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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
Robert Catt wrote:
For the reasons I've given here in a previous post, and after a brief interchange with a certain member of this newsgroup, I've decided to restrict my involvement with r.p.c.a. to its group at Facebook. Other people have written to me me about this individual, and their comments about him are part of the reason I will no longer be reading or posting to this newsgroup. As of today I've removed it from my list. I think it was pretty childish of people to send private emails about someone on this group, in response to a public disagreement that stayed entirely wihin the bounds of civility, if not warm fuzzies. Almost everyone on this newsgroup gets grumpy from time to time, so why does "this individual" get singled out for sneaky gossip? I've never seen the aforementioned individual do anything reprehensible here. He's opinionated, but so are many of us. On the other hand, if that trivial disagreement is the worst thing Robert has seen on usenet, maybe he really *doesn't* belong here. -- Joyce - Mommy loves you too my sweaty litter baby fire - Ummm what mom? - MY SWEET LITTLE BABY GIRL!! sorry honey! -- damnyouautocorrect.com |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
"Adrian" wrote in message ... "MaryL" wrote: "Robert Catt" wrote in message ... For the reasons I've given here in a previous post, and after a brief interchange with a certain member of this newsgroup, I've decided to restrict my involvement with r.p.c.a. to its group at Facebook. Other people have written to me me about this individual, and their comments about him are part of the reason I will no longer be reading or posting to this newsgroup. As of today I've removed it from my list. - - - - - - - - - - I have taken the opposite approach (but certainly not because of any of our posters). I refuse to use Facebook, for this group or any other group. My objection is to Facebook itself, not to individual posters. MaryL I really don't understand peoples hostility to Facebook when they're happy to use usenet which is accessible by anybody. With Facebook, you can decide who can or can't see your posts. -- Adrian That's *exactly* the problem I have with Facebook. I don't have to want to be invited to join. It reminds me a lot of moderated newsgroups and web forums where people can decide what you can and cannot post. With rpca on usenet, I can easily killfile someone (and vice versa) if I don't like the things they're posting. Jill |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
wrote:
For the reasons I've given here in a previous post, and after a brief interchange with a certain member of this newsgroup, I've decided to restrict my involvement with r.p.c.a. to its group at Facebook. Other people have written to me me about this individual, and their comments about him are part of the reason I will no longer be reading or posting to this newsgroup. As of today I've removed it from my list. I think it was pretty childish of people to send private emails about someone on this group, in response to a public disagreement that stayed entirely wihin the bounds of civility, if not warm fuzzies. Almost everyone on this newsgroup gets grumpy from time to time, so why does "this individual" get singled out for sneaky gossip? I've never seen the aforementioned individual do anything reprehensible here. He's opinionated, but so are many of us. On the other hand, if that trivial disagreement is the worst thing Robert has seen on usenet, maybe he really *doesn't* belong here. Maybe you missed it, Joyce, but the way the individual acted certainly wasn't trivial, it led to several people leaving the group permanently. -- Adrian |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
Adrian wrote:
wrote: I've never seen the aforementioned individual do anything reprehensible here. He's opinionated, but so are many of us. Maybe you missed it, Joyce, but the way the individual acted certainly wasn't trivial, it led to several people leaving the group permanently. You mean this little argument about facebook? People left over that?? Feel free to email me privately if that isn't what you're talking about. No sense dragging everyone through something unpleasant twice. Just remove the XXX from my username before sending. -- Joyce It is better to give than to lend, and it costs about the same. -- Unknown (I don't really agree that it's "better to give than to lend", but the rest of the statement is absolutely true.) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
"jmcquown" wrote in message ... "Adrian" wrote in message ... "MaryL" wrote: "Robert Catt" wrote in message ... For the reasons I've given here in a previous post, and after a brief interchange with a certain member of this newsgroup, I've decided to restrict my involvement with r.p.c.a. to its group at Facebook. Other people have written to me me about this individual, and their comments about him are part of the reason I will no longer be reading or posting to this newsgroup. As of today I've removed it from my list. - - - - - - - - - - I have taken the opposite approach (but certainly not because of any of our posters). I refuse to use Facebook, for this group or any other group. My objection is to Facebook itself, not to individual posters. MaryL I really don't understand peoples hostility to Facebook when they're happy to use usenet which is accessible by anybody. With Facebook, you can decide who can or can't see your posts. -- Adrian That's *exactly* the problem I have with Facebook. I don't have to want to be invited to join. It reminds me a lot of moderated newsgroups and web forums where people can decide what you can and cannot post. With rpca on usenet, I can easily killfile someone (and vice versa) if I don't like the things they're posting. Jill - - - - - - - - - Agreed. In addition, Facebook is notorious for sharing information. The r.p.c.a. group seems to be an "invite only" group, but even that would require members to use personal information to sign up. Facebook has a history of changing their "rules" in ways that may not be acceptable to users. MaryL |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
On Nov 13, 11:46*am, Adrian wrote:
Maybe you missed it, Joyce, but the way the individual acted certainly wasn't trivial, it led to several people leaving the group permanently. It was beyond the pale to put it mildly Lesley Slave of the Fabulous Furballs |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
news wrote: On 11/13/2011 6:21 AM, Robert Catt wrote: For the reasons I've given here in a previous post, and after a brief interchange with a certain member of this newsgroup, I've decided to restrict my involvement with r.p.c.a. to its group at Facebook. Other people have written to me me about this individual, and their comments about him are part of the reason I will no longer be reading or posting to this newsgroup. As of today I've removed it from my list. Umm, who are you? Right! (I've never heard of him/her/it before.) I seriously doubt whether I'm the only poster to rpca who resists Facebook, Twitter, et al because of privacy issues. True, genuine privacy is a thing of the past - apart from our government spying on our personal lives, a determined person can find out anything about anyone, nowadays. (But why make it easy for them?) |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
Adrian wrote: "MaryL" wrote: "Robert Catt" wrote in message ... For the reasons I've given here in a previous post, and after a brief interchange with a certain member of this newsgroup, I've decided to restrict my involvement with r.p.c.a. to its group at Facebook. Other people have written to me me about this individual, and their comments about him are part of the reason I will no longer be reading or posting to this newsgroup. As of today I've removed it from my list. - - - - - - - - - - I have taken the opposite approach (but certainly not because of any of our posters). I refuse to use Facebook, for this group or any other group. My objection is to Facebook itself, not to individual posters. MaryL I really don't understand peoples hostility to Facebook when they're happy to use usenet which is accessible by anybody. With Facebook, you can decide who can or can't see your posts. Really? I think you are being overly optimistic! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
More about r.p.c.a. and Facebook
Adrian wrote: news wrote: Umm, who are you? If you were a regular of the group you'd know. Not true! (I've been a "regular" for nearly ten years, and I've never encountered him before.) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FACEBOOK CAT :) | Persian | Cats - misc | 1 | July 9th 12 01:49 PM |
r.p.c.a on Facebook | Robert Catt | Cat anecdotes | 17 | November 15th 11 09:31 PM |
Sherry | Cat anecdotes | 4 | January 26th 11 09:54 PM | |
For Those Who Are On Facebook. | tanadashoes | Cat anecdotes | 0 | May 21st 10 02:46 PM |
OT Facebook | Kyla =^..^=[_2_] | Cat anecdotes | 0 | September 21st 09 11:01 PM |