kebera@alzabo.uucp (Krishna E. Bera) (02/20/90)
bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) writes: >large number of posts to news.groups come from these guys, yet >the contribution they actually make is: 0. Every once in a while they're ok (IMHO). >Lets give them their own damn group. No discussion. Voting starts >right now and ends in 3 weeks. Let's be civilized about this: I am calling for discussion on a group devoted to followups for, about and by the ficcies, gryphons, rissas and any other vocal net-personalities. Now I know alt.flame and soc.net-people might be better suited to this purpose in some peoples' opinions. However, this group would be for discussions specifically *not* related to the newsgroup in which the thread began. People can argue (not necessarily flame) about what someone did or did not say, where followups should have been directed, where to crosspost, or why what they're saying is not a flame. etc. Of course these things *should* be carried out via e-mail, but for various reasons, this isn't working. Alternative names for the group: alt.non-sequitur alt.meta news.groups.meta alt.aside comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac (a historical name meaning: irrelevant) An alt group is preferable. -- Krishna E. Bera "Programmer on the loose" ytopya!kebera@alzabo.UUCP nrcaer!alzabo!kebera@uunet.uu.net