Act Acting » Acting Coach » OT a bit– Usenet Netiquette

OT a bit– Usenet Netiquette

Question:

Kinda like riding a bicycle with  friction brakes, and trying to teach someone with handbrakes how to stop. Methinks bicycle imagery is very boring.

Well, hell, Bill…If I’da known, I could have tossed my Harley into it instead to gussy it up! <g Carl — People are more violently opposed to fur than to leather because it’s safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs. – CASalonen Before you buy.

Response:

Just FYI – Another very useful source is "Zen and the Art of the Internet," which says the following under "Quoting" [which can be found at: http://www.softlab.ece.ntua.gr/facilities/documentation/internet/zen-...] "When you quote another person, edit out whatever isn’t directly applicable to your reply. This gives the reader of the new article a better idea of what points you were addressing. By including the entire article, you’ll only annoy those reading it. Also, signatures in the original aren’t necessary; the readers already know who wrote it (by the attribution). Avoid being tedious with responses–rather than pick apart an article, address it in parts or as a whole. Addressing practically each and every word in an article only proves that the person responding has absolutely nothing better to do with his time."

Response:

I just figured that everyone would be getting at least one or two of the older posts when they came here, so if they were lost, they can review.  But if you have your reader set to retrieve only messages you haven’t read, then I guess you are missing out on some of the info.  I have already said I would use – and have been using – the option that puts the message contents I’m replying to in the post I’m writing, so I had hoped the discussion would be over.  I really don’t like confrontations and arguing, especially when I am, at least in part, the reason they are occurring.  I can handle debates over issues on here, but please stop arguing over this point.  I have acquiesced.  Enough on this.  It really does come down to personal preferences, and since I was politely asked to include extra info in my replies, I complied.  Let’s move on to other subjects. Now I know everyone is going to complain that I am trying to squelch discussions in this group.  I am not.  I am just trying to do it with this one, as it directly concerns me.  And in case this comes off as snotty, condescending, or "mean," as Victoria is often saying, I apologize.  That was not my intention.  I am merely trying to be succinct. — Janice "You lure men to their deaths like a spider with flies!" "Flies are where men are most vulnerable."

Dear Carla, Firstly Bill, with all due respect, I’ve searched high and low, and honestly, have not been able to find anywhere in Usenet rules, where it is considered good manners to quote the actual name of the person to whom you’re replying.  All sources I found mention quoting only part of the message and not the entire thing in a reply, but not needing to mention the name with it.  Below is a paragraph I found about that at: (snip) Carla, thanks for the refresher course…. it confirms most of the

suggested guidelines about courtesy and brevity I read some years back. This minor matter arose with a post Janice had written…. I don’t know

Janice (unless she is Janice the coach with whom I’ve had private correspondence.)  But thus

far, she seems a pretty level-headed person…. I’ve enjoyed her posts, but have been confused, at times, about what the unknown poster has said that evokes her response. This business about citing the name of the poster whom one has quoted is both a personal preference and something that I have found clarifies who is addressing whom, especially on listservers like Act-Pro, Stage & Screen.  You’ve traveled those routes, and you know how complicated it becomes when you have 6 or a dozen corespondents quoting

and commenting…. all – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – at the same time. Included in the netiquette tips you cited is this:     Never forget that the person on the other side is human. If netiquette lists don’t suggest citing the sender’s name or handle in the salutation, or adjacent to the (partial) quote…. well, that’s life.  Netiquette lists are created and edited by human beings, and yet they do evolve over time. But I like to do it as a courtesy and as a personal style, as a function of treating "the person on the other side" as a human.  And I do think that it helps other readers of the "dialogues" to figure how who said what to whom and why. Break a leg, Bill — THE ACTING STUDIO http://gvtg.com/theactingstudio

Response:

Dear Carla, Firstly Bill, with all due respect, I’ve searched high and low, and honestly, have not been able to find anywhere in Usenet rules, where it is considered good manners to quote the actual name of the person to whom you’re replying.  All sources I found mention quoting only part of the message and not the entire thing in a reply, but not needing to mention the name with it.  Below is a paragraph I found about that at:

(snip) Carla, thanks for the refresher course…. it confirms most of the suggested guidelines about courtesy and brevity I read some years back. This minor matter arose with a post Janice had written…. I don’t know Janice (unless she is Janice the coach with whom I’ve had private correspondence.)  But thus far, she seems a pretty level-headed person…. I’ve enjoyed her posts, but have been confused, at times, about what the unknown poster has said that evokes her response. This business about citing the name of the poster whom one has quoted is both a personal preference and something that I have found clarifies who is addressing whom, especially on listservers like Act-Pro, Stage & Screen.  You’ve traveled those routes, and you know how complicated it becomes when you have 6 or a dozen corespondents quoting and commenting…. all at the same time. Included in the netiquette tips you cited is this:     Never forget that the person on the other side is human.

If netiquette lists don’t suggest citing the sender’s name or handle in the salutation, or adjacent to the (partial) quote…. well, that’s life.  Netiquette lists are created and edited by human beings, and yet they do evolve over time. But I like to do it as a courtesy and as a personal style, as a function of treating "the person on the other side" as a human.  And I do think that it helps other readers of the "dialogues" to figure how who said what to whom and why. Break a leg, Bill — THE ACTING STUDIO http://gvtg.com/theactingstudio

Response:

 And I do think that it helps

other readers of the "dialogues" to figure how who said what to whom and why.

I’m going to gently defend one thing on Janice’s behalf: If you’re only experience with Usenet is a threading newsreader (that is, it automatically lets you know what you’re replying to), then it may not occur to you that others (people like me who use a service that doesn’t thread automatically, except as a diagram of who responded when, but not to what) don’t have this facility. Kinda like riding a bicycle with  friction brakes, and trying to teach someone with handbrakes how to stop. Carl — People are more violently opposed to fur than to leather because it’s safer to harass rich women than motorcycle gangs. – CASalonen Before you buy.

Response:

Dear Carl,  And I do think that it helps other readers of the "dialogues" to figure how who said what to whom and why. I’m going to gently defend one thing on Janice’s behalf: If you’re only experience with Usenet is a threading newsreader (that is, it automatically lets you know what you’re replying to), then it may not occur to you that others (people like me who use a service that doesn’t thread automatically, except as a diagram of who responded when, but not to what) don’t have this facility.

No need to defend Janice, Carl.  The only reason that I wrote to her was that I liked several of her posts and just wanted to follow her reasoning in relationship to the dialogue. I don’t know what ISP (commercial or free) she uses, or what browsers she uses.  But in one post, Janice mentioned that she chooses not to quote, because it’s tiresome, especially at 3 AM. I’ll keep on reading Janice’s posts one way or another. BUT, on one post the other day, someone wrote something WITHOUT quoting or citing the sender, and I looked at my queue, ant there were 20 posts on the same topic.  Sorry, Carl, but I deleted the post, ’cause I’m not gonna take the time to review 20 posts to see what the argument is about. Kinda like riding a bicycle with  friction brakes, and trying to teach someone with handbrakes how to stop.

Methinks bicycle imagery is very boring.  That’s an actor said to me this week. A SAG actor who took 2 years off to raise her newborn, she’s returned to acting and cold read auditions.  And she did a miserable cold reading, and I reminded her that it’s just like riding a bicycle…. "you never forget."  And she said, "Bullshit."   She "knows" that she needs to drill or re-drill her cold reading technique. Break a leg, Bill — THE ACTING STUDIO http://gvtg.com/theactingstudio

Response:

 the entire article since it will irritate the people who have already seen it. Even if you are responding to the entire article, summarize only the major points you are discussing.

How about: "I will summarize for the group". Haven’t seen that ever since AOL people were allowed on the net. Ray Normandeau, some interesting NGs Before you buy.

Response:

Yes Carl, and that’s exactly why I mentioned that in my reply to her, giving the benefit of the doubt that possibly that is what was occurring. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –  And I do think that it helps other readers of the "dialogues" to figure how who said what to whom and why. I’m going to gently defend one thing on Janice’s behalf: If you’re only experience with Usenet is a threading newsreader (that is, it automatically lets you know what you’re replying to), then it may not occur to you that others (people like me who use a service that doesn’t thread automatically, except as a diagram of who responded when, but not to what) don’t have this facility. Kinda like riding a bicycle with  friction brakes, and trying to teach someone with handbrakes how to stop. Carl

– Opus (: I was fired from my job at a Howard Johnson’s when somebody asked me the ice cream flavour of the week and I said, "chicken". –Mike Nichols Opus Graphics– http://members.home.net/coble/OpusGraphics Alt.Acting FAQ– http://www.acmecity.com/scoobydoo/witchdoctor/345

Response:

 the entire article since it will irritate the people who have already seen it. Even if you are responding to the entire article, summarize only the major points you are discussing.

Hm. Now whom do I know who does this almost daily? <glancing sideways Carl — Read my lips: NO NEW TEXANS! I’m a Frisbeetarian. I believe when you die, your soul flies up and gets stuck on the roof. – CASalonen Before you buy.

Response:

Alright, Bill’s original comment and the subsequent discussion that followed, got me thinking.  Firstly Bill, with all due respect, I’ve searched high and low, and honestly, have not been able to find anywhere in Usenet rules, where it is considered good manners to quote the actual name of the person to whom you’re replying.  All sources I found mention quoting only part of the message and not the entire thing in a reply, but not needing to mention the name with it.  Below is a paragraph I found about that at: http://www.csam.montclair.edu/Docs/Users_guide/news.html Summarize What You are Following Up. When you are following up someone’s article, please summarize the parts of the article to which you are responding. This allows readers to appreciate your comments rather than trying to remember what the original article said. It is also possible for your response to get to some sites before the original article. Summarization is best done by including appropriate quotes from the original article. Do not include the entire article since it will irritate the people who have already seen it. Even if you are responding to the entire article, summarize only the major points you are discussing.

Bill if you’ve found another source that supports your statement, please post it here. Here are just a few other supports of topics of Netiquette that have come up in this particular group: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Be Careful About Copyrights and Licenses. Once something is posted onto the network, it is probably in the public domain unless you own the appropriate rights (most notably, if you wrote the thing yourself) and you post it with a valid copyright notice; a court would have to decide the specifics and there are arguments for both sides of the issue. Now that the US has ratified the Berne convention, the issue is even murkier (if you are a poster in the US). For all practical purposes, though, assume that you effectively give up the copyright if you don’t put in a notice. Of course, the information becomes public, so you mustn’t post trade secrets that way. When posting material to the network, keep in mind that material that is UNIX-related may be restricted by the license you or your company signed with AT&T and be careful not to violate it. You should also be aware that posting movie reviews, song lyrics, or anything else published under a copyright could cause you, your company, or members of the net community to be held liable for damages, so we highly recommend caution in using this material. Cite Appropriate References. If you are using facts to support a cause, state where they came from. Don’t take someone else’s ideas and use them as your own. You don’t want someone pretending that your ideas are theirs; show them the same respect. Use Descriptive Titles. The subject line of an article is there to enable a person with a limited amount of time to decide whether or not to read your article. Tell people what the article is about before they read it. A title like "Car for Sale" to rec.autos does not help as much as "66 MG Midget for sale: Beaverton OR." Don’t expect people to read your article to find out what it is about because many of them won’t bother. Some sites truncate the length of the subject line to 40 characters so keep your subjects short and to the point. Be Careful with Humor and Sarcasm. Without the voice inflections and body language of personal communications, it is easy for a remark meant to be funny to be misinterpreted. Subtle humor tends to get lost, so take steps to make sure that people realize you are trying to be funny. The net has developed a symbol called the smiley face. It looks like ":-)" and points out sections of articles with humorous intent. No matter how broad the humor or satire, it is safer to remind people that you are being funny. But also be aware that quite frequently satire is posted without any explicit indications. If an article outrages you strongly, you should ask yourself if it just may have been unmarked satire. Several self-proclaimed connoisseurs refuse to use smiley faces, so take heed or you may make a temporary fool of yourself. Summary of Things to Remember     Never forget that the person on the other side is human.     Don’t blame system admins for their users’ behavior.     Never assume that a person is speaking for their organization.     Be careful what you say about others.     Be brief.     Your postings reflect upon you; be proud of them.     Use descriptive titles     Think about your audience.     Be careful with humor and sarcasm.     Only post a message once.     Please rotate material with questionable content.     Summarize what you are following up.     Use mail, don’t post a follow-up.     Read all follow-ups and don’t repeat what has already been said.     Double-check follow-up newsgroups and distributions.     Be careful about copyrights and licenses.     Cite appropriate references.     When summarizing, summarize.     Mark or rotate answers or spoilers.     Spelling flames considered harmful.     Don’t overdo signatures.     Limit line length and avoid control characters.     Please do not use Usenet as a resource for homework assignments.     Please do not use Usenet as an advertising medium.     Avoid posting to multiple newsgroups.

– Opus (: I was fired from my job at a Howard Johnson’s when somebody asked me the ice cream flavour of the week and I said, "chicken". –Mike Nichols Opus Graphics– http://members.home.net/coble/OpusGraphics Alt.Acting FAQ– http://www.acmecity.com/scoobydoo/witchdoctor/345

Response:

Related Posts

Leave a Reply