[net.misc] proposed destruction of net.bizarre

mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) (10/23/85)

In article <382@cad.cs.cmu.edu> mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) writes:
>From: greid@adobe.UUCP
>>YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE
>>THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU.
>
>As you may recall (but probably don't), this was discussed in net.news.group
>(the correct place for that sort of discussion) and people were polled.

Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
bizarre people participated.  I know that I tend to read the "frivolous" 
newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I
imagine that many others do the same.  As a result, a group of serious
people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup.

WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???

Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre.  If anyone is interested (or
not) send me mail.  Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre
could be created if there is enough interest.

P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre.  So unless I
hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-)
-- 
UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb		ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (10/25/85)

[Yes, I know this is in three groups.]

In article <616@k.cs.cmu.edu>, mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes:
> 
> Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
> bizarre people participated.  I know that I tend to read the "frivolous" 
> newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I
> imagine that many others do the same.  As a result, a group of serious
> people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup.

	'Silly' is an understatement, try 'worthless'.
> 
> WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
> EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???

	How could possibly have noticed it in there? There was SO much
GARBAGE in net.bizarre that anything of any value would be quickly lost.
> 
> Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre.  If anyone is interested (or
> not) send me mail.  Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre
> could be created if there is enough interest.

	There's an idea. Create a mailing list.
> 
> P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre.  So unless I
> hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-)

	Please NO!! I don't care if you did use a ':-)', that's not
funny. Keep your trash to yourself. Don't pollute the net with it.
> -- 
> UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb		ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu
 
-- 
Edward C. Bennett

UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward

/* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */

"Goodnight M.A."

ins_akaa@jhunix.UUCP (Kenneth Adam Arromdee) (10/28/85)

In article <296@ukecc.UUCP> edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes:
>[Yes, I know this is in three groups.]
>In article <616@k.cs.cmu.edu>, mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes:
>> Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
>> bizarre people participated.  I know that I tend to read the "frivolous" 
>> newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I
>> imagine that many others do the same.  As a result, a group of serious
>> people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup.
>
>	'Silly' is an understatement, try 'worthless'.

If someone is an extremist who thinks net.religion.jewish is worthless,
should it be removed?  Regardless of whether you think it's worthless,
deciding that a group should not exist because it is "worthless" is
censorship.  You can say that all non-technical groups are "worthless",
but once you have agreed that some such groups should exist, you should
not use "I think it's worthless" as a reason to selectively decide that
some should exist and some should not.

>> WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
>> EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???
>
>	How could possibly have noticed it in there? There was SO much
>GARBAGE in net.bizarre that anything of any value would be quickly lost.

This is patently ridiculous. Don't post it because nobody will read it anyway?
You have based a totally unwarranted conclusion on your prejudicial
viewpoint of net.bizarre (i.e., it's full of garbage). If you feel that
it's garbage, that's your opinion, but don't use that as an excuse not to
inform its readers of something you know will affect them. 

Furthermore, I am located at a university which does not permit me to read
net.news.group.  Leaving discussions about a group's fate out of the group
whose fate is being discussed is not fair to those who will not, or in
my case, CANNOT, access those discussions otherwise.

>> Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre.  If anyone is interested (or
>> not) send me mail.  Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre
>> could be created if there is enough interest.
>
>	There's an idea. Create a mailing list.

This seems to be inconsistent with your remark below not to "pollute the
net". Mail does go over the net, you know! True, you don't have to read
someone else's mail, but you don't have to read net.bizarre either if
you don't want to.  Furthermore, the original net.bizarre deletion announcement 
also said "DON'T consider setting up a mailing list that would end up
passing the equivalent of 'net.bizarre' through the mail..."

>> P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre.  So unless I
>> hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-)
>
>	Please NO!! I don't care if you did use a ':-)', that's not
>funny. Keep your trash to yourself. Don't pollute the net with it.
>Edward C. Bennett

As I already said, if you think something is trash, that is not a sufficient
justification for not letting someone else who doesn't think so read it.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If you know the alphabet up to 'k', you can teach it up to 'k'.

Kenneth Arromdee
BITNET: G46I4701 at JHUVM and INS_AKAA at JHUVMS
CSNET: ins_akaa@jhunix.CSNET
ARPA: ins_akaa%jhunix@hopkins.ARPA
UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!aplcen!jhunix!ins_akaa

mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) (10/28/85)

In article <1541@utcsri.UUCP> clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke) writes:
>In article <617@k.cs.cmu.edu> mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes:
>>... If there was any mention of deletion in net.bizarre, it
>>didn't mention voting.  (I read EVERY article in net.bizarre, so I would
>>remember seeing a deletion notice.)
>
>If you really read every article in net.bizarre, I doubt that you can now
>remember anything at all....:-)

Actually, I was this way long before I started reading net.bizarre. :-)

>I am very sure that there was a mention in net.bizarre of the debate in
>this group.

I am equally sure that there wasn't.  Does anybody know for sure?  Did
anybody archive net.bizarre?

>I presume the reason why this group was not
>swamped by net.bizarrers demanding that it be retained was either (for some
>of them) they didn't have enough sense to figure out what was going on
>[suppose I'd better :-) here too] or (for most) they could see they were
>just fooling around and couldn't honestly claim the group should stay alive.

IF there was any mention that net.bizarre might be deleted (and I don't
admit that there was), it was very brief and was probably thought to be a
joke.  (Come to think of it, I seem to remember a message suggesting that
net.bizarre should be the first newsgroup to commit suicide.  Was THAT the
mention that you are thinking of???  If so, are you surprised that no one
responded?)

I dare say that net.bizarre had as much reason to exist (if not more) than
net.flame, net.jokes, or a lot of other newsgroups.  (Net.bizarre was
originally created illegally, but it WAS eventually accepted by the Powers
That Be.  I can't believe that anyone is actually trying to argue that
net.bizarre was deleted because it was illegally created 3 MONTHS AGO!!?) If
everyone is so interested in reducing net traffic, why do we still have 
net.flame???

I'm still interested in hearing from anybody who wants to save net.bizarre
and/or create mail.bizarre.

Actually, I'm not certain that I need net.bizarre any more.  Net.news.group
is almost as much fun! :-)
-- 
UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb		ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu

"It came time to move, so I packed up my Salvador Dali print of two 
blindfolded dental hygienists trying to make a circle on an Etch-a-Sketch..."

ins_amap@jhunix.UUCP (Mark Aden Poling) (10/30/85)

How bizarre.  Something a lot of people really cared about gets an
elaborate execution, while groups that have been sitting around for
months with less than a hundred articles to their names are seen as
"beneficial".

"God is on the side with the largest artillery."
								Mark!

roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) (11/01/85)

> I dare say that net.bizarre had as much reason to exist (if not more) than
> net.flame, net.jokes, or a lot of other newsgroups.

I would have said "net.bizarre has as little reason to exist as net.flame,
net.jokes, and a lot of other newsgroups".
-- 
Roy Smith <allegra!phri!roy>
System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016

kirsch@sjuvax.UUCP (P. Kirsch) (11/04/85)

In article <1064@jhunix.UUCP> ins_amap@jhunix.UUCP (Mark Aden Poling) writes:
>How bizarre.  Something a lot of people really cared about gets an
>elaborate execution, while groups that have been sitting around for
>months with less than a hundred articles to their names are seen as
>"beneficial".
>
>"God is on the side with the largest artillery."
>								Mark!


For those of you that are still interested in net.bizarre someone wrote to
me regarding a possible bizarre mailing list. If any of you are interested
his name is Michael Browne and the e-mail address I have for him
is: allegra!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb

If you can't reach that address send it to me and I'll pass it along.

I am dying for the recreation of net.bizarre but if a mailing list can be
organized that would be almost as good. 

-- 


Another wunnerful letter from the semi-intelligent rotting brain of:

                              Paul Kirsch
                              St. Joseph's University
                              Philadelphia, Pa

{ astrovax | allegra | bpa | burdvax } !sjuvax!kirsch

Warning: Objects in Terminal Room are Closer than they Appear...