This group
 

A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
I've been seeing the same unchanging name list here for several years
now.

In that post I implied, somewhat indirectly, the constant taunting
from
Fortenberry had something to do with it. Several others said
they thought it had more to do with competition from moderated
forums, like the Washington Fly Fishers and many others.

Perhaps the two (competition from forums and acid reflex disease
caused primarily by Fortenberry) are two sides of the same coin.
Fortenberry's constant pain-in-the-ass baiting would be erased by
the moderator at those forums. Fortenberry couldn't exist there
even if he wanted to. The level of discussion is an order of magnitude
more informative and well educated too. Perhaps as a result
(of his absense, and others like him).

I still log in and read this group once or twice a week. But the
frequency
I do read this group will continue to dribble off, principally because
of the
group's current cyber bully jerk. If you go back and review the
group's posts,
over the past year or so, you'll see there are still a fair number
of reasonable, helpful participants. But there is seldom a week
goes by without a **** storm. And Dangleberry is not only always
in the thick of it, he is usually it's starting point.

It will be interesting to see how much longer the group's few
remaining
responsible readers last. There is an undeniable downhill spiral
in progress. The numbers cannot be disputed. The readership here
is now tiny compared to 5 or so years ago.

This group
 

"salmobytes" wrote in message
oups.com...
A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
I've been seeing the same unchanging name list here for several years
now.

In that post I implied, somewhat indirectly, the constant taunting
from
Fortenberry had something to do with it. Several others said
they thought it had more to do with competition from moderated
forums, like the Washington Fly Fishers and many others.

Perhaps the two (competition from forums and acid reflex disease
caused primarily by Fortenberry) are two sides of the same coin.
Fortenberry's constant pain-in-the-ass baiting would be erased by
the moderator at those forums. Fortenberry couldn't exist there
even if he wanted to. The level of discussion is an order of magnitude
more informative and well educated too. Perhaps as a result
(of his absense, and others like him).

I still log in and read this group once or twice a week. But the
frequency
I do read this group will continue to dribble off, principally because
of the
group's current cyber bully jerk. If you go back and review the
group's posts,
over the past year or so, you'll see there are still a fair number
of reasonable, helpful participants. But there is seldom a week
goes by without a **** storm. And Dangleberry is not only always
in the thick of it, he is usually it's starting point.

It will be interesting to see how much longer the group's few
remaining
responsible readers last. There is an undeniable downhill spiral
in progress. The numbers cannot be disputed. The readership here
is now tiny compared to 5 or so years ago.
While you do make a few valid points, You have overlooked something. You
can't lay this all on Fortenberry. Mr. Mike Conner has been the one that
WILL not let things go and WILL not let then Die. He has belittled a number
of people and when called on the carpet and asked a direct question he goes
off on a tangent and attacks people. So while you may have the problem
identified, you have the wrong person Identified. If you go back and read a
few posts from me in the last 4 days in response to Mr. Mikes out of control
attacks, you will see more than just me asking him why he must continue to
attack after he states on many occasions that he is done. But yet when asked
why if he is done does he continue all he does is Call names, insult and
just simply make himself look like a pre-teen baby throwing a temper because
he didn't get his way.. Well Maybe its time to grow up and act his age
instead of a little boy. For someone of his age you would think that would
be easy to do.

Rick

This group
 

salmobytes wrote:
A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed, ...
snip
Dangleberry ...

What a pantload. I've been posting to roff since before there
was a roff and I've noticed that the folks who get the most
agitated are the ones who are "legends in their own minds".
That would include George Gehrke, His Loony Mikeness and you.

Your animus towards me goes all the way back to when Gehrke
thought he had roff wrapped around his little finger and a
collection of "junk yard dogs" to cheer him on. Neither of
those things were ever true but that was Gehrke's perception,
demented as he was. There was, and apparently still are, a
few who would blame Gehrke's loss of reputation on roff from
"Wise Uncle George" to "Huckster Extraordinaire" solely on me.
As much as I'd like to take credit for that it was Gehrke's
own doing.

Now you want to blame me for what ? Declining readership of
roff ? The decline of Usenet newsgroups ? The post-movie
decline in fly fishermen ? The kidnapping of the Lindbergh
baby ? LOL !!

Take your silly fairy tale somewhere else, nobody with any
sense around here will believe a word of it because we all
know it's Wolfgang's fault ! LOL !!

--
Ken Fortenberry

This group
 

Yes, Mike has contributed too. Ken kept him at
a frenzy rate as best he could. Out of control
posts from all such sources would simply be
erased in a moderated forum. I hesitate to mention the names of the
forums
I prefer to read these days. I wouldn't want to cause
those moderators any more work than they already have.

