Discussion:
The New Charter: Articles of Allegiance
(too old to reply)
Raymond Speer
2006-04-22 16:17:14 UTC
Permalink
PREAMBLE

IT IS DECLARED AND DECREED that this newsgroup be and henceforth forever
is the Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition, and that
treason and sedition to these sacred principles be eliminated with out
mercy. SHWI prevails!

PURPOSE

1. The core purpose of SHWI is to simulate intellectual life under a
dictatorship. Any affront to the sensibilities of any Inquisitor will be
relentlessly and ruthlessly suppressed.

2. The official doctrine of SHWI is that we are poised ont he edge of
chaos. Chaos is intolerable and is defined as any what-if scenario
which:

@An Inquisitor disagrees with the premise.

@Runs afoul of any prohibition.

@Is posted by a person disliked by the Inquisitor for any reason, not
necessary one that is relevant to the scenario in question.

3. In the name of preventing chaos, all sanctions are allowed, including
but not limited to libel, computer hacking, e-mailed complaints to the
poster's employer and family, stalking, and arrrogant lectures.
Remember, better a thread contaiining a thousand admonishments than a
thread contaiining a half dozen entries that an Inquisitor does not like
to read.

PROHIBITIONS

4. BAN ON POLITICS. No poster shall write any entry with political
content that is critical of any political sentiments that an Inquisitor
might hold. The exceptions to the rule are :

@Adolf Hitler and the NSDAP (Nazis)

@Jefferson Davis and the Confederacy.

@Maximilian and the Mexican Empire

5. THE DISCO RULE. Commentary is permitted only on those events which
took place before and during the disco era. Ronald Reagan, Brain
Mulroney and Margaret Thatcher may only be mentioned if there is a
positive allusion to their characters if not their policies (but then
the poster is violating the BAN ON POLITICS.)

6. THE ELEPHANT'S MEMORY RULE. The Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful
Inquisition never forgets and never forgives.
If a poster submits a scenario of any sort, the Inquisitor is to take
out of context any word or words the contributor may have posted in the
past, regardless of how many years ago that comment was written. That
discovery from the past is to become the new focus of the thread.

7. INQUISITOR-APPROVED CONTENT. No poster shall post any scenario or
remark that an Inquisitor does not wish to read. There are many
forbidden topics, and these are a few of them:

@Sea Lion

@Prosperous Nineteenth Century Mexico

@Aztec Civilization Survives & Stops Human Sacrifice

@Roman Railroads

THE ULTIMATE RULE

8. Rigid, absolute and constant compliance with these Articles of
Allegiance are required and enforced upon all posters., but Inquistors
may transcened these rules and do as they desire , to permit them
maximum flexibility in making policy.

The Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition Prevails!

STRENGTH THROUGH UNITY.

