Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!van-bc!sl
From: sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: Portal flames back!
Message-ID: <1885@van-bc.UUCP>
Date: 20 Sep 88 17:44:51 GMT
References: <9027@cup.portal.com> <6934@gryphon.CTS.COM> <9150@cup.portal.com> <3686@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <2700@kitty.UUCP>
Reply-To: sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne)
Organization: Wimsey Associates, Vancouver, BC.
Lines: 22

In article <2700@kitty.UUCP> larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) writes:
>In article <3686@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>, greg@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Gregory Nowak) writes:

>	It is also my opinion.  If it were within my power, I would simply
>deny the Portal site a Usenet feed. If one believes Portal's advertising
>hype, their "internal" bulletin boards far exceed Usenet in size; if this
>is true, then Portal users would miss little if denied Usenet access.

Portal seems to connect to the net via uunet, and pay for that access. I'm
not entirely sure, but I think it would be *extremely* hard for uunet to
limit their service. And I'm sure that Usenix would not want to risk a
lawsuit to find out. So I guess we'll just have to boycott uunet. . .

Seriously the best way to reduce traffic is to simply ignore these types of
postings. If you really are upset about it hit "r" not "f". Thats what mail
is for. After you have used "r", use "K". Then you will be helping to reduce
the problem instead of compounding it with a flame war. In every one of
these cases the bandwidth consumed by flames *far* exceeds that of the
original postings. 

-- 
Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl     Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532