craigm ) writes:

If you don't like OT posts,

1) Don't start them.
2) Don't reply to them.

Just because you put OT in the subject doesn't make it less OT.

Clean up your own act first.

It's far worse.

He still seems to think this is "google groups" since he just posted
reems of google fine print that basically have no relevance to
Usenet.

He constantly changes subject headers without leaving in any
reference to the original subject header.

It's fascinating that this just reinforces the notion that he
is starting all kinds of off-topic threads, since they simply
look like he is starting off-topic threads.

He often (or maybe always) leaves in the full message
he is replying to), even when all he has to add is one line of response.

Like you say, he is one of the worst perpetratores of off-topic posts,
at the very least he likes to get his digs in when someone
does post off-topic junk.

For someone so "concerned" about the state of the newsgroup, he
certainly spends enough time getting into arguments with people.

It's one thing to spank an idiot who thinks it's acceptable
to post an off-topic message here, it's another when he keeps
at it for posts and posts.

Note that it is his behaviour that makes me spank the off-topic
idiots. I see no reason to be polite to a bozo who thinks posting
about movies is appropriate here, and the fact that this "RHF"
is doing his best to allow off-topic posts is the problem.

A few months ago, in his self appointed role as "net cop" here (I
put it in quotes because I want to reinforce the notion that he
can only play at doing any good in this newsgroup so long as
he is part of the problem), he posted about how people should
use "OT" in the subject headers of off-topic posts. In effect,
he's trying to give permission to off-topic posts, by being
"civil" about it. Yet the real lack of civility is in the
people who can't keep their off-topic junk out of this newsgroup.

He has no real notion of netiquette, and certainly his ridiculous
empty posts and empty replies in an attempt to kill threads just
add to the clutter.

Long ago, I basically tuned out of his posts, since he rarely
has anything valuable to say. Just links to stuff from elsewhere.
I could live with that, but his nonsense interpreation of the
rules, and his hypocritical stance on off-topic posts is
a concern to this newsgroup.

I should point out that his lack of real content, is just
echoed in the village idiot's posts, with all the nonsense
posts about search engines. The clueless following the clueless.

He constantly encourages the village idiot, nevermind
that the village idiot basically has nothing of value to post
here.

He's like a lot of clueless posters, taking up bad habits from
those with bad habits. Hence the changing of subject headers
to include people's names in them, a sure sign that he realizes
people aren't reading his junk and that's the only way of getting
attention. Note the cross-posted junk from rec.radio.amateur.misc
often has that sort of nonsense, and surely that's where he's
gotten the brilliant idea of putting people's names in the subject
header. I suspect he also learned the nonsense of changing
subject headers on a whim, and not including any of the original
subject header, comes from those posts.

And once again today, he is confused about the purpose of this
newsgroup. Despite the title, it is not now and never has been
strictly about shortwave. It's about the hobby of radio listening,
and that includes AM broadcast, FM broadcast, low frequency. The
intent was clearly for the "SWL" type, ie people who were interested
in the hobby as opposed to merely listening to the local talk show.
The only real exceptions are amateur radio, because there's a whole
hiearchy for it, rec.radio.amateur.* though someone who only listens
to amateur radio likely does fit in here. And scanners, since
there's at least one newsgroup for that specific area of the
radio hobby.

It's no different from "Communication World" circa 1971, where all
kinds of listening was covered.

The joke is that he keeps posting old messages about the purpose of
this newsgroup, and old messages even spell this out.

Look at the messages, and we get his spew, and the spew from the
village idiot, and very few actual on-topic posts. INdeed, take
away their spew, and there are actually very few posts here.

That's the state of the newsgroup, and the only can defend
these two posters is because they've come so recently that
they don't have a clue what this newsgroup used to be like.

Michael