaints, which must not necessarily be justified). This is more
> or less indiscriminate depending upon where you live and which providers
you
> have access to. Some are fair, some are not. Some subscribers have found
> ways and means to circumvent such restrictions,( this is not hard to do if
> you wish to), and make a constant nuisance of themselves. They are most
> likely disturbed or obsessed in some manner, as most "normal" people would
> not go to such lengths merely to annoy others.
>
> This is not "free speech" in the real sense. Normally, most people
> "Subscribe" to such a newsgroup simply by clicking on the relevant box
next
> to the newsgroup name in a list provided by the ISP´s newsserver. Not
> everybody has access to every group. This depends entirely on what the ISP
> concerned offers. In most cases the newsgroup is then downloaded to the
> subscribers PC upon request.
>
> It is not "free" in a financial sense either, as you do pay for the
service
> in some way. The system of payment varies considerably, as does the
price,
> and the ease and speed of access. Where I live for instance, I have to pay
> for "online time", at a relatively low speed, and it is expensive. In
other
> places ( notably the USA), flat rate telephone subscriptions are common,
and
> quite cheap in comparison. As a rough guide, I have heard of people with
> more or less unlimited internet access for 15$ per month. If I use a
> newsgroup regularly, then my rate is at least ten times that, and is also
> heavily dependent on the volume of material I download, as this in turn
> controls how much online time I have to pay for. This is one reason that
> some people get more incensed about SPAM and general bull**** than others.
> These things always cost somebody money, indeed some providers would quite
> cheerfully bring in the death penalty for spammers! Others are less
> discriminating, and some even seem to make a policy of allowing it.
>
> This is also a fairly major reason why I no longer do much on the
internet,
> it is simply too expensive for me. There are other equally relevant
reasons.
> Approximately 40% of the software on my computer is there purely to
prevent
> online attacks of one form or another, this also costs time and money. I
> have to update it, spend time using it, etc etc. I no longer use my
machine
> commercially, and have to pay the full amount from a modest fixed income.
I
> would rather eat reasonably well, than pay for bull**** and spam on ROFF,
or
> anywhere else for that matter.
>
> Most of my stuff is on various websites which specialise in fishing. You
> will find most of it simply by searching for my name on Google or a
similar
> search engine. I no longer keep track of it, this too costs time and money
> which I do not have. Also the reason why I don´t write much anymore, it is
> too expensive. Nobody wants to pay for it, although they all want
articles.
>
> More or less the final reason in this grade of relevance, is that I don´t
> fish much anymore. It is also too expensive, the fishing I have access to
> locally is poor, despite the price, and since my wife died, I can´t be
> bothered with it much anyway. Therefore I have considerably less incentive
> to discuss it, or to write about it.
>
> ROFF ( and other groups, although I have never subscribed to any other
> newsgroups apart from ROFFT the fly-tying group, and so my experience is
> severely limited) definitely fulfills some social functions, and some
> contributors also interact socially and quite amicably in person, apart
from
> their involvement here. One may also obtain excellent information and
advice
> here, one must of course be capable of differentiating between such, and
the
> rubbish. This is most difficult for beginners, ( either to fishing or to
> usenet). It is rare that anybody here will deliberately provide false
> information on fishing, but opinions differ considerably, as do locations,
> knowledge, experience, etc etc. This must be taken into account when
asking
> questions, or attempting to implement solutions which are offered.
Usually,
> the information you are looking for will turn up if you ask the right
> questions, you merely need to sift it out as required. This is not easy,
but
> still a lot easier than trying to discover such knowledge for yourself on
> the stream. More than a few people here have a lifetime of experience, and
a
> wealth of knowledge which they are prepared to share. In time, you will
get
> to know who you can generally rely on.
>
> For pure fishing information, you would be better served with websites,
> subscription lists, or boards which specialise in it. These are all
> moderated, restricted, and usually well policed. They need the traffic, as
> their advertising revenue etc depends on it, and they don´t want to annoy
> their patrons or their customers. On a list for instance, if you annoy
> somebody, then you will likely simply be removed from the list
immediately,
> the same goes for boards on websites. There is no such thing as "free
> speech" here, as you have no recourse.
>
> In many cases it will not be clear to you why some people are here at all,
> some appear to be stupid, or unnecessarily aggressive, ignorant, etc etc.
> This is merely a cross-section of people who for the most part have a
> general common interest in fishing, and usenet access. Not all are
experts,
> or fanatics, ( at least not fishing fanatrics!), . Some may not even be
> interested in fishing at all!
>
> ROFF is very heavily USA biased, and the endless political discussions
take
> up a fair amount of bandwidth, as do other subjects which are likely of
> little or no interest to anybody outside the USA. There are no other
usenet
> flyfishing groups of any major interest, or with anything like the
traffic,
