Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution


    Request for Discussion (RFD)
    unmoderated group us.talk.constitution


    This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create
    a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution.
    This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by
    consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the
    discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.

    Newsgroups line:
    us.talk.constitution Discussion of the US Constitution


    Rationale: us.talk.constitution

    As the framework for the functioning of the US government
    and the basis for rights of Americans, the US Constitution
    can be an issue in many events. Discussion of such issues,
    all of which have the Constitution as their focal point,
    is scattered over various groups. A group devoted to
    such issues is appropriate.


    ****BEGIN CHARTER*****

    Charter: us.talk.constitution

    us.talk.constitution is an unmoderated group intended
    for discussion of issues related to the US Constitution.
    Discussion might include the document itself, the history
    of the document and its application, and current issues
    concerning the Constitution.



    Posting Guidelines

    The most recent version of the us.* hierarchy posting
    rules apply to this group. Violations of this charter
    or the hierarchy rules may result in action being
    taken against the offender, and articles determined to
    be abuse OF the net may be canceled without warning.

    Note: Newsgroup creation rules and posting
    guidelines for the us.* hierarchy are posted
    on the web at http://www.usenetnews.us


    Six-month trial

    As provided by us.* hierarchy rules, this charter shall
    remain in full force and effect for at least six months.
    At the end of the six-month trial period, amendments may
    be proposed by participants in the group in accordance
    with procedures outlined in the us.* hierarchy newsgroup
    creation rules.


    *****END CHARTER*****



    Procedures

    Time for discussion has been extended by the us.*
    Administrator through October 1, 2003. Additional
    extensions may be made by the Administrator.


    Distribution: us.config, us.legal, us.politics


    Proponents

    Leonard Pulver redlen AT gta DOT igs DOT net
    RTO Trainer bill.white AT us DOT army DOT mil
    edward ohare edward_ohare AT yahoo DOT com

    Host: Leonard Pulver redlen AT gta DOT igs DOT net

  • #2
    3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution


    "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    Request for Discussion (RFD) unmoderated group us.talk.constitution This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution. This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.
    I am against anything that has talk in it that is better suited for politics
    or government. Using Talk will draw every fruitcake that's out there.
    Life expectancy will be very short.




    Comment


    • #3
      3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

      Pulver wrote:
      Request for Discussion (RFD) unmoderated group us.talk.constitution This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy,
      us.talk.constitution.
      This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD. Newsgroups line: us.talk.constitution Discussion of the US Constitution Rationale: us.talk.constitution As the framework for the functioning of the US government and the basis for rights of Americans, the US Constitution can be an issue in many events. Discussion of such
      issues,
      all of which have the Constitution as their focal point, is scattered over various groups. A group devoted to such issues is appropriate. ****BEGIN CHARTER***** Charter: us.talk.constitution us.talk.constitution is an unmoderated group intended for discussion of issues related to the US Constitution. Discussion might include the document itself, the history of the document and its application, and current issues concerning the Constitution. Posting Guidelines The most recent version of the us.* hierarchy posting rules apply to this group. Violations of this charter or the hierarchy rules may result in action being taken against the offender, and articles determined to be abuse OF the net may be canceled without warning. Note: Newsgroup creation rules and posting guidelines for the us.* hierarchy are posted on the web at http://www.usenetnews.us Six-month trial As provided by us.* hierarchy rules, this charter shall remain in full force and effect for at least six months. At the end of the six-month trial period, amendments may be proposed by participants in the group in accordance with procedures outlined in the us.* hierarchy newsgroup creation rules. *****END CHARTER***** Procedures Time for discussion has been extended by the us.* Administrator through October 1, 2003. Additional extensions may be made by the Administrator. Distribution: us.config, us.legal, us.politics Proponents Leonard Pulver redlen AT gta DOT igs DOT net RTO Trainer bill.white AT us DOT army DOT mil edward ohare edward_ohare AT yahoo DOT com Host: Leonard Pulver redlen AT gta DOT igs DOT net

      I support it.

