Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84 chuqui version 1.7 9/23/84; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.flame
Subject: Re: Re: Is anyone else offended.....
Message-ID: <2932@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 1-Jul-85 19:40:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.2932
Posted: Mon Jul  1 19:40:58 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jul-85 07:23:29 EDT
References: <266@timeinc.UUCP> <2908@nsc.UUCP> <128@maynard.UUCP> <261@ihdev.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Followup-To: net.news
Organization: The Dreamer Fithp
Lines: 66
Xref: watmath net.news:3549 net.flame:10932
Summary: 

In article <261@ihdev.UUCP> rjv@ihdev.UUCP (R. J. Vaughn) writes:
>jesus christ chuq.  are you long winded or what?  if you have a point
>to make, make it, but just becuase you like to listen to yourself type
>doesn't mean others do.  in some respects i agree with you, but if
>it takes 104,321 lines to explain it.....

I'm sorry if you think I'm a bit longwinded. In case you were wondering, my
first drafts of most articles tend to be about 30% larger than what really
gets posted (you DO proofread your articles, don't you, and run them
through spell?) so it could be worse. Actually, I don't like listening to
myself type -- the keyclicks tend to give me a headache after a while.

>yes, there are assholes on the net and you are probably right in this
>case, but then some SA says "i'm not here to run a dating service,
>no more net.singles." see where this leads?

In reality, this has already happened at some sites. when volume gets to a
certain level (that level usually being dictated by the cost of
transporting it) something goes. Depending on the SA, they cut out any
subset of the net from the 'least useful' to the 'non-technical'. One of my
hopes out of all of this is to reduce some of the volume and try to
minimize the number of sites that remove the 'non-technical' because I DO
like the idea of keeping around things like net.singles. If net.singles
were to threaten the existence of net.unix-wizards on the network, then I
would jetison it. The same argument applies to net.flame threatening
net.singles (and net.unix-wizards) and that is why I'm taking my current
stand. I think SOMETHING has to get done to reduce volume, and net.flame is
the least useful group I can find.

>you have a good arguement
>for cutting out net.flame, but pull your head out --  >50% of the
>stuff that comes across *all* the newsgroups is crap or huge quotes of previous
>crap.  your arguments for dumping net.flame could be applied to
>a LOT of groups by any SA.

I can't fix the entire net overnight. To fix something, you have to start
somewhere. I think net.flame is a good place to start, and then we can work
on cleaning up the garbage elsewhere. If we wait until we have a complete
solution to fix anything, the only complete solution we'll ever find is
destruction of the net. True, I can probably find an article in any given
newsgroup that can be used to justify that groups removal. My hope is to
get the net back into a shape where the SA doesn't feel they need to remove
groups, and I think net.flame is a step in that direction.

>thats' why people don't like seeing an
>SA dump a group, it's just a start. and once the idea catches on,
>we'll have every other site passing on every other news group, the
>whole 'system' could be fouled up that way.

I hate to tell you, but a LOT of sites (based on my recent mail) have
already caught onto the fact that they can clean up the net by removing
certain groups. It HAS already fouled up certain groups (net.sources.games
is a good example), and I'd like to find a way to get the network to agree
on which groups it won't pass around to minimize this kind of partitioning.
I don't WANT one site to cut off net.flame and another to cut off net.games
and another to cut off net.religion -- that does everyone a disservice. If
we have to cut stuff off, we should all cut off the same stuff, and
net.flame seems to be far and away the candidate for least productive group
on the net.

-- 
:From the misfiring synapses of:                  Chuq Von Rospach
{cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui   nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

The offices were very nice, and the clients were only raping the land, and
then, of course, there was the money...