jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (11/14/89)
Jay's right. There was no valid reason for forcing aquaria
into sci. Putting a rec group into sci to fake out site admins
and/or owners is fraudulent.
Jeff Daiell
Disclaimer: this is not an endorsement of Jay's views
on *public* policy! {|8^)]
--
"'Tis not too late to seek a newer world."
-- Alfred, Lord Tennysonbrian@trantext.UUCP (Brian Bainter) (11/14/89)
jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) writes: >Jay's right. There was no valid reason for forcing aquaria >into sci. Putting a rec group into sci to fake out site admins >and/or owners is fraudulent. I have stayed quiet for some time now with this whole sophomoric mess, but I must add my opinion to those who have gone before. Just how stupid do those who are trying to get a rec group put in to a sci group think that us site admins are? I have a site that has very few rec groups. I take them on a reasonable request basis. I would not be likely to carry rec.aquaria. The stupidity required to think that I as a site administrator am stupid enough to carry *.aquaria just because it has a sci in front of it reminds me of my nine year old daughter, who when told no, tries other more creative avenues to accomplish her goal. All to the same end. Give us a break Richard & Co. You are not dealing with a bunch of naive idiots who don't know their heads from holes in the wall. It would have been nice to just put !rec instead of !sci.aquaria in my sys file. Enough of my ravings. I need to go and see what it is about NO that my nine year old doesn't understand.
dianeh@gryphon.COM (Diane Holt) (11/15/89)
In article <282@trantext.UUCP> brian@trantext.UUCP (Brian Bainter) writes: >Just how stupid do [people] think that us site admins are? Uh ... pass. >I have a site that has very few rec groups. I take them on a reasonable >request basis. [Then later, in his obvious clear thinking on this matter...] >It would have been nice to just put !rec instead of !sci.aquaria in my >sys file. But, if you did put !rec in your sys file, what would happen to your magnanimous gesture in response to all those "reasonable request[s]"? >I would not be likely to carry rec.aquaria. Then your interest in any of this is completely bogus and utterly devoid of anything worthwhile. BTW: Is your site a cul-de-sac? Just curious. >The stupidity required to think that I as a site administrator am stupid >enough to carry *.aquaria just because it has a sci in front of it reminds >me of my nine year old daughter, who when told no, tries other more creative >avenues to accomplish her goal. All to the same end. No one was trying to bat their big brown eyes at you, maybe throw in a little chin-quiver, or say, "Well, if I can't have a dog, could I get a puppy?" The question of distribution of rec versus sci was way down on the list of valid reasons for putting a scientifically oriented information group placed in the sci hierarchy, as far as I was concerned. The fact that sci does get better distribution was, from my perspective, simply an added bonus. Maybe if you'd been reading alt.aquaria for awhile you'd have seen why I felt it was perfectly valid to put it in the sci hierarchy. Far more valid, in fact, than many of the groups currently there. >Enough of my ravings. I need to go and see what it is about NO that my >nine year old doesn't understand. While you're at it, perhaps you could see if maybe she could explain to you what YES means. That is, afterall, the way the VOTE went, you see. Listen, I've never read news.groups up until now, and, frankly, I'm stunned at the attitudes here. I think it may well be time to start thinking about starting a new network -- one that's not "administered" by a bunch of pompous, uptight yahoos, whose goal in life seems to be to strut around, saying, "No -- I don't want to." Rather like the "terrible 2's" ... you do remember the "terrible 2's" from when you're nine-year-old was that age, don't you? Maybe News should devolve into nothing but mailing-lists, with an additional hook for sites with multiple users who participate in a particular mailing-list having something similar to newsgroups, where the messages could be stored singularly rather than multiply placed in each individual's mail file. If no individuals at a site subscribe to a particular mailing-list, then no messages from that list will be sent to that site (though they may be routed through there ... "Don't mind me -- just passing through..."). Then, if someone at a site is interested in, oh, say, the latest scientific findings regarding the discovery of a heretofore unknown species of fish in the Amazon Basin, they could be informed about it without having to go groveling to some puffed-up sysadmin who's decided *he* doesn't *want* no steenking fish stories on *his* little 'puter. I've got my own machine; I'll gladly pass along mail, locally, to another nearby machine. Diane Holt (dianeh@binky.UUCP) "Aw, gee, Dad, do I haffta?" --Wally Cleaver (and probably Brian Bainter)