rec.autos.simulators

Chuck Stuart - Mesquite TX USA

: The article was addressed to people that are into NASCAR Racing
: strictly.

Now hold on a minute.  Since I dabble in Indycar & F1 as well as NASCAR,
I'm being asked to ***out, cuz I don't solely devote myself to NASCAR!
Excuse me, but the last time I checked this newsgroup was about
rec.autos.simulators.  This attitude is exactly what I would like to NOT
see.  And it is this elitist attitude that is fostered when a nice big
community such as r.a.s. begins to segregate its self into individual
exclusive neighborhoods.

: I'm talking about starting up a newsgroup with a slightly more
: specific interest.  The whole group (rec.autos.simulators) doesn't
: need to be divided.  If enough NASCAR racers would enjoy having a
: separate newsgroup, than what's the big deal?  If the ICR2 drivers,
: the GP2 drivers, etc, don't want a separate newsgroup, than that's OK.

And let's not forgot rec.auto.simulators.elitists

Why do we need to break up a community.  Could it be that some people are
beginning to feel their influence wear thin as the conversation turns to
something they are not interested in?  As you all may have gathered, I
am a very suspicious person.  There's always more lurking about than
meets the eye at first glance.  And before the flames begin, this is not
directed at any one individual or any particular posting it is an
observation of the "tone" and "pattern" I am beginning to see develop
as this discussion continues.

"My sims bigger than yours" syndrome? ;-)

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
     Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./.  [-  < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

: >: The article was addressed to people that are into NASCAR Racing
: >: strictly.

: >Now hold on a minute.  Since I dabble in Indycar & F1 as well as NASCAR,
: >I'm being asked to ***out, cuz I don't solely devote myself to NASCAR!
: >Excuse me, but the last time I checked this newsgroup was about
: >rec.autos.simulators.  This attitude is exactly what I would like to NOT
: >see.  And it is this elitist attitude that is fostered when a nice big
: >community such as r.a.s. begins to segregate its self into individual
: >exclusive neighborhoods.

: Lord, lighten up, Mike!  I was anticipating people like yourself that
: own multiple racing simulations crabbing about liking everything in
: one place.  Just trying to use a little insight.  Geez!

Sorry, Kyle, maybe I misunderstood your "The article was addressed to
people that are into NASCAR Racing strictly." comment.  From your
response, I drew the conclusion that if one isn't a NASCAR purest, they
aren't allowed to discuss the issues surrounding "our" newsgroup.  If
that wasn't your intent, then you should "lighten up" as you say, and
word your responses a little more carefully in the future.

Kyle, you are very welcome to your opinions, but please be careful about
how you respond to other people's opinions.  I may seem a little harsh
in response to your posts recently, but that is because you have been
rather harsh and unkind to other people's opinions and posts in this
newsgroup of late.

: Check out Ed Martin's contribution to the Re:
: rec.autos.simulators.nascar thread.  He's behind it 100%, and he
: provided very good reasons why.

And this doesn't sound the slightest "elitist"?  I did read Ed's
reasons, and in my own humble opinion most of his reasons do not justify
breaking up the newsgroup.  He is extremely justified in his goals.  In
that I stand behind him 100%  I just doubt that splitting the newsgroup
will even come close to achieving them.

But hey, these are just the opinions of 2 humble human beings.  There
are others out there.  They all have the right to be heard.  So don't go
trying to shut people out of this process.

And Kyle, I pride myself on my insight, it's one of my good features ;-)

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
     Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./.  [-  < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

sent shooting through ***space:

Just a quick comment -- the RFD I posted on news.groups, et al.,
recommends the following divisions:

rec.autos.simulators            General auto sim information.
rec.autos.simulators.f1         Formula One simulator info.
rec.autos.simulators.indy       IndyCar simulator info.
rec.autos.simulators.nascar     NASCAR simulator info.

This allows for the possibility for designers such as Visiware, EA
(who is entering into the stock car sim market this fall), and others
to get equal time for their products.  And, as always, if a group
"dies" (i.e. goes down to about 10 posts a week), an RFD can be
established to "delete" the group by forwarding all its traffic back
into the more general subdivision.
--
Tony Johns (Hawaii: IWCCCARS)
IWCCCARS Project Coordinator

On Sun, 21 Jul 1996 19:19:16 -0500, "Thomas E. Retkowski"

I hate to contradict you, because it makes me look like I'm
self-glorifying and vain, but the RFD for this newsgroup split has
been in the works for a month, per discussions with Ed Martin and
others regarding moderated and specialized newsgroups.  Your effort
and my effort are completely unconnected, as, I'm assuming, you are
simply calling for the creation of a rec.autos.simulators.nascar group
and the formal RFD calls for a three-way newsgroup reorganization.
--
Tony Johns (Hawaii: IWCCCARS)
IWCCCARS Project Coordinator

says...

Oh yeah, like he's not biased. :-)

   And "Ed Martin thinks it a good idea"...  You've put this in 3-4
messages as a badge of approval.  I respect Ed, I'm glad he's here,
but he has no more input into it than you or I.

   You say he gave several good reasons (in another post), but of
the four "problems" he has with the group, only one will be aided
by r.a.s.nascar (too much message traffic).

   On another note, I'm a bit confused about who's doing this now.
Tony Johns has said he is creating 4 new groups (f1, indy, nascar,
misc), but I haven't seen an RFD from him yet.  The only RFD I've
seen is from Thomas E. Retkowski, which would only create
r.a.s.nascar (and which has some fundamental flaws).  You guys
had better get your act together.

Pick one or more: Model Rockets (competition-NERCB) / PCs (even Atari!) /
Papyrus ICR-ICR2-NCR / Who needs a life when you have multiple non-lives?

On the other hand, playing the devil's advocate, creating a new group
would lend to crossposting and create more of a them vs. us mentality
(looks what just the proposal of it has done to our happy family).
Perhaps we can propose an alternative idea, such as some type of
subject header standard (e.g.  NASCAR:, INDYCAR2:, F1GP2:Topic).

I'll continue reading and posting no matter what happens, just wanted
my opinion known.

Matt Myers
---------------------------------------------
Expressing individualism is just plain wrong.

                          Crow T. Robot

(SNIP)

My vote would have to be no. Although at this time I have no interest
in racing sims other than Nascar Racing, who knows when that could
change?  With ICR2, GP2, NFS, Nascar Racing, and others like X-car,
etc. being developed, I don't look forward to having to check each
individual newsgroup for information. And can I count on Netcom to
pick up these new groups? Probably not. Wouldn't it be just as easy to
state in the subject heading which simulation you're talking about?
Why not use abreviations? Nascar=NAS, GP2 =Grand Prix 2, etc.

BTW, although I respect Ed Martin for his contributions to r.a.s, and
I am very grateful that he takes the time to answer questions here, I
find it humorous that you use his opinion to sway votes in your favor.

Why would he not agree? It cuts down his leisure time spent on r.a.s.
answering questions in half.

I'd like to see a different solution than this. Perhaps a mailing
list, or the above suggestion, but not splitting up r.a.s. Perhaps a
better newsreader would be in order. I use Free Agent from Forte. It
doesn't have kill files, but it's pretty easy to download headers,
peruse them offline, pick which ones you want to read, and then
download them. It also works online, and it's FREE.

David Range

On Jul 22, 1996 00:49:05 in article <Proposed R.A.S. split (was Re:

A few thoughts:

1- I think this RFD would go over more smoothly with USENET if
rec.autos.simulators was dropped and replaced with
rec.autos.simulators.misc.  I'm really not sure why, I just know this was
the case with the rec.aquaria reorganization.  This creates more problems
in itself, such as the need for the addition of other groups and which
subjects fall into the misc. category.

2- crossposting will occur if a r.a.s or r.a.s.m group exists.  It is
inevitable, even with an FAQ.  Athough many newsreaders can filter out
crossposts, many cannot.

3- a person can miss out on information they may be interested in.  Here's
an example:

Someone in the f1 group wants to know how a T2 performs with GP2.  Someone
responds to this post with info on handling, construction, durability,
maintenance, price, etc.
Someone who only follows the nascar group who is interested in the T2 would
miss out on this info.  Without  a split they would see this info.  Of
course this person could post a T2 question to the nascar group.

My point is this.  I only race NASCAR, but have often read threads for
ICR2, F1GP, etc.  which I found interesting or which I thought I could get
some info which would be helpful.   At this time I have no plans on racing
any sim other than NASCAR (NASCAR2), but if there is a split I would follow
all the groups for the above reason.  But I would rather have all the info
in a single group.  I'll vote no.

Tim  

Don't get so offended. Remember you asked for opinions, and you've
turned this into a crusade. Can you guarantee that all participants of
r.a.s. will be able to get r.a.s.nascar? Does everyone get
alt.binaries.simulators.autos? The point is that some people will be
lost in this shuffle, people who can't get r.a.s.nascar, and others
who don't follow r.a.s. daily. Is someone going to post a reminder
that r.a.s.nascar is available in r.a.s every week?  BTW, you didn't
offer any opinion to the above ideas. Calm down and quit thinking this
is personal.

David Range

 >Kyle Langston

I find it HUMOROUS that you use the phrase 'splitting up r.a.s.' when
referring to the potential creation of a r.a.s.nascar newsgroup.  If
the GP2ers, the ICR2ers, etc., don't want to go about creating
separate newsgroups (unless that comes about anyway in the process of
creating subgroups to this one) then they can post in r.a.s. and be
confident in reaching others of the same interest.  r.a.s.nascar would
be just one more newsgroup to subscribe to.  No information would be
lost.  It would just be better organized.

Kyle Langston