UNITY THROUGH FAITH
silkyboyjr
2006-04-22 16:42:23 UTC
Permalink
Fear has become the ultimate tool of this Newsgroup.
Posters should not be afraid of their Usenets. Usenets should be afraid
of their Posters.
4D Man
2006-04-22 17:55:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
IT IS DECLARED AND DECREED that this newsgroup be and henceforth forever
is the Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition, and that
treason and sedition to these sacred principles be eliminated with out
mercy.
Amen, brother. Let the blood of those who profane the sacred Mother
Church be spilt even as the Traitor Drake's was spilt in the chambers
of the Tower of London.
Post by Raymond Speer
Any affront to the sensibilities of any Inquisitor will be
relentlessly and ruthlessly suppressed.
True. Why, not two days ago I discovered one of the second cousins of
the Duke of Newcastle and Cadiz hoarding copies of Luther and Calvin. I
was shocked, and it took many days of treatment with fire to purify
him. I have, obviously, reported my suspicions to King Phillip XVI
himself.
Post by Raymond Speer
Chaos is intolerable
True. All of us, I think, have read of the days of the Whore Queen in
England, who never married because she could not enter a church, and
who attempted to deny Phillip the Great his birthright. Let us,
brothers, never forget those days of chaos, lest they return to trouble
Christendom.
Post by Raymond Speer
BAN ON POLITICS.
Once more, I congratulate you on your insight. Ever since the days of
the Cromwell Revolt, we of the Inquistion have had to seek out any and
all Politicians, whose "Parliament" ranks as one of the chief causes of
the English Chaos.
Post by Raymond Speer
Jefferson Davis and the Confederacy.
Maximilian and the Mexican Empire
Naturally. Ever right minded son of the Church wishes to praise Father
Davis's Holy American Confederacy and Emperor Maximillian's spreading
of the Holy Church to the Mexica.
Post by Raymond Speer
THE DISCO RULE. Commentary is permitted only on those events which
took place before and during the DISCO era.
Of course. Why would the Divine Inquisiton of Spain, Colonies and
Overseerships allow its vital work to enter the public domain, where it
could be available to any heretic or apostate!
Post by Raymond Speer
THE ELEPHANT'S MEMORY RULE. The Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful
Inquisition never forgets and never forgives.
Did Cardinal Marquz forget the rebellion of Gladstone and Brooke? Did
Grand Inquisitor DeVriers forget the infidel Byron?
Post by Raymond Speer
INQUISITOR-APPROVED CONTENT. No poster shall post any scenario or
remark that an Inquisitor does not wish to read.
Lest moral laxity fall upon the masses. Is it not written that when
Moses ascended Mount Sinai, his people made a Golden Calf? And is it
not written that when not ruled by righteous Judges, the Kingdom of
Israel and the Kingdom of Judah did descend into iniquity and sin?
Post by Raymond Speer
There are many
Sea Lion
For did not the Lutheran rebels of 1943 adopt the Sea Lion as their
flag?
Post by Raymond Speer
Prosperous Nineteenth Century Mexico
For rightly did God punish them for fornicating with unbelievers.
Post by Raymond Speer
Aztec Civilization Survives & Stops Human Sacrifice
For what civilisation could have survived when faced with the Empire of
Spain's most righteous and holy wrath?
Post by Raymond Speer
Roman Railroads
Indeed. Has not the Pope made it clear all pilgrimages are to be made
by donkey, to emphasize the humily of the pilgrim?
Post by Raymond Speer
THE ULTIMATE RULE
8. Rigid, absolute and constant compliance with these Articles of
Allegiance are required and enforced upon all posters., but Inquistors
may transcened these rules and do as they desire , to permit them
maximum flexibility in making policy.
Galatians 3:25: "Now that faith in Christ has come we no longer need
the law as our guardian". But those who are not as perfect in the Faith
as we still require law for guidance...

Yours in the body of the Church

Ferdinand McNair

Grand Inquistior of the Order of St. Dominic
Sydney Webb
2006-04-22 22:53:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by 4D Man
Post by Raymond Speer
IT IS DECLARED AND DECREED that this newsgroup be and henceforth forever
is the Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition, and that
treason and sedition to these sacred principles be eliminated with out
mercy.
Amen, brother. Let the blood of those who profane the sacred Mother
Church be spilt even as the Traitor Drake's was spilt in the chambers
of the Tower of London.
Post by Raymond Speer
Any affront to the sensibilities of any Inquisitor will be
relentlessly and ruthlessly suppressed.
True. Why, not two days ago I discovered one of the second cousins of
the Duke of Newcastle and Cadiz hoarding copies of Luther and Calvin. I
was shocked, and it took many days of treatment with fire to purify
him. I have, obviously, reported my suspicions to King Phillip XVI
himself.
[More, much more, snipped.]

Amen, brother. That's the spirit.

- Syd
Alfred Montestruc
2006-04-22 21:48:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
PREAMBLE
IT IS DECLARED AND DECREED that this newsgroup be and henceforth forever
is the Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition, and that
treason and sedition to these sacred principles be eliminated with out
mercy. SHWI prevails!
Yo Mama wears army boots!!

SEALION LIVES FOREVER!!
Alfred Montestruc
2006-04-22 21:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
PREAMBLE
IT IS DECLARED AND DECREED that this newsgroup be and henceforth forever
is the Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition, and that
treason and sedition to these sacred principles be eliminated with out
mercy. SHWI prevails!
Yo Mama wears army boots!!

SEALION LIVES FOREVER!!
Sydney Webb
2006-04-22 22:53:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
PREAMBLE
IT IS DECLARED AND DECREED that this newsgroup be and henceforth forever
is the Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition, and that
treason and sedition to these sacred principles be eliminated with out
mercy. SHWI prevails!
Ray, I speak as a fan. Like most fans, I like your old stuff better
than your new stuff.

