Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Coming Soon: Encryptions VI (rated pg-13)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 00:30:57 -0600
After taking a long hard look at this whole flame war and everything, I
have now come to realize why I hired Doom as my assistant.

I feel that I can endorse the Doom proposal as a new standard for TK
postings. It will serve the function of limiting encryption abuse while
still allowing private messages to be weaved into the storyline.

To summarize it:

***** NOT TO: User1, User2, User3

or

***** PRIVATE TO: User1, User2, User3

--------------------------------------

Unless there are any serious objections to the above, I think we can
implement it sometime early next month as the new standard. I'd have to
write up some new/good rules for the FAQ, hence the delay.

===================================================================

Also, as for the standarizing of the other things (LiveFeed,
IncludedFile, etc), I need to take a better look at that under the light
of a conscious mind.


____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is
\/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)
Message no. 2
From: "Jason Carter, Nightstalker" <CARTER@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Coming Soon: Encryptions VI (rated pg-13)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 23:29:11 -0800
>>After taking a long hard look at this whole flame war and everything, I
>>have now come to realize why I hired Doom as my assistant.

You might want to think twice about that once I've had my say.

>>I feel that I can endorse the Doom proposal as a new standard for TK
>>postings. It will serve the function of limiting encryption abuse while
>>still allowing private messages to be weaved into the storyline.

I hate to break this to you, but the two following suggestions are exactly what
encryptions were meant to do, and did, in the first place. If you look at the
old postings, and even the more recent ones from the old timers (Me, Ed,
and Dan as good examples) you will see that this is how we use encryptions.
The newer crowd (no insult intended) is using Encryption for fun and as an
excuse or replacement for real creativity. Thus we do not need "PRIVATE"s and
"NOT TO"s. We need people to use encryptions correctly and for the proper
reasons.

I was going to respond to Doom's post today, but found yours much more handy.

On a related subject, I think that there needs to be another Crackdown (or maybe
a first crackdown) on all those people who keep on ignoring the posting
guidelines.

*******************************************************************************
* See Ya in Shadows * * "Keep your friends close, but keep *
* Jason J Carter * Carter@***.EDU * your enemies closer." *
* The Nightstalker * * Deep Throat -- The X-Files *
*******************************************************************************
Message no. 3
From: "Robert A. Hayden" <hayden@*******.MANKATO.MSUS.EDU>
Subject: Re: Coming Soon: Encryptions VI (rated pg-13)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 02:13:32 -0600
On Mon, 28 Mar 1994, Jason Carter, Nightstalker wrote:

> I hate to break this to you, but the two following suggestions are exactly what
> encryptions were meant to do, and did, in the first place. If you look at the
> old postings, and even the more recent ones from the old timers (Me, Ed,
> and Dan as good examples) you will see that this is how we use encryptions.
> The newer crowd (no insult intended) is using Encryption for fun and as an
> excuse or replacement for real creativity. Thus we do not need "PRIVATE"s
and
> "NOT TO"s. We need people to use encryptions correctly and for the proper
> reasons.

Right. Encryptions ORIGINALLY were deisgned to be a subtle way of
directing storylines. Unfortuately, the combination of new blood and
over 150 current subscribers has changed that. Now it is used as a test
of writing style or "I'm the baddest mutha" dick waving. This list has
de-evolved beyond the ability to comprehend subtlety, mostly due to the
changing demographics and decreasing population of "old-timers".

The "NOT TO" and "PRIVATE", while they accomplish a nearly identical
purpose, provide a way to do so in a manner that achieves the needed
state of non-subtlty AND makes it possible to still maintain the overall
feeling of storyline (the overall storyline being what I consider to be
the most important part of this list. Without it, we're just a bunch of
people yapping and I'm wasting my time trying to maintain archives and
stories).

I'll be honest, I NEVER liked encrypts. To me it was always a headache
to try to keep track of which of my characters can read which scheme and
whatever. Thus, many time I ignored encrypted storylines simply because
I couldn't be bothered. At least this idea will spell out without any
question WHO it goes to. Coupled with some new FAQ guidelines pointing
out how they should be used sparingly, I think it will both work AND do
little to change the overall atmosphere in the story and on the lists.

> On a related subject, I think that there needs to be another Crackdown (or maybe
> a first crackdown) on all those people who keep on ignoring the posting
> guidelines.

Yea, I know. It gets tough. Also, the whole multi-line internal and
external encrypt shit that started this mess isn't even covered one way
ot the other in the FAQ. At least not very well.

The FAQ needs an enema, badly. And I hope to revamp it in the next few
weeks (actually, getting NERPS: ShadowLore out the door is my #1
priority). But I figured it was important to get some discussion going
BEFORE hand to make sure everything is right.

In any case, Jason, I hope you can see how we need to abandon the keyword
encrytion scheme. We must direct this list towards the lowest common
denominator of poster. There may have been a time where the atmosphere
could work with subtle encryption schemes, but that time is past. Let's
define guidelines that are simple and unobtrusive and get back to writing
great story. It's not perfect, but given the circumstances, I think it
is useable.

____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden@*******.mankato.msus.edu
\ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=-
\/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is
\/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++
n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Coming Soon: Encryptions VI (rated pg-13), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!