|
alt.parenting.spanking FAQ
|
alt.parenting.spanking FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
1) What is "alt.parenting.spanking?" Alt.parenting.spanking is a newsgroup on Usenet. Usenet is a text based system of distributing postings in a group accessible format, which predates the more recent World Wide Web by many years. Some Usenet newsgroups are moderated, which means that one or more individuals determine what and who may post notes to the newsgroup. Others are unmoderated. Alt.parenting.spanking is an unmoderated newsgroup. As such anyone attempting to be a NetCensor should be ignored as such. 2) When did a.p.s. first begin? Alt.parenting.spanking began on 8 August 1995. 3) What is the purpose of a.p.s.? Alt.parenting.spanking is a discussion group for the topic of corporal punishment by parents in a legitimate fashion as defined by relevant law. Any notes relating directly or indirectly to the issue of use of corporal punishment by parents are on topic on a.p.s. 4) What is "spanking?" The reasonable non-inflammatory definition of spanking is the legitimate and legal use of corporal (physical) punishment in the furtherance of disciplined behavior of a child by the parent or legal guardian of said child. The form and manner of such corporal punishment is widely left to the discretion of said parent or guardian and is fully within their legal rights and prerogatives up to the point such actions violate the legal statutes. There are those participants in the newsgroup who seek to use inflammatory and emotionalistic, hyperbolic, hysterical and misrepresentative terms and agenda-serving definitions which only cloud the issue and shut down any reasonable and meaningful discussion on the topic. Such should just be pointed out as such and then ignored as the intentional attempts at disruption that they are. 5) May spanking fetishists post on a.p.s.? Anyone can post to an unmoderated newsgroup, as there is little that can be done to stop them, but since this is a parenting newsgroup, not a fetish newsgroup, such posts are usually ignored or looked upon with disfavor. 6)Is "flaming" permitted on a.p.s.? Since a.p.s. is unmoderated, posters are free to heap insults and slanders on whomever they wish. Remember you can be insulting and offensive even if you use only polite and diplomatic terminology and language. Profanity is generally frowned upon as unnecessarily vulgar. In addition to the obvious division between posters who agree with spanking and posters who are against spanking, there is also a division between posters who desire a civil discourse and posters who desire a "flame war." In the past there have been "flamers" at times on both sides of the spanking issue. There are also those who seem to think they are not flaming when they are, who do not think they are being offensive when they are and who do not think they are being uncivil when they are. Their swaggering selfrighteousness and holier- than-thou arrogance will become readily apparent in short order. 7) What is a "killfile?" A killfile is a simple feature of the software which you use to read Usenet newsgroups. When you place someone's address in your killfile, all of their notes will cease to appear on your screen. This is generally considered to be the Usenet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and humming. The sole purpose of it is to perpetuate one's own ignorance. Whether or not you read someone else's posts they can still read yours and respond. 8) Are discussions about Child Protective Services on topic on a.p.s.? Absolutely! Since Children's Protective Services, by whatever local name they go by, deal with issues of child abuse and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. Another newsgroup specifically about CPS is alt.support.child-protective- services, and posts can be made there as well, but since the world is not as ultracompartmentalized as some would wish it to be, such posts are also on topic in a.p.s. Those who object most strenuously to posts in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. 9) Are binary (image) files appropriate for a.p.s.? Binary files are heavily frowned on throughout Usenet, except in newsgroups expressly designed for the posting of binary files. Please do not post binary files to alt.parenting.spanking or other newsgroups without "binaries" in their names. Compared to the text messages which predominate in Usenet newsgroups, binary files typically take up much larger amounts of memory space and require more downloading time. Some readers of alt.parenting.spanking pay for the online time during which they download new messages to their computers. They will not be amused to discover that more than half of their download consisted of a binary file. 10) Are fictional stories appropriate for a.p.s.? It is very unlikely that a fictional story of any sort will be appropriate for a.p.s. or widely appreciated by readers of a.p.s. Alt.parenting.spanking is devoted to discussion of how spanking impacts the lives of the current generation of non-fictional children. Unless your fictional story somehow relates in a clear and direct manner to real-life spankings of real-life children, it would be best posted elsewhere. 11) What is a "troll?" In Usenet parlance, a "troll" is someone who posts notes on a newsgroup intending to provoke chaos from others while they skip out and leave the firestorm they created for the regular participants of the newsgroup to deal with. No one likes a troll, generally speaking. 12) How can I begin posting to a.p.s.? The best way to read and post to a.p.s. is to use a Usenet "newsreader" devoted to the purpose. The "rn" newsreader is primitive but servicable. The "tin" newsreader is recommended. Ask your ISP about accessing Usenet to find out what is available for someone with your internet account. Also Netscape and Outlook have newsreader capabilities and are usually available on most PCs. Alt.parenting.spanking may also be accessed from the world wide web through any number of newsgroup access sites such as Remarq, Google and others. Some charge for their services, and others do not. 13. Is "terrorism" an appropriate topic for a.p.s? Of course, not. Those who continued to post on the topic of terrorism are spamming the group. They are showing that they have no respect for the participants of a.p.s! Doan |
Kane parses the Doan plagerized FAQ was alt.parenting.spanking FAQ
Doan wrote:
And wrote, and wrote, and wrote, and still won't write and answer to The Question, nor write the simple requirements for debate on the Embry study, nor provide answers to his claims instead instisting someone else prove him wrong, instead of proving himself right. Now why IS that I wonder, other than the possible excuse of that he is still suffering from the treachery of his parents from childhood? Frequently Asked Questions 1) What is "alt.parenting.spanking?" Alt.parenting.spanking is a newsgroup on Usenet. Usenet is a text based system of distributing postings in a group accessible format, which predates the more recent World Wide Web by many years. So far so good. Some Usenet newsgroups are moderated, which means that one or more individuals determine what and who may post notes to the newsgroup. Others are unmoderated. Alt.parenting.spanking is an unmoderated newsgroup. The following was added by the Doananatory, publically exposing himself yet again. Can't even write a FAQ of his own, he has to plagerize another's work with comments uncited as being by him. Tsk. As such anyone attempting to be a NetCensor should be ignored as such. The just miligned redundant and trite "such" overused by a small boy who can't find his Funkin' White. R R R R R 2) When did a.p.s. first begin? Alt.parenting.spanking began on 8 August 1995. 3) What is the purpose of a.p.s.? Alt.parenting.spanking is a discussion group for the topic of corporal punishment by parents The following is an attempt, of course, by our every so neutral "let them make up their own minds" public Doananism Champ, to limit the discussion and attempt to redefine spanking to HIS liking rather to the truth...that "spanking" has more than one standard of evaluation among the civilised and thinking population. Hence you can see where HIS reasoning and bogus attempts to mislead and deceive come from. in a legitimate fashion as defined by relevant law. And below we return the the poorly plagerized, but in this sentence, correct statement. ALL considerations of spanking, pro or con, are welcomed here. Any notes relating directly or indirectly to the issue of use of corporal punishment by parents are on topic on a.p.s. 4) What is "spanking?" Watch him go, he's in high gear now. Notice the use of an inflammatory term, "inflammatory" when discribing spanking as the use of physical pain...like spanking isn't painful...sure, Doanantor, sure. The reasonable non-inflammatory definition of spanking is the legitimate and legal use of corporal (physical) punishment I do not believe this ng is designed to discuss only the legal aspects, as I said before....it's open to ALL discussion, even the sadly offtopic. in the furtherance of disciplined behavior of a child by the parent or legal guardian of said child. I thought you said, "I let them make up their own mind?' That above is starting to depart pretty extremely from your claimed neutrality, as in you want them to get their own information, but here are trying to fob off a definition of this ng that limits it to the law instead of the entire field of inquiry. I guess your moral and ethical bias is becoming more clear today, is it not? The form and manner of such corporal punishment is widely left to the discretion of said parent or guardian and is fully within their legal rights and prerogatives up to the point such actions violate the legal statutes. Actually, Doan, that is not quite what this ng is about. But your attempt to invade and corrupt the FAQ is certainly what you spanking compulsives are about. Dishonesty to yourselves, each other, and the new visitor is duly noted. chuckle (lest we forget one of our greatest contributors to misinformation and foolishness....let them eat peppers....yeah that's legal, except when it isn't.) I see you are busy pushing "legal" when it isn't all that clear. And we like to talk about when it isn't clear. How does that wash with your "parents doing this and that without interference" etc.? There are those participants in the newsgroup who seek to use inflammatory Your words appear to me an attempt to defame so as to minimize arguments against spanking. Is that really fair, given that you are being inflammatory in your OWN choice of words? Or is it okay when you and the other compulsives do so because YOU are RIGHT? and emotionalistic, hyperbolic, hysterical and misrepresentative terms and agenda-serving definitions which only cloud the issue and shut down any reasonable and meaningful discussion on the topic. The only thing that get's shut down does so in exactly the way I have shut YOU down recently....with the truth. You can't handle the heat. Kitchen door is thataway. Such should just be pointed out as such Ah, the truth of "such"ness is used to hammer the opposition once again. We are, really we are, just devestated by your command of the logic and honorable, as well as intelligent argument. and then ignored as the intentional attempts at disruption that they are. If you are going to talk that way about the pro spankers don't you think folks might get us confused? The only "attempts at disruption" and you just ran into one a few weeks ago, are honest confrontations on vital questions of importance to the safety and well being of children, and in fact, to that of parents as well that could run afoul of the law if they do NOT take considerably more pains to seek out information and advice that goes a bit beyond the Donanation of, "reasonable standards." 