rec.autos.simulators

To all members of the sim racing community (if the shoe fits)...............

I am concerned about some posts I've read recently containing disparaging
remarks about the West brothers....and the "time" they are taking to create
WSC.

I am quite aware that this is an "anonymous public forum" and that means
everyone is entitled to their opinion(s)...and to post them if they so
desire.  Whether you "agree" or "disagree" with any statement, position or
opinion.....it is your right and privilege in a forum of this nature to
express it.

What you don't have the "right to do"....is to be rude.

This is not about "rights"....it is about "privileges".....and this forum's
freedom is one of those "privileges" that we should cherish, in my opinion.
Lots of people, have given up their lives willingly......so I can type this
message to you today.  There was a time in the history of this world, within
my lifetime even....when that wouldn't have been possible.  These valuable
lives.....those people who were "sons, daughters, fathers, brothers,
sisters, mothers, grandparents" to many people alive today......some of whom
are likely to be visitors of this newsgroup......these lives were not spent
so we could just "post" any old thing that comes to our mind.  Their lives
gave us the "gift" of this forum......with this gift comes the
"responsibility" for us to preserve it for others, now and in the future.
Being rude, abusive, foul and stupid......isn't being "responsible!"  It is
being lazy!

I don't know how many years I've been coming to this newsgroup?  I've been
sim racing since around 1995....so certainly its been since then.  I recall
distinctly, a time when many of the kinds of posts I see today would not
have been tolerated by the "regulars" on this newsgroup.  Where are they
now?

I am struck with the memory of something I read (or must have studied) when
I was in school.  I don't remember who wrote it.

It reads, "All that is necessary for the powers of evil to prevail in this
world, is for enough good people to do nothing."

"If the shoe fits......" is not directed at those who make rude and abusive
posts here.  It is directed at the good people, who glaringly are absent
from objecting to this kind of behavior these days.

*********************

I met Chris and Tony West in Los Angeles last year at E3.  I didn't get to
spend as much time with them as I wanted......but I did talk with them and
drive WSC.....at least to the extent they had it developed at that time.  I
was with Bob Davis, chief architect at Sears Point Raceway.  We both were
left with the same impression of Chris and Tony.......they were both very
likeable, "regular" kind of guys.  The kind of people you can meet in the
paddock area of any real-world race track just about every
weekend....somewhere in this world.....that has been our "experience" at
least.....with racing people of all types.  This is NOT typical of the
people we've met in the software/*** industry.  Chris and Tony
represent.....to me at least......"a breath of fresh air!"  These guys were
just plain fun to hang with.  And, they clearly loved what they were
doing.......their enthusiasm about sim racing.....about racing of all
kinds........was just "dripping" off them!

Do I "like" the fact that WSC has taken so long to be released?  No.  Do I
think Chris and Tony can do a better job?  Of course, everyone can always
"do a better job".....including me!   Am I "frustrated" sometimes at wanting
to race a good, realistic racing simulation on my computer......like I
firmly believe we'll get from Chris and Tony?   Yes....almost weekly!

Does any of this ever give me the thought that it is, "OK....to be rude to
them in posts I make here....or in email to them?"  No.  Period!

**********************

Chris and Tony.......

I'm looking forward to seeing your work when you feel it is done.  I realize
that "done" is a relative term......and that your definition of it may not
be exactly the same as those who have provided you with the financial
resources to create WSC.  If there is something that we, the *** sim
racing community can do to help you guys.....as a group, or as individuals,
I hope you feel like you could just "ask us?"  Although we represent an
insignificant portion of the total "market" for your product, we are
probably your strongest supporters (other than the investors who sign the
checks you receive......lol....).

Good luck with your efforts.....I'm looking forward to racing you guys
online someday.....at your favorite track in WSC....in your favorite race
car!

Regards,

Tom Pabst

no text - see subject ;).

Regards
Crash

  <Standing ovation>

  Well said, Tom!
Todd Wasson
---
Performance Simulations
Drag Racing and Top Speed Prediction
Software
http://PerformanceSimulations.Com

Hey I seen some screens of that game it looks just like GPL to me.

Well done sir - an excellent response.

I do have one slight nagging worry, in that it was the "it'll be done when
it's done" philosophy that gave us the mess of Daikatana (and have you seen
Duke Nukem Forever recently?).

