radel@chopin.udel.edu (Todd Radel) (05/08/91)
Can all the Amiga freaks who've been posting to our already-crowded newsgroup listen up for just one teensy second? GET OUT OF HERE! Now that I've got your attention ... comp.sys.next is intended for the discussion of NeXT-related issues, not for Amiga owners to post thirty-line messages that say "Amigas are the best." You've got a newsgroup for this sort of thing (comp.sys.amiga.advocacy). Take it there and leave us alone! <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <> Todd Radel UseNet: radel@chopin.udel.edu <> <> English/Int'l. Relations undergrad Prodigy: GJDF25C <> <> University of Delaware KA3QCE <> <>** "Molag no LIKE core dumps! Molag EAT core dumps!" -- Chappy **<> <>**"There will be so little of that, it isn't even funny." -- The Lizard **<> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (05/08/91)
In article <17079@chopin.udel.edu> radel@chopin.udel.edu (Todd Radel) writes: >Can all the Amiga freaks who've been posting to our already-crowded >newsgroup listen up for just one teensy second? > >GET OUT OF HERE! > >Now that I've got your attention ... comp.sys.next is intended for the >discussion of NeXT-related issues, not for Amiga owners to post thirty-line >messages that say "Amigas are the best." You've got a newsgroup for this >sort of thing (comp.sys.amiga.advocacy). Take it there and leave us alone! > > ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> ><> Todd Radel UseNet: radel@chopin.udel.edu <> ><> English/Int'l. Relations undergrad Prodigy: GJDF25C <> ><> University of Delaware KA3QCE <> ><>** "Molag no LIKE core dumps! Molag EAT core dumps!" -- Chappy **<> ><>**"There will be so little of that, it isn't even funny." -- The Lizard **<> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> You should learn a bit more about Usenet before you start flaming. Someone, i.e. ONE person, cross-posted to both newsgroups. Everyone else who replied to that post unknowing posted to both newsgroups. In fact, I didn't notice until you decided to post your flame. A flame was unnecessary. I have no desire to make your group as ridiculously crowded and uninformed as comp.sys.amiga.advocacy usually is. 8-) ANY REPLIES TO THIS POST WILL GO TO BOTH NEWSGROUPS The next time you post, check the line that says Newsgroups: and if there are two newsgroups in it remove the one you don't want to post to. It's that simple. -- Ethan "Brain! Brain! What is Brain?"
sck@watson.ibm.com (Scott C. Kennedy) (05/09/91)
As may have already been pointed out, the reason for the flooding of two newsgroup is our old friend "Cross-posting", I have re-directed this thread to /dev/null So, I hope not to see it in the future. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Scott C. Kennedy (sck@watson.ibm.com) | "All we are saying ... Distributed High Performance Computing | is give peace a chance..." I.B.M. Thomas J. Watson Research Facility | John Lennon - Dec. 8, 1980 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
sparkie@uhura.cs.wisc.edu (Mark Horn) (05/09/91)
No flames intended, but something needs to be cleared up here. And then perhaps we can get back to the business of talking about NeXTs or touting the superiority of amigas. In comp.sys.next article <1991May8.063518.5934@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> you wrote: > In article <17079@chopin.udel.edu> radel@chopin.udel.edu (Todd Radel) writes: > >Can all the Amiga freaks who've been posting to our already-crowded > >newsgroup listen up for just one teensy second? > > > >GET OUT OF HERE! > > > >Now that I've got your attention ... comp.sys.next is intended for the > >discussion of NeXT-related issues, not for Amiga owners to post thirty-line > >messages that say "Amigas are the best." You've got a newsgroup for this > >sort of thing (comp.sys.amiga.advocacy). Take it there and leave us alone! > > You should learn a bit more about Usenet before you start > flaming. Perhaps this is true, but you should also read a little bit of news.newusers. There is a "Netiquette" article posted periodically. This article clearly states that an article posted to any particular group ought to have something to do with the goals of that group. If it is not obvious, postings which state the superiority of amigas do not have anything to do with comp.sys.next - thus a user of comp.sys.next can "flame" someone who is not achieving those goals. > Someone, i.e. ONE person, cross-posted to both > newsgroups. Everyone