[net.news.group] Net.Bizzare's Murder

jrm@wdl1.UUCP (10/29/85)

/***** wdl1:net.flame / jrm / 12:30 pm  Oct 21, 1985*/


The following is mail sent to Gene Spafford (gatech!spaf) in response
to his posting in net.announce regarding the murder of net.bizzarre (sp?).
I suggest that memorial services for net.bizzarre be held in net.general.


**************************************
Check fuel.
Set intensity to KILL.
Open FIRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
**************************************
All right, so you're not a net-fascist; you're a net-jerk.
Your mother must be proud of you.
We are aware that there always has been a small number of
people on the net who disapproved of net.bizzarre; however,
it established its right to exist by the fact that a much larger
number of people approved of it. This is proven by the very 
activity in the group that ypu find so objectionable.
So you overrule the majority, but you're not a fascist. Are you a
communist instead? They operate by these sorts of rules,too.
So the situation is that:
  If too few people are interested in a group, it dies.
  If too many people are interested in a group, it dies.
You want to have it both ways.
	If it is desired to take the net all the way back to
being strictly technical, I could go along with that. At least there
is some logic to it.
	HOWEVER, saying that net.bizzarre is number one on the
hit list indicates brain damage.  It is an interesting group
that is mostly peaceable and civilized; its flame and slander content
is remarkably low.
	If you are going to kill groups, I think there are better 
places to start. Or do you consider that net.flame and net.abortion
have redeeming social value?
	Yes, I'll sign it.
				Jim McGowan
				fortune!wdl1!jrm


/* ---------- */
P.S. This may be considered a vote for the re-creation of
net.bizarre.
I also failed to see any notice in net.bizarre that it was being
considered for deletion. Surely you net fascists are not going to
continue to maintain that such a posting was made?

spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) (11/10/85)

In article <807@wdl1.UUCP> jrm@wdl1.UUCP writes:
>The following is mail sent to Gene Spafford (gatech!spaf) in response
>to his posting in net.announce regarding the murder of net.bizzarre (sp?).
>I suggest that memorial services for net.bizzarre be held in net.general.
>
>**************************************
>Check fuel.
>Set intensity to KILL.
>Open FIRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>**************************************
>All right, so you're not a net-fascist; you're a net-jerk.
[...and further rabid barking deleted.  -spaf]

Ken Arnold sent me the following a week or two ago, and I find i 
very germane to postings like jrm's [posted with permission]:

>There is this Indian holy man sitting under a tree, meditating, with
>his begging bowl in front of him.  As is the custom, many passing
>people pay homage with some offering of food or wealth, according to
>their means.
>
>One ruffian, however, sees the holy man, and stops to taunt and abuse
>him.  After some time of hurled insults, the holy man opens his eyes
>and gently beckons the man closer.  Puzzled, the rogue approaches.
>
>"If you bring me precious gold, and I do not accept it, whose gold is
>it?" asked the wise man.
>
>"Why, mine of course!  If you do not want my gold, then it is still
>mine," ansered the rogue.
>
>"If you bring me lucious fruits as a gift, and I do not want them, to
>whom do the fruits belong?"
>
>"Why, they are mine, of course," came the reply.
>
>"If you hurl insults at me," asked the holy man, " and I do not accept
>them, to whom do they eventually return?"  And he closed his eyes and
>waited for the answer that never came.

BTW, "gatech" no longer accepts or passes nut.flame, so I'm directing
followups to that group.
-- 
Gene "wedding done, thesis to go" Spafford
The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332
CSNet:	Spaf @ GATech		ARPA:	Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ Relay.CS.NET
uucp:	...!{akgua,decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spaf

herbie@polaris.UUCP (Herb Chong) (11/11/85)

In article <807@wdl1.UUCP> jrm@wdl1.UUCP writes:
>We are aware that there always has been a small number of
>people on the net who disapproved of net.bizzarre; however,
>it established its right to exist by the fact that a much larger
>number of people approved of it. 

the number is not small, and most importantly, consists mostly of the
people who pay for the transport of net.bizarre.  if you want to pay
for it, you're welcome to.

>So you overrule the majority, but you're not a fascist. Are you a
>communist instead? They operate by these sorts of rules,too.

the majority?  if you count the posters to net.bizarre, you will find
about 40 people.  total.  since its existence.  if that's a majority,
then i need to learn the math you use.  even the people who started
net.bizarre are beginning to think that maybe it wasn't such a good
idea after all.

>So the situation is that:
>  If too few people are interested in a group, it dies.
>  If too many people are interested in a group, it dies.
>You want to have it both ways.  

too many by whose numbers?  have you polled the net?  can you submit
proof?  even the net.news.group discussion that lead to the "temporary"
reinstatement of net.bizarre involved fewer than 100 people.

>       HOWEVER, saying that net.bizzarre is number one on the 
>hit list indicates brain damage.  It is an interesting group 
>that is mostly peaceable and civilized; its flame and slander content 
>is remarkably low.  

interesting to whom?  even some of the creators are knocking the drivel
in it.  if it kept to the spirit of Ripley's, then maybe one could
justify it.  instead, it consists mostly of stupid jokes which
people have heard before and are cross posted to net.jokes anyway.

>       If you are going to kill groups, I think there are better 
>places to start. Or do you consider that net.flame and net.abortion 
>have redeeming social value?

net.flame will die with a few weeks.  about half the backbone has decided
to stop transmitting it already.  within weeks, most of the rest will
make their decisions.  i would not be optimistic about it if you read it.
as for net.abortion, it does have a redeeming social value, but the
people seem to forget that it's a highly emotional issue and that is
how they are responding.  i don't think there can ever be a rational
solution to net.abortion.

>I also failed to see any notice in net.bizarre that it was being 
>considered for deletion. Surely you net fascists are not going to 
>continue to maintain that such a posting was made?

i'm surprised that, avid reader that you are, you missed it.  it was 
announced that it would go away at least twice.

Herb Chong...

I'm still user-friendly -- I don't byte, I nybble....

VNET,BITNET,NETNORTH,EARN: HERBIE AT YKTVMH
UUCP:  {allegra|cbosgd|cmcl2|decvax|ihnp4|seismo}!philabs!polaris!herbie
CSNET: herbie.yktvmh@ibm-sj.csnet
ARPA:  herbie.yktvmh.ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
========================================================================
DISCLAIMER:  what you just read was produced by pouring lukewarm
tea for 42 seconds onto 9 people chained to 6 Ouiji boards.