Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 v7 ucbtopaz-1.8; site ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ucbvax!ucbtopaz!phoenix
From: phoenix@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA (John H. Johnson)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.group
Subject: Re: Removing net.flame
Message-ID: <990@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 2-Jul-85 05:46:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbtopaz.990
Posted: Tue Jul  2 05:46:17 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jul-85 09:43:18 EDT
References: <3892@alice.UUCP> <2916@nsc.UUCP>
Reply-To: phoenix@ucbtopaz.UUCP ()
Organization: Univ. of Calif., Berkeley CA USA
Lines: 14
Keywords: Alternatives
Xref: watmath net.news:3560 net.news.group:3217
Summary: Mail your flames.


	No one has yet mentioned that flames can be *mailed* - most newsreading
programs have a reply capability.  There are very few remarks that need public
frying, and you get burned just as well with a personal note for most purposes.
If alternatives are stressed, it may be easier for people concerned with an
outlet to accept the move away from net.flame.  As for improving the mentality,
I believe that those who flame will feel a bit more constrained in +what+ they 
post, since mail is more personal, more direct.  Comments?


		0 0		  (Crises?.... What Crises?)
                 ^            
                \_/               John
                                  Phoenix@ucbtopaz       ucbvax!ucbtopaz!phoenix