tneff@dasys1.UUCP (Tom Neff) (06/24/88)
This is a request to be added to Werner Uhrig's kill file, along with Matt, Bob and whoever else doesn't measure up to his exacting standards. Kill files obviously have their place to handle uninteresting topics, but using them to *blinker* oneself from views or attitudes one dislikes is the height of net.folly. If Herr Uhrig has an enemies list, I demand inclusion. Speaking for the impure untermenschen of the net, -- Tom Neff UUCP: ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!tneff "None of your toys CIS: 76556,2536 MCI: TNEFF will function..." GEnie: TOMNEFF BIX: are you kidding?
weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) (06/24/88)
In article <5132@dasys1.UUCP>, tneff@dasys1 (Tom Neff) writes: > Kill files >obviously have their place to handle uninteresting topics, but using them >to *blinker* oneself from views or attitudes one dislikes is the height of >net.folly. I have zero objection to being in anyone's KILL file. In fact, I encour- age it. I use them extensively. It's the only way to read Usenet. And Werner is not "hiding" from anything--he merely has better things to do with his reading time. Werner and I exchanged a little e-mail on the topic--he wanted me to stop. I got mail from others asking me to continue. Werner voted YES on c.w, btw. > If Herr Uhrig has an enemies list, I demand inclusion. It's not an enemies list. It's merely a boredom list. Although I find it strange that he didn't put "women" in his KILL file. I've said it before and I'll say it again: newsgroups and Usenet itself are driven by reader *interest*. Not by what they *ought* to be inter- ested in. Not by what "society" says the correct topic *ought* to be. Only by what the readers are actually interested in. ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
werner@utastro.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (06/25/88)
> If Herr Uhrig has an enemies list, I demand inclusion.
I do NOT have an enemies list (the term kill-file may be unfortunate
but was not coined by me), only a SANITY-list (supposed to keep me
sane); it is an exclusive list and you cannot get on it by simply
demanding it - your posted articles have to qualify you for it !
many people have made friendly appeals to Matt, Bob, Mark, and ?
to tone it down and reduce output - to no avail.
I now practice (and suggest) ignoring all output from them.
Is that taking too much "freedom of speech" for your taste?
They get to "post all they want", I get to say "let's ignore them!"
- who's polluting whose "air"??!!
we all practice this technique every day we are just afraid to
say so aloud to avoid "the bad press" generated by bozos who think
they "defend the right of free speech" by questioning the right of
someone saying "let's ignore this fellow, because all the follow-ups
make matters even worse!"