5) May spanking fetishists post on a.p.s.? Anyone can post to an unmoderated newsgroup, as there is little that can be done to stop them, but since this is a parenting newsgroup, not a fetish newsgroup, such posts are usually ignored or looked upon with disfavor. Gee, now why would you cut and snip and otherwise mutilate a very reasoned and thoughtful invitation, polite too, to take this stuff elsewhere and substitute this rather vapid bit of prose in it's place? 6)Is "flaming" permitted on a.p.s.? Since a.p.s. is unmoderated, posters are free to heap insults and slanders on whomever they wish. Remember you can be insulting and offensive even if you use only polite and diplomatic terminology and language. Profanity is generally frowned upon as unnecessarily vulgar. Interesting...at least to someone that has studied learning theory. Chris posts a balanced and complete section that focuses on what kind of behavior is wanted, and encourages folks toward that, when you, against the commonest and long known and proven learning theory concepts, focus entirely on the negative, what is not wanted. You do know that such an approach tends to the anchor the negative in one's mind thus causing them to surface that very thing in their behaviors, do you not? No, I guess you do not know that. But then that is common among punishers, those that are attracted to compulsively spanking when a child presents and unwanted behavior. In addition to the obvious division between posters who agree with spanking and posters who are against spanking, there is also a division between posters who desire a civil discourse and posters who desire a "flame war." In the past there have been "flamers" at times on both sides of the spanking issue. Well, so far Chris had a clear description. Let's see what a Doananator can do to mess it up, eh? There are also those who seem to think they are not flaming when they are, Doan, you are OUTed at last, and by yourself. Congrats. who do not think they are being offensive when they are and who do not think they are being uncivil when they are. That's why, when you are doing such a bangup job of it, and likely neurotically blind to your insults, I lay into you to get your attention. Have you not noticed that I get more insulting at times? Just assume you did it again, without knowing it. That IS a common, in fact majority wise, characteristic of people who have been spanked in childhood. They are poor readers of others feelings and thoughts, and very good at deluding themselves they are making polite intelligent and oh so logical contributions, when in fact they are often dishonest, peddlers of ignorance as fact, with a callous regard to the feeling, opinions, and thoughts of others....more especially children. Some of those like you...scuse me, some of those like that have left this ng, and good riddance. And when you grow up you'll find your own little self being treated with considerably more gentleness. Until then, yah earn what's yah get, clearly. Their swaggering selfrighteousness and holier- than-thou arrogance will become readily apparent in short order. Tsk, tsk, little braggart and bully, you shouldn't talk about NNN, the long missing Onanator-lil'O, and other such as such who are such suchers of suchness. 7) What is a "killfile?" A killfile is a simple feature of the software which you use to read Usenet newsgroups. When you place someone's address in your killfile, all of their notes will cease to appear on your screen. This is generally considered to be the Usenet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and humming. For you perhaps. For other's it amounts more to smackin' an annoying humming buzzing mosquito and putting it in a box for safekeeping. The sole purpose of it is to perpetuate one's own ignorance. Or to fight off overwhelming boredom with twits such as you that put yourself in positions of importance you haven't earned or deserve. You Drone Doan. Whether or not you read someone else's posts they can still read yours and respond. Interesting that, once again, Chris posted, under this subject title, a very carefully and intelligently thought out bit of advice. He even points to their use to avoid having to read posts of flame wars, a perfectly legitimate use. When I'm conversing with you, for instance, I am really very okay with folks dumping me into the their twit-filter. They shouldn't have to be annoyed at what I say to annoy you, and they certainly should not be subjected to the flaming embarrassment you perpetrate on yourself with you silly childish "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" antics and evasions. Really. Some of us are embarrassed for you, Droan. 8) Are discussions about Child Protective Services on topic on a.p.s.? Absolutely! Since Children's Protective Services, by whatever local name they go by, deal with issues of child abuse and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. Let me see now. It's not appropriate to claim that spanking is a bad thing because it's legal in all states, (I believe you opened early with this claim) but it's really perfectly okay to post all kinds of things from ascsp because someone it's a legal thing only...hmmm. Am I missing something here. Could you clarify a bit for us, having it both ways wise I mean? No, of course you won't. YOu never do. YOu just are just one of those Plantlike Declarative Whine.....opps, WINNERS! Funny, too. Chris didn't go as far as you in your attempt to control peoples thinking. He used the word "appropriate" alot, making suggestions about what is more likely the place to explore CPS issues, and saying that of course, when you discuss spanking AND CPS then this is also a good place to post to. I think you are trying to make out that Chris is saying something he isn't. Now why WOULD you do that? Why would you keep hammering away at this FAQ if you didn't have some residual and reactionary response to some asswhuppins' Chris gave you in the past? Another newsgroup specifically about CPS is alt.support.child-protective- services, and posts can be made there as well, but since the world is not as ultracompartmentalized as some would wish it to be, such posts are also on topic in a.p.s. That's just what I say...and I say it about trying to compartmentalize into false and fabricated compartments, like "parents can decide on their own" when you can't even answer a simple question about the most vital of information they DO need, other than to use the vague and misleading (since it's admitted even by legal experts as unclear and no standard at all) "reasonable standards." Those who object most strenuously to posts in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. And of course here you are again treating us to your wonderful and pious neutrality. How is it that you don't just tell the to get more information like you do about spanking? AFraid of what they will find if they really shovel enough manure aside and get down to the truth? I hereby invite all who read Doan's smarmy attempt to mislead, once again, to really dig down, and leave the garbage in ascps behind and go to government and scientific and social work studies of this issues of child abuse in this country. It has little to do with the aside he just offered to lead you down....sometimes referred to as The Garden Path. 9) Are binary (image) files appropriate for a.p.s.? Binary files are heavily frowned on throughout Usenet, except in newsgroups expressly designed for the posting of binary files. Please do not post binary files to alt.parenting.spanking or other newsgroups without "binaries" in their names. Compared to the text messages which predominate in Usenet newsgroups, binary files typically take up much larger amounts of memory space and require more downloading time. Some readers of alt.parenting.spanking pay for the online time during which they download new messages to their computers. They will not be amused to discover that more than half of their download consisted of a binary file. I take it back. You ARE honest. You left one issue unchanged. Congrats. Of course how important it was to the issues discussed here that you DO lie about remains the question. Speaking of The Question. How about it? 10) Are fictional stories appropriate for a.p.s.? It is very unlikely that a fictional story of any sort will be appropriate for a.p.s. or widely appreciated by readers of a.p.s. Alt.parenting.spanking is devoted to discussion of how spanking impacts the lives of the current generation of non-fictional children. Unless your fictional story somehow relates in a clear and direct manner to real-life spankings of real-life children, it would be best posted elsewhere. 11) What is a "troll?" In Usenet parlance, a "troll" is someone who posts notes on a newsgroup intending to provoke chaos from others while they skip out and leave the firestorm they created for the regular participants of the newsgroup to deal with. No one likes a troll, generally speaking. You seem to do that every few weeks or so, with your post of a phony FAQ. But then I do not want anyone claiming you are a troll, so here I am. SURPRISE!!!! Ain't we got fun? R R R R R 12) How can I begin posting to a.p.s.? The best way to read and post to a.p.s. is to use a Usenet "newsreader" devoted to the purpose. The "rn" newsreader is primitive but servicable. The "tin" newsreader is recommended. Ask your ISP about accessing Usenet to find out what is available for someone with your internet account. Also Netscape and Outlook have newsreader capabilities and are usually available on most PCs. Yah know, I find this odd little recommendation, not posted by Chris, fascinating. "tin" and "rn" are far more closed or easily firewalled while Outlook, especially the Express model, and somewhat Netscape newsreaders are terribly "porous" to hacking, or should I say cracking. Given your technical expertise wouldn't it be more thoughtful and helpful to recommend more secure and more solidly firewall capable newsreaders such as Agent, or even the latest addition of Outlook, specifically, that comes with XP? Oh, well, probably no big thing. Crackers are pretty much into everyone's workstation that post to and recieve directly from Usenet. I guess you forgot to recommend the most secure way of reading mail of all....a web based, such as google, newsreader. Glad I can be of assistance. Alt.parenting.spanking may also be accessed from the world wide web through any number of newsgroup access sites such as Remarq, Google and others. Some charge for their services, and others do not. Hey, guess what. You just DID get one over on Chris. He is remiss in not updating his FAQ file on this. I'll try to give him a heads up. He still has google as opting out on this ng. ...though he does point to the update page. You want to email him or shall I? 13. Is "terrorism" an appropriate topic for a.p.s? Of course, not. Those who continued to post on the topic of terrorism are spamming the group. They are showing that they have no respect for the participants of a.p.s! Well, until you start to look into the parenting practice of the nations that seem to produce and extraordinarily high proportion of terrorists, which also includes one of the nations with nearly the highest incident of admitted spanking in the world, the United States of America. We have our very on OK bomber, folks that take Civvy models of the AK 47 (real full auto machine guns, AK 47's, are hard to get) in semi auto...very deadly and high cyclic firing rate, and those folks that pitch a burning can of gas into a crowded dance hall and kill dozens and even hundreds, and folks that drive their cars into crowds of people, even little children, and people that slip into homes at night, or grab children in the street in broad daylight...well, I'd say something is setting this off... And WE brag, well some like Doanantor do, in this ng that 90% or more of US families use spanking, yet they consider it provacative and inflammatory of us to bring these two facts into juxtaposition, pretending it's just Cargo Cult Science. Me, I kinda sorta tend to go with the long well proven principle that violence begats violence, and children learn...as well know and use for everything else....by what they see and hear, and witness. 'course how COULD there possibly be a connection between the violence in the country and the 90% spanking...after all, the only folks that do violence are those that were not spanked as children, right? Doan Well, at least you signed it. That's to your credit. Somewhere down under that cringing, terrified child left from your childhood, is an honorable, decent, honest man. I'm sure of it or I wouldn't bother with you. Spanking hurts, just like when I spank you here. Only for a child there's no escape, until they are grown. None. They have to bear it, and they have to find a way to that usually amounts to becoming what you are. Never fear, I won't give up on you, child. You are worth it. Am I getting a bit too inflammatory for yah, old boy? Unlike you who promulgate your thoughtful and fairminded and evenhanded and neutral commentary in these ngs? Sorry 'bout that. I guess the reader will have to, between us, "decide for themselves" as you so often have said. I sure hope they know how to google and google your ass into the light of thruth. Kane |
Kane9 Kan't Dance continues... was alt.parenting.spankingFAQ
Can't argue on facts, Kane Kan't now resort to WMD - Weapons of Mass Distraction! ;-) Doan On 9 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: Doan wrote: And wrote, and wrote, and wrote, and still won't write and answer to The Question, nor write the simple requirements for debate on the Embry study, nor provide answers to his claims instead instisting someone else prove him wrong, instead of proving himself right. Now why IS that I wonder, other than the possible excuse of that he is still suffering from the treachery of his parents from childhood? Frequently Asked Questions 1) What is "alt.parenting.spanking?" Alt.parenting.spanking is a newsgroup on Usenet. Usenet is a text based system of distributing postings in a group accessible format, which predates the more recent World Wide Web by many years. So far so good. Some Usenet newsgroups are moderated, which means that one or more individuals determine what and who may post notes to the newsgroup. Others are unmoderated. Alt.parenting.spanking is an unmoderated newsgroup. The following was added by the Doananatory, publically exposing himself yet again. Can't even write a FAQ of his own, he has to plagerize another's work with comments uncited as being by him. Tsk. As such anyone attempting to be a NetCensor should be ignored as such. The just miligned redundant and trite "such" overused by a small boy who can't find his Funkin' White. R R R R R 2) When did a.p.s. first begin? Alt.parenting.spanking began on 8 August 1995. 3) What is the purpose of a.p.s.? Alt.parenting.spanking is a discussion group for the topic of corporal punishment by parents The following is an attempt, of course, by our every so neutral "let them make up their own minds" public Doananism Champ, to limit the discussion and attempt to redefine spanking to HIS liking rather to the truth...that "spanking" has more than one standard of evaluation among the civilised and thinking population. Hence you can see where HIS reasoning and bogus attempts to mislead and deceive come from. in a legitimate fashion as defined by relevant law. And below we return the the poorly plagerized, but in this sentence, correct statement. ALL considerations of spanking, pro or con, are welcomed here. Any notes relating directly or indirectly to the issue of use of corporal punishment by parents are on topic on a.p.s. 4) What is "spanking?" Watch him go, he's in high gear now. Notice the use of an inflammatory term, "inflammatory" when discribing spanking as the use of physical pain...like spanking isn't painful...sure, Doanantor, sure. The reasonable non-inflammatory definition of spanking is the legitimate and legal use of corporal (physical) punishment I do not believe this ng is designed to discuss only the legal aspects, as I said before....it's open to ALL discussion, even the sadly offtopic. in the furtherance of disciplined behavior of a child by the parent or legal guardian of said child. I thought you said, "I let them make up their own mind?' That above is starting to depart pretty extremely from your claimed neutrality, as in you want them to get their own information, but here are trying to fob off a definition of this ng that limits it to the law instead of the entire field of inquiry. I guess your moral and ethical bias is becoming more clear today, is it not? The form and manner of such corporal punishment is widely left to the discretion of said parent or guardian and is fully within their legal rights and prerogatives up to the point such actions violate the legal statutes. Actually, Doan, that is not quite what this ng is about. But your attempt to invade and corrupt the FAQ is certainly what you spanking compulsives are about. Dishonesty to yourselves, each other, and the new visitor is duly noted. chuckle (lest we forget one of our greatest contributors to misinformation and foolishness....let them eat peppers....yeah that's legal, except when it isn't.) I see you are busy pushing "legal" when it isn't all that clear. And we like to talk about when it isn't clear. How does that wash with your "parents doing this and that without interference" etc.? There are those participants in the newsgroup who seek to use inflammatory Your words appear to me an attempt to defame so as to minimize arguments against spanking. Is that really fair, given that you are being inflammatory in your OWN choice of words? Or is it okay when you and the other compulsives do so because YOU are RIGHT? and emotionalistic, hyperbolic, hysterical and misrepresentative terms and agenda-serving definitions which only cloud the issue and shut down any reasonable and meaningful discussion on the topic. The only thing that get's shut down does so in exactly the way I have shut YOU down recently....with the truth. You can't handle the heat. Kitchen door is thataway. Such should just be pointed out as such Ah, the truth of "such"ness is used to hammer the opposition once again. We are, really we are, just devestated by your command of the logic and honorable, as well as intelligent argument. and then ignored as the intentional attempts at disruption that they are. If you are going to talk that way about the pro spankers don't you think folks might get us confused? The only "attempts at disruption" and you just ran into one a few weeks ago, are honest confrontations on vital questions of importance to the safety and well being of children, and in fact, to that of parents as well that could run afoul of the law if they do NOT take considerably more pains to seek out information and advice that goes a bit beyond the Donanation of, "reasonable standards." 5) May spanking fetishists post on a.p.s.? Anyone can post to an unmoderated newsgroup, as there is little that can be done to stop them, but since this is a parenting newsgroup, not a fetish newsgroup, such posts are usually ignored or looked upon with disfavor. Gee, now why would you cut and snip and otherwise mutilate a very reasoned and thoughtful invitation, polite too, to take this stuff elsewhere and substitute this rather vapid bit of prose in it's place? 6)Is "flaming" permitted on a.p.s.? Since a.p.s. is unmoderated, posters are free to heap insults and slanders on whomever they wish. Remember you can be insulting and offensive even if you use only polite and diplomatic terminology and language. Profanity is generally frowned upon as unnecessarily vulgar. Interesting...at least to someone that has studied learning theory. Chris posts a balanced and complete section that focuses on what kind of behavior is wanted, and encourages folks toward that, when you, against the commonest and long known and proven learning theory concepts, focus entirely on the negative, what is not wanted. You do know that such an approach tends to the anchor the negative in one's mind thus causing them to surface that very thing in their behaviors, do you not? No, I guess you do not know that. But then that is common among punishers, those that are attracted to compulsively spanking when a child presents and unwanted behavior. In addition to the obvious division between posters who agree with spanking and posters who are against spanking, there is also a division between posters who desire a civil discourse and posters who desire a "flame war." In the past there have been "flamers" at times on both sides of the spanking issue. Well, so far Chris had a clear description. Let's see what a Doananator can do to mess it up, eh? There are also those who seem to think they are not flaming when they are, Doan, you are OUTed at last, and by yourself. Congrats. who do not think they are being offensive when they are and who do not think they are being uncivil when they are. That's why, when you are doing such a bangup job of it, and likely neurotically blind to your insults, I lay into you to get your attention. Have you not noticed that I get more insulting at times? Just assume you did it again, without knowing it. That IS a common, in fact majority wise, characteristic of people who have been spanked in childhood. They are poor readers of others feelings and thoughts, and very good at deluding themselves they are making polite intelligent and oh so logical contributions, when in fact they are often dishonest, peddlers of ignorance as fact, with a callous regard to the feeling, opinions, and thoughts of others....more especially children. Some of those like you...scuse me, some of those like that have left this ng, and good riddance. And when you grow up you'll find your own little self being treated with considerably more gentleness. Until then, yah earn what's yah get, clearly. Their swaggering selfrighteousness and holier- than-thou arrogance will become readily apparent in short order. Tsk, tsk, little braggart and bully, you shouldn't talk about NNN, the long missing Onanator-lil'O, and other such as such who are such suchers of suchness. 