Irene c wrote:
>"Misty9999" wrote
>snip
>> I never understood why there is no misc.invest.bonds group. The only
>> thing I don't like about the misc.invest* groups are the
>> self-promotors. I consider some of the posters stealth spammers. Have
>> you considered warning people about that in your charter?
>I agree in some groups this is a problem, but the size of the problem seems
>to vary a lot.
Any idea if bonds are ever involved in these (indirectly probably
in most, right?)?
>I do have a bit of a warning already in the charter. Do you have any words
>you'd like to propose in place of these?
>To jog people's memories, from the draft charter: "The proposed unmoderated
>newsgroup misc.invest.bonds is not intended for for-sale postings.
>Advertisements that do appear may be vigorously critiqued."
Are these self promoters actually selling something? Yes, I know
a service can be sold or advertised, but some folks try to make a
distinction. Some of these might argue semantics, so perhaps adding
a generalization (e.g. "commercial", "advertisement") or a
specific mention of "self-promoters" (pick the best term) is
recommended.
>I see one recent RFD put the word "will" in for "may be" in a similar
>warning. Would you prefer this?
It's a question of certainty. If you already know who your readers
are, and more to the point, what the general character is like,
you may know if they are the kind of folks that will go after someone
and thus choose "will". On the otherhand, if they are not, then you
have less of a sense as to how they will react, so you may choose
"may be". The default is probably to use "may be", so that you
don't commit yourself/the group at such an early stage.
ru
--
My standard proposals rant:
Quality, usefulness, merit, or non-newsgroups popularity of a topic
is more or less irrelevant in creating a new Big-8 newsgroup.
Usenet popularity is the primary consideration.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
