greid@adobe.UUCP (Glenn Reid) (10/21/85)
Keywords: The hell you say
Sort of an open letter to Gene Spafford:
You and your backbone site friends have every right to not FORWARD
net.bizarre, and you probably would be justified in doing so. I read
net.bizarre, and have even been known to post to it, but it is true
that the group is filled with drivel and nonsense.
However, the net is an anarchy, as you have pointed out, and although
you have the right to not forward any given newsgroup, you do not have
the right to arbitrarily send out an RMGROUP on it. Save your own
phone bills--I realize the burden placed on the "backbone" sites, and
evereyone appreciates the mail forwarding and netnews forwarding that
is done by such sites--but there is no need or sense in deliberately
trying to destroy it for everybody else.
YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE
THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU.
There. Flaming runs in the family, but nothing personal, you under-
stand. I don't belive in the wasting of resources for nerds to post
the value of pi, but fair is fair. And if a backbone site is not
prepared to be fair across the board, then it shouldn't be a backbone
site.
Glenn Reid {backbone | backbone | decwrl | glacier}!adobe!greid
--
There are stopped jobs.david@ukma.UUCP (David Herron, NPR Lover) (10/22/85)
In article <762@adobe.UUCP> greid@adobe.UUCP (Glenn Reid) writes: >Sort of an open letter to Gene Spafford: > [...] >YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE >THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU. Uh. you have a short memory there. Don't you remember talk about this a month or two ago? Didn't we poll the net on the subject? (I know, because I was one of the original suggestors to kill the group). At the time opinion seemed to run about 50-50. Plus the quality seemed to improve a little. But really, when you look at it, its really drivel, its really HUGE, and it was never properly created. I support killing the group. However, like spaf said ... if y'all want to keep it around, keep it amongst yourselves. Don't spread it around. >There. Flaming runs in the family, but nothing personal, you under- >stand. I don't belive in the wasting of resources for nerds to post >the value of pi, but fair is fair. And if a backbone site is not >prepared to be fair across the board, then it shouldn't be a backbone >site. I don't understand where you get off expecting the backbone to carry absolutely EVERY single piece that is posted. EVERYTHING has its limits ya know. -- David Herron, cbosgd!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET. English is a second language to me -- Baby talk was my first language.
revc@gwsd.UUCP (Bob Van Cleef) (10/22/85)
> Keywords: The hell you say > > Sort of an open letter to Gene Spafford: > > YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE > THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU. > > Glenn Reid {backbone | backbone | decwrl | glacier}!adobe!greid I personally would support giving Gene that right under the guidelines that he is using. I would rather have a net controlled by concensus of a few, then NO net at all. Maybe we need to set up a USENET Council, consisting of 'elected' representatives of the users. Any net user can run/participate electronically. Annual nominations and elections in net.news.council.elections, with the 13 net users with the highest number of votes becoming the dictators of the net for one year. They could discuss proposed changes in net.news.council. You wouldn't need the finacial support to go to USENIX, you wouldn't even have to be 36 years old, you would only need to prove net participation for over one year. Bob -- Bob Van Cleef {ihnp4|akgua|decvax|dcdwest|ucbvax} (619) 457-2701 ...sdcsvax!gwsd!revc Gateway Computer Systems CompuServe - [71565,533] 4980 Carroll Canyon Road San Diego, CA 92121
mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) (10/23/85)
From: greid@adobe.UUCP >YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE >THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU. As you may recall (but probably don't), this was discussed in net.news.group (the correct place for that sort of discussion) and people were polled. Also, the people who created net.bizarre didn't follow the rules in the first place. Looks to me like Spaf is in the right and the people who created and support net.bizarre are in the wrong. But what are you really complaining about? If the backbones don't forward it, it may as well be rmgrouped. It's not going to get very far, and will only have very local circulation. Funny, Spaf suggested making it a local or regional group in his post.... Looks like you're upset because Spaf asked the people who want it to go to the work of maintaining it. -Dragon -- UUCP: ...ucbvax!dual!lll-crg!dragon ARPA: monica.cellio@cmu-cs-cad or dragon@lll-crg
spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) (10/23/85)
So, the net is an anarchy, is it? Well, I'm just exercising my
rights under an anarchy -- I'm issuing "rmgroup" messages.