> so you must take it or leave it. Flyfishing and related content is there,
> but not as much as you might like. There is a lot of other stuff as well.
> Many don´t like it, but they are just as powerless to do anything about it
> as you are. The only way to change something over which you have no real
> power, is from within, by getting involved, and this is also extremely
> difficult. It may also not be even worth the bother. Who cares what people
> talk about on ROFF? Only roffians, and if they wanted to change it, they
> would long since have done so. Ergo, they do not wish to change it.
>
> Contrary to popular opinion, the internet, or usenet itself, does not
exist
> in the USA, or indeed in any other country as such. Nor is it owned by any
> single or group of entities. It is a large collection of decentralised
> servers, scattered all over the globe. Often collectively referred to as
> "Cyberspace". There is no way to police it, although some governments try.
> In the meantime it represents one of man´s greatest achievements in the
> storage and free dissemination of knowledge and information, and is
already
> responsible for considerable upheaval in all systems and walks of life.
Some
> maintain it is indeed the last bastion of "free speech", although as
> detailed above, this is not the case. Free speech is a right, and there
are
> no such rights here. You pay for a service, which can be curtailed at
will.
> It is also volatile in nature, much information is lost daily as there is
no
> way to store it all, and as much of it is in the hands of commercial
private
> or political interest, it can be altered, misused, suppressed, or
destroyed
> at will. The volume alone makes things difficult. Is it a good thing?
> Probably. Is it a bad thing? Probably. Like every other human advance it
> depends on the humans involved. It can be a battlefield, or a flower
garden.
> This depends on the seeds, and who sows and nurtures them.
>
> I contributed, or at least followed ROFF for quite some time, I still look
> in occasionally, as the fancy takes me, and indeed read most of the posts.
> ( I only usually skip politics, or obvious personal arguments, spam, and
> similar stuff), and the "flaming" is a more or less constant feature.
Some
> do it more than others, and only a few people refrain entirely from doing
> so, mostly seemingly depedent on what annoys them most. I too have done my
> share of it in the past, but I no longer do so, as there is no point in it
> for me.Sometimes I read flames which are amusing or otherwise
entertaining,
> or instructive in some way, but mostly I just skim or skip them. Most
> especially when they are from long running "battles" between certain
> individuals, as they are then extremely unlikely to contain anything of
> value, mostly just personal insults and attacks, and are indeed often
merely
> boring and embarrassing.
>
> While it is probably a mistake to rely on character analyses based on the
> posting persona of any particular contributor, most especially based on
one
> or two posts possibly where one is not aware of the past history or actual
> context, it is just as unlikely that somebody who often behaves in a nasty
> and ignorant fashion is a nice person, on usenet, or face to face.
Indeed,
> my own opinion, is that the character displayed here, ( on usenet), is
> probably a more accurate representation of some, because people generally
> tend to behave in a less controlled manner here, than they would face to
> face. Although maybe some are quite as nasty or as nice in person as they
> are here, normal social restrictions notwithstanding? I don´t know. Apart
> from which, anybody can have a "bad day", when his reactions to various
> things do not reflect his normal behaviour.
>
> These reactions vary considerably of course, and are not necessarily
> basically "off topic", although this is often the case.
>
> My own reasons for contributing were complex, and difficult to explain in
> their entirety, and this is doubtless true of practically all other
> contributors. Some salient points for me would be, information,
> entertainment, instruction, and a pastime in itself.
>
> Flaming as such does not bother me much, as I have seen so much of it,
that
> it has practically no impact any more, although it once did. There was a
> time when I was personally hurt and annoyed at personal attacks, but I no
> longer am, as I have long since realised that the attacks are not
"personal"
> at all, they are the result of somebody else´s thought processes, usually
> somebody I do not know, and will never meet, and often ( actually mostly)
> beyond my ability to grasp or deduce, assuming I even wanted to. The same
> goes for others. In the majority of cases such insults and attacks merely
> display the ignorance and obvious feeling of
> inferiority/superiority/obsession/ psychological or psychiatric
disposition
> or disorder of the person so engaged.
>
> Incorrect information gets my goat more than somewhat, as it can have
> extremely deleterious effects on those who actually are trying to obtain
> knowledge or advice. Some racist stuff, and a couple of other things also
> annoy me, but I have also long since learned that it is much easier to
> debunk false information than it is to debunk false ideology, although
> neither is easy. Some people merely continue to believe whatever they wish
> to believe, irrespective of the facts.
>
> Usenet in general, and ROFF in particular, can be useful and entertaining,
> just an expensive/cheap pain in the arse, or a mix in which you must
strive
> to find a balance depending on your inclinations, time, and wallet. You
> pays your money................
>
> In the meantime, I prefer to use what little I have for other things.
>
> TL
> MC
>
>

[Padishar Creel]

Mike ,you have always been kind to me and generous. I still use the reel
you sent me out of the kindness of your European heart. I have also enjoyed
your writing including your poetry.

I am sorry to hear that you are not fishing, but I am sadden even more by
your lack of interest in the sport you have obviously loved a great deal. I
too am getting older and I know that day will come will I will not be able
to fish, but I hope I will be able to participate in the sport by tying,
reading, writing, visiting fly fisherpersons, fly clubs and the like.

Roff is a strange place...but you do have a spot here and I, for one, would
like to see you continue to contribute with the nicely researched advice you
give...

Chris



"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
> >and why you don´t post much any more?
> >
> >Cheers!
> >
> >GT
>
> If you don´t mind, I will post a copy of my reply to you on ROFF. It may
be
> useful to somebody else with similar questions.
>
> ROFF, as well as other groups, may well serve any number of functions,
> which may be useful to somebody. Even if some stuff is restricted to
> perverts, querulants, flamers, political nutcases, soapbox jockeys, and
the
> like.
>
> Much way well not be useful to you, but there is nothing you can do about
> it. ROFF is an unmoderated group, this means that anybody with access to
> the group, and the will to do so, can post anything he likes without let
or
> restraint, as long as his or her ISP ( Internet Service Provider) allows
it.
> Most ISP´s have restrictions of varying nature and degree, some enforce
them
> ( by cancelling or restricting the offending subscriber´s access if they
> receive complaints, which must not necessarily be justified). This is more
> or less indiscriminate depending upon where you live and which providers
you
> have access to. Some are fair, some are not. Some subscribers have found
> ways and means to circumvent such restrictions,( this is not hard to do if
> you wish to), and make a constant nuisance of themselves. They are most
> likely disturbed or obsessed in some manner, as most "normal" people would
> not go to such lengths merely to annoy others.
>
> This is not "free speech" in the real sense. Normally, most people
> "Subscribe" to such a newsgroup simply by clicking on the relevant box
next
> to the newsgroup name in a list provided by the ISP´s newsserver. Not
> everybody has access to every group. This depends entirely on what the ISP
> concerned offers. In most cases the newsgroup is then downloaded to the
> subscribers PC upon request.
>
> It is not "free" in a financial sense either, as you do pay for the
service
> in some way. The system of payment varies considerably, as does the
price,
> and the ease and speed of access. Where I live for instance, I have to pay
> for "online time", at a relatively low speed, and it is expensive. In
other
> places ( notably the USA), flat rate telephone subscriptions are common,
and
> quite cheap in comparison. As a rough guide, I have heard of people with
> more or less unlimited internet access for 15$ per month. If I use a
> newsgroup regularly, then my rate is at least ten times that, and is also
> heavily dependent on the volume of material I download, as this in turn
> controls how much online time I have to pay for. This is one reason that
> some people get more incensed about SPAM and general bull**** than others.
> These things always cost somebody money, indeed some providers would quite
> cheerfully bring in the death penalty for spammers! Others are less
> discriminating, and some even seem to make a policy of allowing it.
>
> This is also a fairly major reason why I no longer do much on the
internet,
> it is simply too expensive for me. There are other equally relevant
reasons.
> Approximately 40% of the software on my computer is there purely to
prevent
> online attacks of one form or another, this also costs time and money. I
> have to update it, spend time using it, etc etc. I no longer use my
machine
> commercially, and have to pay the full amount from a modest fixed income.
I
> would rather eat reasonably well, than pay for bull**** and spam on ROFF,
or
> anywhere else for that matter.
>
> Most of my stuff is on various websites which specialise in fishing. You
> will find most of it simply by searching for my name on Google or a
similar
> search engine. I no longer keep track of it, this too costs time and money
> which I do not have. Also the reason why I don´t write much anymore, it is
> too expensive. Nobody wants to pay for it, although they all want
articles.
>
> More or less the final reason in this grade of relevance, is that I don´t
> fish much anymore. It is also too expensive, the fishing I have access to
> locally is poor, despite the price, and since my wife died, I can´t be
> bothered with it much anyway. Therefore I have considerably less incentive
> to discuss it, or to write about it.
>
> ROFF ( and other groups, although I have never subscribed to any other
> newsgroups apart from ROFFT the fly-tying group, and so my experience is
> severely limited) definitely fulfills some social functions, and some
> contributors also interact socially and quite amicably in person, apart
from
> their involvement here. One may also obtain excellent information and
advice
> here, one must of course be capable of differentiating between such, and
the
> rubbish. This is most difficult for beginners, ( either to fishing or to
> usenet). It is rare that anybody here will deliberately provide false
> information on fishing, but opinions differ considerably, as do locations,
> knowledge, experience, etc etc. This must be taken into account when
asking
> questions, or attempting to implement solutions which are offered.
Usually,
> the information you are looking for will turn up if you ask the right
> questions, you merely need to sift it out as required. This is not easy,
but
> still a lot easier than trying to discover such knowledge for yourself on
> the stream. More than a few people here have a lifetime of experience, and
a
> wealth of knowledge which they are prepared to share. In time, you will
get
> to know who you can generally rely on.
>
> For pure fishing information, you would be better served with websites,
> subscription lists, or boards which specialise in it. These are all
> moderated, restricted, and usually well policed. They need the traffic, as
> their advertising revenue etc depends on it, and they don´t want to annoy
> their patrons or their customers. On a list for instance, if you annoy
> somebody, then you will likely simply be removed from the list
