ptownson@cs.bu.edu (Patrick Townson) (02/14/91)
In article <6870@rsiatl.Dixie.Com> jgd@Dixie.Com (John G. DeArmond) writes: >And if you can't quite manage to accomodate "the opposing viewpoint', >you get upset that people use the means available to them, such >as header forgery, to be heard? Amazing. >>presumably people from a socially responsible organization like EFF to >>violate news etiquette by posting direct to the news group bypassing >>the moderator? Is that any more incredible than the fact that not one >>person from the socially responsible among you criticized such a >>technique? >The reason such techniques are not being criticized here is that it >strikes to the heart of electronic freedoms. This is really rich ... so header forgery = electronic freedom, is that it? Marvelous. >You and the other moderators serve at the >pleasure of me and the others who pay the freight on the net. When you >get a bit out of line, we'll tweak you to remind you that you do NOT >hold any special authority. If you get really out of line, we'll vote >you out completely, we'll direct telecom to the bitbucket or whatever >other things are appropriate. Is that a fact? You seem to be unclear on the concept, John. TELECOM Digest is a mailing list first and foremost. It is gatewayed to Usenet and the comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup as a courtesy to the several folks on Usenet who like reading it. The former moderator of the Digest cut off Usenet for awhile mainly because of people like yourself. I agreed to send the Digest to the gateway again two years ago. By coincidence, because no one else was available when Chip had to drop out, I agreed to 'moderate' comp.dcom.telecom as well, but by default actually since I was really distributing the Digest first, and handling the gateway to comp.dcom.telecom was no extra hassle. In other words, John, I do NOT serve at your pleasure. You read TELECOM Digest via Usenet at *my* pleasure. If you get out of line, then you lose, not me. It is my nickle (my time is worth money) that is in question here. Do we have all that clear now? But you're going to get your way John. The gateway is now closed again. I will post a message advising Usenet readers that TELECOM Digest is no longer available via Usenet / comp.dcom.telecom and give them the option of receiving it via email with QUALIFIED readers being added to the list on application. Of course, a site can also receive a copy and explode it to their own list if desired. Oh, and thanks, John. You really opened my eyes this evening, and enlightened me on who you think are the productive ones here and who you think are the leeches. Other than a lot of extra work at first adding names to the mailing list, my load will be cut by a couple hours every evening. And I have you to thank for it .... as does the rest of the net. Patrick Townson
jgd@Dixie.Com (John G. DeArmond) (02/15/91)
ptownson@cs.bu.edu (Patrick Townson) writes: >In other words, John, I do NOT serve at your pleasure. You read >TELECOM Digest via Usenet at *my* pleasure. If you get out of line, >then you lose, not me. It is my nickle (my time is worth money) that >is in question here. Do we have all that clear now? >But you're going to get your way John. The gateway is now closed again. >I will post a message advising Usenet readers that TELECOM Digest is I think that your acting like a 5 year old with your "if I can't have it my way, I'll take my toys and go hom" attitude is very enlightening as well. It's always been my belief that the way to handle such spoiled brats as yourself is simply to take you up on your threats. Telecom will be better off in the long run. While you're taking your marbles home, you probably should consider the old water glass story. You know, the one about the hole left after you take your finger out of a glass of water being an indication of how much you'll be missed when you're gone. Finally, I wonder if the reason you're squealing like a stuck pig is because people here have been hitting on truths that you just don't want to admit to. Think about THAT too. >Oh, and thanks, John. You're welcome. Look for the call for discussion in news.announce.newgroups and elsewhere calling for an unmoderated comp.dcom.telecom. John -- John De Armond, WD4OQC | "Purveyors of speed to the Trade" (tm) Rapid Deployment System, Inc. | Home of the Nidgets (tm) Marietta, Ga | {emory,uunet}!rsiatl!jgd |"Politically InCorrect.. And damn proud of it
cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu (Robert Jacobson) (02/17/91)
I would propose that comp.dcom.telecom is not the issue. Telephone junkies need techie information. But how about a soc.telecom for those of us more interested in social outcomes than switching gear? Bob Jacobson
hychejw@infonode.ingr.com (Jeff W. Hyche) (02/20/91)
If the current modirator is packing up and going home. Why
don't you just find a new one. Of all the 1000's and 1000's of readers
of usenet surly one would be willing to take up the challage. Heck with
a little shoving and proding toped with someone asking me nicly I might
volenter.
--
// Jeff Hyche
There can be only one! \\ // Usenet: hychejw@infonode.ingr.com
\X/ Freenet: ap255@po.CWRU.Edu