The majority (by a 18 to 1 margin, so far) of letters I've received
on this topic are in favor of the move, so if the net is a democracy,
then we''re still in the clear.
But you're missing the point altogether, I'm afraid. A "net" group
implies worldwide distribution. If no backbone site carries the group,
how is that a worldwide distribution? How is it even close? If you
want "net.bizarre" then create it on your machine. If you want to
share it with some other machines, fine, create a distribution for it
and call it by that name. I won't delete it. But as far as the rest
of the world is concerned, it isn't a "net" group.
And by the way, although some people like to proclaim that the
net is an anarchy, it isn't actually. And it hasn't been for
a long, long time. But that is a different discussion.
--
Gene "sometime in 1986" Spafford
The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332
CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ CSNet-Relay.ARPA
uucp: ...!{akgua,decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spafmcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) (10/23/85)
In article <382@cad.cs.cmu.edu> mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) writes: >From: greid@adobe.UUCP >>YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE >>THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU. > >As you may recall (but probably don't), this was discussed in net.news.group >(the correct place for that sort of discussion) and people were polled. Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the bizarre people participated. I know that I tend to read the "frivolous" newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I imagine that many others do the same. As a result, a group of serious people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup. WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE??? Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre. If anyone is interested (or not) send me mail. Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre could be created if there is enough interest. P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre. So unless I hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-) -- UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) (10/24/85)
From: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu >Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the >bizarre people participated. [...] >WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT >EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE??? I don't have the old posts to back this up, but I think the initial message in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well. If people can't take enough of an interest to read net.news.group when their pet group is being discussed, I hardly think the rest of the net is to blame. What you are implying is that almost every message in net.news.group should be cross-posted somewhere else as well. -Dragon P.S. This is obviously a vote against net.bizarre. -- UUCP: ...ucbvax!dual!lll-crg!dragon ARPA: monica.cellio@cmu-cs-cad or dragon@lll-crg
mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) (10/24/85)
In article <384@cad.cs.cmu.edu> mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) writes: >From: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu >>Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the >>bizarre people participated. [...] >>WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT >>EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE??? > >I don't have the old posts to back this up, but I think the initial message >in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well. I don't think so. If there was any mention of deletion in net.bizarre, it didn't mention voting. (I read EVERY article in net.bizarre, so I would remember seeing a deletion notice.) >If people can't take >enough of an interest to read net.news.group when their pet group is being >discussed, I hardly think the rest of the net is to blame. If I had known of the discussion, I would have read net.news.group and participated. THAT'S WHAT I'M COMPLAINING ABOUT!!! I would have been interested enough to read net.news.group IF I HAD KNOWN THAT MY "PET" GROUP WAS SCHEDULED FOR DELETION!!! Furthermore, I'm not blaming the rest of the net, only the people in net.news.group. :-) >What you are >implying is that almost every message in net.news.group should be >cross-posted somewhere else as well. In the case of messages about deletion, that's exactly what I'm implying. (OK, maybe not EVERY message, but the message that calls for votes should DEFINITELY be cross-posted.) If the voting had been cross-posted to net.bizarre, I would not be happy about the deletion, but I would have accepted it. But it wasn't, so I'm not and I don't. P.S. - I noticed that net.bizarre was back this morning. Since I "threatened" to recreate net.bizarre in a previous post, I want say that I didn't do it. (I DO believe in following rules.) -- UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
samson@h-sc1.UUCP (gregory samson) (10/24/85)