7) What is a "killfile?" A killfile is a simple feature of the software which you use to read Usenet newsgroups. When you place someone's address in your killfile, all of their notes will cease to appear on your screen. This is generally considered to be the Usenet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and humming. For you perhaps. For other's it amounts more to smackin' an annoying humming buzzing mosquito and putting it in a box for safekeeping. The sole purpose of it is to perpetuate one's own ignorance. Or to fight off overwhelming boredom with twits such as you that put yourself in positions of importance you haven't earned or deserve. You Drone Doan. Whether or not you read someone else's posts they can still read yours and respond. Interesting that, once again, Chris posted, under this subject title, a very carefully and intelligently thought out bit of advice. He even points to their use to avoid having to read posts of flame wars, a perfectly legitimate use. When I'm conversing with you, for instance, I am really very okay with folks dumping me into the their twit-filter. They shouldn't have to be annoyed at what I say to annoy you, and they certainly should not be subjected to the flaming embarrassment you perpetrate on yourself with you silly childish "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" antics and evasions. Really. Some of us are embarrassed for you, Droan. 8) Are discussions about Child Protective Services on topic on a.p.s.? Absolutely! Since Children's Protective Services, by whatever local name they go by, deal with issues of child abuse and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. Let me see now. It's not appropriate to claim that spanking is a bad thing because it's legal in all states, (I believe you opened early with this claim) but it's really perfectly okay to post all kinds of things from ascsp because someone it's a legal thing only...hmmm. Am I missing something here. Could you clarify a bit for us, having it both ways wise I mean? No, of course you won't. YOu never do. YOu just are just one of those Plantlike Declarative Whine.....opps, WINNERS! Funny, too. Chris didn't go as far as you in your attempt to control peoples thinking. He used the word "appropriate" alot, making suggestions about what is more likely the place to explore CPS issues, and saying that of course, when you discuss spanking AND CPS then this is also a good place to post to. I think you are trying to make out that Chris is saying something he isn't. Now why WOULD you do that? Why would you keep hammering away at this FAQ if you didn't have some residual and reactionary response to some asswhuppins' Chris gave you in the past? Another newsgroup specifically about CPS is alt.support.child-protective- services, and posts can be made there as well, but since the world is not as ultracompartmentalized as some would wish it to be, such posts are also on topic in a.p.s. That's just what I say...and I say it about trying to compartmentalize into false and fabricated compartments, like "parents can decide on their own" when you can't even answer a simple question about the most vital of information they DO need, other than to use the vague and misleading (since it's admitted even by legal experts as unclear and no standard at all) "reasonable standards." Those who object most strenuously to posts in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. And of course here you are again treating us to your wonderful and pious neutrality. How is it that you don't just tell the to get more information like you do about spanking? AFraid of what they will find if they really shovel enough manure aside and get down to the truth? I hereby invite all who read Doan's smarmy attempt to mislead, once again, to really dig down, and leave the garbage in ascps behind and go to government and scientific and social work studies of this issues of child abuse in this country. It has little to do with the aside he just offered to lead you down....sometimes referred to as The Garden Path. 9) Are binary (image) files appropriate for a.p.s.? Binary files are heavily frowned on throughout Usenet, except in newsgroups expressly designed for the posting of binary files. Please do not post binary files to alt.parenting.spanking or other newsgroups without "binaries" in their names. Compared to the text messages which predominate in Usenet newsgroups, binary files typically take up much larger amounts of memory space and require more downloading time. Some readers of alt.parenting.spanking pay for the online time during which they download new messages to their computers. They will not be amused to discover that more than half of their download consisted of a binary file. I take it back. You ARE honest. You left one issue unchanged. Congrats. Of course how important it was to the issues discussed here that you DO lie about remains the question. Speaking of The Question. How about it? 10) Are fictional stories appropriate for a.p.s.? It is very unlikely that a fictional story of any sort will be appropriate for a.p.s. or widely appreciated by readers of a.p.s. Alt.parenting.spanking is devoted to discussion of how spanking impacts the lives of the current generation of non-fictional children. Unless your fictional story somehow relates in a clear and direct manner to real-life spankings of real-life children, it would be best posted elsewhere. 11) What is a "troll?" In Usenet parlance, a "troll" is someone who posts notes on a newsgroup intending to provoke chaos from others while they skip out and leave the firestorm they created for the regular participants of the newsgroup to deal with. No one likes a troll, generally speaking. You seem to do that every few weeks or so, with your post of a phony FAQ. But then I do not want anyone claiming you are a troll, so here I am. SURPRISE!!!! Ain't we got fun? R R R R R 12) How can I begin posting to a.p.s.? The best way to read and post to a.p.s. is to use a Usenet "newsreader" devoted to the purpose. The "rn" newsreader is primitive but servicable. The "tin" newsreader is recommended. Ask your ISP about accessing Usenet to find out what is available for someone with your internet account. Also Netscape and Outlook have newsreader capabilities and are usually available on most PCs. Yah know, I find this odd little recommendation, not posted by Chris, fascinating. "tin" and "rn" are far more closed or easily firewalled while Outlook, especially the Express model, and somewhat Netscape newsreaders are terribly "porous" to hacking, or should I say cracking. Given your technical expertise wouldn't it be more thoughtful and helpful to recommend more secure and more solidly firewall capable newsreaders such as Agent, or even the latest addition of Outlook, specifically, that comes with XP? Oh, well, probably no big thing. Crackers are pretty much into everyone's workstation that post to and recieve directly from Usenet. I guess you forgot to recommend the most secure way of reading mail of all....a web based, such as google, newsreader. Glad I can be of assistance. Alt.parenting.spanking may also be accessed from the world wide web through any number of newsgroup access sites such as Remarq, Google and others. Some charge for their services, and others do not. Hey, guess what. You just DID get one over on Chris. He is remiss in not updating his FAQ file on this. I'll try to give him a heads up. He still has google as opting out on this ng. ...though he does point to the update page. You want to email him or shall I? 13. Is "terrorism" an appropriate topic for a.p.s? Of course, not. Those who continued to post on the topic of terrorism are spamming the group. They are showing that they have no respect for the participants of a.p.s! Well, until you start to look into the parenting practice of the nations that seem to produce and extraordinarily high proportion of terrorists, which also includes one of the nations with nearly the highest incident of admitted spanking in the world, the United States of America. We have our very on OK bomber, folks that take Civvy models of the AK 47 (real full auto machine guns, AK 47's, are hard to get) in semi auto...very deadly and high cyclic firing rate, and those folks that pitch a burning can of gas into a crowded dance hall and kill dozens and even hundreds, and folks that drive their cars into crowds of people, even little children, and people that slip into homes at night, or grab children in the street in broad daylight...well, I'd say something is setting this off... And WE brag, well some like Doanantor do, in this ng that 90% or more of US families use spanking, yet they consider it provacative and inflammatory of us to bring these two facts into juxtaposition, pretending it's just Cargo Cult Science. Me, I kinda sorta tend to go with the long well proven principle that violence begats violence, and children learn...as well know and use for everything else....by what they see and hear, and witness. 'course how COULD there possibly be a connection between the violence in the country and the 90% spanking...after all, the only folks that do violence are those that were not spanked as children, right? Doan Well, at least you signed it. That's to your credit. Somewhere down under that cringing, terrified child left from your childhood, is an honorable, decent, honest man. I'm sure of it or I wouldn't bother with you. Spanking hurts, just like when I spank you here. Only for a child there's no escape, until they are grown. None. They have to bear it, and they have to find a way to that usually amounts to becoming what you are. Never fear, I won't give up on you, child. You are worth it. Am I getting a bit too inflammatory for yah, old boy? Unlike you who promulgate your thoughtful and fairminded and evenhanded and neutral commentary in these ngs? Sorry 'bout that. I guess the reader will have to, between us, "decide for themselves" as you so often have said. I sure hope they know how to google and google your ass into the light of thruth. Kane |
FLASH - KANE LOCATES OSAMA was Kane9 Kan't Dance continues... was alt.parenting.spanking FAQ
Doan wrote in message ...
