alt.fan.tolkien

In rec.arts.books.tolkien Julian Bradfield wrote: > On 2022-02-11, Julian Bradfield wrote: >> Having spent/wasted more time reading Wikipedia policies in detail, I >> don't understand why the OP's edit was reverted, as it doesn't appear >> to me to contradict either the citation or original research policies, >> so I've asked about it on the talk page of the article. (The right >> place - not the talk page of the user who reverted the change.) > > Those interested can read a reply from an independent experienced > editor at > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings_(1978_film)#c-Alyo-2022-02-13T17%3A52%3A00.000Z-JCBradfield-2022-02-11T17%3A22%3A00.000Z Alyo's definition of "higher quality",as you can imagine, is quite different from mine. > (Also, of course, the OP had been banned from Wikipedia for persistent > refusal to play by the rules of the club he wanted to be in.) Nor should those rules be treated with undeserved respect at any time. -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.

On 2022-02-11, Julian Bradfield wrote: > Having spent/wasted more time reading Wikipedia policies in detail, I > don't understand why the OP's edit was reverted, as it doesn't appear > to me to contradict either the citation or original research policies, > so I've asked about it on the talk page of the article. (The right > place - not the talk page of the user who reverted the change.) Those interested can read a reply from an independent experienced editor at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Lord_of_the_Rings_(1978_film)#c-Alyo-2022-02-13T17%3A52%3A00.000Z-JCBradfield-2022-02-11T17%3A22%3A00.000Z (Also, of course, the OP had been banned from Wikipedia for persistent refusal to play by the rules of the club he wanted to be in.)

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 17:51:11 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield wrote: >On 2022-02-11, Paul S Person wrote: >> OTOH, considering that this is the first actual discussion on either >> of alt.fan.tolkien or rec.arts.books.tolkien, and that "alt" groups >> tend to be be rather ... unrestricted ... in what can be discussed, it >> might be better to keep it here and see if it recovers. I omitted the phrase "for some time" after noting the lack of discussion in these discussion groups. I apologize for any confusion this may have caused. >The reason I (tried to) cancel my reply to you was because it was >wrong (as well as being snarky). Myself, I find that replying to myself and apologizing is much more satisfying. And is pretty much guaranteed to work, at least in the sense that the new post goes wherever the old one went. >Having spent/wasted more time reading Wikipedia policies in detail, I >don't understand why the OP's edit was reverted, as it doesn't appear >to me to contradict either the citation or original research policies, >so I've asked about it on the talk page of the article. (The right >place - not the talk page of the user who reverted the change.) Indeed. Perhaps you will favor us with the reason, should one ever be given. -- "I begin to envy Petronius." "I have envied him long since."

On 2022-02-11, Paul S Person wrote: > OTOH, considering that this is the first actual discussion on either > of alt.fan.tolkien or rec.arts.books.tolkien, and that "alt" groups > tend to be be rather ... unrestricted ... in what can be discussed, it > might be better to keep it here and see if it recovers. The reason I (tried to) cancel my reply to you was because it was wrong (as well as being snarky). Having spent/wasted more time reading Wikipedia policies in detail, I don't understand why the OP's edit was reverted, as it doesn't appear to me to contradict either the citation or original research policies, so I've asked about it on the talk page of the article. (The right place - not the talk page of the user who reverted the change.)

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 19:22:12 -0000 (UTC), "O. Sharp" wrote: >>>You were replying to an article which was cancelled minutes after it >>>was posted (and several hours before you replied). If your usenet >>>provider doesn't honour authenticated cancellations, that's >>>unfortunate. >> >> Ah, making excuses. >[snippp] >> But just keep blaming everyone else. It's working /so/ well for you. > >Since this... discussion?... has clearly moved well away from its >original Tolkien source, I suggest further discussion be moved to a more >appropriate venue, perhaps alt.my.facts.are.better.than.your.facts or >somesuch. Yes, that would be more appropriate. OTOH, considering that this is the first actual discussion on either of alt.fan.tolkien or rec.arts.books.tolkien, and that "alt" groups tend to be be rather ... unrestricted ... in what can be discussed, it might be better to keep it here and see if it recovers. Nice try at diverting it to alt.timewasters, though. How did you expect the participants to find it there? -- "I begin to envy Petronius." "I have envied him long since."

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:24:23 -0800, Stan Brown wrote: >On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 20:56:47 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield wrote: >> You were replying to an article which was cancelled minutes after it >> was posted (and several hours before you replied). If your usenet >> provider doesn't honour authenticated cancellations, that's >> unfortunate. > >And extremely common. Cancels are easily forged. Most Usenet >providers started ignoring them quite a few years ago, back when >Usenet was much more popular and forged cancels were a weapon in >flamewars. > >The only way I know to make a cancel work is to cancel your article >before your provider sends it anywhere else. This does work with >news.individual.net, or at least it did last time I checked, but the >window is only a few minutes. Intriguingly, the posts I am getting from EternalSeptember have this header: Cancel-Lock: sha1:fQrZGV/sd8wZx6i7JHqgRzdJ4e4= but whether that has anything to do with cancelling a post I have no idea. -- "I begin to envy Petronius." "I have envied him long since."

>>You were replying to an article which was cancelled minutes after it >>was posted (and several hours before you replied). If your usenet >>provider doesn't honour authenticated cancellations, that's >>unfortunate. > > Ah, making excuses. [snippp] > But just keep blaming everyone else. It's working /so/ well for you. Since this... discussion?... has clearly moved well away from its original Tolkien source, I suggest further discussion be moved to a more appropriate venue, perhaps alt.my.facts.are.better.than.your.facts or somesuch. ------------------------------------------------------------------ ohh@panix.com "An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a definite proposition." -either the OED, or Michael Palin

On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 20:56:47 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield wrote: >On 2022-02-09, Paul S Person wrote: >>[stuff] > >You were replying to an article which was cancelled minutes after it >was posted (and several hours before you replied). If your usenet >provider doesn't honour authenticated cancellations, that's >unfortunate. Ah, making excuses. And I'm not sure it is the ISP that is to be blamed, as I am using Eternal September since my prior ISP dropped Usenet and I haven't bothered to see if my new ISP provides it. But just keep blaming everyone else. It's working /so/ well for you. -- "I begin to envy Petronius." "I have envied him long since."

On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 20:56:47 +0000 (UTC), Julian Bradfield wrote: > You were replying to an article which was cancelled minutes after it > was posted (and several hours before you replied). If your usenet > provider doesn't honour authenticated cancellations, that's > unfortunate. And extremely common. Cancels are easily forged. Most Usenet providers started ignoring them quite a few years ago, back when Usenet was much more popular and forged cancels were a weapon in flamewars. The only way I know to make a cancel work is to cancel your article before your provider sends it anywhere else. This does work with news.individual.net, or at least it did last time I checked, but the window is only a few minutes. -- Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/ Tolkien FAQs: http://Tolkien.slimy.com (Steuard Jensen) Tolkien letters FAQ: https://preview.tinyurl.com/pr6sa7u FAQ of the Rings: https://BrownMath.com/general/ringfaq.htm Encyclopedia of Arda: http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm

In alt.fan.tolkien Julian Bradfield wrote: > On 2022-02-09, Paul S Person wrote: >>[stuff] > > You were replying to an article which was cancelled minutes after it > was posted (and several hours before you replied). If your usenet > provider doesn't honour authenticated cancellations, that's > unfortunate. Are cancellations not a form of censorship? -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.