In article <384@cad.cs.cmu.edu> mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) writes: > >I don't have the old posts to back this up, but I think the initial message >in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well. If people can't take >enough of an interest to read net.news.group when their pet group is being >discussed, I hardly think the rest of the net is to blame. What you are >implying is that almost every message in net.news.group should be >cross-posted somewhere else as well. > I really don't think it was there. I've been reading net.bizarre for a long time now, and something like that would have caused me to jump on to net.news.group so fast I probably would have had trouble with the Fitzgerald contraction. Also, how am I to know that net.bizarre is being discussed on net.news.group? Telepathy? Word-of-mouth? From whom do I get this information? I think that messages in net.news.group RELATING TO THE DELETION OF GROUPS should be cross-posted to the group that is going to go. For instance, cross-posting deletion messages to net.games.video would likely draw little response. So? So the group gets wiped, that's what! Neat and simple, isn't it? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- G. T. Samson The Evil MicroWizard gts@wjh12.HARVARD.EDU
ron@brl-sem.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (10/24/85)
> > I personally would support giving Gene that right under the > guidelines that he is using. I would rather have a net > controlled by concensus of a few, then NO net at all. > And you have that. The net is an anarchy. The people who seize control of it are those who can yell the loudest and those who can back up what they are saying. If you want to make a power play, grab a bunch of modems and offer to feed news to everyone who wants it. After you control the net flow, you will be in the same postion as Spaf, et al. > Maybe we need to set up a USENET Council, consisting of 'elected' > representatives of the users. Any net user can run/participate > electronically. Annual nominations and elections in > net.news.council.elections, with the 13 net users with > the highest number of votes becoming the dictators of the net > for one year. They could discuss proposed changes in > net.news.council. You wouldn't need the finacial support > to go to USENIX, you wouldn't even have to be 36 years old, > you would only need to prove net participation for over one year. > This is likely go over even worse than the USENET corporation idea that was bounced around a couple of years back. I think the most organization you are likely to get is sort of like OPEC, where the big time sites get together on their own and form a coalition. I don't disagree with most of what SPAF is trying to do, but he seems to be specializing in doing it in away that is designed to piss-off the maximum number of users. -Ron
jsq@im4u.UUCP (John Quarterman) (10/25/85)
> So, the net is an anarchy, is it? Well, I'm just exercising my > rights under an anarchy -- I'm issuing "rmgroup" messages. ... > And by the way, although some people like to proclaim that the > net is an anarchy, it isn't actually. And it hasn't been for > a long, long time. But that is a different discussion. > -- > Gene "sometime in 1986" Spafford Well, I'd like to know what your definition of anarchy is. Also whether you've ever read any Kropotkin or Bakunin. And what form of government or lack thereof you think USENET resembles. By the way, I think you're right about net.bizarre: it was a bad idea from the first and got worse. But you're wrong about net.internat: it's too verbose and it should have been a moderated newsgroup, but it serves a real purpose and is of more value than 80% of other newsgroups. Claiming the only question is due process and not content of the newsgroups is petty and undeserving of you and the others supporting that view. -- John Quarterman, UUCP: {ihnp4,seismo,harvard,gatech}!ut-sally!jsq ARPA Internet and CSNET: jsq@sally.UTEXAS.EDU, formerly jsq@ut-sally.ARPA
edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (10/25/85)
[Yes, I know this is in three groups.] In article <616@k.cs.cmu.edu>, mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes: > > Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the > bizarre people participated. I know that I tend to read the "frivolous" > newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I > imagine that many others do the same. As a result, a group of serious > people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup. 'Silly' is an understatement, try 'worthless'. > > WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT > EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE??? How could possibly have noticed it in there? There was SO much GARBAGE in net.bizarre that anything of any value would be quickly lost. > > Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre. If anyone is interested (or > not) send me mail. Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre > could be created if there is enough interest. There's an idea. Create a mailing list. > > P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre. So unless I > hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-) Please NO!! I don't care if you did use a ':-)', that's not funny. Keep your trash to yourself. Don't pollute the net with it. > -- > UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu -- Edward C. Bennett UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward /* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */ "Goodnight M.A."
clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke) (10/25/85)
In article <384@cad.cs.cmu.edu> mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) writes: >From: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu >>Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the >>bizarre people participated. [...] >>WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT >>EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE??? > >I don't have the old posts to back this up, but I think the initial message >in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well.... Yes. I don't usually read net.news.group, but I used to read net.bizarre occasionally after turning my mind to mush by working too long in the evening. My current bout of net.new... reading began after a message appeared in net.bizarre telling people it was about to vanish. It should vanish, too. There are better ways to harden a mushy mind. About net.internat: I read it during its short life, and agree that it should be recreated after the proper discussion. However -- speaking as one who is a little overwhelmed (if you can be "a little" overwhelmed) by the number of newsgroups, the volume in some of them, and the confusing names of others, I do think that (1) a better name than net.internat could perhaps be found, and (2) new groups should not spring up without following some sensible protocol. It's a pain checking out every new group with a vaguely interesting sounding name, and I'd like to know that its creation has followed rational discussion. The current protocol for group creation sounds quite adequate to me. Indeed, I can't imagine any very different protocol that could work. Clearly, any successful protocol must be independent of the content of the proposed group, since such a large variety of people are to be served by the net; clearly, also, there must be rules to prevent unthinking proliferation of groups; clearly, also, all groups must follow the same rules. I think that means net.internat has been treated correctly. But let's see it recreated after a proper discussion. of new groups that would seem, well, strange to -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 {allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke
clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke) (10/27/85)
In article <617@k.cs.cmu.edu> mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes: >>>WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT >>>EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE??? >>I don't have the old posts to back this up, but I think the initial message >>in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well. > >I don't think so. If there was any mention of deletion in net.bizarre, it >didn't mention voting. (I read EVERY article in net.bizarre, so I would >remember seeing a deletion notice.) If you really read every article in net.bizarre, I doubt that you can now remember anything at all....:-) I am very sure that there was a mention in net.bizarre of the debate in this group. I don't think it mentioned voting, but in any normal group that should have been unnecessary. I presume the reason why this group was not swamped by net.bizarrers demanding that it be retained was either (for some of them) they didn't have enough sense to figure out what was going on [suppose I'd better :-) here too] or (for most) they could see they were just fooling around and couldn't honestly claim the group should stay alive. -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 {allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke
mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) (10/27/85)
In article <32378@lanl.ARPA> hhg@a.UUCP (Harold H Gaines) writes: >... In light of this, I believe that since the following groups are >strictly for the information of the individual, and not the organizations we >are associated with, they should be removed along with net.bizarre: > > net.abortion > net.bicycle > ... > et cetera >If recreational groups like net.bizarre are so terrible, I believe that for >Justice's sake all of them should be removed. > Harold H Gaines I agree. I vote to remove ALL of these groups, AND net.flame. Net.bizarre may have been "silly" and "worthless", but it was rarely offensive. Net.flame IS offensive. (Remember this summer's discussion of "Women and the Consumption of Toilet Paper"??) If net.bizarre deserves to die, then net.flame deserves to die a thousand times over. --Mike -- UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu "It came time to move, so I packed up my Salvador Dali print of two blindfolded dental hygienists trying to make a circle on an Etch-a-Sketch..."
ins_akaa@jhunix.UUCP (Kenneth Adam Arromdee) (10/28/85)
In article <296@ukecc.UUCP> edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: >[Yes, I know this is in three groups.] >In article <616@k.cs.cmu.edu>, mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes: >> Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the >> bizarre people participated. I know that I tend to read the "frivolous" >> newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I >> imagine that many others do the same. As a result, a group of serious >> people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup. > > 'Silly' is an understatement, try 'worthless'. If someone is an extremist who thinks net.religion.jewish is worthless, should it be removed? Regardless of whether you think it's worthless, deciding that a group should not exist because it is "worthless" is censorship. You can say that all non-technical groups