immediately,
> the same goes for boards on websites. There is no such thing as "free
> speech" here, as you have no recourse.
>
> In many cases it will not be clear to you why some people are here at all,
> some appear to be stupid, or unnecessarily aggressive, ignorant, etc etc.
> This is merely a cross-section of people who for the most part have a
> general common interest in fishing, and usenet access. Not all are
experts,
> or fanatics, ( at least not fishing fanatrics!), . Some may not even be
> interested in fishing at all!
>
> ROFF is very heavily USA biased, and the endless political discussions
take
> up a fair amount of bandwidth, as do other subjects which are likely of
> little or no interest to anybody outside the USA. There are no other
usenet
> flyfishing groups of any major interest, or with anything like the
traffic,
> so you must take it or leave it. Flyfishing and related content is there,
> but not as much as you might like. There is a lot of other stuff as well.
> Many don´t like it, but they are just as powerless to do anything about it
> as you are. The only way to change something over which you have no real
> power, is from within, by getting involved, and this is also extremely
> difficult. It may also not be even worth the bother. Who cares what people
> talk about on ROFF? Only roffians, and if they wanted to change it, they
> would long since have done so. Ergo, they do not wish to change it.
>
> Contrary to popular opinion, the internet, or usenet itself, does not
exist
> in the USA, or indeed in any other country as such. Nor is it owned by any
> single or group of entities. It is a large collection of decentralised
> servers, scattered all over the globe. Often collectively referred to as
> "Cyberspace". There is no way to police it, although some governments try.
> In the meantime it represents one of man´s greatest achievements in the
> storage and free dissemination of knowledge and information, and is
already
> responsible for considerable upheaval in all systems and walks of life.
Some
> maintain it is indeed the last bastion of "free speech", although as
> detailed above, this is not the case. Free speech is a right, and there
are
> no such rights here. You pay for a service, which can be curtailed at
will.
> It is also volatile in nature, much information is lost daily as there is
no
> way to store it all, and as much of it is in the hands of commercial
private
> or political interest, it can be altered, misused, suppressed, or
destroyed
> at will. The volume alone makes things difficult. Is it a good thing?
> Probably. Is it a bad thing? Probably. Like every other human advance it
> depends on the humans involved. It can be a battlefield, or a flower
garden.
> This depends on the seeds, and who sows and nurtures them.
>
> I contributed, or at least followed ROFF for quite some time, I still look
> in occasionally, as the fancy takes me, and indeed read most of the posts.
> ( I only usually skip politics, or obvious personal arguments, spam, and
> similar stuff), and the "flaming" is a more or less constant feature.
Some
> do it more than others, and only a few people refrain entirely from doing
> so, mostly seemingly depedent on what annoys them most. I too have done my
> share of it in the past, but I no longer do so, as there is no point in it
> for me.Sometimes I read flames which are amusing or otherwise
entertaining,
> or instructive in some way, but mostly I just skim or skip them. Most
> especially when they are from long running "battles" between certain
> individuals, as they are then extremely unlikely to contain anything of
> value, mostly just personal insults and attacks, and are indeed often
merely
> boring and embarrassing.
>
> While it is probably a mistake to rely on character analyses based on the
> posting persona of any particular contributor, most especially based on
one
> or two posts possibly where one is not aware of the past history or actual
> context, it is just as unlikely that somebody who often behaves in a nasty
> and ignorant fashion is a nice person, on usenet, or face to face.
Indeed,
> my own opinion, is that the character displayed here, ( on usenet), is
> probably a more accurate representation of some, because people generally
> tend to behave in a less controlled manner here, than they would face to
> face. Although maybe some are quite as nasty or as nice in person as they
> are here, normal social restrictions notwithstanding? I don´t know. Apart
> from which, anybody can have a "bad day", when his reactions to various
> things do not reflect his normal behaviour.
>
> These reactions vary considerably of course, and are not necessarily
> basically "off topic", although this is often the case.
>
> My own reasons for contributing were complex, and difficult to explain in
> their entirety, and this is doubtless true of practically all other
> contributors. Some salient points for me would be, information,
> entertainment, instruction, and a pastime in itself.
>
> Flaming as such does not bother me much, as I have seen so much of it,
that
> it has practically no impact any more, although it once did. There was a
> time when I was personally hurt and annoyed at personal attacks, but I no
> longer am, as I have long since realised that the attacks are not
"personal"
> at all, they are the result of somebody else´s thought processes, usually
> somebody I do not know, and will never meet, and often ( actually mostly)
> beyond my ability to grasp or deduce, assuming I even wanted to. The same
> goes for others. In the majority of cases such insults and attacks merely
> display the ignorance and obvious feeling of
> inferiority/superiority/obsession/ psychological or psychiatric
disposition
> or disorder of the person so engaged.
>
> Incorrect information gets my goat more than somewhat, as it can have
> extremely deleterious effects on those who actually are trying to obtain
> knowledge or advice. Some racist stuff, and a couple of other things also
> annoy me, but I have also long since learned that it is much easier to
> debunk false information than it is to debunk false ideology, although
> neither is easy. Some people merely continue to believe whatever they wish
> to believe, irrespective of the facts.
>
> Usenet in general, and ROFF in particular, can be useful and entertaining,
> just an expensive/cheap pain in the arse, or a mix in which you must
strive
> to find a balance depending on your inclinations, time, and wallet. You
> pays your money................
>
> In the meantime, I prefer to use what little I have for other things.
>
> TL
> MC
>
>