      Snark


      Comment


      • #4
        3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

        On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:10:20 -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]>
        amazed us with his/her particular brand of stupidity in
        <[email protected]03896.news.uni-berlin.de> in us.config when he/she
        wrote:
        "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]
        Request for Discussion (RFD) unmoderated group us.talk.constitution This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution. This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.
        I am against anything that has talk in it that is better suited for politicsor government. Using Talk will draw every fruitcake that's out there.Life expectancy will be very short.
        It's nice to see that the first fruitcake has arrived.


        --
        K. A. Cannon
        kacannon at databasix dot com
        (change the con to com to reply)

        mhm33x1

        "Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process
        he does not become a monster. And when you look into the abyss,
        the abyss also looks into you"
        - Nietzsche, From Beyond Good and Evil, (1886)


        "The person who stands up and says, 'This is stupid,' either is asked to
        `behave' or, worse, is greeted with a cheerful 'Yes, we know! Isn't it
        terrific!'" - Frank Zappa

        Comment


        • #5
          3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

          After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:10:20
          -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:
          "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]
          Request for Discussion (RFD) unmoderated group us.talk.constitution This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution. This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.
          I am against anything that has talk in it that is better suited for politicsor government. Using Talk will draw every fruitcake that's out there.Life expectancy will be very short.
          Are there some examples of this?
          --
          SGT Robert White 31U, OKARNG HHC 45th eSB Thunderbirds!

          Comment


          • #6
            3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution


            "RTO Trainer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
            news:[email protected]
            After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:10:20 -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:
            "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]
            Request for Discussion (RFD) unmoderated group us.talk.constitution This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution. This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.
            I am against anything that has talk in it that is better suited for
            politics
            or government. Using Talk will draw every fruitcake that's out there.Life expectancy will be very short. Are there some examples of this?
            It's an opinion. Remember those? Those are what other people are allowed
            to have.




            Comment


            • #7
              3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

              RTO Trainer wrote:
              After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct
              2003 20:10:20
              -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:
              "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
              Request for Discussion (RFD) unmoderated group us.talk.constitution This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy,
              us.talk.constitution.
              This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD. I am against anything that has talk in it that is better
              suited for
              politics or government. Using Talk will draw every
              fruitcake
              that's out there. Life expectancy will be very short. Are there some examples of this?
              Well the "fruitcake" has already rendered his opinion. The
              only question will be whether he chooses to infest utc like
              he has us.config, uma and umn-g.

              Snark


              Comment


              • #8
                3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution


                "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
                news:H0Peb.10865$R[email protected] link.net...
                RTO Trainer wrote:
                After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct
                2003 20:10:20
                -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:
                "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]>> Request for Discussion (RFD)> unmoderated group us.talk.constitution>>> This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create> a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy,
                us.talk.constitution.
                > This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by> consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the> discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD. I am against anything that has talk in it that is better
                suited for
                politics or government. Using Talk will draw every
                fruitcake
                that's out there. Life expectancy will be very short. Are there some examples of this?
                Well the "fruitcake" has already rendered his opinion. The only question will be whether he chooses to infest utc like he has us.config, uma and umn-g.
                Speaking of infestations. I can see that you are still the locust you
                always were. And I vote against anything that is supposed to be serious
                discussions that is under something as trollish as talk. I am not the only
                one that has voiced that opinion. You are a newbie to the net, kid.




                Comment


                • #9
                  3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

                  Daryl Hunt wrote:messagenews:[email protected] link.net..
                  ..
                  RTO Trainer wrote:
                  After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct
                  2003 20:10:20
                  -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:>> "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in message> news:[email protected]>>>> Request for Discussion (RFD)>> unmoderated group us.talk.constitution>>>>>> This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to
                  create
                  >> a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution.
                  >> This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is
                  by
                  >> consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the>> discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.>> I am against anything that has talk in it that is
                  better
                  suited for
                  > politics or government. Using Talk will draw every
                  fruitcake
                  > that's out there. Life expectancy will be very short.> Are there some examples of this?
                  Well the "fruitcake" has already rendered his opinion.
                  The
                  only question will be whether he chooses to infest utc
                  like
                  he has us.config, uma and umn-g. Speaking of infestations. I can see that you are still
                  the locust you
                  always were. And I vote against anything that is supposed
                  to be
                  serious discussions that is under something as trollish as
                  talk. I
                  am not the only one that has voiced that opinion. You are
                  a newbie
                  to the net, kid.
                  I may be a newbie but, I knew what a BI index was and why if
                  you continued to post the same lines over and over again to
                  multiple groups you would exceed it.