are "worthless", but once you have agreed that some such groups should exist, you should not use "I think it's worthless" as a reason to selectively decide that some should exist and some should not. >> WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT >> EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE??? > > How could possibly have noticed it in there? There was SO much >GARBAGE in net.bizarre that anything of any value would be quickly lost. This is patently ridiculous. Don't post it because nobody will read it anyway? You have based a totally unwarranted conclusion on your prejudicial viewpoint of net.bizarre (i.e., it's full of garbage). If you feel that it's garbage, that's your opinion, but don't use that as an excuse not to inform its readers of something you know will affect them. Furthermore, I am located at a university which does not permit me to read net.news.group. Leaving discussions about a group's fate out of the group whose fate is being discussed is not fair to those who will not, or in my case, CANNOT, access those discussions otherwise. >> Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre. If anyone is interested (or >> not) send me mail. Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre >> could be created if there is enough interest. > > There's an idea. Create a mailing list. This seems to be inconsistent with your remark below not to "pollute the net". Mail does go over the net, you know! True, you don't have to read someone else's mail, but you don't have to read net.bizarre either if you don't want to. Furthermore, the original net.bizarre deletion announcement also said "DON'T consider setting up a mailing list that would end up passing the equivalent of 'net.bizarre' through the mail..." >> P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre. So unless I >> hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-) > > Please NO!! I don't care if you did use a ':-)', that's not >funny. Keep your trash to yourself. Don't pollute the net with it. >Edward C. Bennett As I already said, if you think something is trash, that is not a sufficient justification for not letting someone else who doesn't think so read it. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------- If you know the alphabet up to 'k', you can teach it up to 'k'. Kenneth Arromdee BITNET: G46I4701 at JHUVM and INS_AKAA at JHUVMS CSNET: ins_akaa@jhunix.CSNET ARPA: ins_akaa%jhunix@hopkins.ARPA UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!aplcen!jhunix!ins_akaa
mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) (10/28/85)
In article <1541@utcsri.UUCP> clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke) writes: >In article <617@k.cs.cmu.edu> mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes: >>... If there was any mention of deletion in net.bizarre, it >>didn't mention voting. (I read EVERY article in net.bizarre, so I would >>remember seeing a deletion notice.) > >If you really read every article in net.bizarre, I doubt that you can now >remember anything at all....:-) Actually, I was this way long before I started reading net.bizarre. :-) >I am very sure that there was a mention in net.bizarre of the debate in >this group. I am equally sure that there wasn't. Does anybody know for sure? Did anybody archive net.bizarre? >I presume the reason why this group was not >swamped by net.bizarrers demanding that it be retained was either (for some >of them) they didn't have enough sense to figure out what was going on >[suppose I'd better :-) here too] or (for most) they could see they were >just fooling around and couldn't honestly claim the group should stay alive. IF there was any mention that net.bizarre might be deleted (and I don't admit that there was), it was very brief and was probably thought to be a joke. (Come to think of it, I seem to remember a message suggesting that net.bizarre should be the first newsgroup to commit suicide. Was THAT the mention that you are thinking of??? If so, are you surprised that no one responded?) I dare say that net.bizarre had as much reason to exist (if not more) than net.flame, net.jokes, or a lot of other newsgroups. (Net.bizarre was originally created illegally, but it WAS eventually accepted by the Powers That Be. I can't believe that anyone is actually trying to argue that net.bizarre was deleted because it was illegally created 3 MONTHS AGO!!?) If everyone is so interested in reducing net traffic, why do we still have net.flame??? I'm still interested in hearing from anybody who wants to save net.bizarre and/or create mail.bizarre. Actually, I'm not certain that I need net.bizarre any more. Net.news.group is almost as much fun! :-) -- UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu "It came time to move, so I packed up my Salvador Dali print of two blindfolded dental hygienists trying to make a circle on an Etch-a-Sketch..."
john@gcc-milo.ARPA (John Allred) (10/29/85)
In article <621@k.cs.cmu.edu> mcb@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes: > >I agree. I vote to remove ALL of these groups, AND net.flame. Net.bizarre >may have been "silly" and "worthless", but it was rarely offensive. >Net.flame IS offensive. (Remember this summer's discussion of "Women and >the Consumption of Toilet Paper"??) If net.bizarre deserves to die, then >net.flame deserves to die a thousand times over. > --Mike If you don't like such discussions, Mike, why are you here? You *do* know where your 'u' key is, right? -- John Allred General Computer Company uucp: seismo!harvard!gcc-milo!john ^^^^ note new path-------------||
