Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/3/85; site ukecc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward From: edward@ukecc.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) Newsgroups: net.news Subject: Re: Removing net.flame Message-ID: <154@ukecc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 9-Jul-85 10:11:14 EDT Article-I.D.: ukecc.154 Posted: Tue Jul 9 10:11:14 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 13-Jul-85 08:29:26 EDT References: <990@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> Organization: Univ. of Ky. Engineering Computing Center Lines: 29 Keywords: Alternatives In article <990@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA>, phoenix@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA (John H. Johnson) writes: > > 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? > But a mailed flame would not satisfy most flamers. There seems to be a certain amout of ego gratification associated with flaming. Flamers get a charge out of `winning' a public battle of wits. To `win' in a private mail discussion offers less thrills than humiliating someone infront of the entire USENET. Read just about any flame. There is almost an implied "See, I'm better/smarter/more-sophisticated than you" message underlying the thoughts of the flamer. Many USENETters, it seems, rely on this method of pumping their egos to fill some void in their personalities. As has been said before, if net.flame is removed, these people will migrate to other newsgroups for their mindgames. -- Edward C. Bennett UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward /* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */