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..."