I made a proposal on Friday regarding a compromise for the splitting
of rec.autos.simulators, and although I was surprised by the low
response rate, the suggestions I did receive were constructive.
Following is a refined version of my proposal incorporating my
original ideas and those contributed by fellow drivers...
There seem to be two factions here: Pro-Split and Anti-Split. As a
Pro-Split individual, let me suggest a way to keep the group intact,
but meet my concerns for getting information. (I do not know what
everyone's individual concerns are, but they may be similar to mine.)
In short, my proposal is a simple code that indicates a newsgroup user
who is "in the know" and simultaneously tells you which sim category
is being referenced. You can do a search for what you want, or filter
out everything else if you have that capability.
The proposed categories:
%NASCAR% - NASCAR related
%ICR% - IndyCar related
%F1% - Formula 1 related
%RACE% - Other less-popular simulators
%SIM% - General group issues such as painting cars, policy, etc.
As new simulators are released, new codes can be easily added. For
some reason, the percentage sign (%) reminds me of the crossed
checkered flags, and unlike * or & I don't see it very often, so it
seems like a simple code to remember.
I do not want to sound preachy, but I assume we all come to this
newsgroup for information, not to take the ego around the track for a
few laps. I propose that if this code does go into effect, we can
adopt a "Code of Racing" similar to what real drivers use so we can
maintain the flow of information, advice, and commentary that we all
ultimately seek at this site.
I would like to create the first draft of a simple, unintimidating
"Code of Racing" and post it once a week under the article
header %%% IF YOU'RE NEW HERE, READ THIS FIRST %%% to welcome
rookies to the group and explain to them how the system works. I
would like as much input as possible from as many drivers as possible
regarding this document, because I do not want to be in a position
where I judge the actions of anyone else.
I am now moving ahead with this proposal, and still welcome any
comments, suggestions or criticism. From this point forward, please
feel free to use the codes mentioned above, and I suspect that life
may be easier for all of us.
___
Pooch O-iiiii-O
: The proposed categories:
: %NASCAR% - NASCAR related
: %ICR% - IndyCar related
: %F1% - Formula 1 related
: %RACE% - Other less-popular simulators
: %SIM% - General group issues such as painting cars, policy, etc.
: As new simulators are released, new codes can be easily added. For
: some reason, the percentage sign (%) reminds me of the crossed
: checkered flags, and unlike * or & I don't see it very often, so it
: seems like a simple code to remember.
This is a good idea. One that even applies if r.a.s. gets split.
However, I really think the "%" is over-kill. I know it's kinda a cute,
but it really serves no purpose. Besides it's just to hard to type ;-)
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Yes split the groups. It would be easier for the parties looking for the
information on their favorite sims.
>Yes split the groups. It would be easier for the parties looking for the
>information on their favorite sims.
The official discussion is going on in news.groups. The title of the
main article and thread is RFD: rec.autos.simulators reorganization.
Kyle Langston