Even so, the Wests are clearly "good guys", and deserve to succeed. Just
don't leave it years, OK? ;-)

--
David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.92)
The GPL Scrapyard - http://scrapyard.netcabins.com
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll, really" -
Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh.

Tom,
  If you want to save the world from Evil, use Linux, vote third party
and boycott the Intel/Rambus alliance.  I'm not sure anyone here gives
to squirts about the few people attacking the Wests, least of all the
Wests themselves.  If you don't like what people are saying, ignore
them and support the cause you see as righteous.

fits)...............

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.racesimcentral.net/

This coming from the person that wants to pay someone to give them the
answers to the A+ test

Okay, I'm going a bit out on a limb here...

That would include me, I suppose.

Feel free to be concerned and to express your concern.

Sorry, that's a bit inaccurate. Most ISPs have TOS which makes it a
disconnecting offense to post illegal material etc. which may (or may
not) include slander.

Ditto.

Well, okay.

And here I feel that you are dead wrong. Even if I do feel you are being
a bit patronizing, which I generally find offensive, I have a hunch that
it was unintended. So no harm done.

What I don't buy is your premise that these people gave up their lives
for us to behave the way YOU want us to. They did not have a shared
opinion and even if we defined a broad, inclusive decription I feel that
it would be something like: "I want MY descendants to make their own
lives worthwhile and hopefully happy."  What you are doing is to decide
what is "right" for each and every one of us based on your own morals.

I don't think I have the "responsibility" to preserve this forum for
posterity or even the present. What I do have, is a desire to have this
forum for my own use and to make it as nice a place for me to be as
possible. This does mean that I don't flame people, I write helpful (or
at least I try :-) ) comments, I answer questions, I point out things
that are amusing to me, I poke good-natured fun at people (even Saints),
and I compliment people. Why? Because I want this to be a nice place for
ME to be!

 > Being rude, abusive, foul and stupid......isn't being "responsible!"
 > It is being lazy!
 >
In general, I aggree with you here. I have read some marveously
brilliant, well-written, and amusing flames but they were the exception.

That does not make them "better" than the present regulars/irregulars.
Just different - perhaps even a bit less tolerant? ;-)

There are two very different schools of thought on this subject. The
other one is "If we ignore it, it will go away." Personally, I tend to
aggree with this latter group regarding "lesser evils", but that is
mainly because those who oppose "fanatics" (very, very broad definition
here!) tend to be as fanatical themselves. And sometimes even more so.
In most other newsgroups I read, the concensus seems to be to ignore
flamebait and such.

<Snip stuff about the Wests - interesting but irrelevant to my post.>

Yes, it does (subject to ISP TOS). BUT it is dumb! Period!

<Snip more West stuff>

Tom,

We have the same goal, keeping the "negative" remarks away from r.a.s.,
but we disaggree on philosophy and method. I do believe in your right to
express how you feel about the issue - and it looks to me as if you feel
strongly - but please don't tell me what is "right". 'kay? :-)

Sincerely yours,

Jens

P.S: I have tried to avoid being rude in this post. If somebody takes
offense to anything here, please reconsider: It is probably unintended
and due to a case of an unfortunate choice of words.

Okay, I'm going a bit out on a limb here...

That would include me, I suppose.

Feel free to be concerned and to express your concern.

Sorry, that's a bit inaccurate. Most ISPs have TOS which makes it a
disconnecting offense to post illegal material etc. which may (or may
not) include slander.

Ditto.

Well, okay.

And here I feel that you are dead wrong. Even if I do feel you are being
a bit patronizing, which I generally find offensive, I have a hunch that
it was unintended. So no harm done.

What I don't buy is your premise that these people gave up their lives
for us to behave the way YOU want us to. They did not have a shared
opinion and even if we defined a broad, inclusive decription I feel that
it would be something like: "I want MY descendants to make their own
lives worthwhile and hopefully happy."  What you are doing is to decide
what is "right" for each and every one of us based on your own morals.

I don't think I have the "responsibility" to preserve this forum for
posterity or even the present. What I do have, is a desire to have this
forum for my own use and to make it as nice a place for me to be as
possible. This does mean that I don't flame people, I write helpful (or
at least I try :-) ) comments, I answer questions, I point out things
that are amusing to me, I poke good-natured fun at people (even Saints),
and I compliment people. Why? Because I want this to be a nice place for
ME to be!

