How would you esplain it?
 

On 22 Mar 2007 12:14:10 -0700, "salmobytes"
wrote:

I noticed something interesting, I think.
Google has a lot of freely available statistics about
usenet traffic and usage patterns, on a group by group basis,
going back a long ways.

Some groups, like rec.woodworking, are statistically stable.
The average number of posts per day for rec.woodworking now
is roughly what it was seven years ago.

But traffic to rec.outdoors.fishing.fly is roughly 80% less
than it used to be.

Do we have fewer fly fishermen?
Or are they.....well. What is it?
How what why.

Troll.

I'd offer that there are lots of reasons. As to ROFF specifically,
boredom with ROFF, tired of what they see as the bull****, spending time
on what they see as more "civil" forums, etc. But simply comparing one
NG to another isn't really a complete view. In my eight or so years
around here (this is now the only NG or other "forum," fishing or
otherwise, in which I'd say I even semi-regularly participate), there
have been lots of comings and goings, and some seem to always be leaving
and never coming back, time after time after time.

IAC, are _all_ rec. hierarchy NGs stable except ROFF? If not, there is
likely all sorts of explanations for those changes, including ROFF's
changes. Heck, USENET isn't as big a portion of online, um,
communication as it once was - think of the changes over the last seven
years with regard to the 'net.

TC,
R
....and heck, there's not nearly as many AOLers and WebTVers
"discovering" that new, wonderful thing called newsgroup websites...

How would you esplain it?
 

Dave LaCourse wrote:

Most of the good guys have left. ...

Those you named were your contemporaries, the roster of roffians
is ever changing, always has been. You wouldn't recognize some of
the earliest posters to roff who dropped by the wayside, folks
come and go constantly. Part of it is just the nature of Usenet
newgroups, I mean let's face it participating here is a monumental
waste of time. Which is fine by me, that's part of why I come here,
to waste time when I should be writing, but it's still fundamentally
wasting time. At some point most folks without a lot of time to
waste quit wasting it here. Perfectly normal.

I'm surprised there *is* a roff. Forty! Turn out the lights when you
leave. d;o)

Hell, I'm surprised there's still Usenet newsgroups. They're way
more trouble than they're worth to ISPs and I'm astounded at how
many ISPs still bother with them.

--
Ken Fortenberry

How would you esplain it?
 

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:13:05 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:


Hell, I'm surprised there's still Usenet newsgroups. They're way
more trouble than they're worth to ISPs and I'm astounded at how
many ISPs still bother with them.


They have to have the binary groups for downloaders, so they keep our
conversational groups on because it's not much space, effort, or cost
for them to do so and it looks so good when they can point to us when
complainers whine about the 'Net only being good for porn,

I understand that most ISPs don't really bother with newsgroups the
past few years. They farm them out to big providers.
--

r.bc: vixen
Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher.
Almost entirely harmless. Really.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli

How would you esplain it?
 

On 22 Mar 2007 13:59:02 -0700, "salmobytes"
wrote:

On Mar 22, 3:02 pm, wrote:
Troll.

Perhaps my original post was a troll of sorts.
But I didn't see it that way.

I do think what I noticed is an interesting trend.
Usenet is less popular in general, partly due to
the relatively recent proliferation of interactive blogs
and website forums. So maybe that's the explanation.

I'd agree that it's a part of it, sure.

But I doubt it. Google statistics show various
newsgroups rise and fall in popularity, almost like
the weather. But the downward trend on roff is
at least 2 maybe 3 years old and steady, like
a blue run the ski hill, it's all downhill with very
few bumps.

And I'd offer it's what those who have "left" see as the bull****. But
here's the thing, IMO: picture, if you will, a fish camp. There are
30-40 folks sitting around shooting the breeze, and all of a sudden, two
folks decide to start boxing. Neither "jumped" the other, it's mutual
combat, entered into willingly by both parties. Why would anyone feel
"forced" to join in? Watch it if you wish, ignore it if that's more
your taste, and join in if you'd like, but no one is forcing anyone to
choose a option.

Same thing here. Heck, here, if one can't simply ignore the virtual
boxing match, they can literally keep their seat and with a few
keystrokes, put up an electronic wall so that the whole thing is all but
invisible to them.

And of course, there's really not all that much _strictly_ FFing related
that the same 50-100 folks can talk about for years on end, and really,
that'd be boring as hell. IMO, it's natural that everything under the
sun gets at least some coverage.

And I say this knowing full-well my own role in the overall nonsense of
this place - the downright humorless nastiness (and no, I don't mean
Mike) of, um, certain posters may well scare off those with too-thin
skins. Tough **** - wrong as he may or may not be, no one is or can
force anyone to read what they don't want to read, and if they can't
control themselves, that's on them, not ROFF or any poster(s) to it.

TC,
R

How would you esplain it?
 

But traffic to rec.outdoors.fishing.fly is roughly 80% less
than it used to be.