I've jumped into these spats occasionally too (like now).
The increasing frequency of these never-ending **** storms
may or may not be related to the downhill spiral in readership.
But I think it is.

This group
 

salmobytes wrote:
Yes, Mike has contributed too. Ken kept him at
a frenzy rate as best he could. Out of control
posts from all such sources would simply be
erased in a moderated forum. I hesitate to mention the names of the
forums
I prefer to read these days. I wouldn't want to cause
those moderators any more work than they already have. ...

Ok, put up or shut up time. Go back and review the roff posts
for the last year, pretend you are fair-minded moderator and
count the number of my posts you would erase. Do the same
thing for His Loony Mikeness and post the numbers.

--
Ken Fortenberry

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 06:28:45 -0700, salmobytes
wrote:

A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
I've been seeing the same unchanging name list here for several years
now.

In that post I implied, somewhat indirectly, the constant taunting
from
Fortenberry had something to do with it. Several others said
they thought it had more to do with competition from moderated
forums, like the Washington Fly Fishers and many others.

Perhaps the two (competition from forums and acid reflex disease
caused primarily by Fortenberry) are two sides of the same coin.
Fortenberry's constant pain-in-the-ass baiting would be erased by
the moderator at those forums. Fortenberry couldn't exist there
even if he wanted to. The level of discussion is an order of magnitude
more informative and well educated too. Perhaps as a result
(of his absense, and others like him).

I still log in and read this group once or twice a week. But the
frequency
I do read this group will continue to dribble off, principally because
of the
group's current cyber bully jerk. If you go back and review the
group's posts,
over the past year or so, you'll see there are still a fair number
of reasonable, helpful participants. But there is seldom a week
goes by without a **** storm. And Dangleberry is not only always
in the thick of it, he is usually it's starting point.

It will be interesting to see how much longer the group's few
remaining
responsible readers last. There is an undeniable downhill spiral
in progress. The numbers cannot be disputed. The readership here
is now tiny compared to 5 or so years ago.

Um, wouldn't "responsible readers" be responsible for what they read and
to which they responded? OK, so I suppose, technically, being
responsible for what one reads doesn't automatically make one
responsible for how or if they reply, but I'd offer that even if one
accepts the argument that a person might be "duped" into at least seeing
something, it'd be pretty hard to dupe that accidental tourist into
replying to something they didn't even want to read. OTOH, if folks
have left because they continued to chose to read and reply to that
which they found distasteful, I'd offer that no loss has been suffered
either by the reader or the NG.

IAC, I have a coupla-three questions: who makes you read this NG, who
forces you to reply, and perhaps most importantly, why are they forcing
you to post replies that serve no purpose whatsoever other than to stir
the same ****pot you claim drives off the people you claim to lament
losing? And whatever the alleged cause and/or effect, why do care about
any of it?

HTH,
R
....who is an adult and has been around here a fair amount of time - as
such, I've a pretty good idea of what posts I want to read and freely
chose to read your post and reply to it.

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 09:39:34 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

salmobytes wrote:
Yes, Mike has contributed too. Ken kept him at
a frenzy rate as best he could. Out of control
posts from all such sources would simply be
erased in a moderated forum. I hesitate to mention the names of the
forums
I prefer to read these days. I wouldn't want to cause
those moderators any more work than they already have. ...

Ok, put up or shut up time. Go back and review the roff posts
for the last year, pretend you are fair-minded moderator and
count the number of my posts you would erase. Do the same
thing for His Loony Mikeness and post the numbers.

I'd offer that all NGs are "moderated" unless someone is somehow
"forced" to set up a newsclient, subscribe, read, reply, etc. I'll
decide what I wish to read and how or if I reply, thank you vary much.

OTOH, if one were to apply typical NG moderator definitions/standards,
I'd not be surprised in the least to find that 75% of the posts to ROFF
since day one wouldn't make it past a such a moderator...including many
which sparked no real controversy...and this very thread...which is
precisely the reason I've no interest _at all_ in such a forum.

HTH,
R

This group
 

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:26:39 -0000, salmobytes
wrote:

Yes, Mike has contributed too. Ken kept him at
a frenzy rate as best he could. Out of control
posts from all such sources would simply be
erased in a moderated forum. I hesitate to mention the names of the
forums
I prefer to read these days. I wouldn't want to cause
those moderators any more work than they already have.

I've jumped into these spats occasionally too (like now).
The increasing frequency of these never-ending **** storms
may or may not be related to the downhill spiral in readership.
But I think it is.

Three points:

1. I believe it is impossible to have a "moderated group under the
rec domain.

2. Fortenberry has been here since this place started. How could it
be "successful" and then "unsuccessful" when he hasn't changed in the
12 or so years I have known him.

