Archive-name: rec-autos/part1

[most recent changes, 15 March 1993: addition of alt.autos.karting -- rpw]

               === Welcome to Rec.Autos.* ===

This article is sent out automatically each month, and contains a general
description of the purpose of each of the automotive newsgroups, and
some suggested guidelines for discussions.  The keywords `Monthly Posting'
will always appear to make killing this article easy for users of
newsreaders with kill facilities.  This article is posted to all autos
groups, but followups are directed only to rec.autos.  If you don't
understand what this means, ask your system administrator for help, or at
least for copies of the newuser documentation.  Failing that, please
subscribe to the newsgroup news.announce.newusers and read the
documentation provided there.

Introduction to the Rec.Autos newsgroup hierarchy:

rec.autos.tech

is intended for technical discussions of automobiles, their design,
construction, diagnosis, and service.  Other discussions are largely
inappropriate, especially For Sale ads.

rec.autos.sport

is intended for discussion of legal, organized competition involving
automobiles.  Technical discussions are appropriate insofar as they apply
to competition vehicles.  Discussion from either of two viewpoints,
spectator and participant, is encouraged.  Arguments about sports cars are
largely inappropriate, as are most other discussions.  For Sale ads are
inappropriate unless they are for competition vehicles and/or equipment.
Discussions of illegal events are marginal; one should probably avoid
advocating breaking the law.  (remember, the FBI reads Usenet!)

rec.autos.driving

is intended for discussions related to the driving of automobiles.
Also, if you must discuss 55 vs. 65, or radar detectors, or <insert
your pet driving peeve> boneheads, do it here.

rec.autos.vw

is intended for discussion of issues related to the use and ownership
of automobiles manufactured by Volkswagen (this includes VWs, Audis,
Seats, etc.)  It was created on the grounds that the info-vw mailing
list was very successful.  It should not be presumed from the existence
of this group that it is appropriate to create many groups to cover many
different marques; groups specific to individual marques should only be
created on demonstration of sufficient interest, via some avenue such as
a mailing list.

rec.audio.car

is not properly part of the rec.autos.* hierarchy.  it is, however,
the correct place for discussion of automotive audio equipment, and
so is mentioned here.

rec.autos.antique

is intended for the discussion of older cars (usually more than 25 years
old, although this is not a hard-and-fast rule.)

alt.hotrod

is not part of the hierarchy, but also of potential interest to the
rec.autos reader.  it is gatewayed to the moderated hotrod mailing
list, and is for serious discussion of modifying and developing
performance vehicles.

alt.autos.rod-n-custom

also not part of the `official' hierarchy; devoted to that peculiar
American hobby of customizing older cars.

alt.autos.karting

for the discussion of the popular motorsport and hobby, karting.

rec.autos

is intended to capture discussion on all other automotive topics.


Crossposting:

Crossposting occurs when more than one newsgroup name is included on
the Newsgroups: line in the article header; such articles will appear
in all of the newsgroups listed.

Crossposting is one of the most misunderstood and misused facilities on
Usenet.  You should only post to a group because you feel an article is
appropriate; you should NEVER crosspost just to reach a particular
audience.  This distinction is subtle, but important.  Radar Detector
articles, for example, are more-or-less appropriate in rec.autos.  They are
almost never appropriate in sci.electronics or rec.ham-radio, and the fact
that you might want to reach the audience in sci.electronics or
rec.ham-radio is NOT adequate justification for posting to either group.

Crossposting between any or all of the rec.autos.* groups is usually
inappropriate; if you find yourself doing so, consider whether or not it is
truly advisable, before sending your article.  Consider setting Followup-To:
to point to only one newsgroup if you feel you must crosspost.

Crossposting between rec.autos.* and misc.consumers is chancy at best; in
particular flame wars over the speed limit in the US and/or the use of
radar detectors should NEVER be crossposted between any of these groups.

Most readers of sci.electronics and rec.radio.* couldn't care less about
the police radar and radar detector arguments that go on endlessly in
rec.autos.

It is an excellent idea to check the Newsgroups: and Followup-to:  lines of
articles before posting a followup.  In particular, be wary of posting to
misc.test, rec.arts.startrek.*, or talk.bizarre, or any combination of these
three.  The life you save may be your own.

Distribution:

There is a field in the header of any news article which allows you to
(partially) control where the article goes; it is called the Distribution
field.  It may be very useful for many reasons; it should also serve
as a reminder that news is a very large and widespread system.

The distribution of rec.autos.* is fairly extensive.  As of this writing, 
the Automotive newsgroups are known to reach most of Europe, Australia,
New Zealand, and some locations in Japan.  With this in mind, I offer the
following hints about use of the Distribution: field in your article
headers, and on article content.

