Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-miles!chabot
From: chabot@miles.DEC (L. S. Chabot)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: Do the Great Moronic Masses Need Electronic Hand Jive?
Message-ID: <820@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Mar-85 09:54:23 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.820
Posted: Fri Mar  1 09:54:23 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Mar-85 03:03:50 EST
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 35

Ken Arndt:
> That is, some persons reading my postings on the net can't tell when I am
> being serious or if I mean what I say because I don't make use of the 'smiley
> face' symbol to let everyone in on the tone of my voice.  It was told to me
> that it was in the net 'rules' that use of the ( :- ) was incumbent upon me. 
> 
> Well, I have thought about that and I have decided that it's a bunch of bosh!
> I mean, I see no real substantive difference between what you are reading on
> this screen and what you would read in any type of hard copy.  

Big difference:  what I normally choose to read in hard copy is written by
*professional writers*.  

For a year people have been complaining that you are offensive.  Some of the
offensive material has the appearance of an attempt at humor.  Those who 
suggest the inclusion of ":-)" are asking you to follow the convention so that
they have some idea as to whether you're joking, rude, or insane: if you were
to follow the convention readers would have a better guide as to your intent.

You have early on insisted on flaunting conventions of the net, so much as to
make people believe you refuse to read the net etiquette document.  You have
carried on abortion discussions in net.women, which is specifically mentioned
in that document, and when asked to move the discussion to net.abortion you
called the askers nazis.  Private mail from those disagreeing with you gets
ridiculed publicly in newsgroups, and it's of little interest to anyone else.

Perhaps rather than discussing why you feel you don't have to follow conventions
you could enlighten us as to why you think your articles should be read at all.
Following conventions might make it possible for any message you wish to convey
to reach those you wish to reach.

L S Chabot
UUCP:	...decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-amber!chabot
ARPA:	...chabot%amber.DEC@decwrl.ARPA
USFail:    DEC, LMO4/H4, 150 Locke Drive, Marlborough, MA  01752