Yes I do remember it, and from my view point, it's is not totaly correct. Like I said before:
Unless I am really careful, and know my mood is bad, I am a fish that is hooked by " Troll Bait ". I said " Troll Bait ", because that is how I perceive some of it, the bait used by trolls to start a " fight ", " to cause tempers to flair ", Flame bait is much the same, as far as I perceive it, but then again that how our lives are shaped, by perceptions that we have. It is still true, I have learned a few new things, but, it does not mean that I would not prefer to spend more time talking about biofuels, and less on politics. If I was totaly consistent, I would refuse to even bother with any political discussion, for that manner, I might even leave the list if it was that big a deal. I have no doubt that some people on the list would be happy if I was to leave ( at least that is my perception ). Yes, I change, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse, that is part of the nature of being Bi-Polar. That is part of who I am. If the list can not accept me for who I am and what positive things I can sometimes offer, I am sorry, not just from me to the list, but the fact that some people who claim to be " enlightened " and better than Greg H. are in fact, no better than my self. Politics and the bickering that generally goes with them, tends to bring out the worst in me. Doesn't mean I don't learn a thing or two, and it does not mean I like it, when it brings the worst of me out. That is why I " prefer " it was not a part of the day to day discussions, because it tends to bring out the worst in me ( when I am at my worst, mood wise ). ( more below ) > >From: "Greg and April" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:19:16 -0700 > >Subject: Re: [biofuel] Re: Behind the Great Divide > > > ><snip> > > > >Many people on the list, see the war as a, result or by-product of the oil > >issue, and so to them it would be on-topic. For example, " Bush wants to > >invade Iraq for the oil ", to some people, this is the truth, and to them it > >would retard the developement of BioDiesel as a viable option for the > >average consumer. As a result of some of these discusions ( which I tried > >to stay out of at first ), I learned a few things. It does not mean I totaly > >change my stance on the issue, but, I am a little more aware. > > > >This list, is like anyother, some of the info will be of use to some but not > >to others. I scan the subject line, and some of the info., and if it is no > >use, or I don't want to be apart of it, I deleat it, and most of the other > >items with that subject. If on the other hand, It is of intrest, I save it > >for future reference, and I make a point to check all others with that same > >subject, saving the useful info, delegating things like the "Thank you" and > >"Your welcome" post. > > > >Greg H. This was written when I was in one of my neutral to better moods ( not to mention before I had a spell checker ), and still holds true today. I keep things of interest, and delegate those that are not. But like someone else said, " What I want and what the list wants is sometimes two different things, and something that I am willing to " agree to disagree " on. Does not mean I like it, or that I agree with it, it is just personal preference, and please correct me if I am wrong, but, being able to say what ones personal preferences are, seems to be a viable subject for this list. Does this make more sense? Greg H. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith Addison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 17:56 Subject: [Biofuel] PLEASE READ - Moderator's message > This is partly a response to Greg, in the "Using an email discussion > list" thread, which has now become something else. That needs dealing > with, generally, not just for Greg, and so do a few other things. > > First: > > >I know, and that's why I try and delete them. Sometimes I fail, and > >react, when I'm at my worse. Unless I really am careful, and know my mood > >is bad, I am a fish that is hooked by " Troll Bait ". Other times it is > >only a simple annoyance to the reason I joined the list, and is just > >deleted. > > > >Greg H. > > You're not very consistent Greg. Remember this? > > >From: "Greg and April" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 11:19:16 -0700 > >Subject: Re: [biofuel] Re: Behind the Great Divide > > > ><snip> > > > >Many people on the list, see the war as a, result or by-product of the oil > >issue, and so to them it would be on-topic. For example, " Bush wants to > >invade Iraq for the oil ", to some people, this is the truth, and to them it > >would retard the developement of BioDiesel as a viable option for the > >average consumer. As a result of some of these discusions ( which I tried > >to stay out of at first ), I learned a few things. It does not mean I totaly > >change my stance on the issue, but, I am a little more aware. > > > >This list, is like anyother, some of the info will be of use to some but not > >to others. I scan the subject line, and some of the info., and if it is no > >use, or I don't want to be apart of it, I deleat it, and most of the other > >items with that subject. If on the other hand, It is of intrest, I save it > >for future referance, and I make a point to check all others with that same > >subject, saveing the useful info, deleating things like the "Thank you" and > >"Your welcome" post. > > > >Greg H. > > What has been consistent is the way the list as a whole has stuck to > its guns over this issue of "political" posts, "off-topic" posts, etc > etc. And why. > > This is from another list member, a few days before that post from you: > > >To whom it may concern: > >I am leaving this "news group" because it is anything but a news group about > >biofuel. I was hoping to learn a lot, but unfortunately it takes too long > >to sort through the unrelated