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