ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (06/21/85)
> > If you don't like the way things are said in (altogether now..) > >NET.FLAME, > > DON'T READ THE GROUP THEN!!! > > I don't, but I still see this kind of drivel. Note the "Newsgroups:" > line in the header: > > Newsgroups: net.flame,net.women > > This stuff is also in net.women. > > Now, *FLAME ON* before you berate someone for inappropriate postings > engage your own brain and look at what *you're* doing. I couldn't > care less what shows up in net.flame, or how it's phrased. In other > groups, a modicum of decorum is expected. Scott showed none. *FLAME OFF* > > Ed Gould mt Xinu, 2910 Seventh St., Berkeley, CA 94710 USA > {ucbvax,decvax}!mtxinu!ed +1 415 644 0146 Perhaps, we should enforce some more social reform through software (as was done with the last release of news) in that when you hit followup to a message for more than one group that it asks you group by group which of the ones you wish your followup to appear in (it already knows to followup net.general -> net.followup). -Ron
jss@sjuvax.UUCP (J. Shapiro) (06/23/85)
[Pacman's revenge....] > Perhaps, we should enforce some more social reform through software (as > was done with the last release of news) in that when you hit followup > to a message for more than one group that it asks you group by group > which of the ones you wish your followup to appear in (it already knows > to followup net.general -> net.followup). > > -Ron I think this is a good idea, as experience shows that allowing people to edit the followup lines optionally is not sufficient - in practice, we are obviously finding that they do not. My vote is yes, and I would offer to implement it, but by the time I got to it we would all be running Amber... Jonathan S. Shapiro Haverford College