What's wrong with RSG?
in [Golf]
|
From: John van der Pflum on 24 Feb 2007 13:47 On 24 Feb 2007 10:01:59 -0800, "annika1980" <annika1980(a)aol.com> wrote: snippage....... > And the reason you see even the folks who usually rag on off- >topic posts (like Pflum) jump in on the political threads is because >that is what interests them at that moment. FTR -- I don't just in on the political threads. I just rag on them. -- jvdp Start clearing your calendars http://www.rsgcincinnati.com
From: David Geesaman on 24 Feb 2007 14:23 >> My point is that there wouldn't be off-topic threads if people didn't >> respond to them. That's a very weak argument. There wouldn't be a lot of off-topic discussions if you and others weren't starting them. And most of the off-topic stuff is hardly done in a respectful way here - it's childish trolling. If it's off-topic, you (Annika, et al) would at least put OT in the subject line. But the nature of these threads is trolling, not discussion. >> The photo boards are similar in that the same folks usually post there >> and so there is interaction between people who recognize other posters >> by name. There are more on-topic posts there simply because there is >> more to talk about in the photo world with new equipment coming out >> all the time. There aren't too many new earth-shattering advances in >> golf these days ... just the usual big new drivers that guarantee 30 >> more yards. And the club builders have better sites to go to for info >> as well. There is a fine line between mixing some off-topic discussion with the regular stuff, but this balance is totally out of whack right now and has been for a long time. The 'regulars' here are RSG spend most of their time here talking non-golf stuff. That alone tells me there is something wrong. Everyone here is perfectly capable of resuming this discussion in rec.politics or some other usenet group. >> RSG would be dead by now if it didn't constantly aquire new posters, >> even as older posters go to other places. Yes, like any newsgroup >> many newbies visit only a few times and then move on, but some stay >> and become the regulars. >> Hence, RSG lives on. RSG is not a living thing. It is a group of people holding discussions. It might not be dead, but it's far from living along it's original purpose. I'd say it's in really bad health, and the off-topic discussion is the addiction. Some people here might have a major self-worth problem if there were only 50 posts here per day. They would lose their entire social picture. Oh well, who am I to tell addicts they are disillusioned? Dave
From: Bobby Knight on 24 Feb 2007 15:42 On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 14:23:20 -0500, David Geesaman <dgeesamanIHateSpam(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> My point is that there wouldn't be off-topic threads if people didn't >>> respond to them. <clip> >The 'regulars' here are RSG spend most of their time here talking >non-golf stuff. That alone tells me there is something wrong. Everyone >here is perfectly capable of resuming this discussion in rec.politics or >some other usenet group. > Try reading Annika's post again. Those news groups...and most of the others that are highly posted, like the athletic groups, are cluttered and there is never any conversation. They truly are dependent on new blood, because the old-timers there can hardly get a word in edgewise. >>> RSG would be dead by now if it didn't constantly aquire new posters, >>> even as older posters go to other places. Yes, like any newsgroup >>> many newbies visit only a few times and then move on, but some stay >>> and become the regulars. >>> Hence, RSG lives on. > >RSG is not a living thing. It is a group of people holding discussions. > It might not be dead, but it's far from living along it's original >purpose. I'd say it's in really bad health, and the off-topic >discussion is the addiction. I've been posting to RSG for 11 or 12 years, and this has been said so many times that it's pitiful. RSG isn't dead, and won't die any time soon. > When you finish your round of golf and go in for a beer, what do you discuss? 100% golf? Of course not. >Some people here might have a major self-worth problem if there were >only 50 posts here per day. They would lose their entire social >picture. Oh well, who am I to tell addicts they are disillusioned? > Good question. Who are you to tell anyone anything? I know Annika pretty well, and there doesn't seem to be a lack of self confidence there...or with any of the posters here. Your evaluation of self-worth should be confined to yourself, because that's all you actually have knowledge of. I would find it irresponsible for anyone to tell you what that would be. Well, I've been here when there were about 100 posts a week up until now, which is ten times larger. I love posting here, because the people all have something in common, and lately there has been a little more golf...and that will rise as the majors come into play. If there's golf to be discussed, fine. If not, at least the majority here have that in common. From what I know, there is only one person that has admitted to not playing the game. Bottom line is that RSG is what it is. Whether or not you think it has evolved into something interesting, or boring, is up to you. As is whether or not you stick around. Frankly I've always made it a point to read your posts and hope that you do. -- ___, \o | / \ . "Someone likes every shot"! bk
From: dugjustdug on 24 Feb 2007 16:19 Nice post, Annika - though I disagree with some of what you said. But, hey, it just wouldn't be a discussion w/o disagreement, eh? Your "19th Hole" anology is a good one. But, don't you have to play the round before going to the 19th hole? The point made about OT clutter often comes from those that haven't contributed to the heart of the newsgroup (if you subscribe to the notion that RSG is about golf primarily). I seldom contibute to the OT stuff. And much of the on topic stuff can quickly get derailed. In short - I make a choice and choose not to read it. Yet, it does bother me that the ratio of OT to Golf posts ain't what it used to be. I hope this changes as the season progresses. My 2 cents - dug
From: Robert Hamilton on 24 Feb 2007 16:40
....snippitt.. I pretty much disagree across the board. I've been posting to usenet groups since the late 1980's or so, and other DB's before that. They did used to be communities, but now way now. Most of the people who post here golf much if at all. David Laviulle hit the nail on the head with this sort of group a long time ago; people live out some fantasy. We have the great clubmaker who "dosen't like" what Wishon has to say on this or that, but doesn't understand simple things like the design if DGSL shafts. Laughable. We get the golf swing experts quoting from some book, but really have no clue as to the nature of the different swing systenms that have come out over the years. You then get a lot of defending of the various myths, like the scratch golfers who can't break 80 on a recreational layout! It hasn't always been that way though. The people who are really into golf don't come here much. The people who really know clubmaking haven't come here for years at all. All of usenet has declined in a similar fashion since every goober with a computer started posting. For me it's entertaining, but not in any sense serious with respect to golf or people. RSG, like most usenet groups represents a very antisocial "community" if it is a community in any sense at all. Anything that could be good is sacrificed for the sake of the phoney online persona. |