Jump to article index
From: ????????????????????????
Subject: Pipes Digest #108 - August 31, 1993

		 Pipes Digest #108 - August 31, 1993

Welcome to new members:

	Arthur Noguerola	(????????????????????????????????)
	Randy Smerik		(???????????????????????????)

I'm mailing a Digest a bit early this time, because there have been a
lot of comments on the proposed tobacco newsgroup, and because
tomorrow's the day that Colin promised to initiate the request for
discussion (RFD). If you have any comments about the group, the best
thing at this point would probably be to mail them directly to Colin
at ???????????????????? Send a copy to me if you'd like them included
in the Pipes Digest.

If you'd like to make a legitimate fine-tobacco newsgroup a reality,
it is _imperative_ that you support the proposal on the open
newsgroups. PLEASE join in! I presume the posting will be done on
news.groups; any place else, Colin?

Also, I want to re-emphasize that, although the name of the digest
contains the word "Pipes," discussion of cigars, or any other
tobacco-related topics, are welcome here. This goes regardless of what
happens with respect to the newsgroups.

As always, light 'un up and enjoy! -S.


~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U

From: Todd
Subject: Re: Pipes Digest #107 - August 24, 1993

First, I vote for rec.fine.tobacco, unmoderated.  I think the group should
be self-policing.  We can bounce the bozos out by ignoring them.

Second, I was in the U.S. Capitol building the other day and saw this
exhibit called "A good 5-cent cigar" or something like that.  It is one of
a number of exhibits on the history of the Senate and House.  Anyhow, they
had a full box of "Webster" cigars in the display case.  It's from circa
1950.  And I thought the cigars I keep around in the open for three weeks
were bad! :)

Todd

[ Sounds like it's worth a look if you're in Washington, Todd! -S. ]


~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U

From: Martin A. Lodahl <??????????????????????????>
Subject: This Newsgroup Thing

Concerning the proposals for the newsgroup:

I have to admit, I suspect we may regret entering this fray.  The 
process of the creation of rec.motorcycles.harley was just horrible,
thanks to the incredible bigotry of the "antis".  Smoking, especially
of pipes and cigars, is a loaded-enough topic for us to be pretty 
confident of the same sort of reception.  It took four tries to
get the Harley group established, and there are those of us who
now doubt it was worth all the tsuris.  The Harley mailing list
has better discussions and a much better S:N ratio.

If we go ahead, I favor the rec.* heirarchy over alt.*, as many who
reside in the *.com domain are denied the alt.* groups.  Corporate 
America just can't relate to (paying for) alt.sex.

I further recommend that the "main" discussion group be moderated.
The more time I spend on the internet, the more convinced I become
of the benefits of moderation.  In the case of the Harley group, 
for example, there has never been a time when there isn't at least
one "flame" thread, started by non-Harley-riders who feel they
need to attack the Harley folks in their own group.  This is simply
noise, wasting net resources with no benefit to anyone.  The 
anti-smoking folks I've met seem to feel divinely empowered to 
be the most obnoxious squits on the face of the planet, and I 
believe we can expect a HUGE dose of this during the CFD/CFV phase,
and it will not go away.  The responses we got on rec.food.drink
are just a small sample.  Did anyone else notice that while there
were howls and shrieks that we were discussing something outside
the group's charter, there was no similar reaction to the discussion
of shrimp in Maryland that immediately followed?  We've been warned.

A "talk.politics.smoking" group might be a useful lightning rod,
but IMHO, a waste of time.  No one's mind is likely to be changed 
about any aspect of this.  People will still claim to support human
rights while forcing oppression and bigotry of the rawest kind
upon smokers.

If my tone sounds a little depressed, it's because I'm already
bracing myself for the ugliness I'm sure will follow.  This will
not be fun, folks.  A moderated digest may serve us better.

	-  Martin

= Martin A. Lodahl   			Pacific*Bell Systems Analyst =
= ???????????????????          Sacramento, CA           916.972.4821 =
= If it's good for ancient Druids, runnin' nekkid through the wuids, =
= Drinkin' strange fermented fluids, it's good enough for me!  8-)   =

[ Don't be down, Martin. Yes, it'll be an uphill struggle, but one
worth struggling for. -S. ]


~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U

From: Andrew Lewis Tepper <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Cigars anyone?

Excerpts from netnews.rec.food.drink: 29-Aug-93 Cigars anyone? by James
????????????????? 
> Does anyone here like to smoke fine cigars?  Is there any interest in
> starting a discussion or a newsgroup on this fast-growing avocation?
We just had a major flamewar on rec.food.drink on this very subject! :)
We are in the process of starting such a board, and are getting things
going (RFD/CFV) on Wednesday. I think it will be called
rec.fine-tobacco. The board will be lightly moderated, and we are also
proposing an unmoderated rec.politics.smoking board for people to yell
at each other on. Steve Masticola runs a pipes mailing list that you
might find interesting.

Andy

[ Don't quite know the context, Andy, but thanx for the plug! -S. ]


~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U

From: Victor Reijs <???????????????????????>
Subject: news on smoking;-)

Hello Steve,

I wonder how the relation between the present discussion list will be and the
news? Is there a means of having the groups linked in a close manner? I would
like that, because of the difficulty in reaching news!

All the best,

Victor

[ I had no plans to link the newsgroup(s) with the pipes mailgroup.
However, should the newsgroup be created, I could set up a cron job
that could mail articles to members who don't get news easily. Let's
defer that discussion until we have something to discuss. -S. ]


~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U

From: Maverick <???????????????????????????>
Subject: Re: Pipes Digest #107 - August 24, 1993

Here, here!  I do believe that a small unmoderated group could be created
without the deluge of unsavouries attacking every little post.  Thus I
propose the following:

	rec.tobacco	: FAQ and discussion, effectively a misc version
			  of a rec.tobacco.d

	rec.tobacco.pipe	: For pipes

	rec.tobacco.cigar	: For cigars

	rec.tobacco.growing	: For discussion on growing, curing, etc...

		.
		.
		.

	and a host of others should the need arise.

-r.

[ You forgot rec.tobacco.budworms... :-) -S. ]


~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U

From: ?????????????? (Joe L. Reda)
Subject: Re: Pipes Digest #107 - August 24, 1993

Hey Steve, 

Was there a Pipes Digest #105?  I noticed I have 104 thru 107 but
no 105.  If there was, could you send me a copy?

I'm leaning on John to post to the group his recent meeting with
the fine British gentlemen of the Norwich Pipe Club.   We met 
with them last year when we were in the UK, and John went there
again in June.  

Take care!  \\JR

[ Copy sent. Lean on! :-) -S. ]


 U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ | ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U
 )				       *   *				  )
( Pipe smokers will rule the world!      *   ??????????????????????	 (
 ) (if they don't run out of matches...) *   Steve Masticola, moderator	  )
(				       *   *				 (
 U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ U/~ | ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U ~\U





Article Index

  1. Subject: Pipes Digest #108 - August 31, 1993
  2. Subject: Re: Pipes Digest #107 - August 24, 1993
  3. Subject: This Newsgroup Thing
  4. Subject: Re: Cigars anyone?
  5. Subject: news on smoking;-)
  6. Subject: Re: Pipes Digest #107 - August 24, 1993
  7. Subject: Re: Pipes Digest #107 - August 24, 1993
Previous Home Next