jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) (09/16/85)
[...] I resolved to wait until I got ten mail messages flaming me... A week ago, I goofed and sent a game review to net.games.chess in addition to net.games.board (I forwarded it via another message which happened to be posted to both groups). Since that time, I have got eleven messages telling me to keep net.games.chess to chess. I KNOW THAT!!! I SCREWED UP! I SAW IT MYSELF THE NEXT DAY. Might I suggest that the guardians of group purity (in any group) wait until the SECOND inappropriate message before descending in droves. Two messages indicates a trend that may need correcting. A single message should be assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo
nadya@dartvax.UUCP (Nadya M. Labib) (09/17/85)
In article <16465@watmath.UUCP> jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) writes: >I KNOW THAT!!! I SCREWED UP! I SAW IT MYSELF THE NEXT DAY. > >Might I suggest that the guardians of group purity (in any group) >wait until the SECOND inappropriate message before descending in >droves. Two messages indicates a trend that may need correcting. >A single message should be assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. How do you NOT send it to the newsgroups the previous person sent it to? How do you send it to the appropriate newsgroups? How do you send it to another newsgroup? As you can see, I am clueless in this respect. Muchos gracias, Nadya
mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA (Monica Cellio) (09/19/85)
From: linus!watmath!jagardner@cca (Jim Gardner) >Might I suggest that the guardians of group purity (in any group) >wait until the SECOND inappropriate message before descending in >droves. Two messages indicates a trend that may need correcting. >A single message should be assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. This time of year there are a lot of new, naive users. I think the correct response is to send a short, *polite* note explaining the problem and pointing to net.announce.newuser. Keeping track of all the people who post inappropriately would be a major task. You don't deserve flames unless it's *obvious* you know better (the Frank Adrian incident comes to mind) but you should expect some mail. -Dragon -- UUCP: ...ucbvax!dual!lll-crg!dragon ARPA: monica.cellio@cmu-cs-cad or dragon@lll-crg
andrew@orca.UUCP (Andrew Klossner) (09/20/85)
> Might I suggest that the guardians of group purity (in any group) > wait until the SECOND inappropriate message before descending in > droves. Two messages indicates a trend that may need correcting. > A single message should be assumed to be innocent until proven guilty. What, we're supposed to keep running logs of offenses? No way, sucker. When you screw up, you get flamed. A lot.