How many people out there are actually serious about having a
newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With
NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut
down on the clutter in this newsgroup.
First, a decision needs to be made as to whether a separate newsgroup
should be for a particular series (NASCAR in this case) or more a
general category of racing (closed***pit as opposed to open wheel
racing)
Second, somebody needs to find out how to get a project like this
rolling, assuming there is enough interest to warrant the creation of
a new newsgroup. I have no idea how to do this, nor where to find
information about creating a newsgroup.
Note: I'm not trying to assume a 'leader' role in this situation.
I've read multiple articles on the subject, so I know some people that
frequent this newsgroup may be into this suggestion (which was not
originated by me). If you are NOT interested in this new newsgroup
idea, there is no point in responding to this article. Ditto if you
are not into the NASCAR side of simulated racing.
I can't WAIT to see what comes of this posting.
Kyle Langston
Debate over a NASCAR-only newsgroup
Kyle Langston polled interest in a NASCAR-specific newsgroup ahead of NASCAR 2 and the NRL. Michael Carver and others objected that most readers enjoyed all sims and that splitting would cause cross-posting, and criticised Langston for invoking Ed Martin's support. Tony Johns said his RFD proposed separate f1, indy and nascar groups; the argument grew personal.
community/meta
Automated summary.
Well, I am not sure about anybody else out there, but I am a fan of
Simulated Auto Racing. That includes Indycar NASCAR & F1 and anything
else that may come down the pike. (Great idea a Pike's Peak Challenge
simulation!)
I kinda like having all of the topics in one box. That's one of the
reasons we have Subject Headings. So one can choose what to read and
what not to read. If people are wise and preface the subject with the
sim's Keyword (Hawaii, NASCAR, ICR2, GP2) one can easily choose what to
read and what not to read.
If someone wants to talk about converted tracks from NASCAR to ICR2,
does this go in the NASCAR newsgroup or the ICR2 newsgroup? Right, one
can cross-post. Well, then we'll have people in one group saying that
doesn't belong here.... Yadda Yadda Yadda
My vote is keep it all together. It will calm down again. Then again
it will all SPIKE again when NASCAR2 comes out, then it will die down
again, and then it will SPIKE again when the promised GP2 patch never
arrives, then it die down again, then it will SPIKE when NRL is up 'n
runnin', then it will .....
Go with the flow/rhythm & relax!
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
[snip]
The article was addressed to those interested in only NASCAR Racing.
If you're talking about tracks converted from NASCAR for ICR2 use,
that would only be of interest to ICR2 owners. Right? NASCAR owners
would already have the tracks. And vice versa. How can you predict
that someone would complain about an article that is reasonably
specific to both NASCAR Racing and ICR2?
rec.autos.simulators newsgroup will always be here. If people want to
reach EVERYONE that races any kind of simulation, than they can post
it here, or cross post to the NASCAR newsgroup and the
rec.autos.simulators newsgroup. What's the big deal?
Kyle Langston
Quoted text (8 lines)
> How many people out there are actually serious about having a >newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With >NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut >down on the clutter in this newsgroup. > First, a decision needs to be made as to whether a separate newsgroup >should be for a particular series (NASCAR in this case) or more a >general category of racing (closed***pit as opposed to open wheel >racing)I vote YES to rec.auto.simulators.nascar
Reason: If there are groups for each type of racing there will be less
clutter.And if someone likes em' all they can just subscribe to em' all..
Easy as pie :) *notice it's almost dinner time*
Mick
Well,
Since my server was screwed up again I didn't know Tony had already
started the process so please ignore my post about offering to go
through the process myself.
