thornton@kcl-cs.UUCP (ZNAC468) (02/19/86)
In article <9349@ritcv.UUCP> sma8465@ritcv.UUCP (PUT YOUR NAME HERE) writes: > > I just have one small question. Why is that all people seem to do >on this (and other newsgroups) is to point out faults and criticize things >(ie. programs, people, movies, the weather, ad nauseaum). I realize that >this is something people like to do, but must it be done to this extent? >Try to think about the ideals the show represented and continues to >represent. Let's try to keep the complaining down just a bit. It would >be to much to expect no complaining. After all, what am I doing with this >article? > > Steve Abbott WHAT ELSE IS THERE?? Barely an article is published with which EVERYONE agrees.*IF* some article were to fulfil this critierium it would be the only one on that subject *EVER* submitted (save for all those who agree strongly enough to say why. i.e. me). SOME OTHER THINGS THAT OCCASIONALLY TURN UP: NEWS! Precious little news ever appears, surprising for a NEWSgroup? Reviews of books, rarely no criticism. Inquires, very few and often never lead to discussions. SO is it any wonder that people exercise their right to criticize? Some other points relating to your article: The ideals of the show? Did I not quote IDIC? Isn't one of the ideals that of free speech (which I was defending) ? Andy T. Anagram time : BEND YOUR GENDER = GENE RODDENBURY A WARMISH LENTIL = WILLIAM SHATNER DRY MALE ONION = LEONARD NIMOY HIS CRETIN CHAPEL= ? ?