How much did Sauron know?

"Clams Canino" <cc-marine RemoveThis @earthdink.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:13u952v3oojiu45@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "harsha" <harsha.dsh RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:64692880-b0eb-4950-afed-
>
>> That is what I would ideally want to do. But my experience in other
>> forums and groups shows that when new threads are created about
>> previously discussed topics, the newbies aren't treated well by the
>> regulars. The new viewpoints aren't noted and they are simply directed
>> to previous discussions.
>
> Agreed 100%
>
> A) Revive the old thread.
> B) Acknowledge that you *know* it's an old thread.
> C) Explain your *new* question or perspective.

This group has its faults, but there generally is not a tendency here to
slam people for bringing up subjects that have been discussed before. Unless
it is balrog wings, of course.

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: How much did Sauron know? 

harsha wrote:
> On Mar 22, 6:38 am, "Bill O'Meally" <omeall... DeleteThis @wise.rr.com> wrote:

But my experience in other
> forums and groups shows that when new threads are created about
> previously discussed topics, the newbies aren't treated well by the
> regulars.

I'm not saying you shouldn't review the FAQs or Google old discussions.
Mention your findings along with your own perspective in your post. But
I don't see a newbie coming along and resurrecting a bunch of dead
threads as being generally well received here.
--
Bill
"Wise fool"
Gandalf _The Two Towers_
(The wise will remove "se" to reach me. The foolish will not!)
 >> Stay informed about: How much did Sauron know? 

On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 08:20:13 -0500, "Bill O'Meally"
<omeallymd.TakeThisOut@wise.rr.com> wrote:

>harsha wrote:
>> On Mar 22, 6:38 am, "Bill O'Meally" <omeall....TakeThisOut@wise.rr.com> wrote:
>
> But my experience in other
>> forums and groups shows that when new threads are created about
>> previously discussed topics, the newbies aren't treated well by the
>> regulars.
>
>I'm not saying you shouldn't review the FAQs or Google old discussions.
>Mention your findings along with your own perspective in your post. But
>I don't see a newbie coming along and resurrecting a bunch of dead
>threads as being generally well received here.

That's why you should join the Dead Thread Faction. Instead of being
a newbie resurrecting a bunch of dead threads, you will be a member of
a _conspiracy_ to dominate the Usenet by resurrecting a bunch of dead
threads (which is much more socially acceptable, of course.)

Morgoth's Curse
 >> Stay informed about: How much did Sauron know? 

In message <news:64l7qfF2cefakU1@mid.individual.net>
"Öjevind Lång" <bredband.net.TakeThisOut@ojevind.lang> spoke these staves:
>

<snip>

> This group has its faults, but there generally is not a tendency
> here to slam people for bringing up subjects that have been
> discussed before. Unless it is balrog wings, of course.

Balrog wings is an exceptional topic in many ways, of course.

Generally I would say that I think that referring to old threads is
intended as an aid -- the intention is not to shut people up, but to
enable them to question the accepted answers.

And I agree that this group isn't as bad as others when it comes to the
'been there, discussed that, read the archives/FAQ' attitude one often
meets when asking questions that have been discussed previously -- some
questions pop up occasionally even from regulars and sometimes new
angles get introduced.

--
Troels Forchhammer
Valid e-mail is <troelsfo(a)gmail.com>
Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.

In this case the cause (not the 'hero') was triumphant,
because by the exercise of pity, mercy, and forgiveness of
injury, a situation was produced in which all was redressed
and disaster averted.
- J.R.R. Tolkien, /The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien/ #192
 >> Stay informed about: How much did Sauron know?