That said, I sometimes wonder whether you, and a handful of others,
mightn't misunderstand the BoP and her handmaidens (ETMHP, the Iron Law
of Disco and the 30 Year Rule). They do not apply, they cannot apply,
to the 'bad' posters - the trolls and the uncaring. As Phil Edwards
pointed out they are a 'self-denying ordinance' - a discipline we can
voluntarily undertake to avoid flame-wars and to prevent us being sucked
in by trollery. Of course, when we eschew the flame-wars the trolls
would foment we deny them the energy on which they feed and the trolls
_hate_ the BoP for that.

There are many good posters who have not signed up to the BoP, who
prefer to retain their freedom of action. Nonetheless these tend to
avoid politic-fests and seldom bother to criticise the existence of the
BoP.

[snip]
Post by Raymond Speer
5. THE DISCO RULE. Commentary is permitted only on those events which
took place before and during the disco era. Ronald Reagan, Brain
Mulroney
By suggesting Mulroney had a Brain you are certainly violating... ahem.

ETMHP is a flexible guideline. As has been noted before
Tzintzuntzan's excellent _Missile for Mobutu_ is a 1990s WI but,
focusing mostly on Zaire/DRC, has not generated any flames.

But the Disco Rule ISTM has value to prevent flamewars from either side
of politics in the Anglosphere. If we're looking at America, almost any
of the retired Presidents of the last 30 years - F*rd, Carter[5], Foul
Ole Ron, The Wolf and Bad Boy Bubba - are still capable of generating
strong emotions. But it works the other way, too. Twenty-five years
after the resignation of Richard M Nixon a poster described the 37th
President as 'evil'.[1] I recently caught up with the (Canberra-based)
poster, 32 years after the end of the Nixon Presidency and with age has
come perspective. The viewpoint has been moderated to "possibly the
most evil President since Truman". Truly time heals all wounds.

[1]
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.history.what-if/msg/ac3b16ba2121f5ae

[5] Too soon to say.

- Syd
--
"A fantastic, melodramatic yarn; much like an episode of _Neighbours_,
but with less Toadfish and more Trojans."
- Brook Davis reviews Margaret Atwood's _The Penelopiad_
Raymond Speer
2006-04-23 04:46:40 UTC
Permalink
Dear Syd:

RE: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RULES.

I will not dispute that it would be nice if there was some rule that
prevented disagreements and brought everybody into harmony.

However, the censorship ordinances presently under discussion
manifestly fail their announced purpose. If anything, they are the
root cause for the bitterness that saturates this group.

If the goal is to avoid progressively hotter flames in extended
arguments, the rules fail, stretching into 150 plus condemnations &
retorts a thread that would have had maybe six entries but for the
controversy over whether or not the poster was entitled to post his
scenario in the first place.

RE: SOCIAL ENCOURAGEMENT FOR SILENCE.

I cannot believe that Australia has veered so far from the English
speaking mainstream that you folks risk criminal penalties to satircally
chide any PM more recent than Gough Whitlam, but you have my profound
sympathy if Australians are now being arrested or fined for writing what
they think. For the moment in America, I am not yet covered by such a
shroud of intimdation, and I wonder why I, a free man, am to abey the
discipline that a foreign government presses on its people. Am I
prohibited from mentioning the Fulan Gong if SHWI gets posters from
China?

I am as one with Phil MacGregor on this point: no one shall ever force
you to read or comment on a scenario that, let's say, involves the
ultimately failed marriage of Charles & Di. You can avoid the scenario
by the caption on the piece. By not interjecting that the post si
contrary to your personal code of writing AH, you will have the further
satisfaction of seeing the thread end in a dozen entries as most (as do
most threads on this group).

RE: CURRENT BEHAVIOR ON THIS GROUP.

Sooner or later, someone following the Elephant's Memory Rule is going
to dredge up an old quote I made calling Coyu our "leader and
protector." I do not think that anyone is going to put that quote into
context.

I made that quote when Coyu had worked his butt off to close down Net
Nazis who dumped their Holocaust denial sludge on this group. Those guys
really did seek to ruin this group and turn it into a forum of defense
for the Third reich. The pity is that zealots on this group appear to
confuse a Nazi dumping twenty articles an hour on this grioup with a
real poster who makes a Bill Clinton scenario. The real poster is
treated like a Nazi invader and that is plain wrong.

Bacik then, I backed Coyu a hundred percent. I Coyu I thought I knew
from his actions fighting Nazis would not excerpt sardonic comments
about kids made by a teacher and attempt to use them much later as
accusations that tthe teacher has evil designs on his pupils. The Coyu I
thought I knew would understand that extreme negative statements are
spewed by probably the majority of divorcing partners, and he would not
hold such comments against anyone.