 > Being rude, abusive, foul and stupid......isn't being "responsible!"
 > It is being lazy!
 >
In general, I aggree with you here. I have read some marveously
brilliant, well-written, and amusing flames but they were the exception.

That does not make them "better" than the present regulars/irregulars.
Just different - perhaps even a bit less tolerant? ;-)

There are two very different schools of thought on this subject. The
other one is "If we ignore it, it will go away." Personally, I tend to
aggree with this latter group regarding "lesser evils", but that is
mainly because those who oppose "fanatics" (very, very broad definition
here!) tend to be as fanatical themselves. And sometimes even more so.
In most other newsgroups I read, the concensus seems to be to ignore
flamebait and such.

<Snip stuff about the Wests - interesting but irrelevant to my post.>

Yes, it does (subject to ISP TOS). BUT it is dumb! Period!

<Snip more West stuff>

Tom,

We have the same goal, keeping the "negative" remarks away from r.a.s.,
but we disaggree on philosophy and method. I do believe in your right to
express how you feel about the issue - and it looks to me as if you feel
strongly - but please don't tell me what is "right". 'kay? :-)

Sincerely yours,

Jens

P.S: I have tried to avoid being rude in this post. If somebody takes
offense to anything here, please reconsider: It is probably unintended
and due to a case of an unfortunate choice of words.

Okay, I'm going a bit out on a limb here...

That would include me, I suppose.

Feel free to be concerned and to express your concern.

Sorry, that's a bit inaccurate. Most ISPs have TOS which makes it a
disconnecting offense to post illegal material etc. which may (or may
not) include slander.

Ditto.

Well, okay.

And here I feel that you are dead wrong. Even if I do feel you are being
a bit patronizing, which I generally find offensive, I have a hunch that
it was unintended. So no harm done.

What I don't buy is your premise that these people gave up their lives
for us to behave the way YOU want us to. They did not have a shared
opinion and even if we defined a broad, inclusive decription I feel that
it would be something like: "I want MY descendants to make their own
lives worthwhile and hopefully happy."  What you are doing is to decide
what is "right" for each and every one of us based on your own morals.

I don't think I have the "responsibility" to preserve this forum for
posterity or even the present. What I do have, is a desire to have this
forum for my own use and to make it as nice a place for me to be as
possible. This does mean that I don't flame people, I write helpful (or
at least I try :-) ) comments, I answer questions, I point out things
that are amusing to me, I poke good-natured fun at people (even Saints),
and I compliment people. Why? Because I want this to be a nice place for
ME to be!

 > Being rude, abusive, foul and stupid......isn't being "responsible!"
 > It is being lazy!
 >
In general, I aggree with you here. I have read some marveously
brilliant, well-written, and amusing flames but they were the exception.

That does not make them "better" than the present regulars/irregulars.
Just different - perhaps even a bit less tolerant? ;-)

There are two very different schools of thought on this subject. The
other one is "If we ignore it, it will go away." Personally, I tend to
aggree with this latter group regarding "lesser evils", but that is
mainly because those who oppose "fanatics" (very, very broad definition
here!) tend to be as fanatical themselves. And sometimes even more so.
In most other newsgroups I read, the concensus seems to be to ignore
flamebait and such.

<Snip stuff about the Wests - interesting but irrelevant to my post.>

Yes, it does (subject to ISP TOS). BUT it is dumb! Period!

<Snip more West stuff>

Tom,

We have the same goal, keeping the "negative" remarks away from r.a.s.,
but we disaggree on philosophy and method. I do believe in your right to
express how you feel about the issue - and it looks to me as if you feel
strongly - but please don't tell me what is "right". 'kay? :-)

Sincerely yours,

Jens

P.S: I have tried to avoid being rude in this post. If somebody takes
offense to anything here, please reconsider: It is probably unintended
and due to a case of an unfortunate choice of words.

Okay, I'm going a bit out on a limb here...

That would include me, I suppose.

Feel free to be concerned and to express your concern.

Sorry, that's a bit inaccurate. Most ISPs have TOS which makes it a
disconnecting offense to post illegal material etc. which may (or may
not) include slander.

Ditto.

Well, okay.

And here I feel that you are dead wrong. Even if I do feel you are being
a bit patronizing, which I generally find offensive, I have a hunch that
it was unintended. So no harm done.

What I don't buy is your premise that these people gave up their lives
for us to behave the way YOU want us to. They did not have a shared
opinion and even if we defined a broad, inclusive decription I feel that
it would be something like: "I want MY descendants to make their own
lives worthwhile and hopefully happy."  What you are doing is to decide
what is "right" for each and every one of us based on your own morals.

I don't think I have the "responsibility" to preserve this forum for
posterity or even the present. What I do have, is a desire to have this
forum for my own use and to make it as nice a place for me to be as
possible. This does mean that I don't flame people, I write helpful (or
at least I try :-) ) comments, I answer questions, I point out things
that are amusing to me, I poke good-natured fun at people (even Saints),
and I compliment people. Why? Because I want this to be a nice place for
ME to be!

 > Being rude, abusive, foul and stupid......isn't being "responsible!"
 > It is being lazy!
 >
In general, I aggree with you here. I have read some marveously
brilliant, well-written, and amusing flames but they were the exception.

That does not make them "better" than the present regulars/irregulars.
Just different - perhaps even a bit less tolerant? ;-)

There are two very different schools of thought on this subject. The
other one is "If we ignore it, it will go away." Personally, I tend to
aggree with this latter group regarding "lesser evils", but that is
mainly because those who oppose "fanatics" (very, very broad definition
here!) tend to be as fanatical themselves. And sometimes even more so.
In most other newsgroups I read, the concensus seems to be to ignore
flamebait and such.

<Snip stuff about the Wests - interesting but irrelevant to my post.>

Yes, it does (subject to ISP TOS). BUT it is dumb! Period!

<Snip more West stuff>

Tom,

We have the same goal, keeping the "negative" remarks away from r.a.s.,
but we disaggree on philosophy and method. I do believe in your right to
express how you feel about the issue - and it looks to me as if you feel
strongly - but please don't tell me what is "right". 'kay? :-)

Sincerely yours,

Jens

P.S: I have tried to avoid being rude in this post. If somebody takes
offense to anything here, please reconsider: It is probably unintended
and due to a case of an unfortunate choice of words.

Okay, I'm going a bit out on a limb here...

That would include me, I suppose.

Feel free to be concerned and to express your concern.

Sorry, that's a bit inaccurate. Most ISPs have TOS which makes it a
disconnecting offense to post illegal material etc. which may (or may
not) include slander.

Ditto.

Well, okay.

And here I feel that you are dead wrong. Even if I do feel you are being
a bit patronizing, which I generally find offensive, I have a hunch that
it was unintended. So no harm done.

What I don't buy is your premise that these people gave up their lives
for us to behave the way YOU want us to. They did not have a shared
opinion and even if we defined a broad, inclusive decription I feel that
it would be something like: "I want MY descendants to make their own
lives worthwhile and hopefully happy."  What you are doing is to decide
what is "right" for each and every one of us based on your own morals.

I don't think I have the "responsibility" to preserve this forum for
posterity or even the present. What I do have, is a desire to have this
forum for my own use and to make it as nice a place for me to be as
possible. This does mean that I don't flame people, I write helpful (or
at least I try :-) ) comments, I answer questions, I point out things
that are amusing to me, I poke good-natured fun at people (even Saints),
and I compliment people. Why? Because I want this to be a nice place for
ME to be!

 > Being rude, abusive, foul and stupid......isn't being "responsible!"
 > It is being lazy!
 >
In general, I aggree with you here. I have read some marveously
brilliant, well-written, and amusing flames but they were the exception.

That does not make them "better" than the present regulars/irregulars.
Just different - perhaps even a bit less tolerant? ;-)

There are two very different schools of thought on this subject. The
other one is "If we ignore it, it will go away." Personally, I tend to
aggree with this latter group regarding "lesser evils", but that is
mainly because those who oppose "fanatics" (very, very broad definition
here!) tend to be as fanatical themselves. And sometimes even more so.
In most other newsgroups I read, the concensus seems to be to ignore
flamebait and such.

<Snip stuff about the Wests - interesting but irrelevant to my post.>

Yes, it does (subject to ISP TOS). BUT it is dumb! Period!

<Snip more West stuff>

Tom,

We have the same goal, keeping the "negative" remarks away from r.a.s.,
but we disaggree on philosophy and method. I do believe in your right to
express how you feel about the issue - and it looks to me as if you feel
strongly - but please don't tell me what is "right". 'kay? :-)

Sincerely yours,

Jens

P.S: I have tried to avoid being rude in this post. If somebody takes
offense to anything here, please reconsider: It is probably unintended
and due to a case of an unfortunate choice of words.

Okay, I'm going a bit out on a limb here...

That would include me, I suppose.

Feel free to be concerned and to express your concern.

Sorry, that's a bit inaccurate. Most ISPs have TOS which makes it a
disconnecting offense to post illegal material etc. which may (or may
not) include slander.

Ditto.

Well, okay.

And here I feel that you are dead wrong. Even if I do feel you are being
a bit patronizing, which I generally find offensive, I have a hunch that
it was unintended. So no harm done.

What I don't buy is your premise that these people gave up their lives
for us to behave the way YOU want us to. They did not have a shared
opinion and even if we defined a broad, inclusive decription I feel that
it would be something like: "I want MY descendants to make their own
lives worthwhile and hopefully happy."  What you are doing is to decide
what is "right" for each and every one of us based on your own morals.

I don't think I have the "responsibility" to preserve this forum for
posterity or even the present. What I do have, is a desire to have this
forum for my own use and to make it as nice a place for me to be as
possible. This does mean that I don't flame people, I write helpful (or
at least I try :-) ) comments, I answer questions, I point out things
that are amusing to me, I poke good-natured fun at people (even Saints),
and I compliment people. Why? Because I want this to be a nice place for
ME to be!

 > Being rude, abusive, foul and stupid......isn't being "responsible!"
 > It is being lazy!
 >
In general, I aggree with you here. I have read some marveously
brilliant, well-written, and amusing flames but they were the exception.

That does not make them "better" than the present regulars/irregulars.
Just different - perhaps even a bit less tolerant? ;-)

There are two very different schools of thought on this subject. The
other one is "If we ignore it, it will go away." Personally, I tend to
aggree with this latter group regarding "lesser evils", but that is
mainly because those who oppose "fanatics" (very, very broad definition
here!) tend to be as fanatical themselves. And sometimes even more so.
In most other newsgroups I read, the concensus seems to be to ignore
flamebait and such.

<Snip stuff about the Wests - interesting but irrelevant to my post.>

Yes, it does (subject to ISP TOS). BUT it is dumb! Period!

<Snip more West stuff>

Tom,

We have the same goal, keeping the "negative" remarks away from r.a.s.,
but we disaggree on philosophy and method. I do believe in your right to
express how you feel about the issue - and it looks to me as if you feel
strongly - but please don't tell me what is "right". 'kay? :-)

Sincerely yours,

Jens

P.S: I have tried to avoid being rude in this post. If somebody takes
offense to anything here, please reconsider: It is probably unintended
and due to a case of an unfortunate choice of words.

I thought Rambus was suing Intel?

buzard

I really don't see why a simple remark like "I'm sick of hearing about WSC,
the Wests should put up or shut up" is considered so rude as to become a
violation of the "rules" of free speech.  Jesus (oops, I might have offended
someone with that!), it's just a newsgroup.  We aren't affecting the state
of the free world (or any world for that matter).  I understand the need for
some limits on language (sometimes), but if any negative remark is going to
be taken as possibly destroying this precious "gift", I think the
individuals espousing that viewpoint should engage the help of a qualified
therapist.   Free speech and the rights to use it are a dual edged sword.
You have to take the good with the bad.  If you feel that free speech means
you encounter only what you don't find offensive, then perhaps you should
seek a world where all elements are controlled for the "good of the people".
You won't be offended by any disparaging remarks and anyone who makes them
will be shot.  You and all the rest of the self appointed "good people" will
be very happy.  I for one will continue to read and comment in the ways I
feel are appropriate, and if I offend someone, let them tell me I offended
them, and I'll either apologize or not.  Don't read me the "precious gift"
***and expect me to even begin to listen.  Just say "I don't like what you
said about the West Bros." and leave it at that. But to stand in judgment of
others..........

  note:  the use of the word "you" in the previous statement was not meant
to indicate any one individual or group, or to imply that any individual or
group might exist or will exist in the future that meets the criteria of the
above rant.  Use of the word "world" does not imply that such a place
exists, did exist or will exist at any point in the future.  I hope that
makes the above politically correct for everyone.  If anyone was offended or
upset by the above remarks, please remember the following
Stick and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me.
Your pal, Raymond

fits)...............