Well, I had no idea what a emoticon was until now. I searched on Google and
found this.

Happy person
Sad person
:-) Happy person with a nose
:-( Sad person with a nose
:---( Person who is sad because he or she has a large nose
Person who is sad because he or she has a large fish for a nose
:-D Person laughing
:-D* Person laughing so hard that he or she does not notice that a
5-legged spider is hanging from his or her lip
:-| Person unsure of which long-distance company to choose
>8-O-(&) Person just realizing that he or she has a tapeworm
;-) Person winking
.-) Person who can still smile despite losing an eyeball
:-0WW Person vomiting a series of Slim Jims
:-Q Person who just had cybersex and is now enjoying a post-coital
cybercigarette
>:-Q -... Person who was enjoying a post-coital cigarette until he
suddenly noticed, to his alarm, that there is some kind of discharge
dribbling from his cybermember
:-{8 Person who is unhappy with the results of her breast-enlargement
surgery
:V:-| Person who cannot figure out why nobody wants to talk to him or
her, little suspecting that there is an alligator on his or her head
~oE]:-| Fisherperson heading for market with a basket on his or her
head containing a three-legged octopus that is giving off smell rays
>:-[ -{9 Person who is none too pleased to be giving birth to a
squirrel

"Dale Williams" > wrote in message
...
> As one of the resident self-appointed AFW busybodies, I feel once again
> compelled to make a post re courtesy. In doing so, I'm not trying to point
> fingers, nor am I trying to sidestep my own responsibility in this latest
> donnybrook. It's just good to step back sometimes and remember some
general
> guidelines. A lot of this is distilled from earlier posts, so might not
apply
> to recent discussions. But still, IMHO, worth remembering.
>
> 1) Personally, I find it less than helpful to make generalizations about
people
> based on where they live, what they do outside wine, etc. And don't be too
sure
> you know someone's nationality or residence- at least 3 assumptions made
> recently were incorrect (to the best of my knowledge).
> 2) Let's try to cut the personal comments, OK? If you don't like someone,
> filter their posts.
> 3) Try to avoid stating opinions as certainties. The use of terms like "in
my
> opinion" (IMO, IMHO, IMNSVHO, etc.) add nuance to statements which might
> otherwise irritate or offend.
> 4) If you're being funny or teasing, use emoticons. If someone uses a
smile or
> wink emoticon, take a breath before you get offended by their words!
> 5) Please try to not relive old arguments.
> 6)Try to be precise if you can. But if someone isn't, correct only if
there's a
> real possibilty of confusion, or if you feel it can contribute to the
general
> readership's wine knowledge.
> 7)This is Usenet , a tool for discussion. Don't expect to post something
w/o
> possibility of someone refuting it.
> 8) No one is superior (In My Humble Opinion) based on either the
simplicity or
> elegance of what they eat or drink. Isn't this group big enough for
someone to
> have Shiraz with BBQed chicken and another to have rack of lamb with a
fine
> Pauillac? Does it somehow offend you to read about a meal you wouldn't eat
> yourself?
> 9)New Folks: you're here to learn, right? So if someone who has been
serious
> about wine for many years corrects you, learn from it, don't get your
feelings
> hurt.
> 10) Old folks (speaking from perspective of how long you've been on AFW ,
you
> can be new at 66 or old at 26 in my view): remember you were new (to wine
and
> AFW) at some point, too. Correct if need be, but let's try to do so
graciously.
>
> 11) Newbies: we welcome your participation (this is speaking as someone
who has
> participated for a few years, I'm neither an old-timer or a newbie). But
as in
> ANY social situation, whether on or off line, it is wisest not to attack a
> respected member of a community while a newbie, it really won't win you
any
> points.
>
> So there. I'm sure I've offended a few people, including some I regard as
> "friends" (in the newsgroup sense). But please try to take these as
general
> thoughts, not accusations or fingerpointing. And as I said, I'm aware that
I
> was a participant in the Venice discussion, no better than many others.
>
> Please do not respond with posts about " well poster X broke number 3
before I
> broke number 2", or even worse "the (insert Europeans or Americans)
ignored
> number 6". Let's try to move forward with a modicum of grace, ok?
>
> Dale
> PS:I'll add an excellent post Mark Lipton wrote a while ago (bad word wrap
edit
> my fault):
> "Over the past few days, there has been a mini-spate of people
takingexception
> to the posts of others in this group. As I noted in anotherpost, from my
> perspective this group has operated with a minimal amountof interpersonal
> friction (for the most part) since I first started reading it in 1999. I
think
> I speak for everyone here when I say thatwe all want to *encourage* others
to
> post freely and without fear of"reprisal," so I now offer some advice for
> negotiating this newsgroupwith a minimum of Strurm und Drang:
> 1. Please keep in mind that many of the contributors to alt.food.winedo
not
> speak English as their first language. Their comments may lacksome of the
> nuances of native Anglophones' and consequently appear harshor rude where
in
> fact no such intention exists.
> 2. Internet-based communication is treated by most people as
informal(like
> spoken communication) despite the fact that it's written and solacks the
> inflection of spoken communication -- this too can lead tomistaken
impressions
> of the writer's intent. This is one reason why"smilies" and other
emoticons
> have been embraced on Usenet. However,not all use them when they should,
so we
> must also take all comments onUsenet with a thick skin and open mind, as
we are
> forced to read intothose written words the emotional content that written
words
> lack.
> 3. The pseudoanonymity of Usenet also encourages some to behave
> moreaggressively than they would in actual conversation. Taken to
theexteme,
> this results in that phenomenon known as the Usenet "troll":someone who
> purposely tries to create havoc in newsgroups throughpersonal attacks and
> ridicule. Short of that, one might still find thatthe posts of a certain
> individual annoy or disturb. In such cases, onecan always employ the
filters
> that virtually all newsreaders areequipped with to filter out posts by
certain
> individuals or regardingcertain subjects. The details of how to do that
vary
> according tonewsreader software, but tutorials exist on the Web for
> employingfilters in all the popular newsreaders.
> 4. Most of us who frequent this newsgroup do so out of a sincere desireto
> discuss and learn more about wine. Part of this aspect of the groupis
that
> people routinely question or correct mistakes made by others.To some, this
may
> be "nitpicking," but such a definition is necessarilyin the mind of the
> beholder. After three years of reading posts here, Iknow that such
correction
> is rarely if ever offered in anything but ahelpful spirit. However, if
being
> corrected bothers you, you shouldtake care to check your facts *before*
posting
> to reduce the probabilityof being in error -- because erroneous statements
will
> almost invariablybe corrected here.In summary, this group is fantastic
resource
> for learning about allthings wine-related. There will be times when a
> particular post mayupset you, but free speech in this forum is encouraged.
> However, wemust all strive to give others the benefit of the doubt and to
avoid
> asmuch as possible taking any comments made here too personally. As a
sage
> once remarked, "relax, it's only Usenet!" ;-)HTHMark Lipton"
>
> Mark, hope it's OK that I quoted you
>
> Dale
>
> Dale Williams
> Drop "damnspam" to reply