Can't argue on facts, Kane Kan't now resort to WMD - Weapons of Mass Distraction! ;-) Droananator, I'll never in a million years have the ability or interest in WMD that you have. Or are you about to answer The Question, settle your claims about "never-spanked" and prove you have the Embry Study? Talk about Wobbly Meandering Diddling; Osama, you have been found. {:- Sure wish your buddies would come to your rescue and ask for the study. Maybe they would be willing to give up the vital and secret information of a page number to settle that you have the study? Or are you just proving once again that you are the Master Baiter? Kane Doan On 9 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: Doan wrote: And wrote, and wrote, and wrote, and still won't write and answer to The Question, nor write the simple requirements for debate on the Embry study, nor provide answers to his claims instead instisting someone else prove him wrong, instead of proving himself right. Now why IS that I wonder, other than the possible excuse of that he is still suffering from the treachery of his parents from childhood? Frequently Asked Questions 1) What is "alt.parenting.spanking?" Alt.parenting.spanking is a newsgroup on Usenet. Usenet is a text based system of distributing postings in a group accessible format, which predates the more recent World Wide Web by many years. So far so good. Some Usenet newsgroups are moderated, which means that one or more individuals determine what and who may post notes to the newsgroup. Others are unmoderated. Alt.parenting.spanking is an unmoderated newsgroup. The following was added by the Doananatory, publically exposing himself yet again. Can't even write a FAQ of his own, he has to plagerize another's work with comments uncited as being by him. Tsk. As such anyone attempting to be a NetCensor should be ignored as such. The just miligned redundant and trite "such" overused by a small boy who can't find his Funkin' White. R R R R R 2) When did a.p.s. first begin? Alt.parenting.spanking began on 8 August 1995. 3) What is the purpose of a.p.s.? Alt.parenting.spanking is a discussion group for the topic of corporal punishment by parents The following is an attempt, of course, by our every so neutral "let them make up their own minds" public Doananism Champ, to limit the discussion and attempt to redefine spanking to HIS liking rather to the truth...that "spanking" has more than one standard of evaluation among the civilised and thinking population. Hence you can see where HIS reasoning and bogus attempts to mislead and deceive come from. in a legitimate fashion as defined by relevant law. And below we return the the poorly plagerized, but in this sentence, correct statement. ALL considerations of spanking, pro or con, are welcomed here. Any notes relating directly or indirectly to the issue of use of corporal punishment by parents are on topic on a.p.s. 4) What is "spanking?" Watch him go, he's in high gear now. Notice the use of an inflammatory term, "inflammatory" when discribing spanking as the use of physical pain...like spanking isn't painful...sure, Doanantor, sure. The reasonable non-inflammatory definition of spanking is the legitimate and legal use of corporal (physical) punishment I do not believe this ng is designed to discuss only the legal aspects, as I said before....it's open to ALL discussion, even the sadly offtopic. in the furtherance of disciplined behavior of a child by the parent or legal guardian of said child. I thought you said, "I let them make up their own mind?' That above is starting to depart pretty extremely from your claimed neutrality, as in you want them to get their own information, but here are trying to fob off a definition of this ng that limits it to the law instead of the entire field of inquiry. I guess your moral and ethical bias is becoming more clear today, is it not? The form and manner of such corporal punishment is widely left to the discretion of said parent or guardian and is fully within their legal rights and prerogatives up to the point such actions violate the legal statutes. Actually, Doan, that is not quite what this ng is about. But your attempt to invade and corrupt the FAQ is certainly what you spanking compulsives are about. Dishonesty to yourselves, each other, and the new visitor is duly noted. chuckle (lest we forget one of our greatest contributors to misinformation and foolishness....let them eat peppers....yeah that's legal, except when it isn't.) I see you are busy pushing "legal" when it isn't all that clear. And we like to talk about when it isn't clear. How does that wash with your "parents doing this and that without interference" etc.? There are those participants in the newsgroup who seek to use inflammatory Your words appear to me an attempt to defame so as to minimize arguments against spanking. Is that really fair, given that you are being inflammatory in your OWN choice of words? Or is it okay when you and the other compulsives do so because YOU are RIGHT? and emotionalistic, hyperbolic, hysterical and misrepresentative terms and agenda-serving definitions which only cloud the issue and shut down any reasonable and meaningful discussion on the topic. The only thing that get's shut down does so in exactly the way I have shut YOU down recently....with the truth. You can't handle the heat. Kitchen door is thataway. Such should just be pointed out as such Ah, the truth of "such"ness is used to hammer the opposition once again. We are, really we are, just devestated by your command of the logic and honorable, as well as intelligent argument. and then ignored as the intentional attempts at disruption that they are. If you are going to talk that way about the pro spankers don't you think folks might get us confused? The only "attempts at disruption" and you just ran into one a few weeks ago, are honest confrontations on vital questions of importance to the safety and well being of children, and in fact, to that of parents as well that could run afoul of the law if they do NOT take considerably more pains to seek out information and advice that goes a bit beyond the Donanation of, "reasonable standards." 5) May spanking fetishists post on a.p.s.? Anyone can post to an unmoderated newsgroup, as there is little that can be done to stop them, but since this is a parenting newsgroup, not a fetish newsgroup, such posts are usually ignored or looked upon with disfavor. Gee, now why would you cut and snip and otherwise mutilate a very reasoned and thoughtful invitation, polite too, to take this stuff elsewhere and substitute this rather vapid bit of prose in it's place? 6)Is "flaming" permitted on a.p.s.? Since a.p.s. is unmoderated, posters are free to heap insults and slanders on whomever they wish. Remember you can be insulting and offensive even if you use only polite and diplomatic terminology and language. Profanity is generally frowned upon as unnecessarily vulgar. Interesting...at least to someone that has studied learning theory. Chris posts a balanced and complete section that focuses on what kind of behavior is wanted, and encourages folks toward that, when you, against the commonest and long known and proven learning theory concepts, focus entirely on the negative, what is not wanted. You do know that such an approach tends to the anchor the negative in one's mind thus causing them to surface that very thing in their behaviors, do you not? No, I guess you do not know that. But then that is common among punishers, those that are attracted to compulsively spanking when a child presents and unwanted behavior. In addition to the obvious division between posters who agree with spanking and posters who are against spanking, there is also a division between posters who desire a civil discourse and posters who desire a "flame war." In the past there have been "flamers" at times on both sides of the spanking issue. Well, so far Chris had a clear description. Let's see what a Doananator can do to mess it up, eh? There are also those who seem to think they are not flaming when they are, Doan, you are OUTed at last, and by yourself. Congrats. who do not think they are being offensive when they are and who do not think they are being uncivil when they are. That's why, when you are doing such a bangup job of it, and likely neurotically blind to your insults, I lay into you to get your attention. Have you not noticed that I get more insulting at times? Just assume you did it again, without knowing it. That IS a common, in fact majority wise, characteristic of people who have been spanked in childhood. They are poor readers of others feelings and thoughts, and very good at deluding themselves they are making polite intelligent and oh so logical contributions, when in fact they are often dishonest, peddlers of ignorance as fact, with a callous regard to the feeling, opinions, and thoughts of others....more especially children. Some of those like you...scuse me, some of those like that have left this ng, and good riddance. And when you grow up you'll find your own little self being treated with considerably more gentleness. Until then, yah earn what's yah get, clearly. Their swaggering selfrighteousness and holier- than-thou arrogance will become readily apparent in short order. Tsk, tsk, little braggart and bully, you shouldn't talk about NNN, the long missing Onanator-lil'O, and other such as such who are such suchers of suchness. 7) What is a "killfile?" A killfile is a simple feature of the software which you use to read Usenet newsgroups. When you place someone's address in your killfile, all of their notes will cease to appear on your screen. This is generally considered to be the Usenet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and humming. For you perhaps. For other's it amounts more to smackin' an annoying humming buzzing mosquito and putting it in a box for safekeeping. The sole purpose of it is to perpetuate one's own ignorance. Or to fight off overwhelming boredom with twits such as you that put yourself in positions of importance you haven't earned or deserve. You Drone Doan. Whether or not you read someone else's posts they can still read yours and respond. Interesting that, once again, Chris posted, under this subject title, a very carefully and intelligently thought out bit of advice. He even points to their use to avoid having to read posts of flame wars, a perfectly legitimate use. When I'm conversing with you, for instance, I am really very okay with folks dumping me into the their twit-filter. They shouldn't have to be annoyed at what I say to annoy you, and they certainly should not be subjected to the flaming embarrassment you perpetrate on yourself with you silly childish "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" antics and evasions. Really. Some of us are embarrassed for you, Droan. 