***********************************************
** Keep the shiny side up & the hammer down **
*** Ron "Cougar" Riekens II ***
**** Owner - Driver ****
**** Medallion Motorsports/*** Photography ****
*** NASS ARCA Series #96 Pontiac ***
***********************************************
Quoted text (7 lines)
>> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup will always be here. If people want to >> reach EVERYONE that races any kind of simulation, than they can post >> it here, or cross post to the NASCAR newsgroup and the >> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup. What's the big deal? >NEVER cross post. No one wants to read your messages more than once. >Chuck Stuart - Mesquite TX USAQuoted text (9 lines)
>: 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.Quoted text (19 lines)
> How many people out there are actually serious about having a >newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With >NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut >down on the clutter in this newsgroup. > First, a decision needs to be made as to whether a separate newsgroup >should be for a particular series (NASCAR in this case) or more a >general category of racing (closed***pit as opposed to open wheel >racing) > Second, somebody needs to find out how to get a project like this >rolling, assuming there is enough interest to warrant the creation of >a new newsgroup. I have no idea how to do this, nor where to find >information about creating a newsgroup. > Note: I'm not trying to assume a 'leader' role in this situation. >I've read multiple articles on the subject, so I know some people that >frequent this newsgroup may be into this suggestion (which was not >originated by me). If you are NOT interested in this new newsgroup >idea, there is no point in responding to this article. Ditto if you >are not into the NASCAR side of simulated racing. > I can't WAIT to see what comes of this posting.Quoted text (18 lines)
> How many people out there are actually serious about having a >newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With >NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut >down on the clutter in this newsgroup. > First, a decision needs to be made as to whether a separate newsgroup >should be for a particular series (NASCAR in this case) or more a >general category of racing (closed***pit as opposed to open wheel >racing) > Second, somebody needs to find out how to get a project like this >rolling, assuming there is enough interest to warrant the creation of >a new newsgroup. I have no idea how to do this, nor where to find >information about creating a newsgroup. > Note: I'm not trying to assume a 'leader' role in this situation. >I've read multiple articles on the subject, so I know some people that >frequent this newsgroup may be into this suggestion (which was not >originated by me). If you are NOT interested in this new newsgroup >idea, there is no point in responding to this article. Ditto if you >are not into the NASCAR side of simulated racing.You wanna see clutter? Wait until you see all the cross-posting! I would love
to have separate groups for each type of racing, but until cross-posting is
banned, it will be a big mess. Redundancy is prevelant wherever there are
similar groups.
My two cents.
Regards,
Terry
>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.
>Kyle Langston
I am very glad Ed Martin is here to give us all help, and I do appreciate
his help, but just because he has decided to only answer NASCAR specific
threads, and some of you do not want to see the GP2 and ICR2 threads does
not justify splitting up the group.
Again I return to the coincidence that while there was mostly Hawaii and
Nascar2 threads going on here you guys did not mind it, now that those
subjects have taken a bit of a background position, now all of a sudden
there is this supposed "NEED" to break the group up.
I was one of the original supporters of creating r.a.s back when we used
to discuss auto sims on com.sys.ibm.pc.games.action and at that time there
sure was a need for a specific group.
When the NRL really exists and if then there is a large amount of traffic
in this group, I would be a full supporter of splitting. For now, I say
it is not needed.
This does indeed look a bit like a situation as Michael suggests of a
elitist attitude some people are taking, and they want to make it difficult
on everyone just to simplify their own personal needs. A kill file with
ICR2, NFS and GP2 in it would probably solve the problem for many of you.
Can't we all just get along? :^)
Cheers.
--John
--
-------------------
John (Joao) Silva
http://weber.u.washington.edu/~jsilva
Seattle, Washington USA.
: > I had to read your message a few times to try to make sense of
: >it. What the hell is the point of taking a survey of only positive
: >responses? If you get ten yes's you'll go ahead, even if there were
: >100 no's?!?
: Well, that's an exaggerated case. I think there will be a lot more
: positive response compared to the negative. Even Ed Martin feels it's
: a good idea.
I admire Ed Martin ALOT! But that doesn't mean I have to agree with
him. It doesn't mean he's Moses delivering the sacred tablets? I don't
even want to see him "forced" out of contributing to r.a.s.
So, what's your point?
The article was addressed to people that are into NASCAR Racing
strictly.
Clutter isn't the main reason for starting up a separate newsgroup.
When the NRL is launched, I'm fairly sure constant messages involving
that league will be posted SOMEWHERE.
If there was not a separate group for ICR2, you'd check this
newsgroup.
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.
Well, I consider that a part of getting a newsgroup started.
That is not the point!
Kyle Langston
I suggested a NASCAR-specific group just the other day. It had nothing to
do with issues of influence, because I have NO influence here. I just
don't want to sift through dozens of messages about other simulators.
Everyone deserves a forum for their interests, but this newsgroup is being
overwhelmed, as more products hit the market. I use NASCAR Racing
exclusively, so it would be nice to have a NASCAR-specific newsgroup. I
support having specific newsgroups for EACH racing simulation.
Kirn Cromur
> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup will always be here. If people want to
> reach EVERYONE that races any kind of simulation, than they can post
> it here, or cross post to the NASCAR newsgroup and the
> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup. What's the big deal?
NEVER cross post. No one wants to read your messages more than once.
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.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Quoted text (22 lines)
>> How many people out there are actually serious about having a >>newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With >>NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut >>down on the clutter in this newsgroup. >> First, a decision needs to be made as to whether a separate newsgroup >>should be for a particular series (NASCAR in this case) or more a >>general category of racing (closed***pit as opposed to open wheel >>racing) >> Second, somebody needs to find out how to get a project like this >>rolling, assuming there is enough interest to warrant the creation of >>a new newsgroup. I have no idea how to do this, nor where to find >>information about creating a newsgroup. >> Note: I'm not trying to assume a 'leader' role in this situation. >>I've read multiple articles on the subject, so I know some people that >>frequent this newsgroup may be into this suggestion (which was not >>originated by me). If you are NOT interested in this new newsgroup >>idea, there is no point in responding to this article. Ditto if you >>are not into the NASCAR side of simulated racing. > I had to read your message a few times to try to make sense of >it. What the hell is the point of taking a survey of only positive >responses? If you get ten yes's you'll go ahead, even if there were >100 no's?!?Quoted text (23 lines)
>creating a new (non-ALT) news group is a major pain in the butt. A >formal proposal, comment period, voting (both majority and a minimum >of 100 positive votes required), and hoping the group gets propigated >across the net. (NOTE: those are not exact numbers/procedures, but >just what I remember.) You can create a new ALT group more easily, >but propigation is all the more difficult. For more answers try >news.answers or the news.admin.* or news.groups.* hierarchies. > For myself, I think its unwise to split r.a.s. or add sub-segments >such as r.a.s.nascar. The traffic is not that bad, there is sufficient >common interest between the different factions. I think its short- >sighted to start new newsgroups based on a particular sim, which is >subject to the whims of consumer popularity and publisher support. >Assuming, heaven forbid, NASCAR pulls out and Sierra/Papyrus pulls the >plug on Hawaii? What's the point of a separate newsgroup for Hawaii >then? Or when do we create a newsgroup for Visiware's F1 sim? >> I can't WAIT to see what comes of this posting. > Well, you didn't want to hear any of this, but there it is. ;) >PS - I see that Tony Johns has started the ball rolling on this, so > you don't have to worry about doing the work and we'll all see > how it turns out based on the votes of *everyone* in r.a.s. >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?: >: 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
Quoted text (8 lines)
>> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup will always be here. If people want to >> reach EVERYONE that races any kind of simulation, than they can post >> it here, or cross post to the NASCAR newsgroup and the >> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup. What's the big deal? >NEVER cross post. No one wants to read your messages more than once. >Chuck Stuart - Mesquite TX USAsays...
