rlw@briar.UUCP (01/16/87)
One of the more interesting groups to me over the years was the lamented (by me) net.flame. This group was significantly more amusing than net.jokes at its best/worst. Old timers will remember the joy of watching someone who submitted "test" to net.general get charred to a puny, crisp cinder. I hereby propose and offer to moderate a new group: ************* * mod.flame * ************* The contents of this group will be restricted to unprovoked accusations, ad hominem (feminem, mechanism) attacks of any sort, blistering complaints against the unfairness of the world, the fairness of the world, your boss, your spouse, your advisor, your home room teacher, IBM, UNISYS*, etc. Responses by those attacked, representatives of those attacked, or those who wish to defend those attacked will be scorned. No reasonable submission will be accepted. --Dick Wexelblat * UNISYS? UNISYS: -Doctor, Doctor, I've got UNISYS! -Sit down, son, sit down. -Sit down? Dammit, Doctor, if I could sit down I wouldn't be here.
edc@altnet.UUCP (Eric D. Christensen) (01/23/87)
In article <639@briar.UUCP> rlw@briar.UUCP (Richard Wexelblat) writes: >I hereby propose and offer to moderate a new group: > > ************* > * mod.flame * > ************* > >The contents of this group will be restricted to unprovoked accusations, ad >hominem (feminem, mechanism) attacks of any sort, blistering complaints against >the unfairness of the world, the fairness of the world, your boss, your >spouse, your advisor, your home room teacher, IBM, UNISYS*, etc. > Good Idea! I feel sort of stupid for supporting the talk.flame idea now! I think that the net desperately needs a place to vent frustration. net.flame get out of hand before, and I'm sure talk.flame would do the same without some supervision. The only question is 'does everyone want to pay the cost of supporting a public bitch list?' Cheers- -- Eric D. Christensen UUCP: ihnp4!sun!altos86!altnet!edc Altos Computer Systems Inter: edc@altnet.UUCP Customer Support Division AT&T: (408)433-3614 or (408)434-6688 399 West Trimble Rd., San Jose, CA 95131
hhm@ihuxo.UUCP (01/28/87)
> In article <639@briar.UUCP> rlw@briar.UUCP (Richard Wexelblat) writes: > >I hereby propose and offer to moderate a new group: > > > > ************* > > * mod.flame * > > ************* > > I wholeheartedly support this. There was no excuse for killing net. flame, no matter what was said there. Maybe the bluenoses who killed it in the first place would rather that people do physical violence to each other rather than let off steam and get it off their chests. Larry
woods@hao.UUCP (01/28/87)
In article <684@ihuxo.UUCP> hhm@ihuxo.UUCP (Mayo) writes: >> In article <639@briar.UUCP> rlw@briar.UUCP (Richard Wexelblat) writes: >> >I hereby propose and offer to moderate a new group: >> > >> > ************* >> > * mod.flame * >> > ************* >> > >I wholeheartedly support this. There was no excuse for killing net. >flame, no matter what was said there. Yes, there was. It was expensive and was threatening to kill the entire net by forcing some sites that pay most of the phone bills (including, but not limited to, ours) to consider leaving the net altogether. That *one* group of dubious value accounted for over 20% of all net traffic (and expense). After it's demise, our phone bill immediately dropped by 15%. >Maybe the bluenoses who killed >it in the first place would rather that people do physical violence >to each other rather than let off steam and get it off their chests. No, we'd rather that you mail your flames so that your site can share in the cost, instead of posting them to 100000+ readers, none of whom gives two shits what you think, and making it cost hundreds of times as much with zero extra benefit. I can firmly state that there is no way our site is going to pay to carry a group where people are encouraged by its very name and charter to be juvenile and abusive. I'm sure at least some of the other backbone sites agree. If you want to create the group and then set up your own links to pay for its distribution, I won't try to stop you, provided you can find anyone (including your company) willing to help pay for it. Good luck. --Greg -- UUCP: {hplabs, seismo, nbires, noao}!hao!woods CSNET: woods@ncar.csnet ARPA: woods%ncar@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA INTERNET: woods@hao.ucar.edu
gibson@osu-eddie.UUCP (01/30/87)
In article <506@hao.UCAR.EDU> woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods) writes: >In article <684@ihuxo.UUCP> hhm@ihuxo.UUCP (Mayo) writes: >>> In article <639@briar.UUCP> rlw@briar.UUCP (Richard Wexelblat) writes: >>> >I hereby propose and offer to moderate a new group: >>> > >>> > ************* >>> > * mod.flame * >>> > ************* >>> > >>I wholeheartedly support this. There was no excuse for killing net. >>flame, no matter what was said there. > > Yes, there was.... etc. etc. > > I can firmly state that there is no way our site is going to pay to carry >a group where people are encouraged by its very name and charter to be juvenile >and abusive. I'm sure at least some of the other backbone sites agree. If you >want to create the group and then set up your own links to pay for its >distribution, I won't try to stop you, provided you can find anyone (including >your company) willing to help pay for it. Good luck. > >--Greg Sounds like this should be mod.flame's first article :-) *snicker* --Kerr Bear
cramer@kontron.UUCP (01/30/87)
> In article <684@ihuxo.UUCP> hhm@ihuxo.UUCP (Mayo) writes: > >> In article <639@briar.UUCP> rlw@briar.UUCP (Richard Wexelblat) writes: > >> >I hereby propose and offer to moderate a new group: > >> > > >> > ************* > >> > * mod.flame * > >> > ************* > >> > > >I wholeheartedly support this. There was no excuse for killing net. > >flame, no matter what was said there. > > Yes, there was. It was expensive and was threatening to kill the entire net > by forcing some sites that pay most of the phone bills (including, but not > limited to, ours) to consider leaving the net altogether. That *one* group > of dubious value accounted for over 20% of all net traffic (and expense). > After it's demise, our phone bill immediately dropped by 15%. > > >Maybe the bluenoses who killed > >it in the first place would rather that people do physical violence > >to each other rather than let off steam and get it off their chests. > > No, we'd rather that you mail your flames so that your site can share > in the cost, instead of posting them to 100000+ readers, none of whom > gives two shits what you think, and making it cost hundreds of times as much > with zero extra benefit. > I can firmly state that there is no way our site is going to pay to carry > a group where people are encouraged by its very name and charter to be juvenile > and abusive. I'm sure at least some of the other backbone sites agree. If you > --Greg What? You don't carry talk.politics.misc, talk.abortion, and soc.women? Clayton E. Cramer