1) Please take care not to send for-sale ads about clapped out Ford
Mavericks in New Jersey to France or California; i doubt that anyone in
either place will care, except for my girlfriend, who for some strange
reason likes Mavericks (but only 4-door Mavericks, at that.)

2) When posting technical questions, please include the market for which
your car was manufactured.  For example, there are a number of differences
between a European-market Ford Escort and a US-market Escort.  Likewise,
all 1750cc and early 2000cc Alfa Romeos reached the US with Spica Fuel
injection; European market cars usually got carbs (often Webers).  These
differences can be important to your readers; make your situation clear.
Failure to do so can lead to pointless flame wars and a significant
spread of misinformation.

3) Be careful about your capacities and specifications when posting;
in the US we get a mix of Metric and English system values, whereas
Europe is almost entirely on the Metric system.  A future edition
of this monthly posting will contain a list of commonly-used
abbreviations that may not be known in some places that rec.autos
reaches; this cuts both ways so let us not be parochial about it.

4) Use the Distribution: field to limit where your article goes, when
possible.  Within North America, the values na (north america), can
(canada), and usa may be used.  in addition, the two-letter state
abbreviations of the US are supported in some cases; e.g. if i wanted
to send an article only to New York and New Jersey, i could put
"ny,nj" in a Distribution field.  note that multiple, comma-separated
values are legal.  these distribution fields vary widely, however, so
you should check with your local sysadmin to find out what is likely
to be supported in your area.

The Dangers of Overgeneralization:

To amplify a warning from the distribution section of this article:
Be wary of making foolish assumptions about all cars, tires, etc.  What is
true for a 1973 Buick with a 455cid engine may be quite utterly wrong for a
1976 Honda with a 1200cc engine.  Headlight laws in Sweden are decidedly
different from those in Idaho.

The Need for Adequate Specification:

When you ask a question, please give a reasonable amount of information;
e.g., if you have a question about your Honda, please specify year,
model, engine size, etc.  Otherwise, most answers to your question may be
quite useless.


Concerning Lemons:

At one time or another, every auto manufacturer has manufactured a lemon or
two; even Honda admits to this.  Please don't waste everyone's time by
announcing to the world that your `brand x' automobile is terrible, so all
`brand x' automobiles are terrible, so no one should ever buy a car from
the `brand x' company.  Such articles are worse than useless, because they
cause substantial wasted bandwidth while carrying little or no useful
information.


Concerning Flames:

As much as we might wish it, a flame-free newsgroup is something that most
likely will never occur.  Here are some guidelines for flames and how
to deal with them (a list of flame-prone topics follows in the next section
of this posting):

If you post something truly obnoxious and inflammatory, don't imagine for a
minute that including the words `No Flames' will work.  It won't, and
you'll get exactly what you deserve.

If you're going to flame, you're more likely to get away with it if you can
cite a fact or maybe a well-known reference.  No one is likely to believe
bald, unsupported assertions.

Be careful about who you choose to insult.  Consider not insulting anyone.


Asking the Question:

It is a bad idea to post a question and end it with a phrase like `Please
send email, I don't read this group'.  It is a much better idea to
end the question with `Please send email, if there is sufficient interest
I'll summarize the results in a later posting.  I may miss posted responses
to this request'.

Answering the Question:

If someone wants to hop up their Yugo, don't tell them to get a Mustang.
Either be silent, or give them useful advice.  If someone wants advice on
defending a speeding ticket, don't tell them to obey the law next time --
it's offensive, presumes guilt which is not proven, and doesn't directly
address the original question.  In general, don't post in order to see
your words in print, and don't post in order to enjoy feeling smug and
self-righteous.


Stale and/or Inflammatory Topics:

Certain topics are considered stale by `old timers'; while discussion of
them is certainly ok, and new, factual information is welcome, ravings
about them are extremely tiresome, and may get the person who posts them
ignored altogether.  Some topics are naturally inflammatory; it is
difficult if not impossible to have meaningful discussion of them.  Some
of these topics include the following:

1)  the 55mph speed limit in the US: Pro and Con

2)  discussions about the morality and legality of the sale and usage of
    radar detectors.

3)  discussions over which radar detector is best.

4)  discussions over what is a sports car (this is one reason why
    rec.autos.sport is not a `sports car' group -- everyone would argue
    about what constitutes a `sports car'.)

5)  disputes over whether or not US Federal law protects the driver's
    right to own and operate a radar detector

6)  `Buy American' discussions

7)  `clever' bumper stickers and personalized license plates

8)  <insert nationality here> cars are terrible

9)  What kind of car did Maxwell Smart drive?
      [when I have a complete, accurate answer it will be added to the
          commonly-asked questions article which is also posted monthly.
          Until then, please don't waste bandwidth on this topic. -- rpw]



Please direct comments and suggestions about this article to:

     welty@cabot.balltown.cma.com