else who replied to that post unknowing > posted to both newsgroups. That is irrelevant. The poster of any news article is fully responsible for his or her post - which includes making sure that he/she knows where it's going. And anyone following up to a cross posted article can direct the article to go to only the appropriate places. The point this person is trying to make is that the people who post to comp.sys.next (whether cross-posting or not) with posts devoid of anything valuable to the general goals of comp.sys.next (or any other group) are wasting bandwidth and other people's time - in particular those people who read comp.sys.next. > In fact, I didn't notice until you > decided to post your flame. A flame was unnecessary. Not true. If the "flame" causes the amiga folk who are cross posting, intentionally or otherwise, to leave, then it was more than necessary, it was effective. > I have no > desire to make your group as ridiculously crowded and uninformed > as comp.sys.amiga.advocacy usually is. 8-) Thank you. That is appreciated. However, the point is that if you HAPPEN to be making my newsgroup "rediculously crowded and uninformed" (intentionally or not), I have the right to tell you to stop. Your posting seems to suggest otherwise. > ANY REPLIES TO THIS POST WILL GO TO BOTH NEWSGROUPS > > The next time you post, check the line that says > Newsgroups: and if there are two newsgroups in it remove the one > you don't want to post to. It's that simple. EXACTLY! You advocate the practice that the original posters ignored - checking the newsgroups line. And a reader of comp.sys.next has every right to "flame" anyone who is obviously not fulfilling the goals of comp.sys.next (this applies to any other group, too) > -- Ethan Again, I don't intend any flames here. If you wish to state that amigas are directly created by the hand of God - by all means do so! But please do it in the group(s) that are more appropriately suited for that. The newsgroup comp.sys.next is not one of them. - sparkie (Mark Horn) -- sparkie@uhura.cs.wisc.edu NeXT Campus Consultant @ U. of Wisconsin, Madison
dac@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton) (05/09/91)
In article <17079@chopin.udel.edu>, Todd Radel writes: > Can all the Amiga freaks who've been posting to our already-crowded > newsgroup listen up for just one teensy second? > > GET OUT OF HERE! > > Now that I've got your attention ... comp.sys.next is intended for the > discussion of NeXT-related issues, not for Amiga owners to post thirty-line > messages that say "Amigas are the best." You've got a newsgroup for this > sort of thing (comp.sys.amiga.advocacy). Take it there and leave us alone! What a geek! The NEXT Vs Amiga flamewars have been going on for the past three months, fired by the arrogant and inquisitive types of the net. Any replies about NEXT machines are going to be redirected to your newsgroup. The shit flows both ways, Mr Radel. Get your idiotic NEXT players to stop posting to Amiga newsgroups, and I'm sure you'll see a marked reduction in crossposts. And your side is usually the instigator of the flames anyway. :-( Dac --
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (05/10/91)
In article <1991May8.141750.18975@ni.umd.edu> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes: > And I disagree, a FLAME is necessary. A flame is never necessary. It makes you feel better, a most selfish goal, but it never accomplishes anything. Well, it makes people think less of you. > Take it where it belongs. comp.sys.next.advocacy It's time. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
dac@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton) (05/11/91)
In article <t-bHeoo@cs.psu.edu>, Michael D Mellinger writes: > In article <191d8c10.ARN1dfa@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au> dac@prolix.pub.uu.oz.au (Andrew Clayton) writes: > > The shit flows both ways, Mr Radel. Get your idiotic NEXT players to stop > posting to Amiga newsgroups, and I'm sure you'll see a marked reduction in > crossposts. > > Who started cross posting anyway? Editing the newsgroups: line is a > quick fix. Yeah, sure, but that's not the point. Radel comes in here with a rocket for c.s.a.advocacy, when it's the NEXT mob of ingrates who are the prime contributor to the problems that c.s.n has with 'crossposting'. Honestly, if people took notice of ALL of the mewling about crossposting, heck, there wouldn't be anything BUT arguments about who