Oh yeah, like he's not biased. :-)
Quoted text (7 lines)
>> I had to read your message a few times to try to make sense of >>it. What the hell is the point of taking a survey of only positive >>responses? If you get ten yes's you'll go ahead, even if there were >>100 no's?!? >Well, that's an exaggerated case. I think there will be a lot more >positive response compared to the negative. Even Ed Martin feels it's >a good idea.> How many people out there are actually serious about having a
>newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With
>NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut
>down on the clutter in this newsgroup.
[snip]
>Kyle Langston
Just my $0.02, but I think this would be a good idea if implemented
properly. It would be not so much a splitting of this group, but a
specific branch. I for one like to follow all the SIMS and browse
almost all the articles, but having a more detailed means of finding
information on one product/racing type would be invaluable.
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
Quoted text (10 lines)
>>(SNIP) >>>Well, that's an exaggerated case. I think there will be a lot more >>>positive response compared to the negative. Even Ed Martin feels it's >>>a good idea. >>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. >What I'm doing is stating a FACT. Ed is somewhat well known in this >newsgroup (or is that NOT a fact?), and I was simply referring to an >earlier article he had posted backing this idea.Quoted text (7 lines)
>(SNIP) >>Well, that's an exaggerated case. I think there will be a lot more >>positive response compared to the negative. Even Ed Martin feels it's >>a good idea. >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.(SNIP)
Not to nitpick, but I do believe you were rather rude in the "Are we
Nuts thread". I don't have the article, but I believe your response to
a convention in Boston was " Great more load on the servers". Instead
of thinking about it, you couldn't wait to flame me and push "send".
This has no bearing on whether or not r.a.s.nascar comes about, but
better wording and contemplation before flaming someone would be
appreciated.
David Range
: On Sun, 21 Jul 1996 19:19:16 -0500, "Thomas E. Retkowski"
: >Tony Johns didn't start the ball rolling, I did...I've asked for his
: >assistance in the matter.
: 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.
I can vouch for this. Tony's only concern is in bettering the situation
that has developed recently here at r.a.s. We are on the threshold of
losing what I consider to be extremely valuable assests to our love
(auto simulators). Ed and the other Papyrus employees who have been
gracious enough to visit here and impart their wisdom and assistance
feel that they have been abused. I can understand their feelings (and I
am sure at times they have probably felt I was one of the abusers --
though that was never my intention.) Tony has been quitely working in
the background discussing this very issue with some key people who have
contributed alot to making r.a.s. what it is.
While I may disagree with the "solution" Tony and Ed support, it in no
way means I don't whole heartedly support their cause to provide for a
safe forum for representives of the software companies and for the
hardworking "***rs" to continue to participate in.
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
cool idea seeing that im just looking for nascar info which sometimes is
hard looking through 200 when is gp2 going to be realesed messages.
That's the second time I saw that in one of your posts - does that mean
that anyone who drives something else is somehow not a true NASCAR fan?
I drive all of the sims, and many of the people over on CompuServe drive
all three, includingthe league commisioners of the NASCAR series. Just
because someone happens to enjoy driving sims other than NASCAR doesn't
mean they don't have an opinion about a new group. You're talking of
moving information of which I am a reader equally as much as you are,
and therefore I have an equal say in what happens to it, as do all other
users of this newsgroup.
Cheers!
John
_________________________________
__ _____| |_____ __
________| |__| :| John Wallace | |__| |________
\ :| |::| :| Team WW Racing TSW | |::| | /
> :| |::| :|_________________________________| |::| | < / :|__|::|____/ * Sim Racing News * \____|::|__| \
/______:/ \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm \::/ \._____\
http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~harmon/simnews
says...
[much snipped]
If the RFD goes through the way it's written, r.a.s as a single group will
cease to exist. So David is just stating a FACT. It doesn't make much sense to
create one new offshoot group and leave the original in place. The purpose of
creating a new group is to split the existing one into two or more subtopics.
Everyone will have a place to go.
With smaller groups come more repeated questions and less people willing to
answer them. I hope some of us are willing to become FAQkeepers so newbies
don't get scared off. Just a thought.