vc155ah@unmc.UUCP (10/30/85)
In article <> mjc@cad.cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio) writes: >From: greid@adobe.UUCP >>YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE >>THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU. > >As you may recall (but probably don't), this was discussed in net.news.group >(the correct place for that sort of discussion) and people were polled. Also, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What people? I never saw <any> polls in the group itself. I never saw any <real> discussions on disbanding the newsgroup, or an article on where poor grunt type users could go to grovel before the Gods of the Net for the right to a newsgroup to discuss the random and bizarre occurance in life! Maybe what my gripe is that if I had never been 'strolling' through the newsgroups and hadn't during my random wanderings come across and article in this newsgroup about the disbanding of net.bizarre, I would, probably like many others, be wondering what in the hell happened to the group. Ronald C. Rosul Jr. (vc155ah!unmc!unmvax)
cjsgro@watrose.UUCP (Carlo Sgro) (10/30/85)
First of all, this discussion does NOT belong in net.misc, OK? Secondly, In article <1050@jhunix.UUCP> ins_akaa@jhunix.ARPA (Kenneth Adam Arromdee) writes: > >Furthermore, I am located at a university which does not permit me to read >net.news.group. Leaving discussions about a group's fate out of the group >whose fate is being discussed is not fair to those who will not, or in >my case, CANNOT, access those discussions otherwise. > Wow. Talk about priorities :-). WITHOUT getting into the argument as to whether or not net.bizarre should exist or not, I would like to know how an institution on the net can justify carrying net.bizarre and NOT net.news.group. I consider net.news.group to be up there in importance with net.announce.newusers (which, unfortunately, too many people tend to ignore). WHY does jhunix.ARPA not carry net.news.group? Could it be that they carry it but (as Mr. Arromdee states) they don't allow certain users to read it? Does their feed not carry it? Have they decided that it is a spurious newsgroup? What's the scoop????? -- Carlo Sgro ...![ihnp4||decvax||allegra||clyde||utzoo]!watmath!watrose!cjsgro "ihnp4 Express: Overnight to the USA or you don't pay!"
ins_amap@jhunix.UUCP (Mark Aden Poling) (10/30/85)
How bizarre. Something a lot of people really cared about gets an elaborate execution, while groups that have been sitting around for months with less than a hundred articles to their names are seen as "beneficial". "God is on the side with the largest artillery." Mark!
roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) (11/01/85)
> I dare say that net.bizarre had as much reason to exist (if not more) than > net.flame, net.jokes, or a lot of other newsgroups. I would have said "net.bizarre has as little reason to exist as net.flame, net.jokes, and a lot of other newsgroups". -- Roy Smith <allegra!phri!roy> System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
kirsch@sjuvax.UUCP (P. Kirsch) (11/04/85)
In article <1064@jhunix.UUCP> ins_amap@jhunix.UUCP (Mark Aden Poling) writes: >How bizarre. Something a lot of people really cared about gets an >elaborate execution, while groups that have been sitting around for >months with less than a hundred articles to their names are seen as >"beneficial". > >"God is on the side with the largest artillery." > Mark! For those of you that are still interested in net.bizarre someone wrote to me regarding a possible bizarre mailing list. If any of you are interested his name is Michael Browne and the e-mail address I have for him is: allegra!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb If you can't reach that address send it to me and I'll pass it along. I am dying for the recreation of net.bizarre but if a mailing list can be organized that would be almost as good. -- Another wunnerful letter from the semi-intelligent rotting brain of: Paul Kirsch St. Joseph's University Philadelphia, Pa { astrovax | allegra | bpa | burdvax } !sjuvax!kirsch Warning: Objects in Terminal Room are Closer than they Appear...
wersan@daemen.UUCP (John Slasher Wersan III) (11/05/85)
> Keywords: The hell you say > > Sort of an open letter to Gene Spafford: > > You and your backbone site friends have every right to not FORWARD > net.bizarre, and you probably would be justified in doing so. I read > net.bizarre, and have even been known to post to it, but it is true > that the group is filled with drivel and nonsense. > ....... > > YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE > THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU. > > I don't belive in the wasting of resources for nerds to post > the value of pi, but fair is fair. > > Glenn Reid {backbone | backbone | decwrl | glacier}!adobe!greid > As a co-news administrater, when I saw the rmgroup control message reach our site, I took it with a heavy heart, one of the few things that I looked forward to was the things that I would read in net.bizarre. But as it was pointed out the cost was very high, so I accepted the removal of the group. But after reading this article, what I think would have been a better way, was to have those sites that did not want to receive the group just to remove it at their site, or not accept the newsgroup at all. Then those sites that still wanted it could keep it. -- John Wersan UUCP : {decvax,dual,rocksanne,rocksvax}!sunybcs!daemen!wersan inhp4!kitty!daemen!wersan "The doctor said I had dain bramage... But my friends don't know what 'dat shit is"