(Coyu himself is being punished by his words being taken out of context.
A single comment he made about ethnic cleansings of Southrons --
undeniably sarcastic humor -- is now being thrown in his face as if that
makes him an American Milosec.)

RE: WHERE WILL THIS END?

Phil MacGregor has the right solution for people who are not satisfied
in skipping scenarios they wish to avoid. Go to a moderated group and
e-mail your posts to an editor or editors who then puts your comments
(as redacted) on the usenet.

Once Censorship as a means of Harmonius Understanding has been
legitimated, where are you guys gonna end? Some little old lady joins
the group and she is offended by some scenario on Menzies or Hepburn or
Long --- will the next rule prohibit any discussion of things more
recent than the Charleston Era? Can a persistent Jacobite ban mention of
kings and queens who are usurpers to his sensibilities?

I want to post to Social History What If. I do not want to post to
Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition.

Yours Truly, Ray Speer
a***@pacific.net.au
2006-04-23 05:16:30 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 23:46:40 -0500, ***@webtv.net (Raymond Speer)
wrote:

Hear! Hear!

Phil

Author, Space Opera (FGU), RBB #1 (FASA), Road to Armageddon (PGD).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: ***@pacific.net.au
Sydney Webb
2006-04-23 11:52:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
RE: THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE RULES.
I will not dispute that it would be nice if there was some rule that
prevented disagreements and brought everybody into harmony.
However, the censorship ordinances presently under discussion
manifestly fail their announced purpose. If anything, they are the
root cause for the bitterness that saturates this group.
Nonsense. The BoP was introduced in 2000 by Phil Edwards. I invite you
to look at the flame-wars we had in the two years proceeding with those
in the two subsequent years and thereafter. There is no question in my
mind that the NG is a nicer, more civil and more on-topic place.

We simply don't seem to have threads of the frequency and length of
_Kent State_, _Political Correctness in Schools_, _OT: Roads and Rails_,
_Pax Americana_, _WI Repubs didn't drool all over Reagan_, _Reagan and
discrimination (OT)_, _Ned Ludd and Class Legislation_, _NATO aggression
against Yugoslavia [OffTopic], _WI Europeans Supported Free Trade_ and
_how to attack the USA_; to name but a few.
Post by Raymond Speer
If the goal is to avoid progressively hotter flames in extended
arguments, the rules fail, stretching into 150 plus condemnations &
retorts a thread that would have had maybe six entries but for the
controversy over whether or not the poster was entitled to post his
scenario in the first place.
I've given ten from the bad old days. Can you give three recent
examples of what you describe?
Post by Raymond Speer
RE: SOCIAL ENCOURAGEMENT FOR SILENCE.
I cannot believe that Australia has veered so far from the English
speaking mainstream that you folks risk criminal penalties to satircally
chide any PM more recent than Gough Whitlam,
No. If you want to understand Australian libel laws then Sam Russell is
the go-to-guy, not Stan Boleslawski. Death, not duration, is our
protection from libel.

[snip]
Post by Raymond Speer
I am as one with Phil MacGregor on this point: no one shall ever force
you to read or comment on a scenario that, let's say, involves the
ultimately failed marriage of Charles & Di.
Fabulous rhetoric, Ray. But a bit like saying "As an anti-Communist I
am one with Benito Mussolini on this topic". The comparison rather
distracts from the point one is trying to make.

For me, s.h.w-i has an educative mission. If a newbie is engaging in an
off-topic thread with a troll like McGr*gor then I will try to gently
steer said newbie onto the path of AH. If I see an AH scenario that
reeks of flamebait, again I may try a gentle nudge.

[snip]
Post by Raymond Speer
RE: CURRENT BEHAVIOR ON THIS GROUP.
The Coyu I
thought I knew would understand that extreme negative statements are
spewed by probably the majority of divorcing partners, and he would not
hold such comments against anyone.
I think you're missing the Yu M.O., Ray. Many of us on this NG have had
painful divorces. But here you are referring to a particular divorcee,
aren't you? The lamentable Mr M*ntestruc. It is not one's status as a
divorcee that attracts the business. It's being an off-topic troll, a
flaming arsehole. If one is a flaming arsehole and does not like being
on the receiving end of the business then there are three remedies to
choose from:

1. Stop being a flaming arsehole;

2. Take one's flaming arseholery elsewhere; or

3. Wait for Coyu to die.

Personally I think the trolls are lucky to have *three* choices but then
I'm not as generous a soul as Carlos.