is crossposting what to where. The POINT of my message was the the very people who escalated the entire shitful argument about poxy NEXT computers were already within the legion of braindeath that is nomenclaturized as comp.sys.next. It's their fault. Fuck, I don't want to read the inane shit about whose machine can run a 68040 and who has better resolution, and who can have the biggest applications. It's not of interest to the general Amiga community. Let the NEXT flamelords suffer the slings and arrows of derision that THEY THEMSELVES initiated. > I don't know about you guys, but now that school is out I want to get > some work done(NeXT hacking, of course) and I can't possible followup > to 12-40 messages a day. Go for it. The less ossified opinionated crap I've got to wade through from you NEXT freaks, the better! > Shall we do this again in 6 months. :-) Oh, I've no doubt that you'll want to prod and poke and get some reaction from a group that basically doesn't care about your platform of choice. Your boring presence will be relegated to bit-buckets around the globe. Enjoy your ongoing extended vacation in nowheresville. Dac --
groenewo@fwi.uva.nl (Ferry van het Groenewoud) (05/13/91)
sparkie@uhura.cs.wisc.edu (Mark Horn) writes: >No flames intended, but something needs to be cleared up here. And then >perhaps we can get back to the business of talking about NeXTs or touting the >superiority of amigas. >In comp.sys.next article <1991May8.063518.5934@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> you >wrote: >> In article <17079@chopin.udel.edu> radel@chopin.udel.edu (Todd Radel) writes >> >Can all the Amiga freaks who've been posting to our already-crowded >> >newsgroup listen up for just one teensy second? >> > >> >GET OUT OF HERE! >> > >> >Now that I've got your attention ... comp.sys.next is intended for the >> >discussion of NeXT-related issues, not for Amiga owners to post thirty-line >> >messages that say "Amigas are the best." You've got a newsgroup for this >> >sort of thing (comp.sys.amiga.advocacy). Take it there and leave us alone! There is something in your tone that I don't like. Maybe I can find out what that is. >> >> You should learn a bit more about Usenet before you start >> flaming. >Perhaps this is true, but you should also read a little bit of news.newusers. >There is a "Netiquette" article posted periodically. This article clearly >states that an article posted to any particular group ought to have something ...to do with Next computers (?) (unintentionally deleted this line!) claiming >the superiority of amigas do not have anything to do with comp.sys.next - thus >a user of comp.sys.next can "flame" someone who is not achieving those goals. The decision if an article posted to any group has anything to do with that group is ofcourse subjective and ill defined. It doesn't occur too much that someone gets told his post doesn't belong somewhere. If people started to respond publicly on every posting that her or his posting is out of line, there would be twice as much postings on Usenet. I think the above flame is way out of line, and the somewhat arrogant tone of it too. Personally, I think that the - by some persons claimed - superiority of Amiga's over NeXT is of interest of NeXT owners very much. A useful comparision between the computers could come forth from that. >> Someone, i.e. ONE person, cross-posted to both >> newsgroups. Everyone else who replied to that post unknowing >> posted to both newsgroups. Ah well, nothing wrong with that, is there, the one that posted it to both csaa and csn had a good reason for it, at least that's my opinion. So the replies should go to BOTH groups as well so that all parties involved can read about it. But wait, I believe someone else wants to say something about this too! Let's hear it from him: >That is irrelevant. The poster of any news article is fully responsible for >his or her post - which includes making sure that he/she knows where it's >going. And anyone following up to a cross posted article can direct the >article to go to only the appropriate places. Good! Only to the appropriate places! That's just what the ones that replied did! Or did they crosspost it to alt.tv.muppets as well? >The point this person is trying to make is that the people who post to >comp.sys.next (whether cross-posting or not) with posts devoid of anything >valuable to the general goals of c.sys.next (or any other group) are wasting >bandwidth and other