Finale' and then some (long, trust me)

[garfield at pilgrimhouse.com]

On Mon, 1 Jun 1998 20:29:46 -0500, "Bob McElroy"
<rmcelroy at cfu-cybernet.net> wrote:

>Perhaps we are all being a little too sensitive about our egos.

Hey BobE dude. Hey SiliChallenge. Hey maties.

God knows I am NOT the person to be playing peacemaker in all this, bein
the flaming idiot that I am, but where angels fear, ... you know the
rest.

>Further, I seem to recall that you implied this could be easily adapted to your engine.

NOPE, Mr. TotallyChallenged didn't intimate it was easy, but he DID
express two facts: he NEEDED to use acoustic sensing, cuz there wasn't
anythin ELSE available or REAL at the moment, and also that he wanted to
know about this "special sauce" TI stuff. Thas all. It's ALL TOO TRUE
that the DSP approach to solving the limitations/weaknesses of acoustic
knock detection is NO easy matter. Like some have recently opined, it's
just fine for a chip foundry to offer "artist's conception" drawings.
But/well/and TI's stuff may be a tad further along, but ANYONE who knows
shtick from shinola knows that DSP isn't for your "casual observer".
Your point well-taken. The other guy's also. He was I BELIEVE reeling
from the segue we've made toward "newer technology", where as he needs a
real and present solution NOW.

In my NSHO, the place where you dudes took a "point of departure" was,
you thot his request for TI DSP info was merely a lazy request for
stuff, where as I know the guy, and it was way more than that, he has a
present project problem he needs to solve, so YOU say, "hey, get off yer
duff and just go over to the TI site", thinkin he's a slacker and a
drone, and he says, "hey, arshole, I'm tryna solve a REAL problem here
and am lookin for help/info". I'd say from what I ken of yous guys
demeanors, that you'd both get along JUST fine after a few pints, cuz
yer basically the same bloak, but met comin vrs. goin.

Thas my take on the situation. Nobody wants to excuse lazy "gee, can
someone tell me how many inches to the foot?" questions, of which there
have been of late WAY too many, but at the same time, sometimes yous
gotta read thru the lines and figure out who is talking, and WHY. Again,
that's why I vote for private lists where everybody, and I MEAN
everybody, KNOWS who they're talking to, and WHY. Our XAviation group is
about 1/3 the size of diy_efi, but we don't have ANY of these problems
usually, cuz we are FORCED by the charter to declare upon entrance our
interests, and our full first and last names. That way, when somethin
wacko like this comes up, you can AT LEAST go back to the all-in-one
archive, and summon up the bloak and his intended purpose for being
here, and get a "read" on him, as well as know WHO he is. I don't know
just exactly who this "challenged" guy is, although I s'pose if I had
arfOwit, I would. But WE use first and last names, until we get sooo
familiar that BillG is sufficient, ifyaknowadamean.

As I've mentioned to others on the list, it's not too late to take
DIY_EFI 'private'. ALL that we do, in my own XAviation group, is require
each new subscriber to (1) introduce himself, and say in public WHY he
wants to be here, and especially his interest in EFI, and (2) we don't
allow any anonymous or psuedonymous members who don't wanna take
responsibility for what they post by putting their first and last name
to it, and (3) we have a board of 7 Founding Members who serve as a
governing body to settle disputes and solve knotty problems with the
list, whenever they come up, so a single list administrator doesn't have
to be the "bad guy". We picked these 7 guys, on my list, from a
well-respected list of people on a public list we were "taking private",
sotaspeak.

Now, because of some bizarre interlopers to diy_efi, Orin has already
had to switch over to "approve the subscriber" mode, rather than
"automagic subscribe mode". As netbots and spamhacks become more
prevalent, this is gonna be necessary anyway. Why not just institute a
simple "gate-keeper" to give notice that everyone on the list is
"responsible" for who they are and what they post. My own group doesn't
have ANY censorship or moderation; posts made to the list by members go
directly to the list; there is no "oversight" or "approval" or
"censorship" for what is posted, but I can tell you that since it's
inception, our XAviation list hasn't even thot or desired such
"controls", CUZ the mere asking for an introduction and explanation of
WHY the person wants to join, seems to have eliminated almost 99% of the
rabble! The mere asking the question, "So are you seriously interested
in this topic, or do you just wanna hang and chat?" seems to have
accomplished an ENORMOUS amount of filtering, all by itself.

Here endeth Garfield's impassioned plea for MORE "private" lists, not
automatically open, like some barn door, to anyone and everyone who
want's to come in and pee on the floor.

BTW, I think you two guys, Silly-conChallenge and the "Bob McElroy"
would actually get along fine. Too bad we've had this "Future Shock" of
the way this group is managed at present. Fronkly, I think it's "F*ckup
Shock" myself. The attempt of the internet to "elide" REAL people has
produced nuthin but F*ckups. Time to edge on back to the Garden,
ifyaknowadamean.

Take the group PRIVATE, and RESPONSIBLE, and SERIOUS. Appoint a board of
founders by vote, and DO IT! Most of these stupid problems will vanish
into thin air, as they have on our XAviation group. Try it; you can
always throw away the Front Door of the Meeting Room, at a later date,
if you don't like it, and wanna go back to "The Barn".

Gar