ugzannin@sunybcs.UUCP (Adrian Zannin) (08/15/85)
Sorry, but I think that it's time for me to fly and leave this newsgroup.
Over the last two months I have been reading the group and I find it getting
quite boring. I personally feel that most of the stuff that gets posted
these days belongs in net.consumers or net.legal. Well, time for me to hit
the Big U...bye...
--
Adrian Zannin
..{bbncca,decvax,dual,rocksvax,watmath,sbcs}!sunybcs!ugzannin
CSNET: ugzannin@Buffalo.CSNET
ARPANET: ugzannin%Buffalo@csnet-relay.ARPA
BITNET: ugzannin@sunybcs.BITNETmlg@akgua.UUCP (M.L. Graham [Mike]) (08/20/85)
> Sorry, but I think that it's time for me to fly and leave this newsgroup. >Over the last two months I have been reading the group and I find it getting >quite boring. I personally feel that most of the stuff that gets posted >these days belongs in net.consumers or net.legal. Well, time for me to hit >the Big U...bye... > Adrian Zannin I assume Adrian is refering the discussions on DWI, 55 MPH speed limit, the legality (morality?) of radar detectors etc that have been the subject of a lot of the postings recently. Maybe what we need is a new group, net.auto.tech where technical discussions can be posted. You know - "my 83 Ford/Chevy/whatever does this etc etc. Help" Then the opinion/philosophy discussions can remain in net.auto, but those who are only interested in the technical info won't have to wade through rest of the articles. Mike Graham @AT&T Technologies Atlanta, Georgia (Norcross really, but who ever heard of Norcross.) akgua!mlg
jeepcj2a@fluke.UUCP (Dale Chaudiere) (08/22/85)
> > Sorry, but I think that it's time for me to fly and leave this newsgroup. > >Over the last two months I have been reading the group and I find it getting > >quite boring. I personally feel that most of the stuff that gets posted > >these days belongs in net.consumers or net.legal. Well, time for me to hit > >the Big U...bye... > > Adrian Zannin > > I assume Adrian is refering the discussions on DWI, 55 MPH speed limit, > the legality (morality?) of radar detectors etc that have been the > subject of a lot of the postings recently. > Maybe what we need is a new group, net.auto.tech where technical > discussions can be posted. You know - "my 83 Ford/Chevy/whatever does > this etc etc. Help" Then the opinion/philosophy discussions can remain > in net.auto, but those who are only interested in the technical info > won't have to wade through rest of the articles. > > Mike Graham @AT&T Technologies > Atlanta, Georgia > (Norcross really, but who ever heard of Norcross.) > akgua!mlg I agree. I read net.auto only for the technical discussions and skip most of the other. I put in my 2 cents worth for net.auto.tech. Any others more opinions out there on this?
josie@poseidon.UUCP (Jack Gross) (08/23/85)
>I agree. I read net.auto only for the technical discussions and skip most of >the other. I put in my 2 cents worth for net.auto.tech. Any others more >opinions out there on this? Lets hear it for net.auto.tech. Im sick and tired of having to skip over all the stupid articles about avoiding the law and other illegal acts. I don't like the fact that there is a 55 MPH limit, but thats life. I guess if I owned a rader detector I would also invent a method to rob banks. As long as I don't get caught why should anyone mind, the FDIC will cover the losses ? It is a fact that highway fatalities are much lower with a 55 MPH limit. I resent those who feel that they have superior driving capabilities and that "they" can control their car at higher speeds as well as I can at the limit. Maybe we should all be required to take a speed test. Each state could license drivers for different speed ratings, dependent on each persons reflexes. Then all of those fools that think that they are better than the rest of us can go and kill themselfs like a bunch of race car drivers. I will still read the net, but only because I like the topic of automobile's. In reality radar DWI and all other illegal activities should be on their own net. How about net.murder or net.crook ? Jack Gross
rosberg@ihuxi.UUCP (Rosberg) (08/23/85)
> > > Sorry, but I think that it's time for me to fly and leave this newsgroup. > > >Over the last two months I have been reading the group and I find it getting > > >quite boring. I personally feel that most of the stuff that gets posted > > >these days belongs in net.consumers or net.legal. Well, time for me to hit > > >the Big U...bye... > > > Adrian Zannin > > > > I assume Adrian is refering the discussions on DWI, 55 MPH speed limit, > > the legality (morality?) of radar detectors etc that have been the > > subject of a lot of the postings recently. > > Maybe what we need is a new group, net.auto.tech where technical > > discussions can be posted. You know - "my 83 Ford/Chevy/whatever does > > this etc etc. Help" Then the opinion/philosophy discussions can remain > > in net.auto, but those who are only interested in the technical info > > won't have to wade through rest of the articles. > > > > Mike Graham @AT&T Technologies > > Atlanta, Georgia > > (Norcross really, but who ever heard of Norcross.) > > akgua!mlg > > I agree. I read net.auto only for the technical discussions and skip most of > the other. I put in my 2 cents worth for net.auto.tech. Any others more > opinions out there on this? *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***ddd Absolutely...I'm pretty tired of the barracks-lawyer fights... I'd like to find discussions of a more technical nature (ie, how do I get my 66 GTO to handle better?). q . q w !