                  'The end result was 107 cancels for spamming usenet. I
                  cancelled a whole 15 posts as a courtesy to HT that were
                  about the life cycle and relationship of yourself to
                  Trematodea and managed to get in some good teaching on
                  parasitology while I was at it.

                  Yep, a newbie with an IQ of 60 ran rings around you. That
                  says a lot about you doesn't it?

                  Snark


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution


                    "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
                    news:[email protected] link.net...
                    Daryl Hunt wrote: message news:[email protected] link.net.. .
                    RTO Trainer wrote:> After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:10:20> -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:>>>>> "Pulver" <[email protected]> wrote in message>> news:[email protected]>>>>>> Request for Discussion (RFD)>>> unmoderated group us.talk.constitution>>>>>>>>> This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to
                    create
                    >>> a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution.>>> This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is
                    by
                    >>> consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the>>> discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.>>>> I am against anything that has talk in it that is
                    better
                    suited for>> politics or government. Using Talk will draw every fruitcake>> that's out there. Life expectancy will be very short.>>> Are there some examples of this? Well the "fruitcake" has already rendered his opinion.
                    The
                    only question will be whether he chooses to infest utc
                    like
                    he has us.config, uma and umn-g. Speaking of infestations. I can see that you are still
                    the locust you
                    always were. And I vote against anything that is supposed
                    to be
                    serious discussions that is under something as trollish as
                    talk. I
                    am not the only one that has voiced that opinion. You are
                    a newbie
                    to the net, kid.
                    I may be a newbie but, I knew what a BI index was and why if you continued to post the same lines over and over again to multiple groups you would exceed it.
                    Don't you have another side to that record, Troll Boy?






                    Comment


                    • #11
                      3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

                      Daryl Hunt wrote:messagenews:[email protected] link.net..
                      ..
                      Daryl Hunt wrote:
                      messagenews:[email protected] link.net..
                      .
                      <snip>
                      Speaking of infestations. I can see that you are still
                      the locust
                      you always were. And I vote against anything that is
                      supposed to be
                      serious discussions that is under something as trollish
                      as talk. I
                      am not the only one that has voiced that opinion. You
                      are a newbie
                      to the net, kid. I may be a newbie but, I knew what a BI index was and why
                      if
                      you continued to post the same lines over and over again
                      to
                      multiple groups you would exceed it. Don't you have another side to that record, Troll Boy?
                      Actually, you have the record. You're the only person in
                      the us.* hierarchy that was ever cancelled for spamming
                      usenet, and have the distinction of a record 107 cancelled
                      spam posts to your name. Quite possibly more.
                      Two records that I don't think anyone will beat.

                      Snark

                      Ok, folks, wait for it, here it comes, the last word.




                      Comment


                      • #12
                        3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution



                        "[email protected]" wrote:
                        Pulver wrote:
                        Request for Discussion (RFD) unmoderated group us.talk.constitution This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy,
                        us.talk.constitution.
                        This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD. Newsgroups line: us.talk.constitution Discussion of the US Constitution Rationale: us.talk.constitution As the framework for the functioning of the US government and the basis for rights of Americans, the US Constitution can be an issue in many events. Discussion of such
                        issues,
                        all of which have the Constitution as their focal point, is scattered over various groups. A group devoted to such issues is appropriate. ****BEGIN CHARTER***** Charter: us.talk.constitution us.talk.constitution is an unmoderated group intended for discussion of issues related to the US Constitution. Discussion might include the document itself, the history of the document and its application, and current issues concerning the Constitution. Posting Guidelines The most recent version of the us.* hierarchy posting rules apply to this group. Violations of this charter or the hierarchy rules may result in action being taken against the offender, and articles determined to be abuse OF the net may be canceled without warning. Note: Newsgroup creation rules and posting guidelines for the us.* hierarchy are posted on the web at http://www.usenetnews.us Six-month trial As provided by us.* hierarchy rules, this charter shall remain in full force and effect for at least six months. At the end of the six-month trial period, amendments may be proposed by participants in the group in accordance with procedures outlined in the us.* hierarchy newsgroup creation rules. *****END CHARTER***** Procedures Time for discussion has been extended by the us.* Administrator through October 1, 2003. Additional extensions may be made by the Administrator. Distribution: us.config, us.legal, us.politics Proponents Leonard Pulver redlen AT gta DOT igs DOT net RTO Trainer bill.white AT us DOT army DOT mil edward ohare edward_ohare AT yahoo DOT com Host: Leonard Pulver redlen AT gta DOT igs DOT net
                        I support it.
                        Thank you!
                        Snark

