jgreely@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) (08/05/89)
In article <4617@eos.UUCP> chguest@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Charles J. Guest) writes: >How can you get someone banned from the net? Proof by example works pretty well. You've managed in under ten minutes to provide more arguments *against* the existence of n.n.q than all of the other people before you. You have asked ignorant questions, tasteless questions, insulting questions, completely irrelevant questions, and I'm sure I haven't seen the whole mess yet. Basically, what is done when someone like you crops up is that people send mail to the administrators of your machine, informing them of your complete lack of tact and taste, and politely asking them to do something about the problem. Usually, the result is a stern lecture to the person who's making a fool of themselves, and, occasionally, the pulling of their posting privileges for an indefinite period ("until they grow up"). "Everyone is entitled to an *informed* opinion." -- Harlan Ellison -=- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely)
csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) (08/05/89)
In article <4617@eos.UUCP> chguest@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov allegedly writes: >>How can you get someone banned from the net? And J Greely <jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: >Proof by example works pretty well. You've managed in under ten >minutes to provide more arguments *against* the existence of n.n.q >than all of the other people before you. Sheesh. Pay attention, J. The last two messages I saw the claimed to be from Chuck Guest -- including one asking how to create forgeries -- were both very sloppily done forgeries. Chuck and I have our disagreements, but forging stupid messages from him is beneath contempt. <csg>
jgreely@oz.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) (08/05/89)
In article <79817@pyramid.pyramid.com> csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) writes: >Sheesh. Pay attention, J. The last two messages I saw the claimed to be from >Chuck Guest -- including one asking how to create forgeries -- were both very >sloppily done forgeries. Chuck and I have our disagreements, but forging >stupid messages from him is beneath contempt. I was paying attention. It doesn't really matter who sent the series of (more than two) questions, the person who sent them deserved a reply. Sending it by email would have possibly angered an innocent, and the subsequent minor flamewar would have made the responsible party too happy for his own good. I wanted to get the questions buried quickly. They were uniformly designed to generate heat (some more successfully than others), and the tactic of cross-posting them only makes it worse. Whoever is responsible thinks the net's a bit too quiet recently. Candidates, anyone? -=- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely)