[news.admin] mathew@mantis.co.uk should grow up

bill@franklin.com (bill) (05/25/91)

In article <FDmc311w164w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk 
        (CNEWS MUST DIE!) writes:
: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
: > In article <1991May20.093018@mccall.com> tp@mccall.com (Terry Poot) writes:
: > >Are you saying that this is a problem that doesn't merit attention? ...
: >
: > No, that it's a problem that is very difficult to solve, and that the
: > naive solutions which people constantly propose have unacceptably nasty
: > side effects.
:
: I see. And having hours of my time wasted by your software is not an
: "unacceptably nasty side effect"?

Why, yes, that is correct.

If the time that is wasted is because *your* site generates bad
headers, then wasting your time is a perfectly acceptable, even
desirable, side effect.

You see, it is *your* software that is wasting *your* time. Don't
blame other people's software for *your* faults, even if their
software's actions are the proximate cause of your distress.

There's a moral point here, which I expect you are unequipped to
comprehend, but I'll explain it anyway. If you participate in a
cooperative activity with clearly stated rules, yet fail to follow
those rules, it is *your* fault if your rule violations prevent
you from getting the full value of the activity. Yours and no one
else's. There is no moral reason why anyone should act to
accomodate your rule breaking; if they do choose to accomodate
you, it is an act of generosity and you should thank them for it.
But if they choose not to accomodate you, you have no recourse,
and no legitimate grounds for complaint. You may not blame them
for whatever action they choose to take to protect themselves from
your rule violations; cooperative ventures requires *cooperation*,
which violating the rules certainly is not.

Usenet is a cooperative activity; its rules relating to article
formats are spelled out in the RFCs. Through the generosity of
the authors of various news software, the rule violations that
many have perpetrated have been accomodated. Now, some of those
authors have decided that enough is enough of that accomodation.
That means that those of you who were being accomodated are now
out of luck.

If you don't like that, that's too bad. You have no right to
their generosity and no right to complain about what is, after
all, entirely *your* fault.

Followups have been directed to alt.flame.