"StarFuryG7" wrote in message
news:1535d503-dfce-4694-94c5-846c8c16cd56@b12g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 8, 9:14 pm, "Nicole Massey" wrote:
>
> I can't speak to the frequency of it, but my last post to the list that
> wasn't a reply about something Walter Koenig said regarding the show,
> never
> showed up, and when I emailed a moderator I was told that it didn't hit
> their system. This has been a problem here for several years now --
> someone
> who has a better archive and was posting here more often can tell you when
> this particular problem popped up, though I remember it was after when I
> lost my sight that that message came through, and I was out of commission
> for about a year after that happened in terms of using the computer, so it
> was more recently than the summer of 2004.
> I get the impression that the server goes down from time to time or locks
> up, and then nothing gets through, so that could be a reason as well. Like
> I
> said before, moderated newsgroups are a kludge on normal usenet traffic,
> so
> sometimes less than optimum things happen. I'm on another mailing list
> that's moderated simply to eliminate crossposting, and that newsgroup gets
> about two orders of magnitude more spam than I get on any other newsgroup,
> simply because messages have to go through an email process to get
> moderated, so like I said above, it's often a less than optimum process.
> Furthermore, it's also of almost no importance. This is a free forum
> without
> advertizing and only volunteer effort, and no one is going to lose their
> home, dinner, clothing, or water over it, so it's just window dressing.
> And
> Jay's response to you was because he finally got some time to respond and
> you were rather offensive about it all, so let's not get all victimy here.
> The simple truth is that you had something go not right, you thought it
> was
> enemy action instead of happenstance, and so, from what you've said, you
> then decided they were persecuting you for some reason and got defensive.
It actually goes beyond that, as there's background here that you're
simply not aware of given that some of it occurred behind-the-scenes
in email exchanges going back a long time ago; situations that I found
to be particularly distasteful which I simply haven't forgotten about
over time. It's pointless to go into specifics though given that it
won't change a thing. Suffice it to say, as I've stated here
previously on numerous occasions, not just recently within the last
few months, posts have gone missing all the way back to the 90s from
whatever service or newsgroup server I happened to be posting from. If
it's indeed tech-related, it sure takes in a lot of territory,
although whether it stems from this newsgroup and how it's configured
or from some unknown intermittent ghost in the machine, I wouldn't be
able to say obviously as there's simply no way for me to know. But
over time, spanning well over a decade, it looks suspicious, and more
than that, has felt suspicious to boot on a number of occasions. This
is not something which has popped up within just the last few years--
at least not for me.
> And before you go into the whole
> "protecting Joe" angle, Joe doesn't need any protecting -- he's dealt with
> far greater questions about his integrity than what Claudia suggested. And
> everyone knows that he's the one to clear up such things, keeping in mind
> Vorlon commentaries on the truth.
It wasn't integrity-related as I recall; more so embarrassing perhaps
than anything...a portion of it anyway, which I would think to be a
potential reason for it having been kill-filed perhaps by someone in a
position to do it.
> Now, mayhap, was there something you would like to say about the show? I
> can't believe we're coming up next year on the fifteenth anniversary of
> the
> end of it.
Generally if there's something I want to say about the show nowadays,
or for a long time for that matter, I'd do it elsewhere, such as on
IMDB as Jan has noted, or in one of the other forums I frequent (the
old AOL message board I routinely visited is gone, since they deleted
all of their old boards all a while back in favor of a new and
supposedly "improved" message board format, which is as lousy as can
be. But I have generally shied away from posting here for a whole host
of reasons, not just the possible, and from what you say, probable
technical issues.
All of this stuff aside though, I just want to say that despite our
differences here you deserve a lot of credit for the way you're able
to effectively communicate using a computer. The fact that you appear
to be able to do so with such ease despite your loss of sight is
remarkably impressive, at least to me anyway. One of the things that's
always bothered me about "Covert Affairs" is that one of the main
characters is supposed to be something of a computer whiz even though
he's blind, which I've found to be incredibly unrealistic. You however
give me reason to second guess that personal perception, for what it's
worth.
---
I have prior experience in IT as a LAN administrator, Desktop Support tech,
Helpdesk Manager, Technical Writer, and a few others. (All before I lost my
sight) Anyone who knows how to type can express themself well, though it
requires that they also know how to express themself well too. I'm something
of a word geek, so I take clear communication seriously, and I've been doing
this for almost 32 years now, as I started out with BBS systems.
I acknowledge that I don't know everything about your personal interaction,
but I do know a lot about the way things are run here. As said by another on
this thread, if you didn't get a rejection email, then your message wasn't
rejected by moderation -- their own personal feelings aside, I believe this
group has moderators with enough integrity that they wouldn't squash
something and not tell you about it being rejected.
I also think that embarassing Joe from something Claudia said wouldn't be
enough reason to reject an email. (Especially with some of the CYA
retconning Claudia has done in the past to remove her responsibility from
some issues)
Two monks were walking down a road that was well travelled, dodging others,
for their order had a rule that they were not to physically touch anyone
else. When they reached a river, an old woman stood there, scared to cross,
so the older monk lifted her up on his shoulders and carried her across the
river on his back. The younger monk said nothing, but this bothered him not
a little. They walked on and at evening, after traversing another 20 miles,
they sat down for dinner and sleep.
The younger monk said, "Brother, something is bothering me. That old woman,
you touched her by carrying her across the river. That violates our rules.
And I am concerned for you."
The older monk looked at him and said, "And I am concerned for you, my
brother, for the same reason."
The younger monk, surprised, said, "Why? I've done nothing."
His older compatriot said, "I carried that woman across a stream, a distance
of a hundred and fifty feet. You've carried her now for over twenty five
miles. Don't you think it's time to put her down now?"
Any gruge or bad feelings you hold isn't going to keep those you're holding
them against miss one nanosecond of sleep. You are a different matter. As
has been said here, they're letting you keep this up -- any one of the
moderators could hand moderate you or tell us to knock it off and shut down
the thread. They aren't. This should tell you something about the integrity
of he people for whom you're holding on to something that started long ago.
This is my option for B5 related stuff -- I dont' use Facebook both because
it has blind accessibility problems and because I got tired of BBS's when I
shut mine down in 1997. And that makes me wonder -- if you're not here to
talk about the show, just why are you here then?
--- SBBSecho 2.20-Win32
* Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:340/400)
|