emails. Does anyone know of a good discussion > >group where they stick to the subject matter and actually discuss producing > >biofuels and alternate energy sources. If so please let me know. I would > >love to get involved. > > And, in his next post: > > >I wanted to learn about making my own biofuel and > >alternative energy sources. The ironic thing is... I want to learn these > >things BECAUSE... of the politics you keep discussing. > > And then: > > >You are right. I am getting good info. I'll just keep sorting through. : ) > >Thanks. > > It reminds me of something I posted when we moved here, on "The > Natural Life Cycle of Mailing Lists": > > >4. Community (lots of threads, some more relevant than others; lots > >of information and advice is exchanged; experts help other experts > >as well as less experienced colleagues; friendships develop; people > >tease each other; newcomers are welcomed with generosity and > >patience; everyone -- newbie and expert alike -- feels comfortable > >asking questions, suggesting answers, and sharing opinions). > > > >5. Discomfort with diversity (the number of messages increases > >dramatically; not every thread is fascinating to every reader; > >people start complaining about the signal-to-noise ratio; person 1 > >threatens to quit if *other* people don't limit discussion to person > >1's pet topic; person 2 agrees with person 1; person 3 tells 1 & 2 > >to lighten up; more bandwidth is wasted complaining about off-topic > >threads than is used for the threads themselves; everyone gets > >annoyed). > > > ><snip> > > > >6b. Maturity (a few people quit in a huff; the rest of the > >participants stay near stage 4, with stage 5 popping up briefly > >every few weeks; many people wear out their second or third 'delete' > >key, but the list lives contentedly ever after). > http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000007.html > [Biofuel] PLEASE READ - moderator's message > > These need posting again too: > > >Here are a couple of recent views on it: > > > >"Frankly, I don't know how to separate biofuels from politics. > >Politicians enact the rules that determine if biofuels are legal, > >and if legal what standards must be met for sale, and if available > >for sale, how they will be taxed. Politicians determine what > >subsidies will be provided to the petrochemical industry, and big > >biofuels, and what obstacles will be put in front of small biofuels > >producers. Biofuels are not going to be produced, marketed or used > >in a vacuum. The relative prices of fossil fuels relative to > >biofuels where they can be used interchangeably is going to be a > >huge factor in the mass acceptance of biofuels. When you recognize > >the degree of inter-mingling between corporatism and governments > >(especially senior governments), and the agenda of the current power > >elite, biofuels are a clear threat and that makes them political. > >There are people who embrace biofuels specifically because they see > >them as a means to reduce dependence on foreign (i.e. Middle East) > >oil, or reduce the number of people sacrificed in oil wars, or > >because it is better for the environment. That's political. My > >initial interest in biodiesel was the diversion of waste vegetable > >oil from our local landfill. Definitely political. I want to see the > >implications of my interest in biofuels, good, bad and indifferent > >so I am making informed choices, whether those implications are > >environmental, financial, social or political." > > > >And: > > > >"It's the tangential and improbable off topics which have > >subsequently proved to be veritable lodestones of information, and > >not merely on biofuels. Besides, man does not live by bread alone > >and, at least for me, reading the list is a continual liberal > >education, daily broadening horizons and bringing different > >viewpoints into my ken." > > And Greg, please beware - there's a rule about it, and it gets > enforced, and recently was. > http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000028.html > > See: > http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000005.html > > Also, please be careful - the message that sparked all this off was > flame-bait, and he knew it, but "troll-bait"? Are you quite sure of > that? Are you sure you're not providing it yourself? > > I think you should consider what happened in July with the infamous > Fahrenheit 9/11 thread. > > Maybe you'd like to have another look at the moderator's message that > ended that. > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/36631/ > > Actually I think quite a lot of people should. > > It has a lot to do with the original message in this thread: > http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000008.html > [Biofuel] Using an email discussion list > > And with this one again: > http://wwia.org/pipermail/biofuel/Week-of-Mon-20040906/000007.html > [Biofuel] PLEASE READ - moderator's message > > And with the main reason we moved the list here. A lot of people > still seem to think it's a shop. > > The majority of them, incidentally, are members who were previously > on the "Web only - no email" option. Many or most seem to have made > the transition without too much hassle, some needed some help to sort > it out, but some of the responses, if you can call them that, have > been absolutely pathetic, no other word for it, and nearly all of > those were on "no email". Yet more confirmation of what I said in > that first "Using an email discussion list" post: > > "We'd argue that if you're not prepared to learn the few simple > skills required to handle an email list well, will you be prepared to > learn the skills needed to make your own fuel well?" > > How about someone who's been here for three years, has posted a few > messages, and is now complaining like mad because it's "not a monthly > newsletter"? How oblivious can you get? He completely ignored > everything. No thought of trying to figure anything out or to see > what his options are or try to help himself in any way, he just > whines. He's not alone. > > "Web forums might be more sociable, arguably, but on average, > discussion is more chatty and superficial, the noise to signal ratio > is higher, there's less direction and development, and the users > don't build up their own information resources - it's a bit like > having no memory." > > Web boards? Naah. > > Quite a number of these people are unsubbing. That's just fine, just > as they wish. Yet the total remains about the same, at just over > 3,000. > > If it should shrink to only 300, and they're members who're prepared > to take it seriously, that it's a community, *their* community, and > they behave like responsible, self-moderating community members, I'll > be more than pleased. I'll be delighted. If we can achieve that kind > of community here, I couldn't care less how many members it has. For > two reasons. One is that I don't have the time to run any other kind > of list - we don't have the time, Journey to Forever doesn't have it. > Running this list has been costing us very heavily for the last two > years or more, it's held us back, done us and our project harm. I've > said so before, but I just stuck it out somehow. Not any more. I've > also said quite a few times that we don't think biofuels is the most > important part of our project, important of course, but just a part - > but it's a very greedy part that means more important things have to > go without. Not any more. > > The other reason, the more important one, is that such a list will be > able to go about its business a LOT better and will achieve at least > as much, regardless of how many members it has or doesn't have. > > That's what we're aiming for, and this is it - it either flies or it > dies. It should fly. I know that a lot of people here want that. A > lot of other people I didn't know before have now told me the same. > (Thankyou!) > > Well, it's up to you. Get on with it. > > Best wishes > > Keith Addison > List owner > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "robert luis rabello" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 00:12 > >Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Using an email discussion list > > > > > > > > > > The only problem with "political" posts is that they can disagree > > > with how we feel about a given issue. My first response to the "Kerry > > > Poll" results was that American politics are not the business of the > > > "rest of the world." However, this is simply not true. What we do > > > impacts a very large number of other people who share the same planet, > > > (arguably, all of them) and the leadership of our country matters to > > > these people, even if they have no right to vote in our election as we > > > do. > > > >And the opposite is true to. What the leadership (official or un-official > >leadership ) of other countries do, affects the US as well. What they do, > >also affects the US as well as the planet. Matters of foreign policy of > >any nation ( and/or religious belief ) affect everyone on the planet, should > >we ( the people - not the leadership, of the US ) be telling them what to do > >as well? That would be nice, but, totaly unrealistic especially if the > >other leaders decide that we are heathen, for stupid things like were we > >live, or what religion we want to believe in. > > > >In theory, it would be nice if the people of a country/state/nation told > >their leaders what they want, and the leaders should then follow through, > >but, unfortunately, it doesn't happen that way ( you know the saying " You > >can't please all of the people all of the time"? ). In some cases the > >leaders tell the people what the people want, or the leaders just tell the > >people what needs to be done and if it isn't done death or worse is the > >result. At other times the leader finds out what he/she thinks the people > >want, and does it, even if it is something totaly opposite the following > >week. > > > > > Many of these people are our friends, and as such, we should be > > > listening to them, even if we see the issues in an entirely different > > > light. They want us to do what is right and good. They want us to > > > take a responsible leadership role. There's nothing wrong with them > > > telling us so. > > > >Granted, and I have no problem with that, as long as it is in the proper > >time and place. Were I on a international political list I would not only > >expect it, I would encourage exchange of political ideas. > > > > > > > > I encourage you to develop some respect for the differing "political" > > > views posted on this forum. You and I don't have to agree with them, > > > but we Americans shouldn't be dismissive either. Personally, I don't > > > care for EITHER candidate, so I'm going to hold my nose when I cast my > > > ballot. . . > > > > > > >I have respect for "political" views, I just don't believe this is the > >proper place to be doing laundry. I don't care for some things that both > >of the major candidates have done, the only difference, is that one has more > >of my respect than the other. > > > > > Concerning the propriety of such posts on the biofuels list, it's > > > been a long established principle that these belong here. That is not > > > negotiable. If you and I don't like them, we don't have to read them. > > > > > > >I know, and that's why I try and delete them. Sometimes I fail, and > >react, when I'm at my worse. Unless I really am careful, and know my mood > >is bad, I am a fish that is hooked by " Troll Bait ". Other times it is > >only a simple annoyance to the reason I joined the list, and is just > >deleted. > > > >Greg H. > > _______________________________________________ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ > _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