Do we have fewer fly fishermen?
Or are they.....well. What is it?
How what why.

this place originated as a cybersapce bar room, where folks who
were originally attracted by an obvious common sporting interest sat
and relaxed, just bull****ting about fishing and lifeitsownself, at
the end of the fishing day, as friends do after the same activity in
real life.

but we came to know each other too well, and began to care more
about our opinions of life beyond our sport than our place inside that
sport, and we became a perfect example of the axiom that familiarity
breeds contempt. this evil is made so much easier to engage in by the
distance of the medium.

in short, the inability to understand that if we failed to isolate
our differenting political views from our common love of this
marvelous craft, we would be doomed to destructive infighting, has
brought us to our present wholesale calamity.
it truly saddens me when i consider how much pleasure i have
received from my time on the water and in places close thereto with
those of you who have become such bitter enemies in this virtual
pigstye. i would give several shiny nickels to be able to start all
over again, and spend a couple weeks immersed in the vastly different
gifts of personality and sporting talent that all of you bring to the
amazing places where trout live, from montana to maine, and from
wisconsin to the old north state.
truth is, i wouldn't go to another clave on a bet. i deal with
too much combativeness on a day to day basis as it is. anyway, each
of you with whom i have fished have my respect and friendship. i have
always enjoyed my time on the water with you.

your friend in the old north state
wayno

How would you esplain it?
 

How would you esplain it?
 

web based discussion groups - most people have gone to web based forums
where they can post jpegs, have avatars and post cutesy little animated
emoticons. Text based news feed is for old farts

--
Some of my angling snaps:

http://gallery.fishbc.com/gallery/vi...bumName=RalphH
"salmobytes" wrote in message
ups.com...
I noticed something interesting, I think.
Google has a lot of freely available statistics about
usenet traffic and usage patterns, on a group by group basis,
going back a long ways.

Some groups, like rec.woodworking, are statistically stable.
The average number of posts per day for rec.woodworking now
is roughly what it was seven years ago.

But traffic to rec.outdoors.fishing.fly is roughly 80% less
than it used to be.

Do we have fewer fly fishermen?
Or are they.....well. What is it?
How what why.

How would you esplain it?
 

On 22 Mar 2007 19:26:45 -0700, "
wrote:



But traffic to rec.outdoors.fishing.fly is roughly 80% less
than it used to be.

Do we have fewer fly fishermen?
Or are they.....well. What is it?
How what why.

this place originated as a cybersapce bar room, where folks who
were originally attracted by an obvious common sporting interest sat
and relaxed, just bull****ting about fishing and lifeitsownself, at
the end of the fishing day, as friends do after the same activity in
real life.

but we came to know each other too well, and began to care more
about our opinions of life beyond our sport than our place inside that
sport, and we became a perfect example of the axiom that familiarity
breeds contempt. this evil is made so much easier to engage in by the
distance of the medium.

in short, the inability to understand that if we failed to isolate
our differenting political views from our common love of this
marvelous craft, we would be doomed to destructive infighting, has
brought us to our present wholesale calamity.
it truly saddens me when i consider how much pleasure i have
received from my time on the water and in places close thereto with
those of you who have become such bitter enemies in this virtual
pigstye. i would give several shiny nickels to be able to start all
over again, and spend a couple weeks immersed in the vastly different
gifts of personality and sporting talent that all of you bring to the
amazing places where trout live, from montana to maine, and from
wisconsin to the old north state.
truth is, i wouldn't go to another clave on a bet. i deal with
too much combativeness on a day to day basis as it is. anyway, each
of you with whom i have fished have my respect and friendship. i have
always enjoyed my time on the water with you.

Whoa...

I guess I'd have to say I like and respect "you," at least as far as the
online wayno as much as anyone around here, but **** down a stick and
say grace, "bitter enemies?!?!?!" Are ya drinkin' bad whisky, man? What
possible nonsense heresabout could warrant anyone being such on the
basis of the shtick on ROFF? Folks go on and on about all the
contention around here, but geez, why take it seriously, if you feel the
need to read such at all?

ROFF ain't life, and life ain't ROFF. Oh, sure, they might cross paths
and dance a bit on occasion, but anyone who truly confuses the two
really needs to step back and take a breath or two. IMO, ROFF is
something like a fraternity house meets backwater roadhouse - lots of
bull****, lots of fun, but at the end of the day, the majority of the
gracious plenty ration of bull**** is transcended by the underlying
camaraderie of the thing. IOW, it ain't all real...what's real is,
well, what's real...

TC,
R
PS: Mumsy told me a funny...well, truth be told, Mumsy told Settlesworth
and he told me...

Did ya hear the one about the lawyer who found a conscience?

Yeah, no one else did, either...

your friend in the old north state
wayno

How would you esplain it?
 

On Mar 23, 3:26 am, " wrote:

SNIP

your friend in the old north state
wayno

http://img168.imageshack.us/my.php?image=roffrs3.jpg

So many things, once treasured, now crumbled into dust
mayhap they withered so because they must?
too late to turn the tide and make amends
naught left, but to sadly raise a glass, to absent
friends..................

TL
MC

How would you esplain it?
 

RalphH wrote:
web based discussion groups - most people have gone to web based forums
where they can post jpegs, have avatars and post cutesy little animated
emoticons. Text based news feed is for old farts.

Old farts and woodworkers apparently. ;-)

--
Ken Fortenberry