dmb@TIS.COM (David M. Baggett) (12/28/89)
att!drutx!druwy!dlm@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Dan Moore) writes: > I am very surprised at how many people treated this. People >are now using this as a way of bragging that they were ready to fight >the battle till the bitter end. And how if it hadn't been for them >that Usenet would have been ruined. Almost sounds like they (and there >are lots of people in that "they") need the PR in order to join the >"net gods". I hardly think this was the motive or the attitude of those who posted "energetic" responses. I think people are compelled to write about an issue they feel strongly about. Is that surprising? > This all could've been handled, politely, with a few email >messages to Dave telling him why he was wrong to setup a one way link >to GEnie. He does read and answer his mail. (It does take awhile, his >mail/news feed adds at least 1 day, and often 2 days, each directtion.) >Instead there was a wild attack with no attempt to try milder measures. Why is posting a public message (in itself) impolite? And why is it that you think people are being rude by describing the potential consequences of Dave's actions (wrong or no)? I just don't see what's wrong with public discussion. No one said "Dave Small is a damn jerk" or "Dave Small is trying to rip us off". In fact, most of the discussion was about GEnie's policies, not Dave. Dave was just caught in the middle because he was nice enough to try to do something good for the ST community. > Oh well, maybe it was just time for a good flame war and Dave >was just the easiest target. This is unfair. Just because some of us disagree (and perhaps disagree very strongly) with Dave Small, you assume that we were flaming him. Do you think I`m flaming _you_ right now? I hope not. I really hope Dave didn't get the impression that we (comp.sys.atari) think he's a rotten guy. If I recall correctly, NO ONE said he was. dmb@TIS.COM ----------------------- My opinions are mine, and not my employer's.