[Mike Connor]

"Padishar Creel" > wrote in message
...
<SNIP>
> Roff is a strange place...but you do have a spot here and I, for one,
would
> like to see you continue to contribute with the nicely researched advice
you
> give...
>
> Chris
>


Very kind of you, thanks.

ROFF is not really strange, but some of it´s denizens are. Sad as well. I
wont be posting much, I have very little interest in it. There are better
and more interesting ways of allowing oneself to be abused, doubtless
cheaper to boot.

Maybe I will do a bit of fishing now and again, have to wait and see.

TL
MC

[Mike Connor]

"Padishar Creel" > wrote in message
...
<SNIP>
> Roff is a strange place...but you do have a spot here and I, for one,
would
> like to see you continue to contribute with the nicely researched advice
you
> give...
>
> Chris
>


Very kind of you, thanks.

ROFF is not really strange, but some of it´s denizens are. Sad as well. I
wont be posting much, I have very little interest in it. There are better
and more interesting ways of allowing oneself to be abused, doubtless
cheaper to boot.

Maybe I will do a bit of fishing now and again, have to wait and see.

TL
MC

[Mike Connor]

> wrote in message
...

> Dickie
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

An excellent post, many would agree.

MC

[Mike Connor]

> wrote in message
...

> Dickie
> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

An excellent post, many would agree.

MC

[tony weall]