people's time - in particular those people who read >comp.sys.next. Oh no let's not begin discussions about this again, like "you know where killfiles are for?" You know that, don't you? Don't you?! DON'T YOU?! And oh yeah such a good point about wasting bandwidth, yeah let's all be careful with stupid articles! What really pisses me off are long articles of certain individuals that want to get the right on their side by using all kinds of off-the-subject matters in their articles. And if you don't want to waste time, my friend, then don't use Usenet and take a magazine, so that you don't have to be afraid that you might run into an article that is not of your interest. >> In fact, I didn't notice until you >> decided to post your flame. A flame was unnecessary. >Not true. If the "flame" causes the amiga folk who are cross posting, >intentionally or otherwise, to leave, then it was more than necessary, it was >effective. You sound like "OH STOP IT PLEASE, IT HURTS TOO MUCH! M O T H E R !!!" I wonder why. >> I have no >> desire to make your group as ridiculously crowded and uninformed >> as comp.sys.amiga.advocacy usually is. 8-) Very funny said, I noticed the smiley. But wait, someone is taking this serious! >Thank you. That is appreciated. However, the point is that if you HAPPEN to >be making my newsgroup "rediculously crowded and uninformed" (intentionally or >not), I have the right to tell you to stop. Your posting seems to suggest >otherwise. You have the right to tell anyone to stop, but everyone has got the right to go on if he or she thinks his or her posting should go to a particular newsgroup. Bad luck to you I guess. >> ANY REPLIES TO THIS POST WILL GO TO BOTH NEWSGROUPS >> >> The next time you post, check the line that says >> Newsgroups: and if there are two newsgroups in it remove the one >> you don't want to post to. It's that simple. >EXACTLY! You advocate the practice that the original posters ignored - >checking the newsgroups line. And a reader of comp.sys.next has every right to >"flame" anyone who is obviously not fulfilling the goals of c.sys.next (this >applies to any other group, too) Oh aren't we ignorant! Yes yes, your statement applies to csaa as well, just the same as this posting applies to csn. And who tells who is ignorant around here? Probably the postings were intended to go to both csaa and csn. I still can't see the real reason of your flame although I made up a reason for myself. But I decided to keep that to myself, but I know that anyone with a little bit of attention will have noticed what this is all about already. >> -- Ethan >Again, I don't intend any flames here. If you wish to state that amigas are >directly created by the hand of God - by all means do so! But please do it in >the group(s) that are more appropriately suited for that. The newsgroup >comp.sys.next is not one of them. Maybe if you close your eyes, the Amigas will dissapear entirely. >- sparkie (Mark Horn) >-- >sparkie@uhura.cs.wisc.edu >NeXT Campus Consultant @ U. of Wisconsin, Madison -- Mac. The noise of a wrong calibration. PS/2. You can't see the new thing. IBM. The toys of a dead generation. Sun. You can't feel the beating. NeXT. The choice cause of bad information. Atari. You'll need some healing. Amiga. For boys with real imagination. __ Amiga. You can reach the ceiling. __/ / Ferry van het Groenewoud \__/ groenewo@fwi.uva.nl
ddj@zardoz.club.cc.cmu.edu (Doug DeJulio) (05/13/91)
In article <1991May12.230031.15898@fwi.uva.nl> groenewo@fwi.uva.nl (Ferry van het Groenewoud) writes: > Probably the postings were intended to go to both csaa and csn. I don't think so. This sort of problem crops up occasionally. Somone posts something of genuine interest to both groups. Then a novice user wants to post to just one of the groups, and does it by selecting the "followup" option on their news software. They figure that if they edit the subject line, it's the same as a fresh posting. So, something only intended for one group ends up going to all of them. I think this is what happened. The original crosspost was fine. *Some* of the followups were fine. But some of the followups had a different topic, and had *absolutely* nothing to do with the NeXT. For a couple of days nobody said anything, and the volume of the crossposted stuff grew, and grew, and grew. Some people got short tempers from this and started flaming vigorously. -- Doug DeJulio dd26+@andrew.cmu.edu (AMS/ATK mail) ddj@zardoz.club.cc.cmu.edu (NeXT mail)