======================================================================== USENET REC.MUSIC.REM TYPES OF "LAME" POSTS AND HOW BEST TO RESPOND by Michael Baer and Ron Henry 15 Mar 1995 ======================================================================== Anyone who's haunted Usenet for more than a couple weeks has seen "lame" posts: MAKE.MONEY.FAST, "R.E.M. sucks you losers," "Kirk Cameron/Kurdt Kobain Suicide," "What's rem's singer's name?" "Only an idiot would like Fables!" "Yeah well you're a !" etc, etc.... This document discusses what responses seem most effective in response to such posts. Contents: o "Trolls" o "Spams" o "R.E.M. sucks" o "Flames" o "Net.cops" o "Newbie posts" ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Trolls" These are posts with purposeful misinformation, a type of net.anarchism, designed to create confusion and controversy (since everyone will follow up to correct the obviously wrong facts and possibly inadvertently add to the misinformation themselves). The term trolling comes from the image of the author "trolling" around Usenet, like a fisherman on a lake, "fishing" for someone to take their bait. Signs of trolls: unexplained crosspostings, especially to alt.religion.k1b0logy, or any of several other newsgroups haunted by those who conisder it great sport to humiliate others. Obvious misinformation and confusing of facts, urban legends, fake celebrity rumors, and controversial subjects, highlight many trolls. Best response: none at all. Trolls delight in *any* response, e-mail or follow-up, flames, complaints, or polite requests to desist, even warnings to other users about avoiding the troll amuse them, and give them a chance to further mock people. *Just don't do it* -- instead, imagine the troller's ego shrivelling in the gaping silence when *no one* takes his or her bait; this is by far the best prevention. (Hopefully one day every FAQ will mention trolls so everyone will know what to do -- or what NOT to do...) You might also add the name of the thread begun by the troller to your killfile, or filter, if your newsreading program has one. "Spams" Spamming is posting the same article to many newsgroups simultaneously, usually by someone trying to sell something, or scam people. Think of it as Usenet's version of infomercials. (Why "spam"? Remember the Monty Python sketch with people singing "Spam spam spam, spam spam spam...", repeating over and over and over? That's where the term comes from). Again, always check crosspostings before replying; spams are often cross-posted to dozens of groups. Remember that following up to a cross-posted message means your follow-up will go to *all* the groups on the "Newsgroups" line of the header, so be wary! MAKE.MONEY.FAST is the "classic" spam, and is often repeated as a form letter describing how a pyramid sceme will make you rich, as it did to . (In case you don't know, these are usually illegal con games and you should not believe their claims!) In any case, the best reaction to a spam is: a) don't patronize these people; b) DON'T follow-up with complaints on the newsgroup and waste yet more time and space (the spammer does not read the newsgroup and the only people to read your invective are other newsgroup regulars; and c) if you *do* respond, do it by email in the form of a protest against their methods. (This last option, when done by a great many people, is called "mail-bombing," and is sometimes more harmful to the person's system administrator then to the spammer. So be careful.) But often if people make it inefficient for a spammer to sort out 1000 fake or angry responses from one real one, he or she might not continue. Also, if the volume of mail is enough, their sysop will take note and take action accordingly (like cancel the spammer's account, which has happened in a few cases). "R.E.M. sucks" Think about it. These people obviously have no lives and just enjoy getting a rise out of people who do. Don't respond, don't follow up; just let them remain as unpopular as they were before posting. "Flames" Some people take what should be just a difference of opinion, and turn it into something personal. While it is best to ignore such people, as with the "R.E.M. sucks" posts, the person attacked has the right to defend themselves against such attacks. But: it's *always* best to cool off for a time before posting a response; *never* post in anger; turn off your computer and come back later and see if it still seems worth the effort. If you do respond, try to make it a well-thought-out post in which you explain what you believe to be the actual situation, and suggest that it might be best to take it to e-mail in order to avoid wasting newsgroup readers' time. If you're not involved in the dispute, try to stay out of it. *Don't* post any "I wish you idiots would just shut up!" type posts since those are as annoying as the flame war itself. Although most people don't really care, a flame, true or not, can make a lasting negative impression on many who read it, just like rumors about celebrities and politicians that cannot be proved nonetheless damage their credibility. So think twice before you say something mean about someone, even if you are mad at them. "Net.cops" These posts are made by those who take it upon themselves to determine what is "right" and "wrong" for posting in the newsgroup. Of course, sometimes a person making a sincere and helpful suggesion will get labelled as a net.cop, and sometimes a total bully will get away with intimidating people; these matters are subjective. Best to ignore those who tell you what to post and what not to post, *unless* it's common sense (don't be mean to the other kids), or a consensus opinion of long-time group members (i.e., something in the FAQ document which people have agreed they are sick and tired of hearing about). The most enduring flame-war emerging from "net.cop" posts (both pro and con) on rec.music.rem involves whether or not it is appropriate to discuss Michael Stipe's sexual preferences (one that, no matter what our opinions, we're all tired of seeing people arguing over -- and our mentioning it here is not an invitation to start discussing this again!) The "newbie" post: You've seen them (once, you *were* them!) : they've only been on the internet a week; maybe they're connecting through some commercial service that gave the ten free hours and no instructions on what to do with it; maybe they're a college freshman with a brand new college account and no clue. They post the word "test" over and over. They ask a question that's on the FAQ (or should be), one that they wouldn't ask if they had hung around long enough, or post some information (a la Bill Berry's condition) that we've heard a million times before. How annoying! What fools! I'm *sure* I was never that dumb! ;) But many long-time posters may make it even worse by repeatedly following-up with "Read the damn FAQ!" messages. This not only wastes even more bandwidth and hurts the newbie's feelings, but it doesn't tell them what they need to know: like what a FAQ is, why they should read it, or how to get it. (Chances are good that if someone hasn't read a FAQ on r.m.r or some other group, they don't even know what the letters stand for.) The best thing you can do when someone asks a FAQ-covered question is to politely *reply* (by email, almost all newsreader applications can do this) to the person sending the message, telling them what the FAQ is, where it is, and, since many people don't know how to FTP or WWW, how to get it, and offer to send a copy if you have the resources. Oh yeah, answer their question too, since they still may not want to go sifting through the FAQ. Wastes no USENET bandwidth, and makes things convenient all the way around. Also, keep in mind that just because you're the first to post about Bill Berry (for example) on your university/organizational news-server doesn't mean that every newsfeed will have your article first! So, when you see someone posting about something for the umpteenth time, they may actually have been the first (from their perspective) to post, and it just took some hours/days to get to your system. Remember, Usenet is composed of many servers all around the world which are updating each others' systems on various schedules. So you might not even want to post something major you just saw on CNN (esp. if you are hazy on the details!), even though there may be no posts yet about it; odd are in a few hours there'll be a dozen threads all asking "Why hasn't anyone posted anything yet about this...?" and then a day or two later when all the servers catch up with each other, people complaining "Why the hell is everyone posting the same thing over and over?" -- neither of these comments is very useful, if you know how Usenet works. Finally: a particularly annoying brand of newbie post is the infamous "What's your ?" If you *must* respond to these ultimately meaningless questions (meaningless unless someone is keeping track of all the responses, which no one ever does), please do so by email to the original author of the question and suggest that he or she compile statistics for the whole group's benefit. (Bear in mind the original author will be lost from the thread after a week or so, though, so this could lead to confusion and irritation if you suggest compiling statistics to the wrong person!) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In summary: - Use your head. Rudeness is almost never worth the effort. Honestly. Don't say something in a post or email you wouldn't say to a person's face. - Email instead of post whenever possible with material not intended for everyone on the list. - Be aware there are a lot of jerks with lots of free time on the Usenet groups, and they don't necessarily have to be confronted personally by you each and every time they display their jerkiness. - Request and read the FAQ for any heavily trafficked Usenet newsgroup (rec.music.rem or any other) you are interested in. - Email for the newsgroup FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) list, or send the two word message SENDME FAQ to the automated server FABLES@LYNCHBURG.EDU - A good general introduction to Usenet is contained in the beginning of the User's Manual for the shareware application NewsWatcher, which you can FTP from . NewsWatcher BTW is a great program for accessing Usenet on the Mac, though this "Value-Added" version is still in beta test version (I [Ron Henry] haven't hit any bugs yet, though). - Any questions or suggestions? Email rgh3@cornell.edu. =========================================================================