ddski@mhuhk.UUCP (Don Dennis) (09/03/88)
In article <2826@mind.UUCP> greg@mind.UUCP (greg Nowak) writes: >In article <1040@mtund.ATT.COM> newton@mtund.ATT.COM (Newton Lee) writes: >} >}Sorry folks, but the following message is ONLY for AT&T Bell Labs >}employees who do not read netnews "att.wanted" and cannot otherwise >}be reached: ... >}Newton Lee >}AT&T Bell Laboratories >} >}NB: The above message is being distributed ONLY in New Jersey. >[but I'm expanding the distribution because I think it's worth >discussing] > >Just what we'd expect from the new att, eh? First, they don't pass on >third party email, and now this "overgrown leaf node" decides that >since the att groups don't reach everyone they want to, they'll waste >space on non-att machines to get the word out ONLY to att people. >Cross-posted to soc.singles,soc.women,rec.arts.sf-lovers,rec.arts.tv, >and rec.arts.movies, no less. ... >Thanks.-- > greg Greg, Please don't fault all of AT&T for the actions of a few individuals. I am not a system administrator, nor a person with enough power to make policy changes; just a simple user. But I can assure you that the company has been making a great effort to get people to clean up their act when posting to the net. In the last few months there have been numerous postings to AT&T newsgroups warning employees about cross postings, and about the bad reputation AT&T has aquired in this regard. The company (at least Bell Laboratories) has even circulated desk to desk memos outlining netnews guidelines. Word will get around to users in the AT&T community about these transgressions, but remember, we're not a machine, just people trying the best we can and sometimes even making mistakes. -- _____________________________________________________________________ | The only perfect science | Don Dennis | | is hind-sight. | att!mhuhk!ddski (201) 582-7035 | ---------------------------------------------------------------------