jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (10/11/89)
This is only USENET. This is not real life.
The entire reason, as I understand it, for wanting to put
*.aquaria in sci is to promote a higher quality of posting
than might be had in a rec.aquaria, and to have better
propogation for the newsgroup since generally sci groups
travel better than rec groups.
To address the first reason, I think a sci group -will-
have higher quality postings than a rec group, sci.skeptic
notwithstanding.
As for the second reason, hierarchies are artificial
constructions we are free to use as we see fit. If
Richard wants to strive for a higher calliber of posting
in sci.aquaria, wonderful. =We= create the hierarchies
and =we= are free to use them.
Finally, putting *.aquaria in sci is not going to cause
the end of the net as we know it. No fish are going to
die because the group isn't in rec. Computers aren't
going to grow hair on the palms because a ``hobby'' is
being sent through their modem ports. In short, it
doesn't really matter. Anyone who wants to participate
in the fish biz is going to find sci.aquaria sooner or
later.
There is no reason =not= to put aquaria into sci other
than this religious nonsense regarding the purity of
the namespace and I'm hear to tell you the lady is a
tramp ...
--
John F. Haugh II +-Things you didn't want to know:------
VoiceNet: (512) 832-8832 Data: -8835 | The real meaning of MACH is ...
InterNet: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org | ... Messages Are Crufty Hacks.
UUCPNet: {texbell|bigtex}!rpp386!jfh +--------------------------------------taber@pstjtt.enet.dec.com (10/11/89)
In article <17127@rpp386.cactus.org>, jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes... > >There is no reason =not= to put aquaria into sci other >than this religious nonsense regarding the purity of >the namespace and I'm hear to tell you the lady is a >tramp ... The same line of reasoning says there's no reason not to put it in rec. That means there are (at least) two choices and THAT means that people will disagree as to which is "right." This prediction is validated by observation. The seditious implication that people should DO something rather than impotently argue about elegance doesn't even deserve the bandwidth to forward it to hell. >>>==>PStJTT Patrick St. Joseph Teahan Taber Mail address: ahhhhh, you don't want to send me mail....
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (10/12/89)
John, the only way to reliably get a higher quality of postings in a group
is to moderate it. If Richard proposed a moderated sci.aquaria with himself
as the moderator I would drop all objections. Putting an inappropriate group
into sci doesn't help the postings any... it just pollutes sci.
--
Peter da Silva, *NIX support guy @ Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
Biz: peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. Fun: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com. `-_-'
'U`
Quote: Structured Programming is a discipline -- not a straitjacket.jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (10/14/89)
In article <6517@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >John, the only way to reliably get a higher quality of postings in a group >is to moderate it. If Richard proposed a moderated sci.aquaria with himself >as the moderator I would drop all objections. Putting an inappropriate group >into sci doesn't help the postings any... it just pollutes sci. Peter, you talk about USENET like it is something that can be polluted. Show me the pollution. Show me -what- is being polluted. How can you pollute a name? And to counter your earlier swipe at me, rpp386 is NOT a C2 secure machine. Kindly keep your baseless insults in some other newsgroup. -- John F. Haugh II +-Things you didn't want to know:------ VoiceNet: (512) 832-8832 Data: -8835 | The real meaning of MACH is ... InterNet: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org | ... Messages Are Crufty Hacks. UUCPNet: {texbell|bigtex}!rpp386!jfh +--------------------------------------
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (10/15/89)
In article <17135@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes: > Peter, you talk about USENET like it is something that can be polluted. I have two reasons for using the term "pollution". First, to concretize the discussion by referring to a metaphor that most people are familiar with. Secondly, because translating the term into an abstract provides a very apt description of the phenomenon. What is being polluted, ultimately, is people's time. Time that could be spent productively is wasted skipping articles, or duplicating the effort spent by other people in designing the current naming convention. > And to counter your earlier swipe at me, rpp386 is NOT a C2 secure > machine. Well, when you talk about the "C2 secure UNIX system at your desk" it's a natural conclusion to draw. > Kindly keep your baseless insults in some other newsgroup. The flippant response to this is to point out that I *did* keep it in another newsgroup... comp.unix.questions. A more accurate response is that I'm sorry you feel insulted by my posting, but I was rather angry at you at the time for posting the message I was following up to. You did attack my own professional skills and competance in a rather direct way. I apologise for responding in kind. -- Peter da Silva, *NIX support guy @ Ferranti International Controls Corporation. Biz: peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. Fun: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com. `-_-' 'U` Quote: Structured Programming is a discipline -- not a straitjacket.
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) (10/15/89)
In article <6533@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >Well, when you talk about the "C2 secure UNIX system at your desk" it's a >natural conclusion to draw. Never assume anything. rpp386 sits on my dining room floor where the Dinette Set From Hell belongs. snowball.austin.ibm.com sits next to my desk at work. An RT is kinda-C2, but definitely -not- a 386. > You did attack my own professional >skills and competance in a rather direct way. I apologise for responding in >kind. Huh? Please, your paranoia is showing. I pointed out that you made a =mistake=. I did not attack your credentials. The posting you made was very incorrect. The only thing I did was point out your error. Don't try blaming your problems on me. -- John F. Haugh II +-Things you didn't want to know:------ VoiceNet: (512) 832-8832 Data: -8835 | The real meaning of MACH is ... InterNet: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org | ... Messages Are Crufty Hacks. UUCPNet: {texbell|bigtex}!rpp386!jfh +--------------------------------------