Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!bellcore!petrus!scherzo!allegra!alice!jj
From: jj@alice.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.flame
Subject: The final vote on nut.flame
Message-ID: <4519@alice.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 4-Nov-85 11:23:21 EST
Article-I.D.: alice.4519
Posted: Mon Nov  4 11:23:21 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Nov-85 22:04:51 EST
Organization: New Jersey State Farm for the Terminally Bewildered
Lines: 66
Xref: linus net.news.group:3634 net.flame:11712


Since I don't have any interest in letting this drag on forever,
I'll summarize the mail I've gotten:

	Delete net.flame:  93
	Move net.flame to issues.flame, move politics, abortion, religion,
etc likewise, and then delete all of issues : 1
	Keep net.flame (polite): 8
	Keep net.flame, you :3


So I guess the vote is roughly 93:11, with one abstention.  I think that's
a pretty strong indication of the desires of the people who have
the necessary interest to write back.


The overwhealming concensus of those who want to delete the newsgroup
is that removing it makes a statement that flaming is NO LONGER
OK. Anywhere.

Those against removal have two concerns, (those who explained
their concern, at least) the first being "but where will the
flamers post then?", and the second being "but this is the only
place we hear about net.news.groups".  The second, while
true (I'll assume that) is quite odd, and represents
a  very odd choice of newsgroups to have on a machine (or forwarded
through a machine, for that matter...).


Nutnoise administrators:  I am NOT a news administrator, even though I've
been here for ?4?  years.  Hence, I can't
remove the group.  Would somebody like to do so?



*********************
Nutnoise policy on flaming:
	When the net was created, the volume of postings was such that
a few "noise" postings didn't matter.  Now that it costs several million
dollars (spread out, yes, but still...) to keep this mess going,  I
think it's time to make it clear that flaming, in more or less any
form, is not appropriate.

	Among other things, many people do not realize that the net
is a volunteer service that they are OBLIGATED to not abuse.  I recently
posted an article to that effect, and sent a copy to the cbosgd!mark
for net.announce, since I thought it was time that the point was made
that the net MUST NOT BE ABUSED.  This note was rejected as inappropriate,
hence it will not appear in net.announce.


	I propose that, since my article was not appropriate,
it is encumbent on those who want to shut off newsgroups to post,
in net.announce, and a lot of other places, a document like
nettiquette, but more pointed toward the idea that the net is a
volunteer service.  Since I have been pointedly told 
that my writing is not appropriate, someone else will have to
write the article for net.announce.

	Given the mail I've gotten, I don't know why ANYONE would volunteer.
I certainly wouldn't volunteer to run anything to do with the net,
and I doubt if I'd agree to pay for it.
-- 
EVEN NUT.FLAME HAS IT'S LIMITS!
"Sunset and evening star, and one clear call for netnews..."