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. ]