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!linus!gatech!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.group
Subject: Re: Newsgroup creations and deletions
Message-ID: <3107@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 11-Aug-85 03:45:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.3107
Posted: Sun Aug 11 03:45:30 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Aug-85 00:00:36 EDT
References: <3091@nsc.UUCP> <494@cmu-cs-k.ARPA>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Organization: Uncle Chuqui's Lemming Farm
Lines: 82
Xref: linus net.news:3000 net.news.group:2775

In article <494@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) writes:
>It would be nice if it were possible to disagree with the policy of the
>"news gurus" without provoking a defensive flame devoid of semantic content
>and full of resignation threats.  This seems to be a consistent pattern.

Okay, challenge well taken. Here is an attempt at a quiet and semantically
valid discussion of my previous comment.

The basic point I was attempting to make was this: If you don't like
what the "news gurus" are doing, then instead of bitching at us, U
suggest wholeheartedly that you attempt to do it better yourself.
Please remember that the people who attempt to help coordinate this
morass of free-thinkers are doing so as volunteers.

Whenever one of the "news gurus" screws up, or whenever it looks like a
"news guru" might screw up, there is an immediate cry of facism, usually
from the same people that hide under their desks whenever it is suggested
that someone volunteer some time to try to make the net better. 

The reality is that we aren't facist. For the most part, we are simply
human beings that happen to have been silly enough to believe the net was
something worth putting in some time to get/keep running smoothly.
Occasionally, we forget a step, or we simply make a mistake.

I don't see that this is such a big deal. When mistakes are pointed out, we
do what we can to unmistake them. Unfortunately, there is a group of people
on the net who seem to enjoy making as big a deal about these mistakes as
they can. We are verbally attacked, we are abused, and relatively minor
hassles are quickly blown out of proportion and into major confrontations,
for no good reason. If you look at the track record of the "news gurus" I
think you'll find a lot LESS power building megalomania than you will in an
average office environment. Most of us are simply trying to do the best job
we can of keeping the net from falling apart. I'd watch much more carefully
the people that spend their time bearbaiting or attacking whoever is silly
enough to stick their head above the surface; unfortunately, the "news
gurus" have to do that all too often simply to try to get anything done
around here. We put in lunches, evenings, weekends; answer mail, talk on
the phone, whatever it looks like has to be done. For reference, without
Mark and Karen there would be no mapping project. Without myself and spaf
the chaotic state of Usenet documentation would be even more useless.
Without Rick. everyone would still be playing with a VERY buggy 2.10. Next
time you think it is 'fun' to rip into a "news guru" take a look at the
amount of time that is put into the net by these people and then compare
that to your own contribution. If the best you can do is a flame, and the
best a LOT of people seem capable of out there are flames, then you are
better of just staying silent and kicking your dog or somethings.

Oh, excuse me, I'm losing my semantic content. As long as I'm standing up
here on my soapbox talking to nobody, may I suggest that people be willing
to spend a little less time telling the net what needs to be implemented
and a little more time implementing? The number of news experts out there
that know the little software tweak that will turn the network into
Nirvana numbers in the scores. The number of people that actually do something 
about creating Nirvana, well, I count them on about a hand and a half. 

The net seems to be good at one thing -- advice. It seems to be much less
good at good advice. As far as implementations, we can't even get many of
the sites to upgrade to free, available to compile software muchless do
anything about fixing bugs or improving the silly stuff. Talk is great,
folks, but talk doesn't pay the bills, fix the software, or pass along the
mail. Software does. Unfortunately, most of the net seems great at talk,
and not so great at putting their time into the software.

So, if I get testy or defensive once in a while, it is because I get tired
of being cursed, abused, and bitched at for putting in my time so that you
have a medium to share information on. I get tired of being accused of
being power hungry (or worse) because I'm willing to do something for the
net -- especially by people whose main contribution to the net can
generously be called noise in many cases. At least I'm willing TO try and
to put something into the network that I've gotten so much out of, and that
is better than 99% of the rest of you. I know that, and that is the only
thing that has kept me from just leaving the net in disgust, but with the
frequency of abuse I see of many people (not just "news gurus" but many of
the people with intelligence and sensitivity) continuing to rise, it
becomes small consolation.

Is that undefensive and semantically valid enough? Or do I need to find
better words for trying to justify the fact that I happen to care?

-- 
Chuq Von Rospach         nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA
{cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui