george@sysvis (01/07/86)
["Quote without comment" section:] > The recent flood of {INSERT GROUP NAME HERE} with meta-discussion, flames, > insults, and other inappropriate garble (anything but {GROUP NAME}), > partially caused by the lacking feature of the posting-software to prevent > follow-ups to net.{??????}, leads me to request this. Having to wade through > several hundred articles is a good enough argument for me. ... For all those brilliant individuals who vehemently killed several groups on the network because {INSERT REASON} ... This then is the result: 1). Excess baggage in improper forums which are the only reasonable place left to communicate a thought; 2). Lack of a PROPER forum to state/discuss one's ideas/thoughts The GROSS amount of communications (net.verbage) is NOT reduced by killing groups. Those who wish to express things merely look for the MOST APPROPRIATE PLACE to do so. Hence, they are not stayed by the absence of a proper forum. The thing missed by most netters in the wild abandonment of net.{several} was that sometimes a personal lunch hour was spent in amusement in obscure forums that were not work-related in any way. The second thing missed (I saw no comment on) is that USENET is NOW DYING. As each {idiot} kills another group that is "personally unamusing and without saving graces," the network gradually degenerates into a very small number of groups in which there is so much noise data that it is no longer worthwhile to carry any of the network at all. No matter what JUSTIFICATIONS AND RATIONALIZATIONS are used, a free network can only exist if it is free, by definition. That is the freedom to read or not read any group or to express/not express an opinion. This is what makes the network a DESIRABLE item to have in the "shop." Any site which no longer wishes to carry both WORK-RELATED and NON-WORK-RELATED topics available should not try to PREVENT their distribution at other sites by deleting them locally. This is in no way translatable as a free interchange of ideas (the INTERCHANGE is free, not necessarily the process of transferral.) A "backbone" site should be required to have some backbone in administering a "free" network in order to qualify as a "backbone" site. Spineless backbones are oxymorons. ...!ihnp4!sys1!sysvis!george
jsq@im4u.UUCP (John Quarterman) (01/11/86)
Put your (or sysvis's) money where your mouth is.
--
John Quarterman, UUCP: {gatech,harvard,ihnp4,pyramid,seismo}!ut-sally!im4u!jsq
ARPA Internet and CSNET: jsq@im4u.UTEXAS.EDU, jsq@sally.UTEXAS.EDU