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 */