If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
Now that I am totally lost, glad this was all settled before I got here. I
like the meowchat because it gives my cats a life of their own. They each have a personality and this is a way to get it out. When I came, I was sufficating from things going on around me and this gave me an outlet I never knew was out thee. I have met some nice people here, and their cats. As I grow older, I understand how it is not to like change. Seems to me there are more things to be brought back from the past and and thus the number of participants will increase. "Cory" wrote in message g... In article , says... I find that interesting and I just guess you had to be there, why were there flame wars? was it an issue as to splitting in the first place or was it an issue as to how to split? soft I can't remember why, but I had stopped posting to the original RPC around the time of the split, so I wasn't around when the split actually happened. I left RPC for reasons I can't recall (I may have had an illness, actually, due to the nature of my disability. I was posting to RPC around the time I was in school, too, so school may have had something to do with why I wasn't posting at around the time the split happened. I KNOW for a fact that my leaving didn't have ANYTHING to do with being angry or hurt about how the group was treating Onyx or I or how the group was functioning before the split), and when I came back to post again, RPC had split into the groups that are here today. In fact, I remember at the time thinking to myself, "why didn't they just call 'our' newsgroup 'rec.pets.cats.meowchat' (RPCM). It's simple enough, and it's accurate." I'm SO glad that they didn't call this newsgroup that, in retrospect. The meowchatters back in the day got a LOT of crap. They got a lot of crap from regular RPC'ers not wild about meowchat (who actively dissed us and called meowchat baby talk), but also from trolls, as well. If the group HAD been named RPCM, we'd be an easier mark, I believe, for trolls to seek us out and plague us left and right. What I recall (and what I recall may not be 100% accurate or complete) is that a big reason why people who wanted the split was because they were tired/sick of the meowchat. They wanted it gone from their newsgroup. The meowchatters wanted to continue to let their kitties have their own voices. AIUI, the arguing and the flamewars all escalated from there, and the split became an issue that was about more than just meowchat, for reasons I can't recall. I think some of it was a combination of both splitting the groups in the first place, and also how to split the groups. If you'll notice, there's a group in the RPC hierarchy called rec.pets.cats.health+behav. Like I said earlier, I wasn't around when the split actually happened, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that there were people who wanted there to be two separate groups: rec.pets.cats.health, and rec.pets.cats.behavior... so yeah, I would imagine that there was a fair amount of talk about how to split the groups. Since this is Usenet, there had to be a consensus. Usenet's funny... there are these things called RFDs, or request for discussion. I see now that they happen in the news.* hierarchy. I think they used to take place in the alt.config newsgroup many years ago. There are also, IIRC, RFVs, or request for votes. RFDs and RFVs both center entirely around creating new newsgroups. I can't remember if RFDs just happen and people discuss creating a new newsgroup simply because there was a call for an RFD, or if an RFD has to be voted upon in order for there to actually even BE a discussion about creating a new newsgroup. Anyway, when an RFD happens, people discuss creating the new newsgroup, whatever its name may be (e.g. alt.fan.billy-bob). If there seems to be a consensus that the new newsgroup should be created, then I *believe* an RFV is called for. There's a magic number of votes or a percentage that has to approve the creation of a new newsgroup in order for it to even be created. I believe the rationale for that is so that Usenet is not just flooded with newsgroups. Having said that, yes, if you look at your list of newsgroups, there ARE newsgroups that exist that are pretty stupid and never, ever seem to get traffic. However, that is actually one of the reasons that there are RFDs and RFVs and that the rules for creating a new newsgroup are as stringent as they are. You just have to trust me when I say that the glut of newsgroups that don't get any traffic would be about 20 times higher than it is today if the process that IS in place today didn't exist at all. OK... I think that that just about covers it. I hope I've answered all of your questions this time around. If not, just post other questions you may have, and I or someone here who's been here long enough to know will answer them as soon as I/we can. :-) --- Unca Cory ;-) |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
