On 02/12/14 16:40, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 12/2/2014 11:16 AM, Spike wrote:

It's a plain and simple fact, and explicitly stated. So simple that
everyone should be able to understand it.

And there is no reason to think the current moderators of rram will
become the moderators of ukrram,

"*For now* the moderators are different. but with a freemason-type
succession policy nothing can be guaranteed"

It's complete rebuttal of your claim that it "... is an entirely
different newsgroup, with entirely different moderators".

Which is why I said "If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and
has the antecedents of a duck, it's a duck".

Nope. No rebuttal at all. You're comparing apples and oranges. They
are two different newsgroups with two different audiences and two
different sets of moderators.

"Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who
brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the
roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for
the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down
to the Americanisms".

An entirely different newsgroup, formed by the same chap and running a
cut-and-paste Charter and ModPol, so the success of them can be already
seen in the group this was all lifted from. It's, well, crap.

So he used another newsgroup's charter as a template? Here's something
you don't obviously know - people don't create everything from scratch.
They often use something that already exists as a template. And that
isn't restricted to usenet charters.

They are two different newsgroups. You're comparing apples and oranges.

The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who
brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the
roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for
the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down
to the Americanisms.

[1] 61.7% blog posts

[2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months

[3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours.

Many of us refuse to post to rram for various reasons, but would gladly
embrace ukrram.

That's your problem. Please don't lumber us Brits with it.

I never said anything about it involving you.

Non sequitur.

You can always RFD for change (or whatever you call it over there).

Why? I'm quite happily ignoring it - as you should ukrram if you don't
like it.

You're not happy at all. You want the Brits to host you a moderated
group so you can play in it.

You've already got one, but because you've blotted your copybook you
want another one to play with. I don't see why we should all be lumbered
because of your shortcomings.

This has zero to do with rram, but you can't seem to get that fact
through your thick skull. And the creation of ukrram has absolutely
nothing to do with rram. I know you can't understand that, either.

I think you're struggling with this:

"Only by noting that the chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who
brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the
roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for
the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down
to the Americanisms".

So what's the real reason, Spike?

The chap who is behind the RFD is the same chap who
brought 'order' to the US groups (and RRAM can be seen by all to be the
roaring success of this policy[1,2,3]), and the Charter and ModPol for
the proposed group being little more than a cut-and-paste job, even down
to the Americanisms.

[1] 61.7% blog posts

[2] Less than 1 post per day from individuals over 18 months

[3] The last gap between individual's posts was 4 days 2 hours.

And we don't want Stuckle over here. Isn't the US big enough for you?


--
Spike

"Hard cases, it has frequently been observed, are apt to introduce bad
law". Judge Rolfe