brendan@cs.widener.edu (Brendan Kehoe) (05/09/91)
In <wBoJ22w164w@bluemoon.uucp>, dddean@bluemoon.uucp writes: >I have been a user of the News Net for some time ... Obviously not as long as you think you've been. For the RECORD, Craig Shergold got into the Guiness book of world records (I saw it, over 16 MILLION cards as of May 1990). On top of that, a wealthy businessman brought him to Nevada and gave him the treatment he needed. Case closed. A touching thought, years old. -- Brendan Kehoe - Widener Sun Network Manager - brendan@cs.widener.edu Widener University in Chester, PA A Bloody Sun-Dec War Zone "Does this person look relaxed to you? Well, it's actually an experiment of Contour's new 565-E chair!"
tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) (05/12/91)
From the keyboard of eric@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Eric J. Nihill): :In article <19259@rpp386.cactus.org-> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes: :->In article <1991May10.032307.10210@swsrv1.cirr.com-> toma@swsrv1.cirr.com (Tom Armistead) writes: : :Why is this trash showing up in alt.sources? Why? Because people are careless and either don't notice or don't give a damn. One poster when reminded in email that commentary doesn't belong in alt.sources got all high and mighty and claimed that he can damn well post whatever he wants wherever he wants, and that if I didn't like it, I should try to get alt.sources moderated. This really seems like going too far: why can't people just cooperate to do the right thing here? --tom -- Tom Christiansen tchrist@convex.com convex!tchrist "So much mail, so little time."
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) (05/13/91)
In article <1991May12.150829.27945@convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes: >Why? Because people are careless and either don't notice or don't give a >damn. One poster when reminded in email that commentary doesn't belong >in alt.sources got all high and mighty and claimed that he can damn well >post whatever he wants wherever he wants, and that if I didn't like it, I >should try to get alt.sources moderated. This really seems like going too >far: why can't people just cooperate to do the right thing here? Tom, since I'm at least one of the people that sent you the "high and mighty" note, might I point out that your "save the alt.sources group" view is a tad egocentric? Who died and made you alt.sources.police-man? I don't see moderating alt.sources as a bad thing. However, I do see the notes the alt.sources.police send as a bit stupid. One was dumb enough to send me a note last year when I posted a patch with "Re: whatever the subject was" and justified his sending me the stupid note by saying I shouldn't have followed up to my source posting in alt.sources. So, get off the high horse, or expect me to keep sending you equally obnoxious replies. Or you could just moderate alt.sources and be done with it, right? Surely if everyone agrees with your viewpoint, getting the group moderated will be an absolute snap and you can get yourself elected moderator. Right? -- John F. Haugh II | Distribution to | UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 255-8251 | GEnie PROHIBITED :-) | Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "If liberals interpreted the 2nd Amendment the same way they interpret the rest of the Constitution, gun ownership would be mandatory."
kyle@WENDY-FATE.UU.NET (Kyle Jones) (05/13/91)
Tom Christiansen writes: > >From the keyboard of eric@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Eric J. Nihill): > :In article <19259@rpp386.cactus.org-> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes: > :->In article <1991May10.032307.10210@swsrv1.cirr.com-> toma@swsrv1.cirr.com (Tom Armistead) writes: > : > :Why is this trash showing up in alt.sources? > > Why? Because people are careless and either don't notice or don't give a > damn. One poster when reminded in email that commentary doesn't belong > in alt.sources got all high and mighty and claimed that he can damn well > post whatever he wants wherever he wants, and that if I didn't like it, I > should try to get alt.sources moderated. This really seems like going too > far: why can't people just cooperate to do the right thing here? Rhetorical question I'm sure, but this is just another example showing that the net is just another facet of Real Life. People are unreasonable in Real Life, too. There's no reason to expect that the same people who drop gum on the sidewalk, or turn in front of you without signaling, or stand right in front of the doors so you can't get out of the train, aren't right here doing their part to make net as aggravating a place as the rest of the world.
tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) (05/13/91)
From the keyboard of jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II): :So, get off the high horse, or expect me to keep sending you equally :obnoxious replies. Or you could just moderate alt.sources and be :done with it, right? Surely if everyone agrees with your viewpoint, :getting the group moderated will be an absolute snap and you can get :yourself elected moderator. Right? I don't want to be moderator, John; all I would like is for alt.sources to be for sources. Why is this such a terribly unreasonable thing to ask? --tom -- Tom Christiansen tchrist@convex.com convex!tchrist "So much mail, so little time."
jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) (05/13/91)
In article <1991May13.012237.27832@convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes: >I don't want to be moderator, John; all I would like is for alt.sources >to be for sources. Why is this such a terribly unreasonable thing to ask? When you can do something to keep the irrelevant postings out of alt.sources in the first place, then you've gone a long way to keeping the irrelevant followups out as well. I hate to keep saying this over and over, but not everyone that reads about sending Chris another postcard is going to read the article telling him or her not to over in some other newsgroup. If you want to point out that some posting was really way off, where is the best place to do it? In a different newsgroup? In any case, who are =you= (That's Tom in case you can't figure it out) to decide what is relevant and what isn't? If you wish to be the moderator, call a vote and be the moderator. Since you stated that you don't want to be the moderator, stop trying to moderate the group. -- John F. Haugh II | Distribution to | UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 255-8251 | GEnie PROHIBITED :-) | Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "If liberals interpreted the 2nd Amendment the same way they interpret the rest of the Constitution, gun ownership would be mandatory."