[snip]
Post by Raymond Speer
RE: WHERE WILL THIS END?
Phil MacGregor has the right solution for people who are not satisfied
in skipping scenarios they wish to avoid. Go to a moderated group and
e-mail your posts to an editor or editors who then puts your comments
(as redacted) on the usenet.
McGr*gor (note spelling) wants to have s.h.w-i for use as his personal
toilet and to dump his shit here whenever he pleases, rather than
writing AH. For me, I'd rather that soc.history.what-if group served
the purpose given it in the Charter. If that means occasionally making
a blunt [Meta] post like this rather than posting AH it's a price I'm
willing to pay, notwithstanding there are far better net-cops than I.

- Syd
a***@pacific.net.au
2006-04-23 12:50:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sydney Webb
Post by Raymond Speer
RE: WHERE WILL THIS END?
Phil MacGregor has the right solution for people who are not satisfied
in skipping scenarios they wish to avoid. Go to a moderated group and
e-mail your posts to an editor or editors who then puts your comments
(as redacted) on the usenet.
McGr*gor (note spelling) wants to have s.h.w-i for use as his personal
toilet and to dump his shit here whenever he pleases, rather than
writing AH. For me, I'd rather that soc.history.what-if group served
Dear S*d,

Thanks for telling me what I want.

Without your expert advice on the inner workings of my mind I would
never have been able to come to such a conclusion.

Of course, the reason I would not have done so is because your
conclusions as to my thought processes and intentions are, as worthy
as your Hero, He Who Must Be Obeyed.

Worse, you are obviously lacking in the intellectual stature needed to
grasp Ray's point ... the censors are the problem *now*.

Sure, there have been extended flamewars in the past, so what?

The problem here and now are the extended flamewars (well, I guess its
really *one* flamewar that continually recurrs) between those who wish
to determine what can and can't be said on this newsgroup based on
their own personal fiat and those who object to being told by some
arseholes that there is a rule that prevents posting on certain topics
when there is, and can never be, such a rule as they claim to want and
try to enforce.

That's the problem.

More.

All those who want to enforce such a rule, "gently" (so called) or
otherwise, *are* the problem *here and now*.

That's you, btw.
Post by Sydney Webb
the purpose given it in the Charter. If that means occasionally making
Yes. I agree. The purpose given in the *ORIGINAL* Charter. Which makes
NO mention whatsoever of any Ban on Politics or the other so-called
"Bans" that a few self-righteous, and self-appointed, would be censors
want to impose on the group.

That purpose is to discuss alternate history ... and, no, there is NO
"30 year rule" in the Charter. Nor is there a prohibition against
posting on political what ifs.

And there is NO rule that would allow the Charter to be changed.
Post by Sydney Webb
a blunt [Meta] post like this rather than posting AH it's a price I'm
willing to pay, notwithstanding there are far better net-cops than I.
What, leaving the phone calls employers to He Who Must Be Obeyed?

Don't even have the "courage" of your convictions?

The would be censors ... that includes YOU ... are the *current*
problem.

As Ray said, ignore the posts you don't like and they'll go away. Or
killfile them ... and if you haven't got web access that'll allow you
to do that, tough. Life's shitty sometimes ... pay the bucks and stop
whining.

Phil

Author, Space Opera (FGU), RBB #1 (FASA), Road to Armageddon (PGD).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: ***@pacific.net.au
Raymond Speer
2006-04-23 14:07:00 UTC
Permalink
INT POLICE HEADQUARTERS, DAY

The Cop enters the corner office of the Chief of Detectives. The Cop is
a good man, but maybe a mite self righteous, and the Chief is an older
guy who has seen it all in his decades on the force.

COP You want to see me, Chief?

CHIEF You said too much when you defended your performance as a Net Cop.
You described our suspect, Phil McGregor, as a troll who wants to use
SHWI as a toilet to shit in.

COP McGregor is a troll who wants to use SHWI as a toilet for his shit.

CHIEF Goddamn it, but you did not have to say that aloud. If this case
goes anywhere, we know that McGregor's number one defense will be that
the cop was so prejudiced against me, he framed me. Don't you remember
OJ Simpson and Mark Fuhrman?

COP I'm sorry, Chief.

CHIEF Sorry does not cut it. You're off the case as of now. I'm
reassigning McGregor and Montresec to somebody that is not carrying your
baggage,

As the Cop turns to leave, the Chief makes another comment.

CHIEF And do not go after them on your own, or it will be your badge.

Madder than hell, the Cop says nothing but nods in the affirmative.

CHIEF You are too emotionally wrapped up in this case. I do worry that
if you found exculpatory evidence in Mcgregor's favor, you would toss it
because you hate him so much.
a***@pacific.net.au
2006-04-23 14:45:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
CHIEF You are too emotionally wrapped up in this case. I do worry that
if you found exculpatory evidence in Mcgregor's favor, you would toss it
because you hate him so much.
I think that sums it up all to well.

I'd like to think that I am not prejudiced in the reverse way, but
<sigh> I probably am ...

Phil

Author, Space Opera (FGU), RBB #1 (FASA), Road to Armageddon (PGD).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: ***@pacific.net.au
b***@tcnj.edu
2006-04-23 14:55:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
Post by Raymond Speer
STRENGTH THROUGH UNITY.
UNITY THROUGH FAITH
England Prevails!

Oh, my, this might be the wrong thread for that.
d***@supanet.com
2006-04-23 16:15:04 UTC
Permalink
Raymond Speer wrote:

(some stuff, most of which is snipped)

For the record, I'm a very occasional visitor, and an even more
occasional poster. I've been involved in one or two what-if scenarios
presented here with varying degrees of my personal involvement.
Post by Raymond Speer
2. The official doctrine of SHWI is that we are poised ont he edge of
chaos. Chaos is intolerable and is defined as any what-if scenario
@An Inquisitor disagrees with the premise.
It's a little curious, therefore, how so many scenarios that get
discussed focus on whether or not a premise is viable.

If a scenario has a debatable start point and premise, then there will
inevitably be discussion of that. I don't see where the problem is. You
would have stronger grounds if there was never any discussion over the
viability of a PoD.
Post by Raymond Speer
5. THE DISCO RULE. Commentary is permitted only on those events which
took place before and during the disco era. Ronald Reagan, Brain
Mulroney and Margaret Thatcher may only be mentioned if there is a
positive allusion to their characters if not their policies (but then
the poster is violating the BAN ON POLITICS.)
Am I allowed to say you are talking cobblers? To take just one example,
there have been a number of What-if scenarios discussed that focus on
the Falklands War. Inevitably, changing the outcome of that War has an
impact on the political career of Thatcher.

Given the postings of a number of the British contingent, I find it
vastly amusing that you ascribe to that British contingent a
requirement that posts should be positive about the character of
Herself. In my limited experience of this newsgroup, the British
contingent are much more likely to be critical than not. A few
Americans who may recall the lady do have an almost religious belief in
Herself, and don't take kindly to anyone criticising her. But given the
huge number of lengthy timelines in which herself has appeared, I think
it is fair to say that you are not entirely correct in your assessment,
and that your assessment is novel and imaginative, but not entirely
straight-forward. Astute readers will note that I have fallen in Sir
Humphrey Appleby-ese, which is terribly useful when discussing an
opinion that seems to bear all the hall-marks of arising from the
flexible and uncluttered mindset required of those such as James
Hacker.
Post by Raymond Speer
7. INQUISITOR-APPROVED CONTENT. No poster shall post any scenario or
remark that an Inquisitor does not wish to read. There are many
@Sea Lion
May I say that you are talking complete and utter cobblers? The reason
that there is a tendency for the bulk of this newsgroup to get ratty
over Sea Lion is that it is rather difficult to come up with a viable
Sea Lion.

There have been Sea Lion scenarios presented that didn't get bogged
down in the initial premise, but these have been of the "The Germans
launch Sea Lion, the operation gets well stuffed, the Germans lose that
operation. What then?" nature.

There is minimal point discussing a working Sea Lion, in the same way
that there is minimal point discussing Alien Space Bats, because both
have about the same degree of plausibility.

Sea Lion isn't forbidden, as the discussions on "What if Sea Lion is
tried and fails" threads demonstrate. If someone wants to show how Sea
Lion could be made to work, good luck to them, but it's not exactly a
high probability event. And I daresay you'll forgive regulars of this
newsgroup from sighing when yet another variant of "If only Hitler
hadn't stopped the attack on Dunkirk, Sea Lion would have succeeded"
raises its head.

If you want to feel all self-righteous about opposing censorship, then
fine. Give yourself a pat on the back and three gold stars. You're
talking complete cobblers, of course. The newsgroup has found that
certain discussions (such as whether Europeans are Lazy, or the Rights
and Wrongs of bombing Bosnia) attract an element that isn't really
involved in discussing alternate history, and that such discussions are
best avoided. These are guidelines. If you don't want to follow them,
fine. This newsgroup has been described as like having a chat with your
mates in a pub. There's a number of different discussions. If you
insist on turning up the noise level of the (Pre-disco music) jukebox
such that no-one can hear what's being said, then don't be surprised if
people ask you not to do that again, because they like being able to
discuss alternate history. If you keep on doing it, don't be surprised
if people ask you to go forth and multiply. Or something like that.
b***@forpresident.com
2006-04-23 19:25:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@supanet.com
Post by Raymond Speer
5. THE DISCO RULE. Commentary is permitted only on those events which
took place before and during the disco era. Ronald Reagan, Brain
Mulroney and Margaret Thatcher may only be mentioned if there is a
positive allusion to their characters if not their policies (but then
the poster is violating the BAN ON POLITICS.)
Given the postings of a number of the British contingent, I find it
vastly amusing that you ascribe to that British contingent a
requirement that posts should be positive about the character of
Herself. In my limited experience of this newsgroup, the British
contingent are much more likely to be critical than not. A few
Americans who may recall the lady do have an almost religious belief in
Herself, and don't take kindly to anyone criticising her.
Those, not surprisingly, tend to be the same people who don't take
kindly to criticisms of Reagan.

(snip)
Post by d***@supanet.com
If you want to feel all self-righteous about opposing censorship, then
fine. Give yourself a pat on the back and three gold stars. You're
talking complete cobblers, of course. The newsgroup has found that
certain discussions (such as whether Europeans are Lazy, or the Rights
and Wrongs of bombing Bosnia) attract an element that isn't really
involved in discussing alternate history, and that such discussions are
best avoided. These are guidelines. If you don't want to follow them,
fine. This newsgroup has been described as like having a chat with your
mates in a pub. There's a number of different discussions. If you
insist on turning up the noise level of the (Pre-disco music) jukebox
It's 2006, and there are now actual disco records that are more than
30 years old. So maybe "pre-punk" would be a more apt description
of the "30 year rule"

Stan B.
The Horny Goat
2006-04-24 01:57:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@forpresident.com
Post by d***@supanet.com
Given the postings of a number of the British contingent, I find it
vastly amusing that you ascribe to that British contingent a
requirement that posts should be positive about the character of
Herself. In my limited experience of this newsgroup, the British
contingent are much more likely to be critical than not. A few
Americans who may recall the lady do have an almost religious belief in
Herself, and don't take kindly to anyone criticising her.
Those, not surprisingly, tend to be the same people who don't take
kindly to criticisms of Reagan.
Heh heh. Too true.

Having said that I wasn't reading too carefully the first time through
and thought 'Herself' was HM Betty Windsor. Which leads to the ObWI:
What if Queen Elizabeth had the politics and outspokedness of her
husband?

I would think the monarchy WOULD survive simply because the Queen
would tell her two eldest sons to be happy and content with their
wives, spend lots of time in the woods or on the beach and raise LOTS
of little royals and quit being twits about it. Simply keep them
barefoot and pregnant and all will be well. Other than Andrew's
enjoyment of flying helicopters and Charles' love of architecture it's
all pretty harmless right? Oh and fer gawd's sake make sure your sons
are married by 25 and your daughters by 20....or other suitably
chauvinistic stuff.

Not as fun for the paparazzi but it would eliminate most of the
scandals...
A***@nhm.ac.uk
2006-04-24 04:16:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@supanet.com
certain discussions (such as whether Europeans are Lazy, or the Rights
and Wrongs of bombing Bosnia) attract an element that isn't really
involved in discussing alternate history, and that such discussions are
best avoided. These are guidelines. If you don't want to follow them,
fine. This newsgroup has been described as like having a chat with your
mates in a pub. There's a number of different discussions. If you
insist on turning up the noise level of the (Pre-disco music) jukebox
such that no-one can hear what's being said, then don't be surprised if
people ask you not to do that again, because they like being able to
discuss alternate history.
That is exactly the point. I may also be only a very occasional poster,
but I
lurk in this group (and its predecessor) since the beginnings. And the
climate
here definitely improved vastly over the years, especially since the
introduction
of the BOP. Anyone who really wants OT flamewars should look back 10
years or
so, when the group was crammed with that stuff. Does anyone really want
that
again ? Of course the BOP/Pre-disco rule makes it difficulot to discuss
some
intersting stuff, but that is the price to have a NG with a high S/N
ratio.

Andreas










--
Andreas Morlok
Department of Earth and Planetary Science
Kobe University
Kobe
Japan

Borked Pseudo Mailed
2006-04-23 16:50:10 UTC
Permalink
BRAVO!!!! VRAIE BON!!!! A true work of
art, Raymond.

May I suggest an addendum? An ammendment
if you will? I think it needs a section
on the punishments to meted
out to violators.

Perhaps a gauntlet whereby violators
are forced to endure a series of
blistering rebukes from Inquisitors?
Post by Raymond Speer
PREAMBLE
IT IS DECLARED AND DECREED that this newsgroup be and henceforth forever
is the Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition, and that
treason and sedition to these sacred principles be eliminated with out
mercy. SHWI prevails!
PURPOSE
1. The core purpose of SHWI is to simulate intellectual life under a
dictatorship. Any affront to the sensibilities of any Inquisitor will be
relentlessly and ruthlessly suppressed.
2. The official doctrine of SHWI is that we are poised ont he edge of
chaos. Chaos is intolerable and is defined as any what-if scenario
@An Inquisitor disagrees with the premise.
@Runs afoul of any prohibition.
@Is posted by a person disliked by the Inquisitor for any reason, not
necessary one that is relevant to the scenario in question.
3. In the name of preventing chaos, all sanctions are allowed, including
but not limited to libel, computer hacking, e-mailed complaints to the
poster's employer and family, stalking, and arrrogant lectures.
Remember, better a thread contaiining a thousand admonishments than a
thread contaiining a half dozen entries that an Inquisitor does not like
to read.
PROHIBITIONS
4. BAN ON POLITICS. No poster shall write any entry with political
content that is critical of any political sentiments that an Inquisitor
@Adolf Hitler and the NSDAP (Nazis)
@Jefferson Davis and the Confederacy.
@Maximilian and the Mexican Empire
5. THE DISCO RULE. Commentary is permitted only on those events which
took place before and during the disco era. Ronald Reagan, Brain
Mulroney and Margaret Thatcher may only be mentioned if there is a
positive allusion to their characters if not their policies (but then
the poster is violating the BAN ON POLITICS.)
6. THE ELEPHANT'S MEMORY RULE. The Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful
Inquisition never forgets and never forgives.
If a poster submits a scenario of any sort, the Inquisitor is to take
out of context any word or words the contributor may have posted in the
past, regardless of how many years ago that comment was written. That
discovery from the past is to become the new focus of the thread.
7. INQUISITOR-APPROVED CONTENT. No poster shall post any scenario or
remark that an Inquisitor does not wish to read. There are many
@Sea Lion
@Prosperous Nineteenth Century Mexico
@Aztec Civilization Survives & Stops Human Sacrifice
@Roman Railroads
THE ULTIMATE RULE
8. Rigid, absolute and constant compliance with these Articles of
Allegiance are required and enforced upon all posters., but Inquistors
may transcened these rules and do as they desire , to permit them
maximum flexibility in making policy.
The Supreme Headquarters of the Wonderful Inquisition Prevails!
STRENGTH THROUGH UNITY.
UNITY THROUGH FAITH
d***@supanet.com
2006-04-23 18:28:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Borked Pseudo Mailed
BRAVO!!!! VRAIE BON!!!! A true work of
art, Raymond.
May I suggest an addendum? An ammendment
if you will? I think it needs a section
on the punishments to meted
out to violators.
Perhaps a gauntlet whereby violators
are forced to endure a series of
blistering rebukes from Inquisitors?
Oh, I'm hardly a regular enough contributor to be called an Inquisitor.
I did a bit of work on a thread entitled the Flashman Option, which had
a bit of alternate history content, and I contribute in areas where I'm
not entirely ignorant (such as Sea Lion or amphibious warfare in
general or certain aspects of cricket). Other than that, I just drop in
from time to time. At most, I'm a very part-time Inquisitor.

Still, it's another indicator on Lothian's Approximation. A not
entirely reliable guide, but one that has a positive, non-zero
correlation.
L***@gmail.com
2006-04-24 00:14:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raymond Speer
STRENGTH THROUGH UNITY.
UNITY THROUGH FAITH
So, Ray, forget to take the crazy pills this month?

Cheers

L
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...