Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!amdcad!sun!pitstop!sundc!seismo!uunet!mcvax!ukc!its63b!dougie From: dougie@its63b.ed.ac.uk (Dougie Nisbet) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: Can something be done about 770K waste of time postings... Message-ID: <1317@its63b.ed.ac.uk> Date: 12 May 88 17:59:28 GMT References: <1574@looking.UUCP> <22099@bu-cs.BU.EDU> <392@pan.UUCP> <859@actnyc.UUCP> Reply-To: dougie@its63b.ed.ac.uk (Dougie Nisbet) Organization: Medical Statistics Unit, University of Edinburgh Lines: 43 In article <859@actnyc.UUCP> jsb@actnyc.UUCP (The Invisible Man) writes: >In article <392@pan.UUCP> jw@pan.UUCP (Jamie Watson) writes: > [ much flaming deleted ] >)I like your mentioning of talk.bizarre, though - perhaps we should get the >)entire comp.binaries.* hierarchy aliased to talk.bizarre, which is not (thank >)God) carried in Europe, so we wouldn't have to pay for future lunacy like this. > >(This is too easy...) Where do you get off flaming a news group that you don't >even receive? Is it the title that you find offensive? Is it those unruly >Americans you don't like? > It isn't always necessary to experience something to have an opinion about it. (Drugs, alcohol, prostitution, politics, arms, incest, rape) Jamie's reaction is perhaps excessive, but understandable. The incredibly overwhelming impression I receive of American's not realising that their posting permiate all over the world is probably felt by many others. (No, I don't want to buy your concert tickets, or rent your apartment, its just a teeny bit out of the way ...) I followed the recent arguments about talk.bizzare V comp.binaries.ibm.pc in news.admin, and feel that any group which feels its claim to fame is to get top of the traffic ratings is probably not wanted here. >The crux of your argument (if it may be termed an argument, the Abuse department >is down the hall to your right) seems to be that only those froups that you >personally find useful should be allowed to exist. Perhaps there should only >be 1 froup titled net.Jamie (moderated by yourself? or perhaps by God, whom you >feel certain agrees with you; or perhaps you feel you *are* God?) > Well, this is big of you isn't it? Perhaps you feel that that this is a constructive response? Perhaps you feel that Abuse deserves Abuse? Gosh, how can I bear your biting sarcasm. > >-- > "When you awake, you will remember everything" > jim (uunet!actnyc!jsb) Yes, very good, very moving, very deep. Right now I need aphorisms like I need holes in my heads HHGTTG