"Padishar Creel" > wrote in message
...
> Mike ,you have always been kind to me and generous. I still use the reel
> you sent me out of the kindness of your European heart. I have also
> enjoyed
> your writing including your poetry.
>
> I am sorry to hear that you are not fishing, but I am sadden even more by
> your lack of interest in the sport you have obviously loved a great deal.
> I
> too am getting older and I know that day will come will I will not be able
> to fish, but I hope I will be able to participate in the sport by tying,
> reading, writing, visiting fly fisherpersons, fly clubs and the like.
>
> Roff is a strange place...but you do have a spot here and I, for one,
> would
> like to see you continue to contribute with the nicely researched advice
> you
> give...
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> "Mike Connor" > wrote in message
> ...
>> >and why you don´t post much any more?
>> >
>> >Cheers!
>> >
>> >GT
>>
>> If you don´t mind, I will post a copy of my reply to you on ROFF. It may
> be
>> useful to somebody else with similar questions.
>>
>> ROFF, as well as other groups, may well serve any number of functions,
>> which may be useful to somebody. Even if some stuff is restricted to
>> perverts, querulants, flamers, political nutcases, soapbox jockeys, and
> the
>> like.
>>
>> Much way well not be useful to you, but there is nothing you can do about
>> it. ROFF is an unmoderated group, this means that anybody with access to
>> the group, and the will to do so, can post anything he likes without let
> or
>> restraint, as long as his or her ISP ( Internet Service Provider) allows
> it.
>> Most ISP´s have restrictions of varying nature and degree, some enforce
> them
>> ( by cancelling or restricting the offending subscriber´s access if they
>> receive complaints, which must not necessarily be justified). This is
>> more
>> or less indiscriminate depending upon where you live and which providers
> you
>> have access to. Some are fair, some are not. Some subscribers have found
>> ways and means to circumvent such restrictions,( this is not hard to do
>> if
>> you wish to), and make a constant nuisance of themselves. They are most
>> likely disturbed or obsessed in some manner, as most "normal" people
>> would
>> not go to such lengths merely to annoy others.
>>
>> This is not "free speech" in the real sense. Normally, most people
>> "Subscribe" to such a newsgroup simply by clicking on the relevant box
> next
>> to the newsgroup name in a list provided by the ISP´s newsserver. Not
>> everybody has access to every group. This depends entirely on what the
>> ISP
>> concerned offers. In most cases the newsgroup is then downloaded to the
>> subscribers PC upon request.
>>
>> It is not "free" in a financial sense either, as you do pay for the
> service
>> in some way. The system of payment varies considerably, as does the
> price,
>> and the ease and speed of access. Where I live for instance, I have to
>> pay
>> for "online time", at a relatively low speed, and it is expensive. In
> other
>> places ( notably the USA), flat rate telephone subscriptions are common,
> and
>> quite cheap in comparison. As a rough guide, I have heard of people with
>> more or less unlimited internet access for 15$ per month. If I use a
>> newsgroup regularly, then my rate is at least ten times that, and is also
>> heavily dependent on the volume of material I download, as this in turn
>> controls how much online time I have to pay for. This is one reason that
>> some people get more incensed about SPAM and general bull**** than
>> others.
>> These things always cost somebody money, indeed some providers would
>> quite
>> cheerfully bring in the death penalty for spammers! Others are less
>> discriminating, and some even seem to make a policy of allowing it.
>>
>> This is also a fairly major reason why I no longer do much on the
> internet,
>> it is simply too expensive for me. There are other equally relevant
> reasons.
>> Approximately 40% of the software on my computer is there purely to
> prevent
>> online attacks of one form or another, this also costs time and money. I
>> have to update it, spend time using it, etc etc. I no longer use my
> machine
>> commercially, and have to pay the full amount from a modest fixed income.
> I
>> would rather eat reasonably well, than pay for bull**** and spam on ROFF,
> or
>> anywhere else for that matter.
>>
>> Most of my stuff is on various websites which specialise in fishing. You
>> will find most of it simply by searching for my name on Google or a
> similar
>> search engine. I no longer keep track of it, this too costs time and
