Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!mhuxn!houxm!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!amdahl!gam From: gam@amdahl.UUCP (Gordon A. Moffett) Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.singles Subject: Re: The realities of mod.personal Message-ID: <680@amdahl.UUCP> Date: Thu, 6-Dec-84 02:53:58 EST Article-I.D.: amdahl.680 Posted: Thu Dec 6 02:53:58 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 7-Dec-84 02:24:36 EST References: <135@decwrl.UUCP> Organization: Amdahl Corp, Sunnyvale CA Lines: 29 Xref: watmath net.news.group:2614 net.singles:4763 Just to throw a monkey wrench into all this (tee hee), I have heard complaints about the suitableness of mod.personal and what it costs to run this network and who pays for it and our reputation is at stake here and on and on and on ... Jeez, you take this SERIOUSLY? Let me show you something: 1746 net.politics* These numbers represent the 1642 unix-wizards number of (512-byte) blocks 1513 net.religion* currently being used by these 718 net.jokes* newsgroups at our site. The 706 net.lang.c newsgroups marked with (*) are 698 net.flame* expired after 10 days, while 499 net.singles* the others are expired after 20 497 net.unix days. I presume these quantities are relatively similar at other sites; maybe even some don't expire the ``uninteresting'' groups early. So what is this pretense that something valuable and important will somehow be degraded by creating a mod.personal? I doubt it would be noticed in all this junk.... [ This is neither an argument for nor against mod.personal, but submitted simply to discourage pretentiousness ]. -- Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,sun}!amdahl!gam 37 22'50" N / 122 59'12" W [ This is just me talking. ]