jt@nrcvax.UUCP (Jerry Toporek) (08/24/85)
I'm also for splitting net.auto. I would be happy to have a net.auto.tech, or whatever, but it seems like what we really have here is a split between net.auto (cars, keeping them running, what to buy, etc.) and net.driving (DWI, 55MPH, radar, etc.). I will happily entertain the net with funny stories about keeping my Jensen-Healy running. Ooops, gotta go, something just fell off.
daw1@rduxb.UUCP (WILLIAMS) (08/25/85)
> It is a fact that highway fatalities are much lower with a 55 > MPH limit. # # ### ## # #### # # #### # # #### ### # # # # # ## # # # ## # # # ### # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ## # # # ## # # # ## # # ### # # #### # # #### # # #### ### In the last decade or so that 55mph has been in effect fatalities have indeed gone down. But that is not the only variable. There are many others, such as improved vehicle construction, to account for the trend. Think about it. Doug Williams AT&T Bell Labs Reading, PA mhuxt!rduxb!daw1
jackh@zehntel.UUCP (jack hagerty) (08/27/85)
> > Maybe what we need is a new group, net.auto.tech where technical > > discussions can be posted. You know - "my 83 Ford/Chevy/whatever does > > this etc etc. Help" Then the opinion/philosophy discussions can remain > > in net.auto, but those who are only interested in the technical info > > won't have to wade through rest of the articles. > > > > Mike Graham @AT&T Technologies > > Atlanta, Georgia > > (Norcross really, but who ever heard of Norcross.) > > akgua!mlg > > I agree. I read net.auto only for the technical discussions and skip most of > the other. I put in my 2 cents worth for net.auto.tech. Any others more > opinions out there on this? You can count me in. BTW, I'm quite familiar with Norcross, especially Peachtree Industrial Blvd. You know, the one near the intersection of Peachtree Rd. and N. Peachtree Rd. -- Jack Hagerty, Zehntel Automation Systems ...!ihnp4!zehntel!jackh
meier@srcsip.UUCP (Christopher M. Meier) (08/27/85)
I'll put in my 2 cents worth for net.auto.tech.
kitten@hao.UUCP (08/28/85)
> I'm also for splitting net.auto. I would be happy to have a net.auto.tech, > or whatever, but it seems like what we really have here is a split between > net.auto (cars, keeping them running, what to buy, etc.) and net.driving > (DWI, 55MPH, radar, etc.). > I will happily entertain the net with funny stories about keeping my > Jensen-Healy running. Ooops, gotta go, something just fell off. ** I vote no for net.auto.tech, and a yes vote for net.driving. I think the above explains it. It's a perfect way for separating those kinds of debates & discussions. Let's hear more about the Jensen-Healy! :-) {ucbvax!hplabs | allegra!nbires | decvax!noao | harpo!seismo | ihnp4!noao} !hao!kitten CSNET: kitten@NCAR ARPA: kitten%ncar@CSNET-RELAY
wjp@whuts.UUCP (PENSCHOW) (08/30/85)
> > > Maybe what we need is a new group, net.auto.tech where technical > > > discussions can be posted. > > > > > > Mike Graham @AT&T Technologies > > > Atlanta, Georgia > > > akgua!mlg Add me to the list. The legal and philosophical drivel that prevails in current net.auto almost has me ready to drop this group. The 'n' key on my terminal is wearing out. Bill Penschow - AT&T Tech - Springfield
meier@srcsip.UUCP (Christopher M. Meier) (08/31/85)
I agree, net.driving does make better sense than net.auto.tech.