>> money
>> which I do not have. Also the reason why I don´t write much anymore, it
>> is
>> too expensive. Nobody wants to pay for it, although they all want
> articles.
>>
>> More or less the final reason in this grade of relevance, is that I don´t
>> fish much anymore. It is also too expensive, the fishing I have access to
>> locally is poor, despite the price, and since my wife died, I can´t be
>> bothered with it much anyway. Therefore I have considerably less
>> incentive
>> to discuss it, or to write about it.
>>
>> ROFF ( and other groups, although I have never subscribed to any other
>> newsgroups apart from ROFFT the fly-tying group, and so my experience is
>> severely limited) definitely fulfills some social functions, and some
>> contributors also interact socially and quite amicably in person, apart
> from
>> their involvement here. One may also obtain excellent information and
> advice
>> here, one must of course be capable of differentiating between such, and
> the
>> rubbish. This is most difficult for beginners, ( either to fishing or to
>> usenet). It is rare that anybody here will deliberately provide false
>> information on fishing, but opinions differ considerably, as do
>> locations,
>> knowledge, experience, etc etc. This must be taken into account when
> asking
>> questions, or attempting to implement solutions which are offered.
> Usually,
>> the information you are looking for will turn up if you ask the right
>> questions, you merely need to sift it out as required. This is not easy,
> but
>> still a lot easier than trying to discover such knowledge for yourself on
>> the stream. More than a few people here have a lifetime of experience,
>> and
> a
>> wealth of knowledge which they are prepared to share. In time, you will
> get
>> to know who you can generally rely on.
>>
>> For pure fishing information, you would be better served with websites,
>> subscription lists, or boards which specialise in it. These are all
>> moderated, restricted, and usually well policed. They need the traffic,
>> as
>> their advertising revenue etc depends on it, and they don´t want to annoy
>> their patrons or their customers. On a list for instance, if you annoy
>> somebody, then you will likely simply be removed from the list
> immediately,
>> the same goes for boards on websites. There is no such thing as "free
>> speech" here, as you have no recourse.
>>
>> In many cases it will not be clear to you why some people are here at
>> all,
>> some appear to be stupid, or unnecessarily aggressive, ignorant, etc etc.
>> This is merely a cross-section of people who for the most part have a
>> general common interest in fishing, and usenet access. Not all are
> experts,
>> or fanatics, ( at least not fishing fanatrics!), . Some may not even be
>> interested in fishing at all!
>>
>> ROFF is very heavily USA biased, and the endless political discussions
> take
>> up a fair amount of bandwidth, as do other subjects which are likely of
>> little or no interest to anybody outside the USA. There are no other
> usenet
>> flyfishing groups of any major interest, or with anything like the
> traffic,
>> so you must take it or leave it. Flyfishing and related content is there,
>> but not as much as you might like. There is a lot of other stuff as well.
>> Many don´t like it, but they are just as powerless to do anything about
>> it
>> as you are. The only way to change something over which you have no real
>> power, is from within, by getting involved, and this is also extremely
>> difficult. It may also not be even worth the bother. Who cares what
>> people
>> talk about on ROFF? Only roffians, and if they wanted to change it, they
>> would long since have done so. Ergo, they do not wish to change it.
>>
>> Contrary to popular opinion, the internet, or usenet itself, does not
> exist
>> in the USA, or indeed in any other country as such. Nor is it owned by
>> any
>> single or group of entities. It is a large collection of decentralised
>> servers, scattered all over the globe. Often collectively referred to as
>> "Cyberspace". There is no way to police it, although some governments
>> try.
>> In the meantime it represents one of man´s greatest achievements in the
>> storage and free dissemination of knowledge and information, and is
> already
>> responsible for considerable upheaval in all systems and walks of life.
> Some
>> maintain it is indeed the last bastion of "free speech", although as
>> detailed above, this is not the case. Free speech is a right, and there
> are
>> no such rights here. You pay for a service, which can be curtailed at
