Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site sdcrdcf.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!greipa!pesnta!pertec!scgvaxd!trwrb!sdcrdcf!faigin
From: faigin@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Daniel Faigin)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Purpose of Net.Flame (Summary - II of III)
Message-ID: <2116@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 5-Jul-85 16:46:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcrdcf.2116
Posted: Fri Jul  5 16:46:48 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 8-Jul-85 05:29:14 EDT
Reply-To: faigin@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Daniel Faigin)
Organization: System Development Corp. R+D, Santa Monica
Lines: 123
Summary: My response to the major points raised in part I


I would now like to present my opinion on some of the points raised:

> 1. a place to flame or  criticize  any  topic,  statement,  or  person  who
> bothers you.  These criticisms need not have a basis in logic.

This I can see as a useful purpose.  The question  here  is  whether  these
criticisms  need  to  be broadcase worldwide.  I personally feel that these
criticisms should be sent via private mail.  On the other hand, if one  has
a  well-thought  out,  logically  based  response  to an article in a given
newsgroup, then it is up to the discretion of the author to determine if it
should be posted.

> 2. a place to let out anger, frustration, hate, and other emotions.

Valid point.  But do we really need to broadcast  this  hate  worldwide.  I
think  there  is enough out there as is.  This leads directly to an idea of
mine: flaming should be allowed, BUT ONLY IN A LOCAL NEWSGROUP.  This would
eliminate  the  problem  of other sites bearing the cost of an individual's
primal scream.

> 3. a place to rant and rave.

Is there really a need to rant and rave for the sake of ranting and raving.
If  there  must, it can be done locally.  I do not feel that it is the duty
of the net to be a psychoanalysis service.

> 4. a place to try satire, or off the wall ideas, knowing that  the  readers
> won't be too offended if they don't see what you were trying to say.

This is definitely not  a  purpose  of  net.flame.  Satire  usually  has  a
target,  and  it  is  often  very hard to communicate it properly via words
alone.  If the idea or topic of satire falls within the domain  of  another
newsgroup,  post  it there.  If it doesn't fit, isn't that what net.misc is
for.  I have never heard a complaint about well written satire.

> 5. a place for people who feel a need to be abusive or offensive.

People who are abusive and offensive should learn to control themselves, not
inflict themselves upon the ENTIRE WORLD. It seems that offensive behaviour
is becoming accepted (gee, I feel like Miss Manners) -- which is a tragedy.
The world would be much better off if people learned common courtesy, and
learned when it is proper to be abusive, and where (pronouced, "in private").

> 6. a place to have pointless arguments that don't belong  in  a  particular
> newsgroup.

It they are pointless and don't belong in a particular newsgroup, then what
are  they  doing  on  the  net?  If  they  have  a  point,  then the polite
discussion, not an argument, should be in net.misc.  We would like to think
that  the  people  on the net are all professionals, or being trained to be
professionals.  There  is  no  need  for  angry  argument  in  professional
circles.

> 7. a place to send stuff that would be considered unreasonable in any other
> group.

If it is unreasonable in other groups, what makes it any more reasonable in
net.flame. If something is unreasonable or possible offensive, the net has a
perfectly acceptable solution -- rotation -- which need not be limited to
net.jokes.

> 8. a place for bored people to have fun,  vent  general  frustrations,  and
> generally mess around.

For some reason this strikes me as an inappropriate use of the net (yet,  I
am  guilty  of doing it).  Maybe this definition applies to the entire net,
and not just net.flame.


> 9. a place  where angry people get sent from other newsgroups so  they  can
> yell  at  each  other  rather than at people who don't like angry people in
> other newsgroups.

This is a common opinion. How often does it happen in real life? From what I
have seen, these arguments just continue in the newsgroup they started it.
Usually, it is just a two way argment, which, if it is serving no purpose,
should revert to private mail.

> 10. a  place  to  provide  articles  serving  as  sparks  to  start  heated
> discussions, possibly quite silly, i.e. women's use of toilet paper.

Silly discussions belong in net.jokes. Heated discussions of silly subjects
are simply profits for the phone company that transmits the drivel.

> 11. a place to allow a no-holds-barred discussion of anything.

I am  not  sure  whether  it  is  possible  to  hold  a  "no  holds  barred
discussion".  In  practice,  people  direct  there  discussions  (i.e., not
arguments) to newsgroups other than net.flame.

> 12. it is not a place for pre-emptive, abusive, personal  attacks,  or  any
> stupid  tomfoolery or drivel anyone chooses to post, nor was it designed to
> encourage it.

This I agree with, whether flame is a local, citywide, statewide, worldwide,
quadrant-wide, etc. newsgroup. 

> 13. a safety valve to keep the rest of the net relatively civil.

Unfortunatly, it looks like this valve has to go back to the factory for
repairs.

> 14. A place where people play the game of erecting personnas
> that they would never use in a real-world face to face situation.

This goes on in all newsgroups, and to a greater extent in
net.flame. I've never liked games like this.

These are my opinions. In the next message, you will find the opinions of
those who have written me. I would like to thank everyone for their responses
so far, and I will continue to summarize as new points are raised.

Daniel
-- 
UUCP: {akgua allegra ihnp4 hplabs sdcsvax trwrb cbosgd}!sdcrdcf!faigin  
ARPA: sdcrdcf!faigin@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA --or-- sdcrdcf!faigin@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU

W: SDC, 2500 Colorado MD 52-46; Santa Monica CA 90406; (213) 820-4111 x6493
H: 11743 Darlington Avenue #9; Los Angeles CA 90049; (213) 826-3357

Don't have good ideas if you aren't willing to be responsible for them.
                                 -- A. J. Perlis, SIGPLAN 17:9 Sept 1982