(RIP) Re: [SI] - Shoot-In - Mandate - Tie-in

"Rita Berkowitz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:7p-dnf2zgcvv2eLVnZ2dnUVZ_v_inZ2d@supernews.com...
> jimkramer wrote:
>
>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>
>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>
> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake,
> Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will
> find in these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love to
> instigate trouble. This is why I started the Usenet Stimulus Project and
> why it has become so successful in thinning out the herd of idiots and
> fools. Now the noise level has dropped drastically. If you want SI to be
> successful you need to take it to a photography group.

We'd all love to see anything of substance produced by your "stimulus"
project. It, like anything else your fat ass touches is useless. Geez, talk
about the pot calling the kettle black...

BTW, you can help this group: go away. And take your multiple area-code ass
with you.

Jufí wrote:
>
> "Rita Berkowitz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:7p-dnf2zgcvv2eLVnZ2dnUVZ_v_inZ2d@supernews.com...
>> jimkramer wrote:
>>
>>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>>
>>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>>
>> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest
>> mistake, Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only
>> thing you will find in these "photography" groups are trolls and
>> malcontents that love to instigate trouble. This is why I started the
>> Usenet Stimulus Project and why it has become so successful in
>> thinning out the herd of idiots and fools. Now the noise level has
>> dropped drastically. If you want SI to be successful you need to take
>> it to a photography group.
>
> We'd all love to see anything of substance produced by your "stimulus"
> project. It, like anything else your fat ass touches is useless. Geez,
> talk about the pot calling the kettle black...
>
> BTW, you can help this group: go away. And take your multiple area-code
> ass with you.

Please don't tell him to go away; it only encourages him!

--
john mcwilliams

"John McWilliams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:uumdnZnWb5isyuLVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Jufí wrote:
>
> "Rita Berkowitz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:7p-dnf2zgcvv2eLVnZ2dnUVZ_v_inZ2d@supernews.com...
>> jimkramer wrote:
>>
>>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>>
>>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>>
>> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake,
>> Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will
>> find in these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love
>> to instigate trouble. This is why I started the Usenet Stimulus Project
>> and why it has become so successful in thinning out the herd of idiots
>> and fools. Now the noise level has dropped drastically. If you want SI
>> to be successful you need to take it to a photography group.
>
> We'd all love to see anything of substance produced by your "stimulus"
> project. It, like anything else your fat ass touches is useless. Geez,
> talk about the pot calling the kettle black...
>
> BTW, you can help this group: go away. And take your multiple area-code
> ass with you.

>Please don't tell him to go away; it only encourages him!

I promise, no more replies to Reata Barkofatz. I killfiled it, whatever it
is.

Rita Berkowitz wrote:
> jimkramer wrote:
>
>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>
>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>
> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake,
> Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will
> find in these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love
> to instigate trouble.

100 on the irony meter.

--
lsmft

John McWilliams wrote:
> Rita Berkowitz wrote:
>> jimkramer wrote:
>>
>>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>>
>>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>>
>> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest
>> mistake, Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only
>> thing you will find in these "photography" groups are trolls and
>> malcontents that love to instigate trouble.
>
> 100 on the irony meter.

You mean insanity meter, right?

Paul Furman wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>> Rita Berkowitz wrote:
>>> jimkramer wrote:
>>>
>>>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>>>
>>>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>>>
>>> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest
>>> mistake, Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only
>>> thing you will find in these "photography" groups are trolls and
>>> malcontents that love to instigate trouble.
>>
>> 100 on the irony meter.
>
> You mean insanity meter, right?

:) Er, not quite! "Rita" is troubled, but not insane by some
definitions: Since his stated goal is to get us lesser souls paying
attention, and writing about him even in unflattering ways, then his
"insanity" is clever; he is creating dissension in all the groups he
crossposts to.

I hope others will help cut down the x-posting by him and "Annika".

--
John McWilliams

Rita Berkowitz <[email protected]> wrote:
> Only thing you will find in
>these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love to instigate
>trouble.

People like you.

--
Ray Fischer
[email protected]

Ray Fischer wrote:
> Rita Berkowitz <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Only thing you will find in
>> these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love to instigate
>> trouble.
>
> People like you.
>

Rita Berkowitz wrote:
> jimkramer wrote:
>
>>> So, is the shoot-in dead?
>>> No suggestions for the next mandate?
>>
>> It is dead. No more attempts at a resuscitation will be made by me.
>
> Cool! I predicted its demise before it started. Your biggest mistake,
> Jim, was to expect to find photographers on Usenet. Only thing you will
> find in these "photography" groups are trolls and malcontents that love
> to instigate trouble. This is why I started the Usenet Stimulus Project
> and why it has become so successful in thinning out the herd of idiots
> and fools. Now the noise level has dropped drastically. If you want SI
> to be successful you need to take it to a photography group.
>
> Rest in peace!
>
>
>
>
> Rita

Didn't someone recently offer to put up some cash and prizes to liven it
up? Surely the lure of a prize would encourage a few people to submit
entries? Maybe it's the "If I can't have it nobody can" syndrome?

It would be a shame to see it go but it was a shame to see Lisa Horeton
and the plethora of people who were really interested photography go too.

Digital cameras have done this. Now that anyone with a $100 digital can
take an almost decent shot, a whole bunch of malcontent's who think they
know all there is to know have started to bring some really bad habits
to the groups. It probably will not be long before most ISPs will dump
newsgroups altogether.

Certainly the complaint register is running hot at my access provider.
It's only a matter of time before the end starts for all of Usenet.


Me and big squid.