root@dogear.UUCP (Bob Kirkpatrick) (05/13/91)
In article <1991May13.012237.27832@convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes: > >I don't want to be moderator, John; all I would like is for alt.sources >to be for sources. Why is this such a terribly unreasonable thing to ask? > My apologies for misposting to a.s. --I simply hit the reply key without checking the newsgroup it was directed to. But, I am really tired of seeing that particular thread.... if that's any excuse. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Kirkpatrick - Dog Ear'd Systems | A division of Brand-X of Spokane WA | "Einstein was probably one of *them*." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) (05/14/91)
From the keyboard of jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II): :In any case, who are =you= (That's Tom in case you can't figure it out) to :decide what is relevant and what isn't? If you wish to be the moderator, :call a vote and be the moderator. Since you stated that you don't want to :be the moderator, stop trying to moderate the group. This is becoming too personal. I'll say it again: I have no desire to be a moderator, I'd just like the community to practice sound judgment. If you really believe that it's good to post things better destined for alt.sourced.wanted and alt.sources.d into alt.sources, then we shall never agree on this matter. The bottom line is that alt.sources works best when it's a source group, like comp.sources.misc, except that it has an instant turn-around time. I wouldn't want to see it moderated and lose that. See what happens when you followup to a comp.sources.misc posting, or post an source-wanted request there. Nothing, which is the right thing. Perhaps we really should be self-moderating like alt.hackers is after all. I think most if not all of the noise would go away. We could even post how in Jonathan Kamen's FAQ. --tom -- Tom Christiansen tchrist@convex.com convex!tchrist "So much mail, so little time."
cliff@demon.co.uk (Cliff Stanford) (05/14/91)
brendan@cs.widener.edu (Brendan Kehoe) writes: > For the RECORD, Craig Shergold got into the Guiness book of world >records (I saw it, over 16 MILLION cards as of May 1990). On top of >that, a wealthy businessman brought him to Nevada and gave him the >treatment he needed. Did he survive? Does he read usenet? Cliff. -- Cliff Stanford Email: cliff@demon.co.uk (Work) Demon Systems Limited cms@demon.co.uk (Home) 42 Hendon Lane Phone: 081-349 0063 (Office) London N3 1TT England 0860 375870 (Mobile)
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/14/91)
Why doesn't someone buy Craig Shergold a terminal and modem so he can disclaim his own damn message... -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
emv@ox.com (Ed Vielmetti) (05/14/91)
In article <1991May13.212809.25299@convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
This is becoming too personal. I'll say it again: I have no desire to be
a moderator, I'd just like the community to practice sound judgment.
If you really believe that it's good to post things better destined for
alt.sourced.wanted and alt.sources.d into alt.sources, then we shall never
agree on this matter.
Sigh. For a while I combed through the vast swamp of usenet looking
for sources postings that weren't posted to alt.sources, tidied them
up ever so slightly, and reposted them to the alt.sources group in a
reasonable way. In exchange for a little bit of bandwidth consumed,
the signal to noise ratio of alt.sources got much better. (review the
contents of the alt.sources archive on wuarchive.wustl.edu to see the
results.)
The community tended to respond in kind, and seeing a sources group
that had sources in it the community tended to post sources to it.
Unfortunately (I guess), my filters for finding errantly posted but
eminently useful sources postings are not all that good, and I had to
discontinue the service. Besides, there was a lingering 5%
discontent with what I was doing, and answering hate mail is never
fun. So I quit.
If you want sources in alt.sources, post sources. More will follow.
Complaining or harrassing people will just create enemies and hate
mail.
--
Edward Vielmetti, vice president for research, MSEN Inc. emv@msen.com
"(6) The Plan shall identify how agencies and departments can
collaborate to ... expand efforts to improve, document, and evaluate
unclassified public-domain software developed by federally-funded
researchers and other software, including federally-funded educational
and training software; "
"High-Performance Computing Act of 1991, S. 272"jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) (05/14/91)
In article <1991May13.212809.25299@convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes: >The bottom line is that alt.sources works best when it's a source group, >like comp.sources.misc, except that it has an instant turn-around time. I >wouldn't want to see it moderated and lose that. Yes, but allowing just any old yahoo to post "Last Wish for Dying Child" comes with its attendant share of problems. Like, countering "Last Wish for Dying Child." If you are going to allow idiots to post these calls for more postcards, you have to allow idiots like myself to post calls for people to ignore the original posting. -- John F. Haugh II | Distribution to | UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh Ma Bell: (512) 255-8251 | GEnie PROHIBITED :-) | Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org "If liberals interpreted the 2nd Amendment the same way they interpret the rest of the Constitution, gun ownership would be mandatory."
brendan@cs.widener.edu (Brendan Kehoe) (05/14/91)
In <1991May13.221016.26124@demon.co.uk>, cliff@demon.co.uk writes: > Did he survive? Does he read usenet? Yup, and I doubt it. -- Brendan Kehoe - Widener Sun Network Manager - brendan@cs.widener.edu Widener University in Chester, PA A Bloody Sun-Dec War Zone "Visualize a dream; look for it in the present tense -- a greater calm than before. If you persist in your efforts, you can achieve...dream control."