Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!haapanen From: haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS]) Newsgroups: net.micro,net.arch Subject: Re: 386 advertising on the net Message-ID: <1839@watdcsu.UUCP> Date: Mon, 4-Nov-85 18:57:47 EST Article-I.D.: watdcsu.1839 Posted: Mon Nov 4 18:57:47 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 5-Nov-85 22:41:06 EST References: <130@intelca.UUCP> <836@terak.UUCP> <467@brl-sem.ARPA> Reply-To: haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS]) Distribution: net Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 28 Xref: watmath net.micro:12575 net.arch:2014 In article <467@brl-sem.ARPA> abc@brl-sem.ARPA (Brint Cooper) writes: >If companies are REALLY concerned about their phone bills (and not about >oneupsmanship), they'll immediately direct their host administrators to >shut off net.bizarre, net.jokes, net.women, net.singles, net.social, >net.motss, net.religion.xxx, net.games (except for, perhaps, the game >companies!), net.rec, and the like. I make no argument for net.jokes, net.flame or any others, but, BUT, *BUT*! There has been much discussion about people posting freeware on net.sources.mac, and how the net should not be used for monetary gain, and therefore we should go for mod.sources.mac or get rid of the whole thing and blah blah blah. Well, then, WHAT GIVES A MULTI-MILLION-DOLLAR CORPORATION THE RIGHT TO POST 300 LINES OF OBVIOUS ADVERTISING ON THE NET WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL PROGRAMMER IS NOT ALLOWED TO POST HIS PROGRAM? Do big companies have more rights? Could you answer this, Brint? Or how about you, Clif? Sorry about the flame --- I feel better now. \tom haapanen watmath!watdcsu!haapanen Don't cry, don't do anything No lies, back in the government No tears, party time is here again President Gas is up for president (c) Psychedelic Furs, 1982