8) Are discussions about Child Protective Services on topic on a.p.s.? Absolutely! Since Children's Protective Services, by whatever local name they go by, deal with issues of child abuse and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. Let me see now. It's not appropriate to claim that spanking is a bad thing because it's legal in all states, (I believe you opened early with this claim) but it's really perfectly okay to post all kinds of things from ascsp because someone it's a legal thing only...hmmm. Am I missing something here. Could you clarify a bit for us, having it both ways wise I mean? No, of course you won't. YOu never do. YOu just are just one of those Plantlike Declarative Whine.....opps, WINNERS! Funny, too. Chris didn't go as far as you in your attempt to control peoples thinking. He used the word "appropriate" alot, making suggestions about what is more likely the place to explore CPS issues, and saying that of course, when you discuss spanking AND CPS then this is also a good place to post to. I think you are trying to make out that Chris is saying something he isn't. Now why WOULD you do that? Why would you keep hammering away at this FAQ if you didn't have some residual and reactionary response to some asswhuppins' Chris gave you in the past? Another newsgroup specifically about CPS is alt.support.child-protective- services, and posts can be made there as well, but since the world is not as ultracompartmentalized as some would wish it to be, such posts are also on topic in a.p.s. That's just what I say...and I say it about trying to compartmentalize into false and fabricated compartments, like "parents can decide on their own" when you can't even answer a simple question about the most vital of information they DO need, other than to use the vague and misleading (since it's admitted even by legal experts as unclear and no standard at all) "reasonable standards." Those who object most strenuously to posts in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. And of course here you are again treating us to your wonderful and pious neutrality. How is it that you don't just tell the to get more information like you do about spanking? AFraid of what they will find if they really shovel enough manure aside and get down to the truth? I hereby invite all who read Doan's smarmy attempt to mislead, once again, to really dig down, and leave the garbage in ascps behind and go to government and scientific and social work studies of this issues of child abuse in this country. It has little to do with the aside he just offered to lead you down....sometimes referred to as The Garden Path. 9) Are binary (image) files appropriate for a.p.s.? Binary files are heavily frowned on throughout Usenet, except in newsgroups expressly designed for the posting of binary files. Please do not post binary files to alt.parenting.spanking or other newsgroups without "binaries" in their names. Compared to the text messages which predominate in Usenet newsgroups, binary files typically take up much larger amounts of memory space and require more downloading time. Some readers of alt.parenting.spanking pay for the online time during which they download new messages to their computers. They will not be amused to discover that more than half of their download consisted of a binary file. I take it back. You ARE honest. You left one issue unchanged. Congrats. Of course how important it was to the issues discussed here that you DO lie about remains the question. Speaking of The Question. How about it? 10) Are fictional stories appropriate for a.p.s.? It is very unlikely that a fictional story of any sort will be appropriate for a.p.s. or widely appreciated by readers of a.p.s. Alt.parenting.spanking is devoted to discussion of how spanking impacts the lives of the current generation of non-fictional children. Unless your fictional story somehow relates in a clear and direct manner to real-life spankings of real-life children, it would be best posted elsewhere. 11) What is a "troll?" In Usenet parlance, a "troll" is someone who posts notes on a newsgroup intending to provoke chaos from others while they skip out and leave the firestorm they created for the regular participants of the newsgroup to deal with. No one likes a troll, generally speaking. You seem to do that every few weeks or so, with your post of a phony FAQ. But then I do not want anyone claiming you are a troll, so here I am. SURPRISE!!!! Ain't we got fun? R R R R R 12) How can I begin posting to a.p.s.? The best way to read and post to a.p.s. is to use a Usenet "newsreader" devoted to the purpose. The "rn" newsreader is primitive but servicable. The "tin" newsreader is recommended. Ask your ISP about accessing Usenet to find out what is available for someone with your internet account. Also Netscape and Outlook have newsreader capabilities and are usually available on most PCs. Yah know, I find this odd little recommendation, not posted by Chris, fascinating. "tin" and "rn" are far more closed or easily firewalled while Outlook, especially the Express model, and somewhat Netscape newsreaders are terribly "porous" to hacking, or should I say cracking. Given your technical expertise wouldn't it be more thoughtful and helpful to recommend more secure and more solidly firewall capable newsreaders such as Agent, or even the latest addition of Outlook, specifically, that comes with XP? Oh, well, probably no big thing. Crackers are pretty much into everyone's workstation that post to and recieve directly from Usenet. I guess you forgot to recommend the most secure way of reading mail of all....a web based, such as google, newsreader. Glad I can be of assistance. Alt.parenting.spanking may also be accessed from the world wide web through any number of newsgroup access sites such as Remarq, Google and others. Some charge for their services, and others do not. Hey, guess what. You just DID get one over on Chris. He is remiss in not updating his FAQ file on this. I'll try to give him a heads up. He still has google as opting out on this ng. ...though he does point to the update page. You want to email him or shall I? 13. Is "terrorism" an appropriate topic for a.p.s? Of course, not. Those who continued to post on the topic of terrorism are spamming the group. They are showing that they have no respect for the participants of a.p.s! Well, until you start to look into the parenting practice of the nations that seem to produce and extraordinarily high proportion of terrorists, which also includes one of the nations with nearly the highest incident of admitted spanking in the world, the United States of America. We have our very on OK bomber, folks that take Civvy models of the AK 47 (real full auto machine guns, AK 47's, are hard to get) in semi auto...very deadly and high cyclic firing rate, and those folks that pitch a burning can of gas into a crowded dance hall and kill dozens and even hundreds, and folks that drive their cars into crowds of people, even little children, and people that slip into homes at night, or grab children in the street in broad daylight...well, I'd say something is setting this off... And WE brag, well some like Doanantor do, in this ng that 90% or more of US families use spanking, yet they consider it provacative and inflammatory of us to bring these two facts into juxtaposition, pretending it's just Cargo Cult Science. Me, I kinda sorta tend to go with the long well proven principle that violence begats violence, and children learn...as well know and use for everything else....by what they see and hear, and witness. 'course how COULD there possibly be a connection between the violence in the country and the 90% spanking...after all, the only folks that do violence are those that were not spanked as children, right? Doan Well, at least you signed it. That's to your credit. Somewhere down under that cringing, terrified child left from your childhood, is an honorable, decent, honest man. I'm sure of it or I wouldn't bother with you. Spanking hurts, just like when I spank you here. Only for a child there's no escape, until they are grown. None. They have to bear it, and they have to find a way to that usually amounts to becoming what you are. Never fear, I won't give up on you, child. You are worth it. Am I getting a bit too inflammatory for yah, old boy? Unlike you who promulgate your thoughtful and fairminded and evenhanded and neutral commentary in these ngs? Sorry 'bout that. I guess the reader will have to, between us, "decide for themselves" as you so often have said. I sure hope they know how to google and google your ass into the light of thruth. Kane |
Kane9 Kan't Dance continues... was alt.parenting.spanking FAQ
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 23:03:50 -0800, Doan wrote:
Can't argue on facts, I don't recall offering to except as in my challenge to you, and my criteria for debate. YOU have failed to meet the criteria. You don't want me going back on my word and opening debate against my honor bound limits, now do you, Droan? Kane Kan't now resort to WMD - Weapons of Mass Distraction! ;-) And WMD is certainly not a distraction from The Simply Question...nosireebobb....r r r r r r. snicker So here's a good faith disclosure, just to prime your little pump. (Can you imagine me expecting good faith with YOU? R R R) The beginning page number for the demographics of the study subjects is 11, with the title subject as "Method" and below it, the word "Subjects." There now, was that all that hard? Naw. I could answer it, why couldn't you? Now, Doan, show us your stuff. It's your turn to show what a moral and ethical giant you are, in service to getting on with the important debate that you so want parents to have.....more information, right? On what page does Dr. Embry mention the word Wilkening? You DO want to prove me a liar, right? So tell us, do you think I don't have the study still? Do you believe I am making up the number and information from the study? And is Wilkening the name of my cat? And will you EVER answer The Simple Question, and clarify your silly schoolboy taunt of "never-spanked" that you challenge me to disprove (thereby showing your debating ethics...as a nonexistent charge or claim cannot be disproved) and answer a simple question that will prove your claim you have The Study? Naw, you don't want to debate the Embry study. You want as much distance and fogging as possible between you and The Simple Question. Want to go back to insisting that Chris and LaVonne join in now? Or could you be more creative and come up with another colorful dodge? Doan Kane {:- On 9 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: Doan wrote: And wrote, and wrote, and wrote, and still won't write and answer to The Question, nor write the simple requirements for debate on the Embry study, nor provide answers to his claims instead instisting someone else prove him wrong, instead of proving himself right. Now why IS that I wonder, other than the possible excuse of that he is still suffering from the treachery of his parents from childhood? Frequently Asked Questions 1) What is "alt.parenting.spanking?" Alt.parenting.spanking is a newsgroup on Usenet. Usenet is a text based system of distributing postings in a group accessible format, which predates the more recent World Wide Web by many years. So far so good. Some Usenet newsgroups are moderated, which means that one or more individuals determine what and who may post notes to the newsgroup. Others are unmoderated. Alt.parenting.spanking is an unmoderated newsgroup. The following was added by the Doananatory, publically exposing himself yet again. Can't even write a FAQ of his own, he has to plagerize another's work with comments uncited as being by him. Tsk. As such anyone attempting to be a NetCensor should be ignored as such. The just miligned redundant and trite "such" overused by a small boy who can't find his Funkin' White. R R R R R 2) When did a.p.s. first begin? Alt.parenting.spanking began on 8 August 1995. 3) What is the purpose of a.p.s.? Alt.parenting.spanking is a discussion group for the topic of corporal punishment by parents The following is an attempt, of course, by our every so neutral "let them make up their own minds" public Doananism Champ, to limit the discussion and attempt to redefine spanking to HIS liking rather to the truth...that "spanking" has more than one standard of evaluation among the civilised and thinking population. Hence you can see where HIS reasoning and bogus attempts to mislead and deceive come from. in a legitimate fashion as defined by relevant law. And below we return the the poorly plagerized, but in this sentence, correct statement. ALL considerations of spanking, pro or con, are welcomed here. Any notes relating directly or indirectly to the issue of use of corporal punishment by parents are on topic on a.p.s. 4) What is "spanking?" Watch him go, he's in high gear now. Notice the use of an inflammatory term, "inflammatory" when discribing spanking as the use of physical pain...like spanking isn't painful...sure, Doanantor, sure. The reasonable non-inflammatory definition of spanking is the legitimate and legal use of corporal (physical) punishment I do not believe this ng is designed to discuss only the legal aspects, as I said before....it's open to ALL discussion, even the sadly offtopic. in the furtherance of disciplined behavior of a child by the parent or legal guardian of said child. I thought you said, "I let them make up their own mind?' That above is starting to depart pretty extremely from your claimed neutrality, as in you want them to get their own information, but here are trying to fob off a definition of this ng that limits it to the law instead of the entire field of inquiry. I guess your moral and ethical bias is becoming more clear today, is it not? The form and manner of such corporal punishment is widely left to the discretion of said parent or guardian and is fully within their legal rights and prerogatives up to the point such actions violate the legal statutes. Actually, Doan, that is not quite what this ng is about. But your attempt to invade and corrupt the FAQ is certainly what you spanking compulsives are about. Dishonesty to yourselves, each other, and the new visitor is duly noted. chuckle (lest we forget one of our greatest contributors to misinformation and foolishness....let them eat peppers....yeah that's legal, except when it isn't.) I see you are busy pushing "legal" when it isn't all that clear. And we like to talk about when it isn't clear. How does that wash with your "parents doing this and that without interference" etc.? There are those participants in the newsgroup who seek to use inflammatory Your words appear to me an attempt to defame so as to minimize arguments against spanking. Is that really fair, given that you are being inflammatory in your OWN choice of words? Or is it okay when you and the other compulsives do so because YOU are RIGHT? and emotionalistic, hyperbolic, hysterical and misrepresentative terms and agenda-serving definitions which only cloud the issue and shut down any reasonable and meaningful discussion on the topic. The only thing that get's shut down does so in exactly the way I have shut YOU down recently....with the truth. You can't handle the heat. Kitchen door is thataway. Such should just be pointed out as such Ah, the truth of "such"ness is used to hammer the opposition once again. We are, really we are, just devestated by your command of the logic and honorable, as well as intelligent argument. and then ignored as the intentional attempts at disruption that they are. If you are going to talk that way about the pro spankers don't you think folks might get us confused? The only "attempts at disruption" and you just ran into one a few weeks ago, are honest confrontations on vital questions of importance to the safety and well being of children, and in fact, to that of parents as well that could run afoul of the law if they do NOT take considerably more pains to seek out information and advice that goes a bit beyond the Donanation of, "reasonable standards." 5) May spanking fetishists post on a.p.s.? Anyone can post to an unmoderated newsgroup, as there is little that can be done to stop them, but since this is a parenting newsgroup, not a fetish newsgroup, such posts are usually ignored or looked upon with disfavor. Gee, now why would you cut and snip and otherwise mutilate a very reasoned and thoughtful invitation, polite too, to take this stuff elsewhere and substitute this rather vapid bit of prose in it's place? 6)Is "flaming" permitted on a.p.s.? Since a.p.s. is unmoderated, posters are free to heap insults and slanders on whomever they wish. Remember you can be insulting and offensive even if you use only polite and diplomatic terminology and language. Profanity is generally frowned upon as unnecessarily vulgar. Interesting...at least to someone that has studied learning theory. Chris posts a balanced and complete section that focuses on what kind of behavior is wanted, and encourages folks toward that, when you, against the commonest and long known and proven learning theory concepts, focus entirely on the negative, what is not wanted. You do know that such an approach tends to the anchor the negative in one's mind thus causing them to surface that very thing in their behaviors, do you not? No, I guess you do not know that. But then that is common among punishers, those that are attracted to compulsively spanking when a child presents and unwanted behavior. In addition to the obvious division between posters who agree with spanking and posters who are against spanking, there is also a division between posters who desire a civil discourse and posters who desire a "flame war." In the past there have been "flamers" at times on both sides of the spanking issue. Well, so far Chris had a clear description. Let's see what a Doananator can do to mess it up, eh? There are also those who seem to think they are not flaming when they are, Doan, you are OUTed at last, and by yourself. Congrats. who do not think they are being offensive when they are and who do not think they are being uncivil when they are. That's why, when you are doing such a bangup job of it, and likely neurotically blind to your insults, I lay into you to get your attention. Have you not noticed that I get more insulting at times? Just assume you did it again, without knowing it. That IS a common, in fact majority wise, characteristic of people who have been spanked in childhood. They are poor readers of others feelings and thoughts, and very good at deluding themselves they are making polite intelligent and oh so logical contributions, when in fact they are often dishonest, peddlers of ignorance as fact, with a callous regard to the feeling, opinions, and thoughts of others....more especially children. Some of those like you...scuse me, some of those like that have left this ng, and good riddance. And when you grow up you'll find your own little self being treated with considerably more gentleness. Until then, yah earn what's yah get, clearly. Their swaggering selfrighteousness and holier- than-thou arrogance will become readily apparent in short order. Tsk, tsk, little braggart and bully, you shouldn't talk about NNN, the long missing Onanator-lil'O, and other such as such who are such suchers of suchness. 7) What is a "killfile?" A killfile is a simple feature of the software which you use to read Usenet newsgroups. When you place someone's address in your killfile, all of their notes will cease to appear on your screen. This is generally considered to be the Usenet equivalent of sticking one's fingers in one's ears and humming. For you perhaps. For other's it amounts more to smackin' an annoying humming buzzing mosquito and putting it in a box for safekeeping. The sole purpose of it is to perpetuate one's own ignorance. Or to fight off overwhelming boredom with twits such as you that put yourself in positions of importance you haven't earned or deserve. You Drone Doan. Whether or not you read someone else's posts they can still read yours and respond. Interesting that, once again, Chris posted, under this subject title, a very carefully and intelligently thought out bit of advice. He even points to their use to avoid having to read posts of flame wars, a perfectly legitimate use. When I'm conversing with you, for instance, I am really very okay with folks dumping me into the their twit-filter. They shouldn't have to be annoyed at what I say to annoy you, and they certainly should not be subjected to the flaming embarrassment you perpetrate on yourself with you silly childish "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" antics and evasions. Really. Some of us are embarrassed for you, Droan. 8) Are discussions about Child Protective Services on topic on a.p.s.? Absolutely! Since Children's Protective Services, by whatever local name they go by, deal with issues of child abuse and since several extreme position posters continue to claim that all spanking is child abuse, even that which is clearly legal in all fifty states of the union, the discussion of CPS is entirely on topic, because people should be entirely aware of what exactly they are doing and causing if they report someone to one of these agencies. Let me see now. It's not appropriate to claim that spanking is a bad thing because it's legal in all states, (I believe you opened early with this claim) but it's really perfectly okay to post all kinds of things from ascsp because someone it's a legal thing only...hmmm. Am I missing something here. Could you clarify a bit for us, having it both ways wise I mean? No, of course you won't. YOu never do. YOu just are just one of those Plantlike Declarative Whine.....opps, WINNERS! Funny, too. Chris didn't go as far as you in your attempt to control peoples thinking. He used the word "appropriate" alot, making suggestions about what is more likely the place to explore CPS issues, and saying that of course, when you discuss spanking AND CPS then this is also a good place to post to. I think you are trying to make out that Chris is saying something he isn't. Now why WOULD you do that? Why would you keep hammering away at this FAQ if you didn't have some residual and reactionary response to some asswhuppins' Chris gave you in the past? Another newsgroup specifically about CPS is alt.support.child-protective- services, and posts can be made there as well, but since the world is not as ultracompartmentalized as some would wish it to be, such posts are also on topic in a.p.s. That's just what I say...and I say it about trying