GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-07 > 1089965306


From: (Hans Vogels)
Subject: Re: Does "snippiness" always run rampant on Gen-Medieval
Date: 16 Jul 2004 01:08:26 -0700
References: <751101ce4c.tim@south-frm.demon.co.uk> <20040715154245.11031.00001604@mb-m02.aol.com>


Would it not be better if Douglas Richardson would be brought to the
bench to account for his behaviour on the newsgroup.

To make it clear to all readers this is not a verdict on his latest
work. I have not seen it and I can only "trust" what others mention
about it.

I want to state that in the past 2 years I have seen lots of strings
initiated by Douglas on a line of new enquiry or when he put himself
in a self made corner. He has brought a huge amount of negative energy
to the newsgroup that rattled lots of contributors. I myself could
care less for it all as I use this group for amusement and an
occasional enlightment.

But as an outsider I need to say that one should not hound the ones
with a critial eye but the one who provokes all this. Who starts
something and lets others do the legwork, who never can say or admit
in clear terminology "I'm sorry, your right and I made a slip up".

The newsgroup would be a lott duller if one would more clearly focus
on the content of the info one provides and not on the speed of the
answer (less typos and less need for correction)

With regards,
Hans Vogels



(StNeel) wrote in message news:<>...
> >From: Tim Powys-Lybbe
>
> StNeel wrote
>
> >> > I have simply stated that *all* here should be able to post their
> >> > views freely and even disagree in a *polite* discussion of various
> >> > views.
>
> Doug Richardson wrote
>
> >> Well said.
>
> And Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote
>
> >Is this another joke?
>
> No Tim. This NG is full of self appointed naysayers and flamers without reason
> who like to strut and censor others by bad manners and postings. So let me be
> blunt. Do you disagree with my above post? And if not - why not?
>
> I will ask one more question. If Mr A flames without cause, a gen-med mild post
> of Mr B - does Mr B have to be polite to an insulting mindless post by Mr A -
> or can he flame back fairly under the tit-for-tat rule?
>
> IMO flaming each other is boring, silly and unconstructive to this NG and its
> purpose. However - censorship by flame is rampant here. What would you suggest
> to stop it so we all can get on with med-gen discussions. I solicit your views
> on this if you wish to express them.
>
> StNeel

This thread: