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