thanks very helpful, soft
Cory wrote in message g... In article , says... I find that interesting and I just guess you had to be there, why were there flame wars? was it an issue as to splitting in the first place or was it an issue as to how to split? soft I can't remember why, but I had stopped posting to the original RPC around the time of the split, so I wasn't around when the split actually happened. I left RPC for reasons I can't recall (I may have had an illness, actually, due to the nature of my disability. I was posting to RPC around the time I was in school, too, so school may have had something to do with why I wasn't posting at around the time the split happened. I KNOW for a fact that my leaving didn't have ANYTHING to do with being angry or hurt about how the group was treating Onyx or I or how the group was functioning before the split), and when I came back to post again, RPC had split into the groups that are here today. In fact, I remember at the time thinking to myself, "why didn't they just call 'our' newsgroup 'rec.pets.cats.meowchat' (RPCM). It's simple enough, and it's accurate." I'm SO glad that they didn't call this newsgroup that, in retrospect. The meowchatters back in the day got a LOT of crap. They got a lot of crap from regular RPC'ers not wild about meowchat (who actively dissed us and called meowchat baby talk), but also from trolls, as well. If the group HAD been named RPCM, we'd be an easier mark, I believe, for trolls to seek us out and plague us left and right. What I recall (and what I recall may not be 100% accurate or complete) is that a big reason why people who wanted the split was because they were tired/sick of the meowchat. They wanted it gone from their newsgroup. The meowchatters wanted to continue to let their kitties have their own voices. AIUI, the arguing and the flamewars all escalated from there, and the split became an issue that was about more than just meowchat, for reasons I can't recall. I think some of it was a combination of both splitting the groups in the first place, and also how to split the groups. If you'll notice, there's a group in the RPC hierarchy called rec.pets.cats.health+behav. Like I said earlier, I wasn't around when the split actually happened, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that there were people who wanted there to be two separate groups: rec.pets.cats.health, and rec.pets.cats.behavior... so yeah, I would imagine that there was a fair amount of talk about how to split the groups. Since this is Usenet, there had to be a consensus. Usenet's funny... there are these things called RFDs, or request for discussion. I see now that they happen in the news.* hierarchy. I think they used to take place in the alt.config newsgroup many years ago. There are also, IIRC, RFVs, or request for votes. RFDs and RFVs both center entirely around creating new newsgroups. I can't remember if RFDs just happen and people discuss creating a new newsgroup simply because there was a call for an RFD, or if an RFD has to be voted upon in order for there to actually even BE a discussion about creating a new newsgroup. Anyway, when an RFD happens, people discuss creating the new newsgroup, whatever its name may be (e.g. alt.fan.billy-bob). If there seems to be a consensus that the new newsgroup should be created, then I *believe* an RFV is called for. There's a magic number of votes or a percentage that has to approve the creation of a new newsgroup in order for it to even be created. I believe the rationale for that is so that Usenet is not just flooded with newsgroups. Having said that, yes, if you look at your list of newsgroups, there ARE newsgroups that exist that are pretty stupid and never, ever seem to get traffic. However, that is actually one of the reasons that there are RFDs and RFVs and that the rules for creating a new newsgroup are as stringent as they are. You just have to trust me when I say that the glut of newsgroups that don't get any traffic would be about 20 times higher than it is today if the process that IS in place today didn't exist at all. OK... I think that that just about covers it. I hope I've answered all of your questions this time around. If not, just post other questions you may have, and I or someone here who's been here long enough to know will answer them as soon as I/we can. :-) --- Unca Cory ;-) |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
I ageez!
Rebecca, apawding enthusiastically "Ellie" wrote in message ... An I fink Mietze and Auntie Melissa deserf uh big round uf fangful apaws! Princess Pasha, standing and applauding Phoebe & Emma also stand and applaud |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
Meow, Colette. Itz a onner to meet yoo.
Rebecca "squiffer" wrote in message ... Ahem, I am Colette, a veddy smart kat, and my own dear sekretary started the glossary. It was long ago, and before this group existed. As I am of both a literary and scientific mind, I veddy much appreciate all the curious minds and their questions. Ahem. That is all fellow furrrrsons. Colette "Stormmee" wrote in message ... :I don't think anyone has ever complained about the work Melissa has done, if : anyone needs to se her dedication they need only go and look at the walk... : bear in mind that honest questions and a desire to understand the dynamics : of a group can often be interpreted incorrectly or not as they are : intended... it seems to me that all of the newer members are doing something : I did not have the courage to do when I first started reading here, I think : around 99 but am not sure... I always wondered how the ball started, how the : calling got started, Melissa is the only one I ever saw do it and I wondered : how that came to be, if there had been someone before, why/how did it : change... just like I wondered when reading the glossary for the first time : who could be that creative and wonderful to catalog all of that... the point : is, I think the group is filled with love and I think that some of us are : sensitive to keeping traditions alive, and others of us want to understand : the traditions keep them and add to the life here at the community, soft fur : her cats : wrote in message : oups.com... : Hello to all. My cats Oprah Anne and Princess Pasha played here for : years (starting in 1996) when I was able to get rpcc through : newsgroups via my dialup account. When that dried up, and I had to : rely on the more difficult to follow internet groups on a dialup : account, I had to give it up for a variety of reasons, the biggest of : which was lack of time, although I did check in occasionally to see : what was going on. This group was always about fun and love for me, : and I can only hope it will remain so for all of you.. : : I just want to take a moment to acknowledge the wonderful work that : Mietze (by way of Melissa) has done for all of us over these last : years. She alone has remembered the names of those cats, dogs, : ferrets, other furs (even a snake or two), and hoomins who have passed : to the rainbow bridge during the past years. She puts their names in : her Walk of Remembrance and has worked tirelessly on the behalf of all : of us to keep the names of those we've loved alive forever. This : year, my beloved Lissa's name was called after she died shortly after : last year's Jellicle Ball. There has been no one more dedicated to : this task than Mietze/Melissa has been, and I wish to thank her for : that. : : That said (and I wish to make clear this is not aimed at those who : simply asked questions), I would like to add that those few of you who : have *complained* should be ashamed. If rpcc no longer wishes to have : a Jellicle Ball, that's fine, but it is a sad day when some in a group : of people who have supposedly been brought together by love of their : furs should attack someone who has done nothing but try to give some : consolation and solace to those who have lost their loved ones. I : have to wonder if those who have been so quick to criticize will step : up to the plate and remember those who go to the bridge this coming : year. : Ellie Terrell, former rpcc-er and mom to kitties Princess Pasha, : Phoebe & Emma : : : : |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
"Stormmee" wrote:
I find that interesting and I just guess you had to be there, why were there flame wars? was it an issue as to splitting in the first place or was it an issue as to how to split? soft I got internet access in 93 or 94, and one of my happiest discoveries (and first addiction) was rec.pets.cats. It was a busy group then, and this was a couple of years before AOL offered Usenet access, before the big ISPs like Earthlink and the rest existed. People were online mostly through school, work, or if they were lucky enough that a local provider existed in their area. Round about 95 or 96, access started to be easier to obtain, more people got online via home computers, and Usenet groups across the board got measurably more active. *Everything* about cats was discussed in rec.pets.cats, and in 95 some of the regulars started amusing themselves by having the cats take over the keyboard and talk to each other. This did *not* amuse some of the other users. As the Mietze would say...oh no, not wun bit!. In order to circumvent some of the complaints, the word "MEOW" was added to the each header so that users who didn't want their serious stuff cluttered up could use their newsreader software to killfile those posts. Forgetting to do this resulted in predictable, usually nasty reminders. And so to the split. "Volume" was the official reason given. Because groups which begin with the word "rec" are one of the "big 8" groups, there's a whole long procedure that has to be followed to create, split or remove one. (These are groups starting with comp, talk, news, rec, humanities, can't think of the others offhand, but not "alt") There were votes on r.p.c on whether to split at all, and when those were tallied there were enough "yes" votes to start the process. Then the whole thing had to shifted over to one of the news.* groups where the charters for each subgroup were hashed out, with everything (including the names) were rejected or ok'd by the high poobahs there. For awhile, it was looking like the meowers were going to be sanctioned only in the *anecdotes group, which would have left us in the same position of antagonizing those who just don't get it. "r.p.c.meowchat" was indeed a suggested name, but was tossed (by meowers) for the very reason Cory suggested...too much of a target. I also think a lot of us were pretty tired of that stupid "MEOW" in the header, it made you feel like a pariah, so why would we want the whole group marked with a scarlet A? My personal favorite among the suggested names was "clowder", but a high poohbah news.groupie vetoed it because he didn't know what it meant. Since a split was inevitable by that point (many meowers really didn't want the split at all), "community" was the best compromise arrived at and approved. And that's the Cliff Notes version of how we got here. :-) Melissa -- Remove the first m to reply |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
"Stormmee" wrote:
[small snip, but thank you and everyone who's said kind things.] I always wondered how the ball started, how the calling got started, Melissa is the only one I ever saw do it and I wondered how that came to be, if there had been someone before, why/how did it change... just like I wondered when reading the glossary for the first time who could be that creative and wonderful to catalog all of that... the point is, I think the group is filled with love and I think that some of us are sensitive to keeping traditions alive, and others of us want to understand the traditions keep them and add to the life here at the community, soft fur her cats "Add to the life"....YESSSSSSS! I would *love* to see new stuff added to the Ball. The important thing to remember is that this is a *creation*. People thought about things to do and then threw it out there to see what would work, what would stick. For the first two Balls, the Calling was just a list. I think Gretchen Marie posted them, but GM was also doing so much else for the Ball, (and has ever since...now *she*, and her successor Little Kitty deserve an enormous amount of credit and applause) and nothing was said about the Calling and who was going to do it for the third Ball. So, Mietze volunteered, and added a speech. The idea was to make the Calling also a brief Tribute to all of the Honorees on the list, in case some didn't have individual Tributes in the days that followed. Another idea, which came along later (but not much later) was Laura Ann's guestbook, now done by the current spokeskitty from Laura's House. It's one of those ideas that stuck, people have fun with it, and, after Laura died it's become a small tribute in itself to her. As far as I'm concerned, it belongs to that House to do until they choose to hand it off, or the Ball is discontinued, because they created it in the first place. I thought it was a lovely touch, having Piglet join Ralph & Kissa at the table this year. Melissa -- Remove the first m to reply |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Mietze! Questionz
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
Seconding what Kami and Ellie and many others have said.
I've been following rpc/rpcc since late 1996 though my kitties have never posted very much. (I'm not quick-witted enough for kitty 'ventures.) For me the Jellicle Ball seems like Homecoming - an old-fashioned custom in Southern churches - where people who've moved-on or moved away come back once a year. I hope we will continue the tradition. The voices from the past are very important. It broke my heart to know that KitTen died but I am so grateful that Sean came back to give us the chance to say good-bye. RPCC is and always has been a magical place. Margaret On Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:12:16 GMT, Kami wrote: Very well said, Ellie. Melissa and Mietze have been Godsends to many. What Melissa has done over the years is detailed and often painful, and she's most appreciated. Kami, mom to Sassy and Whiskers, who used to play here |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Questionz
Thanks for the history, Cory. When I first started lurking in rpc I
never read the MEOW posts. I've never had the patience for reading dialect and wasn't about to start. Then one day I clicked on a MEOW post by mistake. It was "I weared a skirt!" - the adventures of the inimitable Bobbie Rankin under the Christmas tree - and I was hooked. For a time meowchat would make it's way into everything I wrote. I think one reason for the split was that some very vocal folks felt even have to see MEOW in a header was too much of an insult. Another reason was there was an awful lot if traffic in the old rpc - it split into three (or four?) groups. Margaret On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 07:23:17 -0500, Cory wrote: What I recall (and what I recall may not be 100% accurate or complete) is that a big reason why people who wanted the split was because they were tired/sick of the meowchat. They wanted it gone from their newsgroup. The meowchatters wanted to continue to let their kitties have their own voices. AIUI, the arguing and the flamewars all escalated from there, and the split became an issue that was about more than just meowchat, for reasons I can't recall. I think some of it was a combination of both splitting the groups in the first place, and also how to split the groups. If you'll notice, there's a group in the RPC hierarchy called rec.pets.cats.health+behav. Like I said earlier, I wasn't around when the split actually happened, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to learn that there were people who wanted there to be two separate groups: rec.pets.cats.health, and rec.pets.cats.behavior... so yeah, I would imagine that there was a fair amount of talk about how to split the groups. Since this is Usenet, there had to be a consensus. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|