rissa@chinet.UUCP (Patricia O Tuama) (09/22/88)
In article <6498@nsc.nsc.com> nessus@nsc.UUCP (Kchula-Rrit) writes: > I would like to start out by saying that I am a new newsadmin(4 days!) >and I thought this group was for discussing issues relevant to running a >USENET/uucp node. My apologies in advance if I step on any toes. > I think what people are flaming is that the information content of >the messages in question is redundant and serve no use, except providing >revenue for the phone companies. This is one sentiment I agree with, >having visually monitored the modem when transferring news; it bothers >me that I am paying for five copies of the same thing, which to my mind, >translates to getting the information for five times the cost which >cheapens the (whatever good) intentions behind the message(s). Well, all I have to say is boy, are you in for a surprise. Postings saying the same thing abound on Usenet. Post a simple question to any of the rec.groups for instance, and at least five or six netters will post answers most of which will say exactly the same thing. And look what happened right here with our articles. There have been what, ten replies from people all saying the same thing, all complaining about the fact that we all said the same thing. It goes on all the time. > Yes, and I hit "k" when I saw the same message with the same subject >line for the fourth time, and saw 2 dozen killed articles. I finally looked >at one of the "killed" articles and saw that it was not the original article >but someone's response to the original. I then quickly hit "x" and >re-started rn, and saw that a lot of the responses felt similarly to me; >I was initially dismayed when I saw all the articles that I killed that I >thought were simply duplicates. So, we still have to sort through the chaff >to get the wheat; that's why rn has KILL files. Well, yes, that's sort of how the software works, dear. Typing "k" gets rid of the original article and all subsequent discussion. Hmmm.... I don't mean to be rude or anything but are you sure you're ready to be a sysadmin? at that point trish, bemused
rissa@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Patricia O Tuama) (09/25/88)
In article <6552@nsc.nsc.com> nessus@nsc.UUCP (Kchula-Rrit) writes: > My view of the situation is: > 0. It's either be newsadmin, or shut down net access > 1. We all have to learn sometime, and I, along with a few other > newsadmins, think I'm doing all right. > 2. Besides, since I view the whole world as basically a circus and > would find the whole Portal thing amusing, if I and a lot of other > <decent> systems weren't paying for it. 0, 1, 2 ?? oh my goodness, this is truly amazing. Kchula-Rrit, you don't have to justify you're being a sysadmin to me or anyone else. I just thought what you wrote was funny. And of course all of Usenet is a circus. Don't forget the famous Honeyman/North theorem: Usenet is a slow-moving parody of itself and it's equally famous corrollary: Usenet is like walking into a crowded movie theater and yelling, "CAR FOR SALE!" And besides, despite all that stuff Ray Dunn wrote (and say, there was a man on a search and destroy mission) most of the portal stuff that went on in alt.flame over the past couple of weeks was much funnier than any- thing that gets into any of those silly rec.humor.* groups. So my advice is keep the alt.groups and dump soc.sin and .humor et al. There, that should even out your costs a bit. at that point trish, esprit present
honey@umix.cc.umich.edu (Peter Honeyman) (09/27/88)
Patricia O Tuama writes: >Don't forget the famous north/honey thesis: > > Usenet is a slow-moving parody of itself > >and it's equally famous corrollary: > > Usenet is like walking into a crowded movie theater and > yelling, "ANYONE WANNA BUY A USED CAR?" yo, trish, don't forget the toronto variation: everyone stands up and shouts "WRONG THEATER!" peter ps: i made some minor corrections to trisha's note, begging your pardon.