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