Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:51:46 +0530

UNSUBSCRIBE

---

From: Michael Talbot-Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:48:50 +1030 (CST)

There have been many recent posts to this list that (to put it
mildly) did not have a lot to do with administration of Pine sites.

I suppose most of us have sent e-mail that was unnecessary or
inappropriate in some way.  But most of us, also, have some quality
of character which causes us to be prepared to accept and digest a
just rebuke.  We may even have some sense of shame or remorse on
reading a protest against or comment on what we have written.

Some people lack that quality, and unfortunately some of them have
subscribed themselves to this list and trashed it.  They rudely tell
people who don't like their manners, who don't like to read mail of
the kind they send, to unsubscribe.

It is no novelty that there are people who lack that quality.  The
book of Proverbs deals with them, and our prisons are full of them.
Their behavior is characteristic, and it is not hard to identify
them, and in most of the activities of life, to shun them.

Coming to the Pine mailing list, the only way to shun them here is
to unsubscribe from the list, and clearly that is happening.

I would like to suggest, since the amount of legitimate mail to the
list is rather small, that it could become a moderated list, at
least for as long as it takes to get rid of these people.

Another approach would be for the list owner to simply unsubscribe
them.  I don't think there is any law against that.  But they could
still mail to the list. 

Perhaps the list owner could filter out mail from certain addresses
(e.g. with procmail) so that it is not passed on to subscribers.

Thus the moderator would not need to make decisions on every mail,
but only step in from time to time to add an address to a black list
of those who can't subscribe themselves and whose mail to the list
is not forwarded. 

I think it is clear that some such remedy is needed.

--Mike

---

From: Jason Tiller <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 1998 19:33:42 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)

Hi, Michael, :)

As a lurker, I haven't paid too terribly much attention to the recent
flame-fest ("d" is an awfully useful key), but I do manage some big
mailing lists that are sometimes subject to these types of problems, and
moderation or some other type of "list-splitting" is a predictable
suggested solution. (My list, Handbell-L, happens to be somewhat seasonal,
so we can be guaranteed to get heavy, low S/N traffic at certain points of
the year - the "August urge.")

I tend to shy away from these suggestions, however - moderation is a
*pain* (time-consuming, slow, debate-squelching, biased, etc.), and
list-splitting reduces the information content of the original list.  
Yes, the result may be a higher S/N, but at what cost?

> [...]

> (e.g. with procmail) so that it is not passed on to subscribers.

Not necessarily.  Pine-Info is managed by listproc 6.0c (right?), which is
the same software we use for our handbell lists; listproc provides
facilities to "shun" a user, as you put it, with a .ignore list that
disallows them from interacting with the list manager (subscribing,
sending mail, requesting subscriber lists, etc.).  With Handbell-L at over
five years old and probably 2,000+ subscribers (at various points!), I've
only had to ignore one subscriber.

I've found that a more effective tool is a personal message to the
"offender" (I quote that because one person's "offensive" is another's
"stimulating!") from the listowner that reinforces whatever written or
unwritten guidelines bound users' interaction with the list.  If that
doesn't yield results - namely contrition or at least an understanding of
why some behaviors are unacceptable - *then* the clubs can be pulled out.

It's also been my experience that this type of problem is sporadic, with
flare-ups occurring more frequently as the subscribership grows; still,
with an involved listowner, these problems can be dealt with as they come
up without too much pain.

One thing I do ask on Handbell-L, however, is that if there is to be any
clubbing, *I* be the heavy.  My list is too big and too varied for
everyone to act as a "list monitor" and try to chide other subscribers as
they see fit - that's my job, and I feel that keeping the reins on other
users' attempts at corrective actions helps keep the list as a whole more
congenial.  A listowner's duties include keeping the list on-topic and
un-abusive, IMHO, and I feel that subscribers should keep that in mind.

I'm not condoning inflammatory rhetoric, just trying to state my
experience and how these issues could be addressed.

---
---Jason Tiller
[email-masked]
Handbell-L Listowner
Pine Appreciator

---

From: "Robin S. Socha" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:57:46 +0100

> mildly) did not have a lot to do with administration of Pine sites.

That is correct. Basically, they went along the following lines:

"how do I forge my from line?"
"how do I add a signature?"
"how do I filter mail?"
"how do I underline...?"
"why are reply-to's evil?"
 
Now tell me, Michael, what do these questions have to do with "Pine sites"?
 
> reading a protest against or comment on what we have written.

English not being my mother tongue, I presume that this novellette roughly
means "if you fuck up, take the whipping like a man"?
 
> the kind they send, to unsubscribe.

The last person who was told to unsubscribe was this Aaron dude. Now, Michael,
you're not really trying to justify Aaron's brave display of public stupidity,
and his unnerving reluctance to read, are you?

> book of Proverbs deals with them, and our prisons are full of them.

You remember the eye for an eye thing, too, do you, Michael? And American
prisions don't bother me at all. To my knowledge, no German ever got jailed
for telling a luser to unsub from a mailing list.

> them, and in most of the activities of life, to shun them.

Yes, Michael, that is an excellent idea. Go back to your bookshelf, the one
with Darwin, Rosenberg and Himmler in it.

> to unsubscribe from the list, and clearly that is happening.

Let me rephrase that. You are saying: people are unsubscribing because of the
unbearable amount of profane emails sent to this list. I say: if the list were
put to its proper use, the profanity would stay where it belongs (ie Usenet).

> least for as long as it takes to get rid of these people.

Did you just volunteer for that job, Michael? Tell me, have you ever moderated
a list? Are you even remotely aware of what a sucky job this is? And who else
would volunteer?

You see, there's Gnus, the mail and newsreader for XEmacs. It's got this nifty
feature of doc groups. When you fire it up, it's got the FAQ on board, as well
as a set of rules and guidelines for using it. Now, take a minute and *read*
<news:gnus.emacs.gnus> and tell me in which respect it is different from
<news:comp.mail.pine>. Correct: there are far less lusers there, although it's
a Usenet newsgroup. Is Gnus any more difficult to use than Pine? I don't
really think so, although you probably need a fairly good understanding of
Emacs to use it. Are Gnus users more intelligent than Pine users? Hardly
likely - even I can use it. Is their attitude towards the tool different? I
should think so. If you use Emacs, you're probably an advanced user and
therefore prone to reading the docs thoroughly. If anything, I think it might
be a good idea to make the Pine docs even more accessible by re-writing them
in, say, linuxdoc and allow admins to convert them into every conceivable
format. Even an intelligent use of CSS for the HTML docs might make make
printing them out a lot more fun. If you were interested in that, I'd join.
The online help is good, but I prefer hardcopies. If you want to convert the
current help system into something more readable, go for it.

> them.  I don't think there is any law against that.  But they could

They couldn't, but they could re-subscribe from another account most easily.

> (e.g. with procmail) so that it is not passed on to subscribers.

Now that is a great idea. Let's start with aol, compuserve and everything that
says "edu". Gosh, what a quite little list that would be. Site banishes are
lame, Michael, get over it.

> of those who can't subscribe themselves and whose mail to the list

I can see it clearly before me: the Pine Email Police Force, the Pico Vice
Squad and the Pilot Task Force. And you, of course, still dressed in those
funny clothes your big sister forces you to wear every time you've been a
silly billy again.
 
> I think it is clear that some such remedy is needed.

Absolutely. Now, brothers and sisters, let us all rejoice in the Truth and
Rigour and the Depth of Godwin's Law and sing: "Ja, mein Pine Fuehrer, we need
eine Sonderloesung for der Scum of die Earth."

Ro"thisthreadhasjustbeenkilled"bin

+-Vv+
Io oI Digitally enhanced portrait
I = I of Der Grosse Pineator
I _ I
+---+

---

From: Bob Rasmussen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 09:55:55 -0800 (PST)

I'm sure many who agree with Mr. Talbot-Wilson have refrained from commenting
for fear of unleashing a more of the behavior about which he complains, or
have left the list in frustration. Well I'll speak up. I agree completely.

Just about every listserv, online forum, newsgroup, etc. which I have read, if
not moderated in some fashion, soon sinks to the level of a sewer, with a few
contributors who can't or won't conform to norms of social decency dominating
the bandwidth, to the point that the list uses its usefulness. It is, of
course, useless to try to convince them that they are not valued participants,
or that they should use some manners.

Other lists, which are moderated at least to the point of preventing abusive
language, I find to be extremely productive. I community mentality develops,
where people feel free to ask questions, and others feel free to respond.

If there are others who would like to see this list moderated, I encourage you
to speak up. Let's not allow the bad to drive out the good.

Regards,
....Bob Rasmussen,   President,   Rasmussen Software, Inc.

---

From: Jeff A Kinsey <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:23:42 -0500 (EST)

i thought i would never say this: i vote to moderate.

-jeff

--
 "make no small plans - for they have no magic to stir man's souls"

---

From: Lea <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:37:18 -0700 (MST)

> > to speak up. Let's not allow the bad to drive out the good.

I truly hate having to say this, but in my line of work (frontline computer
consulting) I listen to enough verbal abuse as it is.  I don't want to read
abusive language in what's supposed to be a professional mailing list, and
no, I'm not yet prepared to unsubscribe.  The information exchange on this
list over the past few years has been too valuable to me to simply dismiss
it. I can understand Ken and Robin's frustrations - they are both highly
technically competent - but to be honest, I don't think it's fair to assume
that people asking a common question to which the answer is simple haven't
done their homework.  I've had personal experience working with complicated
software for the first time where I really had no idea where the 'feature' I
wanted was hidden...er...located, and the built-in help menus weren't any
help because I didn't know what term the software used to reference this
feature.  

So yeah, another vote for moderation.  Every which way.

Lea

---

From: "Adam H. Kerman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 13:03:37 -0600 (CST)

>From: Lea <[email-masked]>
>Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:37:18 -0700 (MST)

>I can understand Ken and Robin's frustrations - they are both highly
>wanted was hidden...er...located, and the built-in help menus weren't any help
>because I didn't know what term the software used to reference this feature. 

>So yeah, another vote for moderation.  Every which way.

You are all missing the larger issue: Moderation is work, which none of you has
volunteered to do.

No one has yet defended any of the askers of inane questions. Can we all agree
that questions which are easily answered in the FAQs or the Help text do not
belong on this list?

If so, the only question is the degree of contempt with which the askers of
questions are treated.

I've suggested this before: moderate only questions from new members till they
get the idea. But SOMEONE in favor of moderation must volunteer to correspond
with these violators.

I propose a sliding scale:

First time violation:

Dear Lucas User,

I completely understand that you don't understand this program. Nevertheless,
it is a requirement of this mailing list that you lurk for a while (read only,
don't post) to get a feel for the nature of the list. Before you ask a
question, it is mandatory that you read the Help text "^g" and the FAQs.
If you are still having trouble, you may correspond with me.

After that, they get a best of Robin or Ken.

If they still persist, well, a more personal response is in order.

---

From: "Robin S. Socha" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 20:11:22 +0100

Bob Rasmussen ([email-masked]) wants a moderated list:

(...)
> the bandwidth, to the point that the list uses its usefulness. 

Form follows function, Bob. A while ago, the Pine ML was gatewayed to
comp.mail.pine. After a lengthy discussion, the Pine developers decided to
separate the two, leaving the NG for luser problems and the ML for
technical/administration problems.

As far as the latter are concerned, there has been none of the behaviour you
wordily deplore. As for luser questions:

	o new users are required to read the documentation available; if they
	  don't, they're not in a position to complain
	o Pine has ample documentation, although the format is suboptimal;
	  nonetheless, all information is there and in many regards in better
	  shape than in many other programs around
	o not reading the documentation and instead asking the same VFAQ again
	  and again and again is the opposite of the politeness you demand.
	  It's arrogant, stupid and gerenally annoying. It's also rude towards
	  the people who devoted their time to write excellent documentation
	  for a free program

> It is, of course, useless to try to convince them that they are not valued
> participants, or that they should use some manners.

I'll unsubscribe the very moment you, Bob, prove yourself more valuable than
me. Honest. You asked for it - now go for it.

> language, I find to be extremely productive. 

Let me rephrase that: "abusive language destroys productivity", right? Tell me,
Bob, when did you last read code?

> I community mentality develops, where people feel free to ask questions, and
> others feel free to respond.

This seems to be a particularly Microsoftish/American idea. If I told you that
you're not quite up to standard as far as sociology is concerned - would that
be any different from calling you a whining lamer? I don't think so.
E-communication tends to be best when it is concise and hard-hitting. Nice
people with nice attitudes and a generally good aura make me sick. Not
surprisingly, these are exactly the same people who a) ask VFAQs, b) don't
have the slightes clue of the technology they're abusing and c) suck.

Besides which, everyone gets the answer they deserve here, still. If I bumped
into alt.sex.singles.with.severe.social.dysfunctions asking for Lamer Bob, I
wouldn't expect an answer, either. Actually, I would, but that's a different
story, I presume.

> to speak up. 

Oh, I forget. There's also the guys commonly referred to as Samaritans. They
are hardly ever seen when it comes to technical discussions, they generally
don't participate in voluntary work - but they parade the respective forum
going "look, Ma, I'm a Big Boy now, and I want to become a politician with the
moral integrity of our current president". God bless America - with people
like you leading the crowd, it will certainly need that.

> Let's not allow the bad to drive out the good.

Ummm, Bob, rhetorics don't work this way. Neither are you and I "we", nor are
you in a position to judge who's good or bad. Or are you? Is that you God?
Have you turned into

> ....Bob Rasmussen,   President,   Rasmussen Software, Inc.

to put us all to shame? Naaaa - don't think so. Till then...

....Robin S. Socha,  Jerk,   Frustrated, Inc.

-- 
Robin S. Socha
<http://www.kens.com/robin/>

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:20:27 -0700 (MST)

Hi All,
	As I am a luser who wants to be a winner, and who asked one of the
stupid questions that got some of you up and out of your chairs with vitriolic
glee, I would like to apologize.  I am SORRY.  Mea culpa, 3X. 
(YES--I'm CC'ing all of you--on purpose! and I WILL NEVER do it again).
 
I vote for Adam's message for folks like me who--stumbling through this
world--chance upon the eden of this list thinking AHA! I have found a way to
have my questions answered, not realizing--because it is not stated(at least
not where I found the list and signed on to it--that the list is for Xtremely
advanced users/administrators, not your average teacher who is teaching
computer aided compositon classes (3) mostly via pine, and has only been using
pine for four years, and has been too busy teaching the classes to have much
time to figure out pines delicate (oh, so delicate,and subtle) nuances. 

The suggested message to first time offenders seems civil, and i would have
respected it--even appreciated it.  Maybe quick draw Ken could add it to his
signature? 
for now,
jvan

---

From: Michael Talbot-Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:07:10 +1030 (CST)

> You are all missing the larger issue: Moderation is work, which none of you has

Please keep your lines under 80 characters.

> volunteered to do.

Moderation would be a pain, for someone.  But I addressed that, and
someone else has mentioned the listserv 'ignore' facility.

> No one has yet defended any of the askers of inane questions. Can we all agree

All right.  Since you apparently don't know, here is what you do
about askers of inane questions.  There are two standard approaches.
You have a choice, you see.  Here they are:

(1)  Ignore them.  Do not mail them, and certainly don't mail the
list.  Remember, 'd' will delete thir mail.

(2)  Mail the person privately with a helpful reply.  Certainly,
don't mail the list to exhibit yourself and the wit of your reply.

Those are the two standard methods.

--Mike

---

From: Michael Talbot-Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:25:55 +1030 (CST)

> Bob, when did you last read code?

So, read all of the documentation, and read the code.  If you don't,
you uncap the sewer that is Robin S. Socha and it all sloshes out. 
Not just over the "offender" who failed to read all the
documentation and the code, but over everyone. 

Robin, this mailing list is not called "pine-dev".  Even if it were,
sending abusive responses to it, to the list, would not be
excusable.  Keep it for private mail.  There is no need to show off
here.

--Mike

---

From: "Adam H. Kerman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 18:56:31 -0600 (CST)

>From: Michael Talbot-Wilson <[email-masked]>
>Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 10:07:10 +1030 (CST)

>Moderation would be a pain, for someone.

What do you care? It's not your list.

>But I addressed that, and someone else has mentioned the listserv 'ignore'
>facility.

. . . which will not prevent inane threads from beginning.

As long as people like you defend the right to ask inane questions, I will
defend the right of others to answer vitriolicly. It keeps us awake. Few will
admit it, but you find the responses entertaining.

---

From: "Aaron S. Hawley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 21:41:31 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

> don't mail the list to exhibit yourself and the wit of your reply.

i like this philosophy.  if your ken and robin and just want to be cocky,
and mean, don't and use the 'd' key.

by the way i don't think list moderation is the answer. i think this is
the answer

--
Aaron S. [email-masked]://www.uvm.edu/~ashawley/
University of Vermont__802.656.7396__Millis 428

PC-Pine 4.05 E-Mailer_________________small,fast,simple,complex,free
______________________________________http://www.washington.edu/pine

---

From: Barry Landy <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:50:13 +0000 (GMT)

:>I'm sure many who agree with Mr. Talbot-Wilson have refrained from commenting
:>for fear of unleashing a more of the behavior about which he complains, or
:>have left the list in frustration. Well I'll speak up. I agree completely.
:>
:>Just about every listserv, online forum, newsgroup, etc. which I have read, if
:>not moderated in some fashion, soon sinks to the level of a sewer, with a few
:>contributors who can't or won't conform to norms of social decency dominating
:>the bandwidth, to the point that the list uses its usefulness. It is, of
:>course, useless to try to convince them that they are not valued participants,
:>or that they should use some manners.
:>
:>Other lists, which are moderated at least to the point of preventing abusive
:>language, I find to be extremely productive. I community mentality develops,
:>where people feel free to ask questions, and others feel free to respond.
:>
:>If there are others who would like to see this list moderated, I encourage you
:>to speak up. Let's not allow the bad to drive out the good.

I dont mind the language that much, but what I regret is that this list
has become useless for its intended purpose. (For those who dont know,
serious technical queries about pine as opposed to newbie style ROTFM
queries which should be on the newsgroup).

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Landy                        Computer Laboratory:+44 1223 334600
Head of Systems and Development    Direct line:        +44 1223 334713
University of Cambridge Computing Service
New Museums Site                   Email:[email-masked]
Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG

---

From: "Aaron S. Hawley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 12:55:13 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Barry Landy wrote:

> Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 09:50:13 +0000 (GMT)
> From: Barry Landy <[email-masked]>
> To: Pine Discussion Forum <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: A semi-moderated list?
> 

you think real technical issues aren't going to be asked? they are.
they've been submitted simultaneously with some pathetic FAQ's are asked.
or does the last have to have a certain status?

a
--
Aaron S. [email-masked]://www.uvm.edu/~ashawley/
University of Vermont__802.656.7396__Millis 428
Home: Vergennes, VT, US(contrary to the popular belief of Canada)

---

From: Michael Talbot-Wilson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:54:02 +1030 (CST)

> or does the last have to have a certain status?

May I suggest a standard reply (for those wish to reply) to
newbie-style queries: "Read the mail you were sent when you
subscribed to this list."

Yes, one would dearly like to say "sent, and ignored", or "Why
didn't you read ...", make people clearly aware that it was
offensive in them not to read it then, and they are stupid to ask
now; but really, that is a temptation that I think is better
resisted if the list is to serve its intended purpose.

It becomes useless for that purpose more as a result of responses to
FAQs than by the asking of them.  So use your blowtorch, in private
mail PLEASE, on anyone who sends an unnecessary or more amplified
response to the list, either a flame or the actual answer. 

The suggested response could be sent to the list as a warning to
others, if you think there is a need, and if that and the briefest
quote is sent, no harm is done.

Finally, as the person who mailed the comments that started this
thread, let me say I didn't have the mauling of lamers in mind at
all.  I was thinking of another thread then current, which had
reason (IMHO:) and a large majority on one side, and a singular fool
who was immune to reasonable argument, and could not be silenced, on
the other.  In the course of his disgusting remarks, in a list with
world-wide distribution, he insulted the nations who traditionally
have eaten with the bare hand rather than with a knife and fork, and
was too witless to know what he did.

--Mike

---

From: "Aaron S. Hawley" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 20:38:14 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

i'm sorry mike but i can't take you seriously, because you fucking Cc'd
me.  have a good day.

On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, Michael Talbot-Wilson wrote:

> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:54:02 +1030 (CST)

--
Aaron S. [email-masked]://www.uvm.edu/~ashawley/
University of Vermont__802.656.7396__Millis 428
Home: Vergennes, VT, USA (contrary to commmon belief of Canada)