|
Me:> Foldem: Me:---> >There
hasn't been any discussion about this for a week about this post >so
I'll respond. I don't know if >it... It's
not - the place is on RGP and in news.groups. I posted here asking for moderators because I
know that this list (and several others)
is where people have gone to hide from the nonsense and spam on the RGP list. --->That's
fine. I chose to respond on this list
because you posted here. I am entitled
to my opinion on the new moderated group also.
I really don't want this to pass.
I don't really feel strongly enough to campaign against this, but since
Peter posted his call for moderators here I think my follow-up response was
appropriate. >I
have not seen the RFD for votes on RGP yet.
If one comes up I will >vote
NO--I hope everyone who feels this way does the same thing. If >the
group is created, I will probably not participate (though I may >change
my mind). You
don't participate on RGP now Bill.
Neither do many other valued posters - there's too much crap and flaming. ---> Really? That's nice to know. Even discounting all the crap about politics
I've posted, I count like posts in 8 different threads in March, and 8 in
February. I am sorry I can only post on
a different thread every three days. > >This
is with all due respect to the three people listed below. I >respect
what they have done for RGP, but I respectfully disagree with >their decision to support RPGM by agreeing to be
moderators. > Gee
thanks Bill. Glad
to know that you will vote on the issue without reading a scintilla of the
discussion that is available on RGP and news.groups. --->
I read Rich M's posts initially. I have
no confidence that he --->
knows what's best for the group. I am
also a long time poster on --->
RGP and I think many of my posts have been informative. I feel --->
that I have been a contributor to the group for many
years and some --->
people would say that I have done my small part in nuturing and --->
bulding the group. Now, nobody will argue with the fact that you
--->
have been a major contributor to the group, but I really do resent --->
the implication that my decision about whether to
support RGPM or --->
not is uninformed. I
don't wish to continue the discussion in this forum. I would suggest to any who are interested
that they tune in to RGP and subscribe for a time to news.groups. That is the appropriate place for discussion. ---> Okay fine. You felt your call for volunteers was
appropriate for the list, but my continuation of discussion wasn't? Well, I'm just glad Bill
|