Ancient acquisition

Reid Goldsborough wrote:
On 4/16/2010 10:33 PM, Mr. Jaggers wrote:

I do not know who Scurvy Dog is.

Other people indicate they do, as you did (as you know), but no
matter. Too many tangents here, too many wildly stupid accusations,
and too much time on this. My last post about this:

As mostly an outsider here these days, I observe that "Scurvy Dog" is
by far the most frequent and flagrant flamer here, attempting to
disrupt thread after thread with content-free flames. More than one
person here reveals that Scurvy Dog continuously changes handles to
avoid people's killfiles. Several people intimate or say explicitly
that it's known who Scurvy Dog is. I suggest that if people know who
he is, then simply call him by his real name, each time he flames,
and he just might and probably would flame less.

Other people using handles are objecting the most vociferously to
this, so apparently this is what's behind the hostility to my
suggestion. It's maybe too easy to say that "mazorj," "Cato," and the
others deserve "Scurvy Dog," but they do. Well, carry on with all of
your handles, and enjoy the anonymous flames, the excessive chitchat,
and the ever shrinking number of people who put up with it. This
group, sadly, is a dim shadow to what it once was -- this will be
argued too, but I'm very far from the only person who has observed
this. Usenet weirdness never ceases to amuse me, and this strange
acquiescence to anonymous flaming for me anyway is a new angle to it.

There are a few rcc people whose real names I have verified by meeting them
in person at shows - Ira, oly, Nick, Jorg, Jud - and a few more that I have
verified through personal email interchange - Amistad, Bruce, Peter, bgg -
but the vast majority I have not verified - nor does it really matter to me,
I'm just describing a phenomenon that I presume many others have
experienced. Scurvy does not fit into either of those two categories, nor
do you. I have not met either of you at coin shows, nor have I ever had
private email exchange with either of you. Thus I no more know the real
name of the person posting as Scurvy Dog than I know the real name of the
person posting as Reid Goldsborough. Linguistic odds favor yours as more
likely to be a real deal, but not sufficiently for me, at least, to bet
money on. There have been posts by people who claim to know his real name,
even to the extent of calling him by what they claim to be his real name,
but so far they have produced not one shred of reliable evidence. My
worldview is based on reliable evidence. That is why I can state
unequivocally that I do not know the real name of the person posting as
Scurvy Dog.

People use pseudonymous handles for all sorts of reasons. Avoidance of
killfiles is likely to be one of them, but certainly far from being the only
one. Some use more than one over a period of time, some use more than one
in a single thread, and some change their screen names regularly. Some of
us enjoy catching them doing it. Others may be incapable of catching them
or simply uninterested in catching them. Either way, it's not a crime. As
you have observed on more than one occasion, content is what matters.

Your repetitious bluff is a clear indication that you've been out of aces
for some time. An old rule among gamblers in the Old West was to never pull
out of a poker game and leave a guy busted. But you're pulling out on your
own, so I need not feel guilt by likewise pulling out. See ya next time
you're in Dodge.

James

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/13/2010 8:23 PM, Eric Babula wrote:

Sorry, Reid. You and I are just not in the same collecting camp. I have
exactly one ancient coin in my entire collection, and I barely know
anything about that one. And, AFAIK, I have no counterfeits. If I had
an interest in ancients and thought I could, I would certainly have
tried to meet your challenge. But, I've only really collected US coins.

Fair enough. Well, one ancient coin is better than none. g A lot of
collectors of U.S. coins choose not to go back further in time.

If I could go back in time I'd make your mother get an abortion!

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in
:

There are a few rcc people whose real names I have verified by
meeting them in person at shows - Ira, oly, Nick, Jorg, Jud - and
a few more that I have verified through personal email interchange
- Amistad, Bruce, Peter, bgg - but the vast majority I have not
verified - nor does it really matter to me, I'm just describing a
phenomenon that I presume many others have experienced.

Just for the record - my name is Eric Babula.

Eric Babula

Eric Babula wrote:
"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in
:

There are a few rcc people whose real names I have verified by
meeting them in person at shows - Ira, oly, Nick, Jorg, Jud - and
a few more that I have verified through personal email interchange
- Amistad, Bruce, Peter, bgg - but the vast majority I have not
verified - nor does it really matter to me, I'm just describing a
phenomenon that I presume many others have experienced.

Just for the record - my name is Eric Babula.

Perhaps we can have a face-to-face at the upcoming numismatic extravaganza
in Your Fair City?

James

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/16/2010 10:33 PM, Mr. Jaggers wrote:

I do not know who Scurvy Dog is.

Other people indicate they do, as you did (as you know), but no matter.
Too many tangents here, too many wildly stupid accusations, and too much
time on this. My last post about this:

Okay, everyone, let's all hold our breath, hope that he's good to his word,
and thank the Usenet gods for small favors.

BTW, the line for the betting pool forms on the right.

As mostly an outsider here these days, I observe that "Scurvy Dog" is by
far the most frequent and flagrant flamer here, attempting to disrupt
thread after thread with content-free flames. More than one person here
reveals that Scurvy Dog continuously changes handles to avoid people's
killfiles. Several people intimate or say explicitly that it's known who
Scurvy Dog is. I suggest that if people know who he is, then simply call
him by his real name, each time he flames, and he just might and probably
would flame less.

I must fit Einstein's definition of insanity: Telling you that years of
applying the "cure" that you keep suggesting has utterly failed in reforming
the person behind the Scurvy Dog personna - and then expecting a different
outcome, i.e., that you would come to the logical conclusion and stop making
the foolish, feckless suggestion that yet another posting of his identity
will affect his behavior for the better. Silly me.

Other people using handles are objecting the most vociferously to this, so
apparently this is what's behind the hostility to my suggestion. It's
maybe too easy to say that "mazorj," "Cato," and the others deserve
"Scurvy Dog," but they do.

Parsing whether anyone "deserves" anything is a matter of opinion that can
wander into the metaphysical if you try too hard to pin it down. Hell, by
your standards, we "deserve" you too, and I for one do not accept that
claim. g

The only meaningful operative term here is whether we "accept" SD's behavior
*as part of the price we pay* to participate in rcc without killfiling him.
As I like to tell Usenet pests, "Freedom of speech is enshrined in the very
First Amendment because we hold it so dear. It must be important to us
because listening to you is part of the price we pay for it."

Anyway, anyone who responds to, or even reads his posts for any length of
time obviously has come to terms with his behavior and is not significantly
bothered by it. You, OTOH, have allowed him to become a burr in your
saddle. Which means that in terms of his game-playing, most of us beat him
at his own game, but you ended up in his victory column. If you're such an
expert on Usenet, why is the simple solution of "Do not feed the trolls"
beyond your ken?

So knock off the sanctimonious implied declarations of superiority when you
say that we are the losers because we don't follow your inane calls to out
the Scurvy Dog. In rcc, you are the Weakest Link, not the rest of us
..
Well, carry on with all of your handles,

Here's another clue for you, Goldie, from the early days of Usenet.

mazorj is more than a "handle," it's a username. It was the very first
permanent username I ever was assigned. It goes back to DOS days when
filenames were limited to the 8.3 format. In networks, two of those 8
characters were reserved for system uses that I never understood, but it
meant that a username could not exceed 6 characters. For purposes of
alphabetical sorting, the common practice in business networks was to use
the first five letters of a person's last name followed by his first
initial. That limitation no longer exists but I made it my e-mail and
CompuServe addie and I've used it continuously for 27 years. Unlike some
"handles" its purpose is not to conceal. Quite the opposite, actually.
I've never posted using a nym, so even though publicly I neither confirm nor
deny guesses at the details of my identity, you'll always know when it is or
is not me because I never post under any other names. And if you haven't
yet figured it out yet through Google, it stands for John Mazor.

and enjoy the anonymous flames, the excessive chitchat, and the ever
shrinking number of people who put up with it. This group, sadly, is a dim
shadow to what it once was -- this will be argued too, but I'm very far
from the only person who has observed this. Usenet weirdness never ceases
to amuse me, and this strange acquiescence to anonymous flaming for me
anyway is a new angle to it.

Okay, let's do it by the numbers. Which part of the following won't fit in
your head?

1. General Usenet Rule: In unmoderated groups, no amount of admonishment
and complaints by the group can rein in a determined poster who doesn't
care.

2. Specific RCC Rule: Scurvy Dog belongs to the category of annoying
posters described in the General Rule.

3. Factual Finding: Persistent attempts by rcc over many years to reform
SD's behavior by admonishments, complaints, and references to his identity
have failed.

4. Unavoidable Conclusion: What you call "acquiescence" is merely the
rational collective conclusion that further attempts to "jawbone" SD into
good behavior are a waste of time, energy, and bandwidth.

5. Gratuitous Observation: Your behavior and exhortations WRT Scurvy Dog
are indistinguishable from the actions of a clueless git who doesn't get
#1-4.

6. Closing Question: Are you really that much of a clueless git or are you
just playing one on Usenet?

Scurvy Dog wrote:
"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/13/2010 8:23 PM, Eric Babula wrote:

Sorry, Reid. You and I are just not in the same collecting camp. I have
exactly one ancient coin in my entire collection, and I barely know
anything about that one. And, AFAIK, I have no counterfeits. If I had
an interest in ancients and thought I could, I would certainly have
tried to meet your challenge. But, I've only really collected US coins.
Fair enough. Well, one ancient coin is better than none. g A lot of
collectors of U.S. coins choose not to go back further in time.

If I could go back in time I'd make your mother get an abortion!



This from a man whose only contribution to society has been a failed
suicide attempt that left him a vegetable!

On Apr 17, 5:13�am, Reid Goldsborough
wrote:
On 4/16/2010 10:33 PM, Mr. Jaggers wrote:

I do not know who Scurvy Dog is.

Other people indicate they do, as you did (as you know), but no matter.
Too many tangents here, too many wildly stupid accusations, and too much
time on this. My last post about this:

As mostly an outsider here these days, I observe that "Scurvy Dog" is by
far the most frequent and flagrant flamer here, attempting to disrupt
thread after thread with content-free flames. More than one person here
reveals that Scurvy Dog continuously changes handles to avoid people's
killfiles. Several people intimate or say explicitly that it's known who
Scurvy Dog is. I suggest that if people know who he is, then simply call
him by his real name, each time he flames, and he just might and
probably would flame less.

Other people using handles are objecting the most vociferously to this,
so apparently this is what's behind the hostility to my suggestion. It's
maybe too easy to say that "mazorj," "Cato," and the others deserve
"Scurvy Dog," but they do. Well, carry on with all of your handles, and
enjoy the anonymous flames, the excessive chitchat, and the ever
shrinking number of people who put up with it. This group, sadly, is a
dim shadow to what it once was -- this will be argued too, but I'm very
far from the only person who has observed this. Usenet weirdness never
ceases to amuse me, and this strange acquiescence to anonymous flaming
for me anyway is a new angle to it.

--

Consumer:http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur:http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit:http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

Oh, man... I missed out on all the fun! I should check rcc more
often!

While I'm here, Reid, I just have to tell you that I've booked a
Mediterranean cruise. Ports of call include Syracuse, ancient
Carthage and Ostia Antica. Jealous?

~ Anka the World Traveler

On 4/17/2010 9:36 PM, Anka wrote:

While I'm here, Reid, I just have to tell you that I've booked a
Mediterranean cruise. Ports of call include Syracuse, ancient
Carthage and Ostia Antica. Jealous?

Thanks for the update, Anka. I can't tell you how much I appreciate
this. I'd love to chitchat with you about all of your upcoming
adventures, but I'm not allowed to here by the Usenet police. You and
Michael should have a great time. I'm not jealous at all, having been
there and done that, sorta, but I am a teensy-weensy bit enraged that
you took him again instead of me. You cougars! Feel free to talk coins
any time you want. It's really fun when you post links to photos of your
new coin purchases. These are wonderful opportunities for critiques, and
just as I learn from my mistakes, I'm sure lots and lots of people here
learn from yours.

--

Consumer: http://rg.ancients.info/guide
Connoisseur: http://rg.ancients.info/glom
Counterfeit: http://rg.ancients.info/bogos

"Reid Goldsborough" wrote in message
...
On 4/17/2010 9:36 PM, Anka wrote:

While I'm here, Reid, I just have to tell you that I've booked a
Mediterranean cruise. Ports of call include Syracuse, ancient
Carthage and Ostia Antica. Jealous?

Thanks for the update, Anka. I can't tell you how much I appreciate this.
I'd love to chitchat with you about all of your upcoming adventures, but
I'm not allowed to here by the Usenet police.

What a crock!

To paraphrase Pogo, we have met the Usenet Police... and he is you. You're
the only one who has been complaining loud and long about "chit-chat" in
rcc, Mr. Net Kop.

Barring a certain nemesis of yours who shall go un-nymed here, I can't think
of anybody who would truly be bothered by Anka's friendly post or any
responses to it. But you couldn't resist one more hypocritical jab at the
group, could you?

Reid Goldsborough wrote:
On 4/17/2010 9:36 PM, Anka wrote:

While I'm here, Reid, I just have to tell you that I've booked a
Mediterranean cruise. Ports of call include Syracuse, ancient
Carthage and Ostia Antica. Jealous?

Thanks for the update, Anka. I can't tell you how much I appreciate
this. I'd love to chitchat with you about all of your upcoming
adventures, but I'm not allowed to here by the Usenet police.

Oh, go ahead, we don't mind chitchat. Well, most of us. I presume Nick
would take a most dim view, but he can zipzap! plonk you with a couple of
left-clicks and be done with it, so no real harm done! You'll be amongst
excellent company in his killfile, I assure you, as I've already met a lot
of them. Pretty nice bunch of guys, actually. Of course, he won't see this
post, so unless you respond, this'll just be our little secret.

James