to compartmentalize into false and fabricated compartments, like "parents can decide on their own" when you can't even answer a simple question about the most vital of information they DO need, other than to use the vague and misleading (since it's admitted even by legal experts as unclear and no standard at all) "reasonable standards." Those who object most strenuously to posts in the newsgroup about CPS are those who tend to advocate or play apologist for those agencies and do not wish the general public to know the truth about these agencies. And of course here you are again treating us to your wonderful and pious neutrality. How is it that you don't just tell the to get more information like you do about spanking? AFraid of what they will find if they really shovel enough manure aside and get down to the truth? I hereby invite all who read Doan's smarmy attempt to mislead, once again, to really dig down, and leave the garbage in ascps behind and go to government and scientific and social work studies of this issues of child abuse in this country. It has little to do with the aside he just offered to lead you down....sometimes referred to as The Garden Path. 9) Are binary (image) files appropriate for a.p.s.? Binary files are heavily frowned on throughout Usenet, except in newsgroups expressly designed for the posting of binary files. Please do not post binary files to alt.parenting.spanking or other newsgroups without "binaries" in their names. Compared to the text messages which predominate in Usenet newsgroups, binary files typically take up much larger amounts of memory space and require more downloading time. Some readers of alt.parenting.spanking pay for the online time during which they download new messages to their computers. They will not be amused to discover that more than half of their download consisted of a binary file. I take it back. You ARE honest. You left one issue unchanged. Congrats. Of course how important it was to the issues discussed here that you DO lie about remains the question. Speaking of The Question. How about it? 10) Are fictional stories appropriate for a.p.s.? It is very unlikely that a fictional story of any sort will be appropriate for a.p.s. or widely appreciated by readers of a.p.s. Alt.parenting.spanking is devoted to discussion of how spanking impacts the lives of the current generation of non-fictional children. Unless your fictional story somehow relates in a clear and direct manner to real-life spankings of real-life children, it would be best posted elsewhere. 11) What is a "troll?" In Usenet parlance, a "troll" is someone who posts notes on a newsgroup intending to provoke chaos from others while they skip out and leave the firestorm they created for the regular participants of the newsgroup to deal with. No one likes a troll, generally speaking. You seem to do that every few weeks or so, with your post of a phony FAQ. But then I do not want anyone claiming you are a troll, so here I am. SURPRISE!!!! Ain't we got fun? R R R R R 12) How can I begin posting to a.p.s.? The best way to read and post to a.p.s. is to use a Usenet "newsreader" devoted to the purpose. The "rn" newsreader is primitive but servicable. The "tin" newsreader is recommended. Ask your ISP about accessing Usenet to find out what is available for someone with your internet account. Also Netscape and Outlook have newsreader capabilities and are usually available on most PCs. Yah know, I find this odd little recommendation, not posted by Chris, fascinating. "tin" and "rn" are far more closed or easily firewalled while Outlook, especially the Express model, and somewhat Netscape newsreaders are terribly "porous" to hacking, or should I say cracking. Given your technical expertise wouldn't it be more thoughtful and helpful to recommend more secure and more solidly firewall capable newsreaders such as Agent, or even the latest addition of Outlook, specifically, that comes with XP? Oh, well, probably no big thing. Crackers are pretty much into everyone's workstation that post to and recieve directly from Usenet. I guess you forgot to recommend the most secure way of reading mail of all....a web based, such as google, newsreader. Glad I can be of assistance. Alt.parenting.spanking may also be accessed from the world wide web through any number of newsgroup access sites such as Remarq, Google and others. Some charge for their services, and others do not. Hey, guess what. You just DID get one over on Chris. He is remiss in not updating his FAQ file on this. I'll try to give him a heads up. He still has google as opting out on this ng. ...though he does point to the update page. You want to email him or shall I? 13. Is "terrorism" an appropriate topic for a.p.s? Of course, not. Those who continued to post on the topic of terrorism are spamming the group. They are showing that they have no respect for the participants of a.p.s! Well, until you start to look into the parenting practice of the nations that seem to produce and extraordinarily high proportion of terrorists, which also includes one of the nations with nearly the highest incident of admitted spanking in the world, the United States of America. We have our very on OK bomber, folks that take Civvy models of the AK 47 (real full auto machine guns, AK 47's, are hard to get) in semi auto...very deadly and high cyclic firing rate, and those folks that pitch a burning can of gas into a crowded dance hall and kill dozens and even hundreds, and folks that drive their cars into crowds of people, even little children, and people that slip into homes at night, or grab children in the street in broad daylight...well, I'd say something is setting this off... And WE brag, well some like Doanantor do, in this ng that 90% or more of US families use spanking, yet they consider it provacative and inflammatory of us to bring these two facts into juxtaposition, pretending it's just Cargo Cult Science. Me, I kinda sorta tend to go with the long well proven principle that violence begats violence, and children learn...as well know and use for everything else....by what they see and hear, and witness. 'course how COULD there possibly be a connection between the violence in the country and the 90% spanking...after all, the only folks that do violence are those that were not spanked as children, right? Doan Well, at least you signed it. That's to your credit. Somewhere down under that cringing, terrified child left from your childhood, is an honorable, decent, honest man. I'm sure of it or I wouldn't bother with you. Spanking hurts, just like when I spank you here. Only for a child there's no escape, until they are grown. None. They have to bear it, and they have to find a way to that usually amounts to becoming what you are. Never fear, I won't give up on you, child. You are worth it. Am I getting a bit too inflammatory for yah, old boy? Unlike you who promulgate your thoughtful and fairminded and evenhanded and neutral commentary in these ngs? Sorry 'bout that. I guess the reader will have to, between us, "decide for themselves" as you so often have said. I sure hope they know how to google and google your ass into the light of thruth. Kane |
Kane9 Kan't Dance continues... was alt.parenting.spanking FAQ
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:57:56 -0800, Doan wrote:
On 27 Jan 2004, Kane wrote: On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:12:17 -0800, Doan wrote: ....more evasive babble. Little boy, I been on yer dance card for many weeks now but you, shyly peeking from behind your dance seem reluctant to grant me the dance YOU invited me to. Why is that, I wonder? More Kane9 Kan't dance. How pathetic! :-0 I'm not the one refusing the answer to simple questions that would prove conclusively you have the report. You wouldn't even respond when I offered to answer your questions as long as you provided a page number to the location in the report...now why would dodge something so easy that could nail me conclusively I wonder. R R R R R So were you lying or just being stupid, Kane9? ;-) So are you just dodging, or just weaseling, AGAIN, Doananator? Can't answer the Question, Kane9? I don't see that you asked one. What Question are you referring to? I can and have answer my The Question. And it's inassailable. The only way you could prove MY answer wrong is to prove you have the line located and can define it in terms that are practically useful to parents in their day to day parenting....which is what question asked. I didn't ask for a vague rule of thumb, but a precise definition on a par with the exactness of a speed limit sign. Or did you not understand the question? Doan............ Droany.......who to turn to if you want an experienced escape hatch builder. Kane ...who to turn to if you want an experienced kicker of weasel-ass through escape hatches. |
Kane9 Kan't Dance continues... was alt.parenting.spankingFAQ
Barking like a dog, Kane8? Doan a123sdg321 On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:57:56 -0800, Doan wrote: On 27 Jan 2004, Kane wrote: On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:12:17 -0800, Doan wrote: ....more evasive babble. Little boy, I been on yer dance card for many weeks now but you, shyly peeking from behind your dance seem reluctant to grant me the dance YOU invited me to. Why is that, I wonder? More Kane9 Kan't dance. How pathetic! :-0 I'm not the one refusing the answer to simple questions that would prove conclusively you have the report. You wouldn't even respond when I offered to answer your questions as long as you provided a page number to the location in the report...now why would dodge something so easy that could nail me conclusively I wonder. R R R R R So were you lying or just being stupid, Kane9? ;-) So are you just dodging, or just weaseling, AGAIN, Doananator? Can't answer the Question, Kane9? I don't see that you asked one. What Question are you referring to? I can and have answer my The Question. And it's inassailable. The only way you could prove MY answer wrong is to prove you have the line located and can define it in terms that are practically useful to parents in their day to day parenting....which is what question asked. I didn't ask for a vague rule of thumb, but a precise definition on a par with the exactness of a speed limit sign. Or did you not understand the question? Doan............ Droany.......who to turn to if you want an experienced escape hatch builder. Kane ...who to turn to if you want an experienced kicker of weasel-ass through escape hatches. |
Kane9 Kan't Dance continues... was alt.parenting.spankingFAQ
Doan wrote:
Barking like a dog, Kane8? ---------------------------- The **** is in your mouth, you're looking in the mirror. See the reflections! Steve |
Kane9 Kan't Dance continues... was alt.parenting.spankingFAQ
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: Doan wrote: Barking like a dog, Kane8? ---------------------------- The **** is in your mouth, you're looking in the mirror. See the reflections! Steve I see you! ;-) Doan |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:58 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ParentingBanter.com