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

                          On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 09:46:59 GMT, "[email protected]"
                          <[email protected]> wrote, in us.config:
                          Daryl Hunt wrote:news:[email protected] link.net...
                          Daryl Hunt wrote:> "[email protected]" <[email protected]>>wrote in message>
                          news:[email protected] link.net..
                          .
                          <snip>
                          > Speaking of infestations. I can see that you are still> the locust you always were. And I vote against> anything that is supposed to be serious discussions> that is under something as trollish as talk. I> am not the only one that has voiced that opinion.> You are a newbie to the net, kid. I may be a newbie but, I knew what a BI index was and why if you continued to post the same lines over and over again to multiple groups you would exceed it. Don't you have another side to that record, Troll Boy?
                          Actually, you have the record. You're the only person inthe us.* hierarchy that was ever cancelled for spammingusenet, and have the distinction of a record 107 cancelledspam posts to your name. Quite possibly more.Two records that I don't think anyone will beat.SnarkOk, folks, wait for it, here it comes, the last word.
                          The last word(s):

                          1. This post says more about you than it does bout Daryl.

                          2. We have no way of knowing whether Daryl was the
                          'only person in the us.* hierarchy that was ever cancelled
                          for spamming'. The Usenet spam cancelers cancel lots
                          of stuff without telling us anything about it.

                          3. The best thing that could be said about that episode
                          is that you and Daryl were both caught spamming beyond
                          the upper limit. The method of cancellation of the articles
                          is irrelevant.

                          Note to Pulver: I'm going out now, and won't be back
                          until after 3 pm Chicago time. Will respond to your RFD
                          at that time.

                          Henrietta

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

                            On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 22:44:31 -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]>
                            wrote:

                            It's an opinion. Remember those? Those are what other people are allowedto have.

                            Yes, but whether people give it any weight depends on two things. One
                            is the arguments and proof presented with it, and the other is the
                            reputation of the poster for being right... or being wrong.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              3rd RFD: create us.talk.constitution

                              After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct 2003 22:44:31
                              -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:
                              "RTO Trainer" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected] .com...
                              After reviewing Paragraph 5 pf the OPORD of Wed, 1 Oct 2003 20:10:20 -0600, "Daryl Hunt" <[email protected]> exclaimed:
                              "Pulver" <redlen[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]>> Request for Discussion (RFD)> unmoderated group us.talk.constitution>>> This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create> a new newsgroup in the us.* hierarchy, us.talk.constitution.> This is not a call for votes. Newsgroup creation is by> consensus in us.config. Procedures for conducting the> discussion are detailed below at the end of this RFD.I am against anything that has talk in it that is better suited for
                              politics
                              or government. Using Talk will draw every fruitcake that's out there.Life expectancy will be very short. Are there some examples of this?
                              It's an opinion. Remember those? Those are what other people are allowedto have.
                              Opinions are usually stated with a prefaceing clause such as, "I
                              think," or "I beleive," or (not my favorite) "I feel," or even the
                              explicit, "In my opinion."

                              Statements lacking these are usually considered as an attempt to make
                              a statement of fact. That being the format offered, I simply asked if
                              there werer any examples of a *.talk.* group that had suffered the
                              fate you describe.

                              In any event, even opinions are usually predicated on some fact or
                              facts. Is that not the case here? Is this an article of faith or
                              something?
                              --
                              SGT Robert White 31U, OKARNG HHC 45th eSB Thunderbirds!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X