Quoted text (7 lines)
>What's so complicated about following multiple groups, if I may ask? >It would be like r.a.s. with convenient 'divider folders' for each >form of racing. For example, wouldn't r.a.s be even easier to follow >if all the GP2 articles were at the top, followed by the ICR2 articles >in the middle, followed by the NASCAR articles at the bottom? I feel >this would be true. >Kyle Langston> How many people out there are actually serious about having a
>newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With
>NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut
>down on the clutter in this newsgroup.
Sure hope there is enough of Nascar fans to keep a new group alive. A
moderate-size group split in several small-audience groups may well
lead to slow death of them all. The groups need enough traffic to keep
the discussion going on even when nothing new really happens.
splits; both successful and failed.
The only hassle about following r.a.s.* groups is the amount of cross-posting
that will occur will result in folks seeing duplicate messages in all of the
newsgroups. That's not a big deal for me, since my news server doesn't charge
by the minute, but I guess those that download Usenet messages into their
newsreader from a news server that charges by the minute may see an extension
in their daily download time.
--
+------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| G. Warren Abao | Official BBL Jacksonville Jaguars Website: |
+------------------++------------------------+------------------+
| SPOOOOOOOOOOON!!! | BBL Jacksonville 1-0 | IFL Chicago 11-6 |
+-------------------+------------------------+------------------+
>Exactly what could be cross-posted to all the groups that would
>actually be VALID to the subject area of each group? If some moron
>(I'm not referring to you :-) ) wants to crosspost an article to all
>the r.a.s. newsgroups about his latest experience with GP2, then
>that's his problem (and everyone else's, I suppose) I don't feel the
>situation will be as bad as you might think.
If you create *only* r.a.s.nascar, you'll probably find a fair
number of NASCAR posters posting to *both* groups. You'll have your
nice little self-contained world in r.a.s.n, but the rest of us will
have to deal with the cross-posts from r.a.s.n. (which means we'll
get only part of the info from the nascar group, but may end up
reading it a second time in r.a.s.n.).
If r.a.s. gets split, the proper way to do it (IMO) is:
r.a.s.misc,
r.a.s.f1,
r.a.s.indy, and
r.a.s.nascar.
The r.a.s.misc will be *clearly* for posts that don't belong in
the other three groups. Leaving r.a.s. as is is an open invitation
to rampant cross-posting. Killing one group and creating four new
ones will have network propigation difficulties at first, but it is
the right way to do it in the long term (assuming we decide to do
so).
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?
Quoted text (13 lines)
>>What's so complicated about following multiple groups, if I may ask? >>It would be like r.a.s. with convenient 'divider folders' for each >>form of racing. For example, wouldn't r.a.s be even easier to follow >>if all the GP2 articles were at the top, followed by the ICR2 articles >>in the middle, followed by the NASCAR articles at the bottom? I feel >>this would be true. >The only hassle about following r.a.s.* groups is the amount of cross-posting >that will occur will result in folks seeing duplicate messages in all of the >newsgroups. That's not a big deal for me, since my news server doesn't charge >by the minute, but I guess those that download Usenet messages into their >newsreader from a news server that charges by the minute may see an extension >in their daily download time. >G. Warren AbaoAttention Hawaii league Administrators,
I have devoted a part of my web page to posting Hawaii league racing
results and would be happy to post your league results also. I am
even posting some pics and captions if they are exciting!!
Help me out by sending your league results and or point standings.
Come on, let the drivers in your league get some exposure!! If your
league has a logo, send it too!!
Thank-you
vetteracer
Vetteracer's Garage
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/1726
: Please explain how this cross posting to the multiple groups will be
: inevitable.