> will.
>> It is also volatile in nature, much information is lost daily as there is
> no
>> way to store it all, and as much of it is in the hands of commercial
> private
>> or political interest, it can be altered, misused, suppressed, or
> destroyed
>> at will. The volume alone makes things difficult. Is it a good thing?
>> Probably. Is it a bad thing? Probably. Like every other human advance it
>> depends on the humans involved. It can be a battlefield, or a flower
> garden.
>> This depends on the seeds, and who sows and nurtures them.
>>
>> I contributed, or at least followed ROFF for quite some time, I still
>> look
>> in occasionally, as the fancy takes me, and indeed read most of the
>> posts.
>> ( I only usually skip politics, or obvious personal arguments, spam, and
>> similar stuff), and the "flaming" is a more or less constant feature.
> Some
>> do it more than others, and only a few people refrain entirely from doing
>> so, mostly seemingly depedent on what annoys them most. I too have done
>> my
>> share of it in the past, but I no longer do so, as there is no point in
>> it
>> for me.Sometimes I read flames which are amusing or otherwise
> entertaining,
>> or instructive in some way, but mostly I just skim or skip them. Most
>> especially when they are from long running "battles" between certain
>> individuals, as they are then extremely unlikely to contain anything of
>> value, mostly just personal insults and attacks, and are indeed often
> merely
>> boring and embarrassing.
>>
>> While it is probably a mistake to rely on character analyses based on the
>> posting persona of any particular contributor, most especially based on
> one
>> or two posts possibly where one is not aware of the past history or
>> actual
>> context, it is just as unlikely that somebody who often behaves in a
>> nasty
>> and ignorant fashion is a nice person, on usenet, or face to face.
> Indeed,
>> my own opinion, is that the character displayed here, ( on usenet), is
>> probably a more accurate representation of some, because people generally
>> tend to behave in a less controlled manner here, than they would face to
>> face. Although maybe some are quite as nasty or as nice in person as they
>> are here, normal social restrictions notwithstanding? I don´t know.
>> Apart
>> from which, anybody can have a "bad day", when his reactions to various
>> things do not reflect his normal behaviour.
>>
>> These reactions vary considerably of course, and are not necessarily
>> basically "off topic", although this is often the case.
>>
>> My own reasons for contributing were complex, and difficult to explain in
>> their entirety, and this is doubtless true of practically all other
>> contributors. Some salient points for me would be, information,
>> entertainment, instruction, and a pastime in itself.
>>
>> Flaming as such does not bother me much, as I have seen so much of it,
> that
>> it has practically no impact any more, although it once did. There was a
>> time when I was personally hurt and annoyed at personal attacks, but I no
>> longer am, as I have long since realised that the attacks are not
> "personal"
>> at all, they are the result of somebody else´s thought processes, usually
>> somebody I do not know, and will never meet, and often ( actually mostly)
>> beyond my ability to grasp or deduce, assuming I even wanted to. The same
>> goes for others. In the majority of cases such insults and attacks
>> merely
>> display the ignorance and obvious feeling of
>> inferiority/superiority/obsession/ psychological or psychiatric
> disposition
>> or disorder of the person so engaged.
>>
>> Incorrect information gets my goat more than somewhat, as it can have
>> extremely deleterious effects on those who actually are trying to obtain
>> knowledge or advice. Some racist stuff, and a couple of other things also
>> annoy me, but I have also long since learned that it is much easier to
>> debunk false information than it is to debunk false ideology, although
>> neither is easy. Some people merely continue to believe whatever they
>> wish
>> to believe, irrespective of the facts.
>>
>> Usenet in general, and ROFF in particular, can be useful and
>> entertaining,
>> just an expensive/cheap pain in the arse, or a mix in which you must
> strive
>> to find a balance depending on your inclinations, time, and wallet. You
>> pays your money................
>>
>> In the meantime, I prefer to use what little I have for other things.
>>
>> TL
>> MC
>>
>>
so true chris,i agree about mike having a spot here i also have had very
helpfull advice from mike over the years
tony

>
>