rec.autos.simulators

: >Kyle, what will you accept?  It appears that you know all there is to
: >know.  It would appear that there isn't anything anyone can say that you
: >don't have a snappy response to.

: >But, since you asked, the answer is EXPERIENCE!  How long have you been
: >a USENET follower?  How many newsgroups have you followed for long
: >periods of time?  Maybe your version of usenet resides in some parallel
: >universe to the one our's resides ;-)

:       So I ask for an explanation and what do I get?  Some sarcastic
: response as to what my view of newsgroups apparently is.  No, I
: haven't been a USENET follower for years.  That's why I asked the damn
: question.  I don't think years of experience is required to be a part
: of this debate.  If I need an explanation of the other side's
: argument, then I ask for it.  And if I believed I knew all there was
: to know, WHY would I ask ANY question?

I am sorry that you felt my comment was sarcastic.  I didn't really feel
that it was a "cutting, hostile, or contemptuous remark" (Webster's
Dictionary).  For one thing it is hard to judge statements printed on a
CRT compared to ones made in person.  I may be totally misreading your
posts.  If so I am sorry.  But, I think you must also take a look back
at your posts in this newsgroup.  Including ones responding to
other topics.  Some of the posts have been rather curt and contemptuous
of other people's ideas, opinions, and feelings.  It may be that this is
not your intent.  I'm just trying to give you some feedback on how your
posts are coming across to some people (me included).  It is very
possible that we are wrong.  If this is the case, help us out and take a
little more time and reflect on your comments.  Think about how someone
who doesn't know you from Adam, would view them.

Now, more back to the question you posed above.  Your attitude in this
thread is that you KNOW how the USENET community interacts.  You appear
to be very strident in your replies.  Before you go charging into
uncharted waters, it's wise to survey the situation.  Calm down and let
the process take its course.  It isn't an overnight thing.  It takes
time.  There is no need to go "pushing buttons" everytime someone posts
something that opposes your already much stated goal.  Your posts
"appear" to be "cramming" your goal down the throats of those who don't
see it your way.  Notice, I said "appear".

Now you said that you don't think years of experience are required to be
a part of this debate.  And you are right about this.  But if you had
any true experience, you would know exactly how your constant "pushing"
of your agenda is being perceived.  Take some time to "listen" to those
that disagree with you.  They may not be right, but they have a
different perspective on things than you do.  And both perspectives are
valid and needed in this discussion.  BTW:  It's a discussion not a call
to DEBATE.

:       I don't see how crossposting would be so inevitable with separate
: groups.  If someone wants to let all the GP2ers about the latest patch
: to Grand Prix II, for example, they post to the F1 group.  If one of
: the people behind the Sim Racing News website wants to post about the
: addition of the latest issue to their site, then crossposting to all
: the r.a.s.? groups would be appropriate, since their net mag covers
: all racing series and simulations.  I guess it boils down to common
: sense.  Am I to assume that besides you and a select few, USENET
: posters have little or no common sense?  Ok, so maybe that's a little
: sarcastic, but you see my point.  Right?
:       Once again, please explain how crossposting would be inevitable AND
: frequent enough to pose a problem worthy of any concern.

You answered your own question in the above statement.  "I guess it
boils down to common sense."  Some of the reasons you stated for
supporting your idea of creating r.a.s.n. or splintering even further
relate to "problems" you perceive in r.a.s.  For example, poor subject
headings, repeated questions, people overquoting, people underquoting,
just too hard to find the information you are seeking.  All of these
problems may be "lessened" to some degree by splitting up.  But, all of
these problems are caused by the LACK of common sense.  So why would I
expect the same people to use common sense when it comes down to using
cross-posting?

Let me try another example.  Ever follow a thread with the Subject of,
NASCAR wheel camber?  Okay the first few messages are about why NASCAR
shows rear wheel camber when using VIEWSTG.  Pretty soon this
conversation can branch off onto other similar camber issues.  Some
deal with Indycar, some will talk about why doesn't Papryus
include track bar adjustments in NASCAR, still other discussions will
deal with Pocono when some of the NASCAR guys tried to run more camber
in the rear by bending the axle, there could even be a thread about why
Kyle Petty is such a good/bad driver.  Now keep in mind this whole
conversation is taking place under the subject heading "NASCAR wheel
camber".  There's something wrong here.  If I was browsing the newsgroup
looking for some posts on Kyle Petty, I wouldn't find it.  (well that's
another issue <g>).

Let's look at the above with just a slightly different start.  Let's say
that someone wanted to discuss camber in a split newsgroup.  Okay since
this is something that all racing disciplines deal with, he cross-posts
this to all of the newsgroups.  Now one of the NASCAR guys sees this and
replies and his discussion branches off on track-bar adjustments or tire
pressure.  A Indycar guy replies with a discussion of adjusting his
anti-sway bars and brake bias.  A GP2 gal (threw that in to be political
correct), posts about "packers".  All the while this thread is being
propagated in it's cross-post mode.  All of a sudden I am reading about
NASCAR, when I should only be reading about GP2.  The NASCAR guys are
getting upset cuz the ICR2 guys are cross-posting about anti-sway bars.

Kyle, I'm not making the above up.  It happens all the time in the rest
of the USENET universe and it will happen here if we split up.  That is
what I meant by "I know it is inevitable, because of experience".  I am
sorry that my original answer was so curt.  It seems that I can only
write short/curt answers or long boring-rambling-essays.

Hopefully we have just started out on the wrong foot, and we just need to
take a few steps back and reflect on our past posts.

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

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

Kyle Langston

Kyle Langston

There is also too many of these "Split the newsgroups" posts. If these
alone would stop, the traffic on the group would be cut in half!!

LET IT GO.

Mike

Mike

Kyle Langston

If you babys would quit whining about splitting the newsgroup, there
wouldn't be as much traffic to weed through. This is the whole reason
for your whining.

Also, if you had been following this NG for more than a week, you'd
remember that when Hawaii came out, the GP2 guys wanted to start their
own group. But they stuck it out, cause they know that after the
new-ness of Hawaii wore off, the traffic would slow.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO READ ABOUT GP2, DON'T READ SOMETHING THAT HAS GP2
IN THE SUBJECT LINE. SIMPLE.

Mike

Tim Daley
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd rather be lucky than FAST!

"The best things in life...aren't THINGS!" J. Tuman
___________________________________________________________________

Good idea, I'm getting tired of diggin thru all the GP2 posting in order
to find postings about Nascar.  I think with the popularity of both
games, not to mention other racing simulators, that the time has come for
specific newsgroups.  Please keep me informed.

Ligwoc

Kyle Langston

Chill... :)
--
Lannie Schafroth

I second that vote!

--
Lannie Schafroth