3. You want a fly fishing news group to exist, don't moderate it.
That would be a death kiss.

There is nothing different about roff in 1997 or 2007. It is the same
place, rough and tumble, and it will continue to be rough and tumble.

The latest spat with Connor is nothing new. He has been doing that
for several years. Remember when Gehrke was alive? It was the same
thing. Believe it or not, some people are amused by Connor's antics,
just as they were with Gehrke's.

Dave

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 09:39:34 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Ok, put up or shut up time. Go back and review the roff posts
for the last year, pretend you are fair-minded moderator and
count the number of my posts you would erase. Do the same
thing for His Loony Mikeness and post the numbers.

Great challenge.

Dave

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 15:39:43 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
salmobytes wrote:
A a year or so ago I mentioned ...
whine snipped

...
IAC, I have a coupla-three questions: who makes you read this NG, who
forces you to reply, and perhaps most importantly, why are they forcing
you to post replies that serve no purpose whatsoever other than to stir
the same ****pot you claim drives off the people you claim to lament
losing? And whatever the alleged cause and/or effect, why do care about
any of it?

Yeah, it's interesting to me that the "legendary" fly
fishermen like His Loony Mikeness and Pittendrigh find
other forums to be more educated, more informative, more
civil etc. etc., yet here they remain whining about the
downfall of roff.

Why is that ?

Um, well, hence my question to Sandy...

Anyhoo, I've never seen Sandy toot his own horn, so to speak, so I'm not
sure where your "legendary" comment comes from as to him. In fact, I've
not purposefully ignored him (but if he wrote something in a thread that
did catch my attention...), and other than the apparent, um, slapfight
betwixt y'all, I don't recall any real "shtick" or anything
controversial from him.

I would offer that to blame some decline in posts on any one person is
pretty silly, but hey, if that's his opinion... I did see Tom's comment
but that wasn't Sandy making claims; while I don't know how Tom or
anyone else could really know how one of us unknown FFers had
contributed more to the sport than another unknown, I would accept Tom's
word that when Sandy opens his mouth with regard to FFing, he knows of
what he speaks - again, EMMV.

TC,
R

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 12:09:02 -0400, Dave LaCourse
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:26:39 -0000, salmobytes
wrote:

Yes, Mike has contributed too. Ken kept him at
a frenzy rate as best he could. Out of control
posts from all such sources would simply be
erased in a moderated forum. I hesitate to mention the names of the
forums
I prefer to read these days. I wouldn't want to cause
those moderators any more work than they already have.

I've jumped into these spats occasionally too (like now).
The increasing frequency of these never-ending **** storms
may or may not be related to the downhill spiral in readership.
But I think it is.

Three points:

1. I believe it is impossible to have a "moderated group under the
rec domain.

Unless it has changed recently, there are a number of moderated groups
in the rec.* hierarchy - IIRC, alt. groups aren't moderated, but ???

2. Fortenberry has been here since this place started. How could it
be "successful" and then "unsuccessful" when he hasn't changed in the
12 or so years I have known him.

3. You want a fly fishing news group to exist, don't moderate it.
That would be a death kiss.

There are apparently lots of moderated, successful groups and forums if
you define "successful" as solely the fact that a reasonable number of
people participate. And I'd offer that under that standard, ROFF is a
successful newsgroup.

There is nothing different about roff in 1997 or 2007. It is the same
place, rough and tumble, and it will continue to be rough and tumble.

Sandy is right about a decline in the number of posts to ROFF - that's a
easily-checkable fact. But so what? I'd offer that in the last 60
days, there has been a significant jump going solely by the numbers -
heck, Connor seems never to post a single reply, so that alone has
contributed to the sheer number of posts. Again, so what? Heck,
someone could set up a 'bot to post ten replies that simply say
"Automatic Reply" to every post, and the numbers would really increase.
Yet again, so what? I mean, is someone getting a fee on each post or
something?

TC,
R

This group
 

"salmobytes" wrote in message
ups.com...

two points occur to me, Sandy:

First, this IS far different from any moderated forum,
and those who participate here prefer that.
Second, where can one locate data to determine the
number of READERS? I could be able to figure out the
number of posters, but that is far different.

ROFF is what it is. And, IMO, that isn't a bad thing,overall.
Tom

This group
 

wrote in message
...
while I don't know how Tom or
anyone else could really know how one of us unknown FFers had
contributed more to the sport than another unknown, I would accept Tom's
word that when Sandy opens his mouth with regard to FFing, he knows of
what he speaks - again, EMMV.

