peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (11/17/89)
Sat down this morning to read my mail, and I'm overwhelmed by messages from all over the net in response to <7013@ficc.uu.net>. Well, by now you all know that the posting was a forgery. In any case, I've decided to go ahead and tally the votes that have come in so far, just for fun. % count yes no other count: 10 items of mail in input file yes. count: 52 items of mail in input file no. count: 7 items of mail in input file other. Most of the messages in "other" are along the lines of "do you know you're the victim of a forgery?" and "this is a joke, right?". One message claimed to be a vote but didn't say which way they were voting. I'll include a few of the more interesting STAY responses, and *all* the LEAVE responses: ---------- This is a fake posting, right? ---------- You know, if Richard Sexton would devote 1/googolplexth of the energy he's spent being obnoxious and otherwise harrassing the net into creating sci.aquaria on something worthwhile, the world would be a better place. ---------- Stay with usenet! Just quit wasting so much time in those off-the-wall newsgroups and stay with c.s.a(.t) where you are known and loved so much. It won't take as much time that way, you'll get to spend more time with your wife, and you'll have more time to write neat programs for the Amiga. ---------- hmmmm... I feel your imput has been valuable. Yes continue. But be selective... you defiantly seem to have a background that is not exclusively amiga(ian)... so are able to interject a balanced viewpoint. But tis work, tis work! ---------- I don't think you should leave just because Richard is a twit. Your wife is another matter... ---------- Stay. You're a voice of reason in the midst of the flame-happy crazies. Should I be worried about your health, mental or physical? No. The Net comes first. You know that. :-) ---------- I appreciate your comments. (especially in comp.lang.forth) ---------- You are one of the few people on the net, who's postings I read just because your name is on it. Your postings are usually short, and to the point. ---------- No, stay, someday Richard & Co will get theirs. The problem is that lunatics from alt.flame have invaded the world of normal people. Your postings make sense -- that's the problem! ---------- NO, I want "sci.Should Peter da Silva leave USENET?" ---------- I say stay....... I hug a wolf every day.. ---------- PLease don't leave. Youre a nice guy. ---------- (I could not tell if this is supposed to be a joke or not) (I would rather be accused of missing the joke than having) (you leave the net. Just another petty rationalization.) ========== And now, the "leave" folks: ---------- I know I certainly enjoy readin your articles, but if there's a problem, I'd have to vote YES... sorry 'bout that... You could come and visit us.. ---------- Yes. ---------- I vote YES. I think you should spend more time with the wife. Leave USENET. ---------- Your wife may be right. In any case, she cares. You're making it hard by asking a bunch of computer hackers if you should spend less time at your computer. Why don't you let some non-computer people vote too? -bob wilt p.s. we'll miss you ---------- Yes, please leave usenet. Please leave the world while you're at it. ---------- I vote YES!!!! ---------- Yes, your wife comes before mere usenetters 1/2 :) ---------- YES: Anyone actually considering allowing the system that runs USENET to determine their personal affairs can't break with USENET soon enough :-). ---------- YES, leave Usenet. After all, if you don't leave, you can't come back. :-) ---------- Leave, Peter, please. I've always hated your .sig. ========== -- `-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. 'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180. "vi is bad because it didn't work after I put jelly in my keyboard." -- Jeffrey W Percival (jwp@larry.sal.wisc.edu)
jef@well.UUCP (Jef Poskanzer) (11/20/89)
In the referenced message, peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) wrote: }% count yes no other }count: 10 items of mail in input file yes. }count: 52 items of mail in input file no. }count: 7 items of mail in input file other. So in other words, the stupid people, the ones who couldn't figure out it was a forgery, want you to stay. That's a great mandate, Peter. --- Jef Jef Poskanzer jef@well.sf.ca.us {ucbvax, apple, hplabs}!well!jef "I don't trust men who smile too much." -- Commander Kor
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (11/21/89)
In article <14649@well.UUCP> Jef Poskanzer <jef@well.sf.ca.us> writes: > So in other words, the stupid people, the ones who couldn't figure out > it was a forgery, want you to stay. That's a great mandate, Peter. You seem to be suffering from a humor deficiency. I would suggest you see a professional comedian. I'm surprised you didn't flame me for not including a list of voters while I was about it. Not to mention (taken from votes/other): From: uunet!atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu!jwright (Jim Wright): > What?!?! You can't have a vote!! There was no mandatory discussion period!! -- `-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.lonestar.org>. 'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180. "ERROR: trust not in UUCP routing tables" -- MAILER-DAEMON@mcsun.EU.net
edhew@xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew) (11/27/89)
In article <14649@well.UUCP> Jef Poskanzer <jef@well.sf.ca.us> writes: >In the referenced message, peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) wrote: >}% count yes no other >}count: 10 items of mail in input file yes. >}count: 52 items of mail in input file no. >}count: 7 items of mail in input file other. > >So in other words, the stupid people, the ones who couldn't figure out >it was a forgery, want you to stay. That's a great mandate, Peter. >--- >Jef As one of the people who send email to Peter, I would like to point out that the possibility that the article I was commenting on was a forgery was completely irrelevent to my response. A valid question was asked, and IMHO a valid answer was provided. I don't know you personally. Hence, I have little info as to whether I am currently commenting on a forged article. I don't care. The subject matter is what counts here. > Jef Poskanzer jef@well.sf.ca.us {ucbvax, apple, hplabs}!well!jef Ed. A. Hew Authorized Technical Trainer Xeni/Con Corporation work: edhew@xenicon.uucp -or- ..!{uunet!}utai!lsuc!xenicon!edhew ->home: edhew@xenitec.on.ca -or- ..!{uunet!}watmath!xenitec!edhew # This posting has absolutely nothing to do with what I do for a living.
tale@cs.rpi.edu (Dave Lawrence) (12/01/89)
In <1989Nov26.223009.558@xenitec.on.ca> edhew@xenitec.on.ca (Ed Hew) writes:
As one of the people who send email to Peter, I would like to point
out that the possibility that the article I was commenting on was a
forgery was completely irrelevent to my response.
Quite. Unless the article I am looking at appears to be completely
out of character for the poster, it doesn't even enter my mind that I
might be replying to a forgery. I think I would just chuck it all in
and forget about USENET if I had to think that every posting is a
forgery and I should absolutely make sure before I respond to it as
though it were truly from the person the headers indicate.
"Ed, is that you?"
Dave
--
(setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))
"... the broader subject of usenet customs and other bizarre social phenomena."
-- Phil Agre <agre@gargoyle.uchicago.edu>