Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gatech.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!amd!gatech!spaf From: spaf@gatech.UUCP (Gene Spafford) Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.religion Subject: Re: Proposal for net.religion subgroups Message-ID: <10721@gatech.UUCP> Date: Thu, 8-Nov-84 09:25:36 EST Article-I.D.: gatech.10721 Posted: Thu Nov 8 09:25:36 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 10-Nov-84 03:41:58 EST References: <35@tove.UUCP> <19@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> <290@qantel.UUCP> Organization: The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech Lines: 83 Xref: gatech net.news.group:1753 net.religion:4043 (Let's create two new groups: net.religion.zen and net.religion.notzen. Of course, the two would be linked together so that anything posted to one would also post to the other. But no one ever needs to post to it.) I've been reading this discussion for quite a while and it's about time we either resolved it or moved it to a more appropriate group (out of net.news.group, at least). Suggestions: net.philosophy and net.flame. My particular view is that if one is sure of one's faith, it is possible to quietly live it with confidence and strength, thus providing oneself with not only a sense of security, but providing others with a good example and statement about the quality of the particular faith. I believe that people who feel the need to comdemn other beliefs, constantly try to "convert" others, and spend a great deal of their time loudly proclaiming their piety must be rather insecure in their faith, else they wouldn't need to spend so much time reinforcing it. But that's just my view. However, as it applies to the net, there are some points to be made. First of all, there is a small but vocal contingent of "born-again" and/or evangelical Christians on the net (as in almost any other American group, these days). I see it is this group that is interested in a separate newsgroup. There are many other "Christians" on the net, but more in the sense of traditional Christianity, although they may not be very vocal in net.religion. For that reason, I am against naming any subgroup "net.religion.christian". I think another name should be proposed for such a group. And yes, I think there should be such a group. There has been enough discussion generated by all this to show that there is both an audience and an interest. If nothing else, the group can contain further discussion on its Creation (if you claim that the appearance of such a newsgroup is simply an aspect of the net evolving, you are doomed to net.flame for all eternity :-). Any "net." newsgroup is open for everyone to post to. This has always been the case. By the very nature of the news, you cannot restrict postings to "net" groups except by convention (viz., net.women.only). If non-believers wish to post to the group, let them. View it as a test of your faith (if you are a believer). If you're not a believer, you will find the group rather boring after a while (unless you like to continue to bait/abuse others of differing beliefs). The mailing list will undoubtedly continue, and the public is in no position to comment on the correctness of content of private mail -- unless, as Tim noted, it is being sent on publicly supported machines or networks. We have a net.religion.jewish to allow people to ask questions about the Jewish religion and share items of interest to other Jewish netters. It is also a forum to discuss Jewish history and heritage. Should any other religious groups have a significant number of active netters, we should consider, without argument, a ghetto for them too. Likewise with the evangelical Christians. They need a place to discuss common interests and discuss the Christian heritage (like torturing and killing people of different faiths, book-burning, and war in the name of God. A "net.religion.islam" could be used for the same thing. 1/2 :-). But seriously, I am willing to create such a newsgroup as long as it doesn't bear the name "christian" on it -- that implies more people and issues than the group seems intended for. I'm not sure about a "net.religion.newage" -- is there a sufficient number of readers to support such a group? Or would "net.religion" be enough, once some quantitiy of the pro/anti-christian stuff gets moved to its own newsgroup? (I don't (and won't) read net.religion.) If the content of this note has offended anyone, my apologies. I have had some bad experiences with certain religious groups, and it has created a rather permanent (and negative) impression. I don't care what you believe, and I applaud you if your faith helps you find peace and a better life, but I despise people who attempt to push their beliefs on me. That's why I want to get this discussion resolved and out of net.news.group before it turns into (more of) a religious argument. -- Off the Wall of Gene Spafford The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ CSNet-Relay.ARPA uucp: ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-sally}!gatech!spaf