TC,
R

The first magazine article I read of Sandy's was, IIRC, in
Fly Tyer around 1981 or so. Since then, he has published more. He is known
as one of the West's most innovative
tyers, and is generally held in VERY high regard by most
serious professional and amateur tiers.
OTOH, Fortenberry discovered Fawn Lake.
Take your pick as a knowledge base.......
Tom

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 17:26:08 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
while I don't know how Tom or
anyone else could really know how one of us unknown FFers had
contributed more to the sport than another unknown, I would accept Tom's
word that when Sandy opens his mouth with regard to FFing, he knows of
what he speaks - again, EMMV.

TC,
R

The first magazine article I read of Sandy's was, IIRC, in
Fly Tyer around 1981 or so. Since then, he has published more. He is known
as one of the West's most innovative
tyers, and is generally held in VERY high regard by most
serious professional and amateur tiers.
OTOH, Fortenberry discovered Fawn Lake.
Take your pick as a knowledge base.......

I gotta say that I don't generally go for such broad subjective
statements on such a diverse thing as FFing, especially when there
really is no way to verify them - sorta like your view of checking on
_readers_ of ROFF. IAC, as I said, I'd certainly take your word in
"vouching" for his knowledge. As to Ken and Fawn Lake, based on what I
read in the Battle of Fawn Lake (thankfully, not all of it), I suspect
that at least some of it was shtick, but ???

And as to Ken and Sandy, um, interaction...well, I'm sure they are both
delightful young ladies and as soon as they get used to having their
monthly visitor, they'll be just like Paris and Nicole again...

TC,
R
....currently dealing with tropicalstormus interuptus - we could actually
use the rain, and thus far, not even puddles...

Tom

This group
 

This group
 

Tom Littleton wrote:
wrote:
while I don't know how Tom or
anyone else could really know how one of us unknown FFers had
contributed more to the sport than another unknown, I would accept Tom's
word that when Sandy opens his mouth with regard to FFing, he knows of
what he speaks - again, EMMV.

The first magazine article I read of Sandy's was, IIRC, in
Fly Tyer around 1981 or so. Since then, he has published more. He is known
as one of the West's most innovative
tyers, and is generally held in VERY high regard by most
serious professional and amateur tiers.
OTOH, Fortenberry discovered Fawn Lake.
Take your pick as a knowledge base.......
Tom

I didn't know we were talking about "knowledge bases".

Anyone who issues threats of physical violence on a Usenet
newsgroup, as Pittendrigh did, should be considered a nitwit.
I've met him and I can confirm, he's a nitwit. You may hold
him in generally high regard but that opinion is far from
universal among the fly fishing folks where he lives. Many
consider him a pathetic weenie wannabe.

As for Fawn Lake all I discovered is there is no Fawn Lake.

--
Ken Fortenberry

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 15:08:17 -0400, Jeff wrote:

wrote:
As to Ken and Fawn Lake, based on what I
read in the Battle of Fawn Lake (thankfully, not all of it), I suspect
that at least some of it was shtick, but ???


nah...not even close. you're a keen observer, but you missed that one.
ken did do a bit of equivocating (from his initial "there is no fawn
lake" to "it's an unfishable mudhole"), but no shticking. He didn't
tell the truth and he's shtuck with his lie. g

Since having enough info to offer a more in-depth opinion on the Battle
of Fawn Lake than I already have would require, well, acquiring that
info, I'll take your word for it...

jeff (likewise, the bad weather in eastern nc this morning kept me from
more pleasant encounters with the puppy drum, but tomorrow's a new day)

Good luck with the fishing,
R

This group
 

This group
 

On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 21:59:30 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

wrote:
Jeff wrote:
wrote:
As to Ken and Fawn Lake, based on what I
read in the Battle of Fawn Lake (thankfully, not all of it), I suspect
that at least some of it was shtick, but ???

nah...not even close. you're a keen observer, but you missed that one.
ken did do a bit of equivocating (from his initial "there is no fawn
lake" to "it's an unfishable mudhole"), but no shticking. He didn't
tell the truth and he's shtuck with his lie. g

Since having enough info to offer a more in-depth opinion on the Battle
of Fawn Lake than I already have would require, well, acquiring that
info, I'll take your word for it...

Years and years worth of shtick but I was hoping to get one
more roffian contingent to hike all the way up to that mass
of unfishable weeds just for one last laugh. Someone suggested
I should open a concession stand up there. ;-)

Since having enough info to offer a more in-depth opinion on the Battle
of Fawn Lake than I already have would require, well, acquiring that
info, I'll take your word for it...

TC,
R

This group
 

salmobytes typed:
A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
snip
There are probably factors that contribute to a decline in posting, but
Ken isn't one of them. He's one of the few constants here, and has been
a regular pain in the ass (who loves ya, Ken?) since long before your
five year mark. It seems to me that this topic rolls around every six
months or so, and someone always has their theory of what causes it.
Let's face it - it's Bush's fault.
--
TL,
Tim
---------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj/

This group
 

"Tim J." wrote in message
. ..

salmobytes typed:
A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
snip
There are probably factors that contribute to a decline in posting, but
Ken isn't one of them. He's one of the few constants here, and has been a
regular pain in the ass (who loves ya, Ken?) since long before your five
year mark. It seems to me that this topic rolls around every six months or
so, and someone always has their theory of what causes it. Let's face it -
it's Bush's fault.
--
TL,
Tim

Spoken like a truly recovering Republican well on his way to full
Independent/Unafilliated recovery!

Op

This group
 

Ken Fortenberry wrote:

As for Fawn Lake all I discovered is there is no Fawn Lake.


so ... inept at discovery *and* truth.

jeff

This group
 

bla bla, bull**** bull**** snip


"WHAT ! no comment from "wolf****" ? I'm dissapointed.
Edmond Dantes

This group
 

"salmobytes" wrote in message
oups.com...
A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
I've been seeing the same unchanging name list here for several years
now.

In that post I implied, somewhat indirectly, the constant taunting
from
Fortenberry had something to do with it. Several others said
they thought it had more to do with competition from moderated
forums, like the Washington Fly Fishers and many others.

Perhaps the two (competition from forums and acid reflex disease
caused primarily by Fortenberry) are two sides of the same coin.
Fortenberry's constant pain-in-the-ass baiting would be erased by
the moderator at those forums. Fortenberry couldn't exist there
even if he wanted to. The level of discussion is an order of magnitude
more informative and well educated too. Perhaps as a result
(of his absense, and others like him).

I still log in and read this group once or twice a week. But the
frequency
I do read this group will continue to dribble off, principally because
of the
group's current cyber bully jerk. If you go back and review the
group's posts,
over the past year or so, you'll see there are still a fair number
of reasonable, helpful participants. But there is seldom a week
goes by without a **** storm. And Dangleberry is not only always
in the thick of it, he is usually it's starting point.

It will be interesting to see how much longer the group's few
remaining
responsible readers last. There is an undeniable downhill spiral
in progress. The numbers cannot be disputed. The readership here
is now tiny compared to 5 or so years ago.


first you wanna bitch and then you blame others...naming names...

hmmmmmmmmm.....Everybody knows it's Wolfgang's fault, that's why Miller
burnt Gooters...Frank could show you the evidence, but then he's had to kill
ya, and George would make the coffins...

Do you see what I'm saying...?

John

This group
 

"salmobytes" wrote in message
oups.com...
A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
I've been seeing the same unchanging name list here for several years
now.

In that post I implied, somewhat indirectly, the constant taunting
from
Fortenberry had something to do with it. Several others said
they thought it had more to do with competition from moderated
forums, like the Washington Fly Fishers and many others.

Perhaps the two (competition from forums and acid reflex disease
caused primarily by Fortenberry) are two sides of the same coin.
Fortenberry's constant pain-in-the-ass baiting would be erased by
the moderator at those forums. Fortenberry couldn't exist there
even if he wanted to. The level of discussion is an order of magnitude
more informative and well educated too. Perhaps as a result
(of his absense, and others like him).

I still log in and read this group once or twice a week. But the
frequency
I do read this group will continue to dribble off, principally because
of the
group's current cyber bully jerk. If you go back and review the
group's posts,
over the past year or so, you'll see there are still a fair number
of reasonable, helpful participants. But there is seldom a week
goes by without a **** storm. And Dangleberry is not only always
in the thick of it, he is usually it's starting point.

It will be interesting to see how much longer the group's few
remaining
responsible readers last. There is an undeniable downhill spiral
in progress. The numbers cannot be disputed. The readership here
is now tiny compared to 5 or so years ago.

Repost of a very thoughtful response to Jan Mikkelsen's expressed concern
for the future of ROFF in a thread titled "Rethinking it all again,
again..." and dated 4-12-07:

" /Jan 'One who would hate to see also ROFF die'

You may set your mind at ease, Jan.....the much anticipated death of ROFF
simply isn't going to happen. The only thing that COULD make it happen is
for all those who wring their hands and rend their clothing in despair over
the dreadful conditions here to have their wish come true. Enthusiasm for a
beloved avocation like fly fishing is understandable (and even
admirable.....at least for those of us who share that enthusiasm and have
reason to find it defensible) but the activity, for all its complexity and
lifelong value to participants, is too cramped and narrowly focused to
sustain a vibrant community discussion through eternity. The ideal ROFF
that many envision is a lot like the classic picture of the Christian
heaven.....nice climate, and you don't have to worry about
mosquitoes.....but a couple of eons of singing hosannas would find the vast
majority bolting for the nearest exit and jostling for space on the first
commuter train to hell. Those few who missed the last train would then
settle down to an interminable polite discussion about the true nature of
God (otherwise known as "the best knot for attaching leader to fly line")
until the sponsors decided that "Heaven®" was no longer a viable commodity
and closed it down due to lack of interest, leaving the last few holdouts to
ruminate that having an immortal soul isn't quite as peachy as the
advertising brochures made it look. They would then spend the rest of
eternity (a much longer time than most people suppose) wandering from one
moderate forum to another, searching for yet another opinion on the best
floatant, and leaving each as they successively went tits up, all the while
wearing large stinking birds suspended from thongs around their necks.

But, if wishes were fishes......

Or, as friends down south back in the day used to say, "Wish in one hand and
**** in the other......see which fills up faster."

Meanwhile, ROFF plods on. The imminent demise predicted by so many for so
long has failed to materialize, and all the evidence used in support of this
hoary perennial millennial prognostication is nothing more than chimerical
crap. Take, for example, "Salmobyte's" recent revelation that traffic in
ROFF is down by 80% from some halcyon (though unspecified) golden age. By
my (admittedly rough) count, there were about 165 new threads (5 and change
per day, on average) begun in this newsgroup in March of this year and,
according to Google:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.o...hing.fly/about there were
1900 (61 per day)individual messages. If this represents just 20% (100-80)
of the usual, then it follows that there used to be 825 (5 x 20%) new
threads each month (27 per day) and 9500 individual messages (306 per day).
Looking at the chart displayed at the above address, I have failed to find
anything that supports those numbers.....or anything approaching
them......but then, it only goes back as far as mid 1994. Maybe the good
old days were earlier. Anyway, the heaviest traffic I could find was in
January of 2002, with 6375 messages. I'm content to leave judgments about
relative content, tone, worth, etc., between then and now as an exercise for
anyone who may be interested.

As for the current crisis........YAWN! Again, I think a single example
should suffice to typify the whole. So, Mike is gonna be the destroyer of
ROFF, huh? Well, this is every bit as ambitious an enterprise as his former
bid to be its raison d'etre, and there is ample reason to be certain that it
will be every bit as successful. O.k., but at least he is completely
justified in his feelings (if not necessarily his proposed solution) about
what he has been subjected to here in the last year or two.....right? No.
He has, as he well knows, brought this upon himself. Yeah, in a sense,
because he has no control over how others react to his eminently helpful,
logical, and indisputable advice......right? Wrong. He has brought this
upon himself DELIBERATELY, and for the same reasons as the rest of the
entirely self-conscious gaggle of disruptive morons here......or we are left
to suppose that he (and they) are actually so stupid as to be completely
mystified by the rudiments of cause and effect. Anyone who, at this late
date, still believes that Mike is getting anything other than exactly what
he wants from this group NEEDS to find a place where he or she can be told
what to read, what to write, what to think, and what to believe.

Meanwhile, ROFF plods on. Where they exist (and, as pretty much everyone
knows, their distribution is virtually worldwide) pests like mosquitoes (or
stevies, kennies, mikies, davies.....and dicklets) are a fact of life that
people simply have to deal with one way or another. Wishing them out of
existence will never work. In fact, getting worked up into a lather and
loudly cursing the gods raises both body surface temperature and carbon
dioxide exhalation, both of which serve as beacons for mosquitoes and
increase their activity. Likewise, the humunculoid pests in Usenet operate
on precisely the same principle. Even perfectly reasonable declamations on
the sadness of the whole sorry mess serve (as has been, and will continue to
be, demonstrated yet again in this thread) merely serve to fan the
flames....it is EXACTLY what they want. Returning to the minuscule winged
annoyances, the only effective way to deal with them on an individual basis
is to swat them whenever they come within range, and keep swatting as long
as they continue to appear. The trouble with metaphors, of course, is that
they are models, and a model is, by definition, lacking in one or more of
the essential features of that which is modeled. One can metaphorically
swat Usenet pests (and one certainly shouldn't miss any opportunity to do
so) but they don't die. Alternatively (or in combination), one can (and,
again, certainly should) see them for what they truly are.....self-made
toys.....and deal with them accordingly. They hate it. Eventually they
will pretend (however briefly and unconvincingly) that you don't exist until
the irresistible urge overtakes them again and they present themselves for
another swatting.

Bottom line: Life presents many intractable problems that will consume as
much of a person as he or she will allow. Everyone should take time out to
play with the ****-weasels. It makes the world a better place.......and
keeps ROFF alive, vital, and interesting. :)"

Not as helpful and interesting as serial whining, perhaps.....but I guess I
don't much care about that.

Wolfgang

This group
 

Wolfgang typed:
snip
Meanwhile, ROFF plods on.

No - roff is, indeed, quite dead. Sorry nobody informed you, but the wake is
this afternoon with the funeral immediately following. This will be the last
post and then it's "lights out." I'd appreciate it if one of you would close
the door on your way out. Thank you, and goodnight.
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

This group
 

On Sep 24, 8:59 am, "Tim J."
wrote:
Wolfgang typed:
snip

Meanwhile, ROFF plods on.

No - roff is, indeed, quite dead. Sorry nobody informed you, but the wake is
this afternoon with the funeral immediately following. This will be the last
post and then it's "lights out." I'd appreciate it if one of you would close
the door on your way out. Thank you, and goodnight.
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------http://css.sbcma.com/timj

Are we going to burry it in a bentonite formation?

This group
 

On Sep 24, 8:59 am, "Tim J."
wrote:
Wolfgang typed:
snip

Meanwhile, ROFF plods on.

No - roff is, indeed, quite dead. Sorry nobody informed you, but the wake is
this afternoon with the funeral immediately following. This will be the last
post and then it's "lights out." I'd appreciate it if one of you would close
the door on your way out. Thank you, and goodnight.
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------http://css.sbcma.com/timj

BTW I had arranged for Marcel Marceau to read the eulogy.
Unfortunately he died. I called the number of his agent, the picked
up but there was only silence on the other end.

This group
 

"BJ Conner" wrote in message
ups.com...

BTW I had arranged for Marcel Marceau to read the eulogy.
Unfortunately he died. I called the number of his agent, the picked
up but there was only silence on the other end.


Years ago I had the privilege to see Marcel Marceau, he's a pretty awesome
mime.
It might have been interesting to watch Marceau perform the ROFF eulogy, but
even
more of a challenge for someone to get in a ****ing contest with him.
-tom

This group
 

"Tom Nakashima" wrote in message
...

"BJ Conner" wrote in message
ups.com...

BTW I had arranged for Marcel Marceau to read the eulogy.
Unfortunately he died. I called the number of his agent, the picked
up but there was only silence on the other end.


Years ago I had the privilege to see Marcel Marceau, he's a pretty awesome
mime.
It might have been interesting to watch Marceau perform the ROFF eulogy,
but even
more of a challenge for someone to get in a ****ing contest with him.

I'd risk a shiny new nickel on the assumption that he could read and write.

Wolfgang
which, it should not be necessary to add, would put him way ahead of some of
the regular "contributors" here.

This group
 

"BJ Conner" wrote in message
ups.com...

BTW I had arranged for Marcel Marceau to read the eulogy.
Unfortunately he died.

Might be able to find a parrot to give a ROFF eulogy.
-tom

This group
 

"Tom Nakashima" wrote in message
...

"BJ Conner" wrote in message
ups.com...

BTW I had arranged for Marcel Marceau to read the eulogy.
Unfortunately he died.

Might be able to find a parrot to give a ROFF eulogy.

Shouldn't have any trouble at all finding a whole chorus of those here.

Wolfgang
can i get an amen?

This group
 

"asadi" wrote in message
...

"salmobytes" wrote in message
oups.com...
A a year or so ago I mentioned I'd noticed,
(on Google's group statistics) that several key groups
I occasionally read, like comp.lang.php, rec.boats.buidling
and rec.woodworking, were doing well. Their average
number of posts and readers was holding steady, pretty
close to what they were 5 years ago. But rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
was down 80 percent (and that was a year ago). It's probably even more
anemic now.
I've been seeing the same unchanging name list here for several years
now.

In that post I implied, somewhat indirectly, the constant taunting
from
Fortenberry had something to do with it. Several others said
they thought it had more to do with competition from moderated
forums, like the Washington Fly Fishers and many others.

Perhaps the two (competition from forums and acid reflex disease
caused primarily by Fortenberry) are two sides of the same coin.
Fortenberry's constant pain-in-the-ass baiting would be erased by
the moderator at those forums. Fortenberry couldn't exist there
even if he wanted to. The level of discussion is an order of magnitude
more informative and well educated too. Perhaps as a result
(of his absense, and others like him).

I still log in and read this group once or twice a week. But the
frequency
I do read this group will continue to dribble off, principally because
of the
group's current cyber bully jerk. If you go back and review the
group's posts,
over the past year or so, you'll see there are still a fair number
of reasonable, helpful participants. But there is seldom a week
goes by without a **** storm. And Dangleberry is not only always
in the thick of it, he is usually it's starting point.

It will be interesting to see how much longer the group's few
remaining
responsible readers last. There is an undeniable downhill spiral
in progress. The numbers cannot be disputed. The readership here
is now tiny compared to 5 or so years ago.


first you wanna bitch and then you blame others...naming names...

hmmmmmmmmm.....Everybody knows it's Wolfgang's fault,

Can't help it. I'm possessed.

that's why Miller burnt Gooters...Frank could show you the evidence, but
then he's had to kill ya, and George would make the coffins...

A cottage industry! What's my cut?

Do you see what I'm saying...?

I do.

Wolfgang
hm.......why does that worry me? :(

This group
 

"Tom Nakashima" wrote in message
...

"BJ Conner" wrote in message
ups.com...

BTW I had arranged for Marcel Marceau to read the eulogy.
Unfortunately he died.

Might be able to find a parrot to give a ROFF eulogy.
-tom

I was telling my friend at lunch about Marcel Marceau giving an eulogy.
She actually attended a funeral where Marcel Marceau was a guest eulogist.
Said she was in tears when the parrot was translating for the hearing
impaired.
-tom

This group
 

"Wolfgang" wrote in message
...

SNIP


You may set your mind at ease, Jan.....the much anticipated death of ROFF
simply isn't going to happen. The only thing that COULD make it happen is
for all those who wring their hands and rend their clothing in despair
over
the dreadful conditions here to have their wish come true. Enthusiasm for
a
beloved avocation like fly fishing is understandable (and even
admirable.....at least for those of us who share that enthusiasm and have
reason to find it defensible) but the activity, for all its complexity and
lifelong value to participants, is too cramped and narrowly focused to
sustain a vibrant community discussion through eternity. The ideal ROFF
that many envision is a lot like the classic picture of the Christian
heaven.....nice climate, and you don't have to worry about
mosquitoes.....but a couple of eons of singing hosannas would find the
vast
majority bolting for the nearest exit and jostling for space on the first
commuter train to hell. Those few who missed the last train would then
settle down to an interminable polite discussion about the true nature of
God (otherwise known as "the best knot for attaching leader to fly line")
until the sponsors decided that "Heaven®" was no longer a viable commodity
and closed it down due to lack of interest, leaving the last few holdouts
to
ruminate that having an immortal soul isn't quite as peachy as the
advertising brochures made it look. They would then spend the rest of
eternity (a much longer time than most people suppose) wandering from one
moderate forum to another, searching for yet another opinion on the best
floatant, and leaving each as they successively went tits up, all the
while
wearing large stinking birds suspended from thongs around their necks.

But, if wishes were fishes......

SNIP

Wolfgang



ROFLAO!

Not at the content of this paragraph, but at the similarities to your ideas
and the production of George Bernard Shaw's Don Juan In Hell that I was
fortunate enough to see last winter. Absolutely hilarious and thought
provoking.
Thanks for both. (the laugh and the thoughts).

Jeremy Moe

This group
 

BTW I had arranged for Marcel Marceau to read the eulogy.
Unfortunately he died. I called the number of his agent, the picked
up but there was only silence on the other end.

Years ago I had the privilege to see Marcel Marceau, he's a pretty awesome
mime.
It might have been interesting to watch Marceau perform the ROFF eulogy, but
even
more of a challenge for someone to get in a ****ing contest with him.
-tom

I worked on the Rose Parade floats as a teenager in the early 70's.
Red Skelton was the grand marshal one year. I got to talk to him and
after a bit stood back and watched. Marceau was there (riding a
float) and went up to talk to him. Two grand masters, pantomime and
mime. Friggen awesome.
Frank Reid

This group
 

......but a couple of eons of singing hosannas would find the vast
majority bolting for the nearest exit and jostling for space on the
first
commuter train to hell.

Hmm, fly fisherman's Hell.
The fly fishing rules are English
Your guide is from Los Angeles
Your territory is limited to Kansas
The trout come from Ohio
The smallies come from Florida
And all your tackle is Orvis bought in Walmart.
Frank Reid

This group
 

"J & D Moe" wrote in message
news:hSZJi.2100$YN2.1683@trndny07...

ROFLAO!

Not at the content of this paragraph, but at the similarities to your
ideas and the production of George Bernard Shaw's Don Juan In Hell that I
was fortunate enough to see last winter. Absolutely hilarious and thought
provoking.

Oddly enough (I was an English major, after all) I've never seen a
performance of any of Shaw's works.....or even read any of them. Rereading
the paragraph you referred to just now, it occurs to me that Twain's Captain
Stormfield was rustling about somewhere in the nether regions of my brain as
I was writing it. :)

Thanks for both. (the laugh and the thoughts).

You're welcome.

Wolfgang

This group
 

Frank Reid wrote in news:1190687525.888016.67760
@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:


I worked on the Rose Parade floats as a teenager in the early 70's.


I don't recall seeing any floats going down the parade route aflame in the
70's, which is what I think is the likeliest outcome of mixing you and a
float.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply