No commercial postings, please!

fundoc prattled merrily on with:

BTW, here's an interesting thought: you say that I shut up about
your hypocrisy

That is begging the question. I say no such thing!

WTF. That's exactly what you said

Twaddle; "you say that I shut up about your hypocrisy" begs the question
that I am a hypocrite. Naturally, I concede no such thing, and therefore
said no such thing. As you rightly quote me, I said:

"Anyway, you shut up about this for several months once I managed
to hive off the informational (.org) stuff from the commercial (.com)
stuff. What the heck's still eating you?"

See?

Very disingenuous. Did you think I wouldn't notice?

Exactly.

For the rest, it's been a bundle of laughs, as always, fundoc. The sig's a
bit repetitive, but then you always were a bit of a one-tune wonder.

Pip pip!

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.org

fundoc wrote:

I don't have a problem with your sig file, or anyone's sig file, or your
posts, or the contents of anyone's posts. I don't tell anyone what or how to
post and never have except to the extent that I occasionally ask Paghat to
post more hot girl on girl book collecting stories. I'm commenting upon the
content of your post. Post away. Sig file away. Hypocrisy in Japan away.
Frankly, I like it when you're hypocritical because then I get to kick you
for it.


Your absolutist position causes you to mistake compromise for hypocrisy.

We want this group to be for discussion (even if the discussion is
sometimes trivial and repetitive--as it is anywhere) without it turning
into a book-for-sale announcement board, where the regular posts are
drowned in a sea of ads. On the other hand, we're not so foolish as to
deny that the buying & selling of books is central to our collecting.

So the intention of the two rules--disallowing outright commercial
announcements, while allowing them in sigs--is a compromise: To
discourage hit-and-run ad posters while encouraging useful content and
participation from as many people who are interested in book collecting
as possible--even if (gasp) some of the contributors just might want to
sell us a book one in awhile.

This isn't hypocrisy. It's just a way of trying to maintain a vital
newsgroup where the discussion isn't overwhelmed by commercial noise,
while not trying to pretend that there is no commercial aspect to book
collecting. It's a way of dealing with messy reality, is what it is.


--Jon Meyers

Jon and fundoc: As a new member I now feel right at home...reminds
me of Christmas with the families when Uncle Fred and Cousin Dudley
"discuss" politics and religion.

Sam wrote:

As a new member I now feel right at home...reminds me of
Christmas with the families when Uncle Fred and Cousin
Dudley "discuss" politics and religion.

Welcome to the club, Sam!

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.org

Sam wrote:
Jon and fundoc: As a new member I now feel right at home...reminds
me of Christmas with the families when Uncle Fred and Cousin Dudley
"discuss" politics and religion.


Yeah, but all the arguments stop when "A Christmas Story" comes on.

"Some men are Baptists, others Catholics; my father was an Oldsmobile man."


--Jon Meyers

"Jon Meyers" wrote in message
...
Sam wrote:
Jon and fundoc: As a new member I now feel right at home...reminds
me of Christmas with the families when Uncle Fred and Cousin Dudley
"discuss" politics and religion.


Yeah, but all the arguments stop when "A Christmas Story" comes on.

"Some men are Baptists, others Catholics; my father was an Oldsmobile
man."


--Jon Meyers

I agree with this poast.


--
Fundoc

I have a signed copy of Ferrari in the Bedroom ("To Stephen. Excelsior you
fathead. Jean Shepherd.") that's lacking a DJ. Anyone who has a first state
DJ they'd like to sell please contact me.

"Jon Meyers" wrote in message
...
fundoc wrote:

I don't have a problem with your sig file, or anyone's sig file, or your
posts, or the contents of anyone's posts. I don't tell anyone what or how
to post and never have except to the extent that I occasionally ask
Paghat to post more hot girl on girl book collecting stories. I'm
commenting upon the content of your post. Post away. Sig file away.
Hypocrisy in Japan away. Frankly, I like it when you're hypocritical
because then I get to kick you for it.


Your absolutist position causes you to mistake compromise for hypocrisy.

We want this group to be for discussion (even if the discussion is
sometimes trivial and repetitive--as it is anywhere) without it turning
into a book-for-sale announcement board, where the regular posts are
drowned in a sea of ads. On the other hand, we're not so foolish as to
deny that the buying & selling of books is central to our collecting.

So the intention of the two rules--disallowing outright commercial
announcements, while allowing them in sigs--is a compromise: To discourage
hit-and-run ad posters while encouraging useful content and participation
from as many people who are interested in book collecting as
possible--even if (gasp) some of the contributors just might want to sell
us a book one in awhile.

This isn't hypocrisy. It's just a way of trying to maintain a vital
newsgroup where the discussion isn't overwhelmed by commercial noise,
while not trying to pretend that there is no commercial aspect to book
collecting. It's a way of dealing with messy reality, is what it is.

I understand why the group runs the way it does. I even approve - to the
extent that I think about usenet in those terms - and certainly I reap the
benefits, because I don't spend my time here wading through a sea of ads for
ebay auctions of James Patterson novels. But if your "compromise" between
your ideal (NO commercial ads) and your reality is that you yourself post
some form of commercial ad while at the same time telling others not to post
commercial ads, then your (royal your) compromise is still hypocritical,
even if done for the best of intentions. Look: if Yamamoto's sig file
appears at the bottom of a post discussing first edition points for A
Chrstmas Carol, that's not hypocritical; if Yamamoto then posts a "No
commercial ads" warning in which his sig file does NOT appear, even that's
not hypocritical; but to post a message that merely says "no commercial ads"
to which is appended your own commercial ad is hypocritical. It's the very
definition of hypocritical: do as I say, not as I do. And no amount of
semantics changes that. Is it hypocritical to the same extent that it would
be if Pope Benedict ate a baconburger on Good Friday while his mistress is
having a partial birth abortion? Well, no. Usenet. But is it hypocritical
enough to where I get to get a rise out of Yamamoto each and every time I
kick him for doing it? Evidently it is.

"fundoc" wrote in message
...

But is it hypocritical enough to where I get to get a rise
out of Yamamoto each and every time I kick him for doing it?
Evidently it is.


Where you may have had a point, is that a post containing
the bare exhortation combined with a sig could certainly
be interpreted as being either hypocritical and or grossly
ironical, by any spamming newbie who was unaware of John's
substantive contributions to the NewsGroup. Which substantive
contributions legitimise the inclusion of a sig, according
to the terms of the FAQ, at least.

The inclusion of a sig in those circumstances could certainly
be interpreted in that way, by the very person to whom the
post was mainly addressed. But not by anyone else.

Unfortunately for you however, you never actually made that
point, did you ?

So near and yet so far, as ever it would seem.


michael adams

....

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"fundoc" wrote in message
...

But is it hypocritical enough to where I get to get a rise
out of Yamamoto each and every time I kick him for doing it?
Evidently it is.


Where you may have had a point, is that a post containing
the bare exhortation combined with a sig could certainly
be interpreted as being either hypocritical and or grossly
ironical, by any spamming newbie who was unaware of John's
substantive contributions to the NewsGroup. Which substantive
contributions legitimise the inclusion of a sig, according
to the terms of the FAQ, at least.

The inclusion of a sig in those circumstances could certainly
be interpreted in that way, by the very person to whom the
post was mainly addressed. But not by anyone else.

Unfortunately for you however, you never actually made that
point, did you ?

Oh dear. As usually happens when my little spanktards get together for a
circle jerk, you forgot to bring the cookie.

Allow me: http://tinyurl.com/amqwt

"fundoc" wrote in message
...

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"fundoc" wrote in message
...

But is it hypocritical enough to where I get to get a rise
out of Yamamoto each and every time I kick him for doing it?
Evidently it is.


Where you may have had a point, is that a post containing
the bare exhortation combined with a sig could certainly
be interpreted as being either hypocritical and or grossly
ironical, by any spamming newbie who was unaware of John's
substantive contributions to the NewsGroup. Which substantive
contributions legitimise the inclusion of a sig, according
to the terms of the FAQ, at least.

The inclusion of a sig in those circumstances could certainly
be interpreted in that way, by the very person to whom the
post was mainly addressed. But not by anyone else.

Unfortunately for you however, you never actually made that
point, did you ?

Oh dear. As usually happens when my little spanktards get
together for a circle jerk, you forgot to bring the cookie.

Allow me: http://tinyurl.com/amqwt



Unfortunately for you mullet-head, your little joke sort of
misfired. Given that "Sterno" is largely unknown in the UK.
To the intended recipient at least.

Having to look up trade names, sort of lessens the impact!

As I said to you previously, lard brain "so near and yet so far".

Hoot!



michael adams

....