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 ;-)
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Quoted text (11 lines)
>: Please explain how this cross posting to the multiple groups will be >: inevitable. >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 ;-) >-- >**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************Quoted text (10 lines)
>>The only hassle about following r.a.s.* groups is the amount of cross-posting >>that will occur will result in folks seeing duplicate messages in all of the >>newsgroups. That's not a big deal for me, since my news server doesn't charge >>by the minute, but I guess those that download Usenet messages into their >>newsreader from a news server that charges by the minute may see an extension >>in their daily download time. >>G. Warren Abao > Please explain how this cross posting to the multiple groups will be >inevitable. >Kyle Langston> >>What's so complicated about following multiple groups, if I may ask?
> >>It would be like r.a.s. with convenient 'divider folders' for each
> >>form of racing. For example, wouldn't r.a.s be even easier to follow
> >>if all the GP2 articles were at the top, followed by the ICR2 articles
> >>in the middle, followed by the NASCAR articles at the bottom? I feel
> >>this would be true.
This group should be split by theme, not game name, then it's future
proof , eg.
rec.autos.simulators.f1
rec.autos.simulators.indycar
rec.autos.simulators.nascar and
rec.autos.simulators.misc for the rest.
The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously
a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-)
Is anyone going ahead with the "proper" usenet voting process?
--
Tim Chown | GD Review http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreview
: >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.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Quoted text (7 lines)
>>The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously >>a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-) >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. >MikeQuoted text (22 lines)
> > >>What's so complicated about following multiple groups, if I may ask? > > >>It would be like r.a.s. with convenient 'divider folders' for each > > >>form of racing. For example, wouldn't r.a.s be even easier to follow > > >>if all the GP2 articles were at the top, followed by the ICR2 articles > > >>in the middle, followed by the NASCAR articles at the bottom? I feel > > >>this would be true. > This group should be split by theme, not game name, then it's future > proof , eg. > rec.autos.simulators.f1 > rec.autos.simulators.indycar > rec.autos.simulators.nascar and > rec.autos.simulators.misc for the rest. > The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously > a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-) > Is anyone going ahead with the "proper" usenet voting process? > -- > Tim Chown | GD Review http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreviewQuoted text (17 lines)
>> >>What's so complicated about following multiple groups, if I may ask? >> >>It would be like r.a.s. with convenient 'divider folders' for each >> >>form of racing. For example, wouldn't r.a.s be even easier to follow >> >>if all the GP2 articles were at the top, followed by the ICR2 articles >> >>in the middle, followed by the NASCAR articles at the bottom? I feel >> >>this would be true. >This group should be split by theme, not game name, then it's future >proof , eg. >rec.autos.simulators.f1 >rec.autos.simulators.indycar >rec.autos.simulators.nascar and >rec.autos.simulators.misc for the rest. >The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously >a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-) >Is anyone going ahead with the "proper" usenet voting process? >-- >Tim Chown | GD Review http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreviewThere 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
(Kyle Langston) writes:
>>>The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously
>>>a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-)
>>There is also too many of these "Split the newsgroups" posts. If these
Since the "split" posts started, my reader has almost doubled. You
figure it out.
Mike
Quoted text (11 lines)
>>alone would stop, the traffic on the group would be cut in half!! >>LET IT GO. >>Mike >This poses the question 'What came first? The traffic which >encouraged the suggestion of a new newsgroup, or the 'Split the >newsgroup messages' which increased the traffic'? :-) >Kyle LangstonQuoted text (29 lines)
>(Kyle Langston) writes: >>>>The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously >>>>a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-) >>>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 >>This poses the question 'What came first? The traffic which >>encouraged the suggestion of a new newsgroup, or the 'Split the >>newsgroup messages' which increased the traffic'? :-) >>Kyle Langston >Since the "split" posts started, my reader has almost doubled. You >figure it out. >Mike(Kyle Langston) writes:
>>(Kyle Langston) writes:
>>>>>The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously
You obiviously couldn't see my point if it stuck you in the eye.
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
Quoted text (29 lines)
>>>>>a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-) >>>>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 >>>This poses the question 'What came first? The traffic which >>>encouraged the suggestion of a new newsgroup, or the 'Split the >>>newsgroup messages' which increased the traffic'? :-) >>>Kyle Langston >>Since the "split" posts started, my reader has almost doubled. You >>figure it out. >>Mike >Obviously you didn't get the gist of the 'statement'. You've heard of >the chicken or the egg paradox? >Kyle Langston> How many people out there are actually serious about having a
> newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With
> NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut
> down on the clutter in this newsgroup.
>I vote YES!!!
NASCAR ONLY NEWS GROUP
--
Thank you!
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
Quoted text (60 lines)
>(Kyle Langston) writes: >>>(Kyle Langston) writes: >>>>>>The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though >obviously >>>>>>a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-) >>>>>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 >>>>This poses the question 'What came first? The traffic which >>>>encouraged the suggestion of a new newsgroup, or the 'Split the >>>>newsgroup messages' which increased the traffic'? :-) >>>>Kyle Langston >>>Since the "split" posts started, my reader has almost doubled. You >>>figure it out. >>>Mike >>Obviously you didn't get the gist of the 'statement'. You've heard of >>the chicken or the egg paradox? >>Kyle Langston >You obiviously couldn't see my point if it stuck you in the eye. >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. >MikeQuoted text (17 lines)
>> >>What's so complicated about following multiple groups, if I may ask? >> >>It would be like r.a.s. with convenient 'divider folders' for each >> >>form of racing. For example, wouldn't r.a.s be even easier to follow >> >>if all the GP2 articles were at the top, followed by the ICR2 articles >> >>in the middle, followed by the NASCAR articles at the bottom? I feel >> >>this would be true. >This group should be split by theme, not game name, then it's future >proof , eg. >rec.autos.simulators.f1 >rec.autos.simulators.indycar >rec.autos.simulators.nascar and >rec.autos.simulators.misc for the rest. >The current volume is crazy (400+ posts a day here) though obviously >a lot of that is due to the release of F1GP2 :-) >Is anyone going ahead with the "proper" usenet voting process? >-- >Tim Chown | GD Review http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdreview>>> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup will always be here. If people want to
group,
>because "they wanted to reach the bigest audience," or "I wasn't sure where my
Most people aren't that stupid. If they want just NASCAR info then
they will post to just two groups. They will post to the new one
to avoid reading posts like the last few, then this one to get
info from anyone else who can't get to the new one.
Chill... :)
--
Lannie Schafroth
Quoted text (9 lines)
>>> reach EVERYONE that races any kind of simulation, than they can post >>> it here, or cross post to the NASCAR newsgroup and the >>> rec.autos.simulators newsgroup. What's the big deal? >>NEVER cross post. No one wants to read your messages more than once. >>Chuck Stuart - Mesquite TX USA >I can see it now... people crossposting to every rec.autos.simulators.*I second that vote!
--
Lannie Schafroth
>> How many people out there are actually serious about having a
>> newsgroup devoted strictly to NASCAR Racing simulation topics? With
>> NASCAR 2 and the NRL looming in the future, it would definitely cut
>> down on the clutter in this newsgroup.
>>I vote YES!!!
>NASCAR ONLY NEWS GROUP
I agree. I think the group should branch out to better serve the folks
here. I am personally tired of seeing all this GP2 stuff but it obviously
is not tireing to those interested in it. I think that a branching of the
newsgroup is the perfect solution.
Steve
+-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| All the worlds a stage, | ("'-''-/").___..--''"'-._ |
| and there's a comedy playing. | '6_ 6 ) '_. ( ).'-.__.') |
| May as well enjoy the show. | (_Y_.) ._ ) '._ '. ''-..-' |
| | _..'--'_..-_/ /--'_.' ,' |
+-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Go Dale Earnhardt #3 | Go Rusty Wallace #2 | +-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Split_S on IRC Steve_Sarlls on Hawaii sp-s on Warbirds | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
