[TriLUG] Another WRT54G question

Matthew Lavigne mattchew.latreen at gmail.com
Tue Aug 31 09:42:32 EDT 2004


<snip> 
> Matthew's posting was factual and was an attempt to be helpful. The
> contents of the posting can be discussed.

Yes his first one was... but to me there seemed to be a bit of over
reaction in his response to Shane (who it seemed obvious to me was
joking)

 
> Tanner didn't address the contents of the posting but attacked Matthew
> personally. I assume this was to intimidate people who want to post
> helpful information. This shouldn't happen in a public forum or in
> association with a club which hopes to have a public presence.

I did not see this as an attack in any manner but an attempt to say
"Hey, take a deep breathe before posting"  Again not a problem on
either point.

 
> As to the contents of the problem, i.e. whether TriLUG condones breaking
> the rules at RTI, I only know what I read on the mailing list, and it
> appears that breaking RTI's rules is an accepted target for humor and that
> the appearance of driving home with alcohol aboard is not only accepted
> but uproariously funny.

If this was your take on it then we were not reading the same thing! 
I saw several harsh posts, a peace making effort, a joke spun off of a
comment on preference on cider or beer, a factual post based on RTI
policy, then a series of over reactions.


> Amongst friends, with agreed assumptions, you can say such things and
> people will just smile. To regular posters, seeing that most of the other
> posters are people you know well, you may think you're engaging in a
> conversation with friends. You're not - your posting goes to everyone on
> the list, many of who will not know you personally or have any interest
> hearing your assumptions and for who your posting is the only information
> they have about you.

True but as a recent problem on the 64 repeater pointed out.... You
(meaning all involved in the conversation) need to look at what is
said in context.  If you were randomly reading posts there might be a
problem but taken in context the conversation almost makes sense.


 
> Before you post, you need to consider how someone who doesn't know you
> will interpret your posting; a potential sponsor, a person from RTI,
> someone who is thinking of coming to a meeting, someone's mother or
> someone reading an archive years later. If it's not suitable for these
> people, then send it off-line.

True but refer to the previous statement on context.  I doubt that
someone from RTI would take great offense once Matt made his first
point.  I could be wrong but the group is as Aaron points out made up
of generally intelligent members that would generally not show up to a
meeting under the influence.

Matthew



More information about the TriLUG mailing list