Steve Bonine <s...
> My experience with contriving on-topic material to try to revive a
> newsgroup has consistently been negative. Of course, if you're really
> desperate for a discussion about newsgroups, perhaps you could
> contrive one yourself.
A homeopathist would claim that the way to revive a newsgroup is with a
tiny amount of intensely boring material diluted with enormous amounts
of meaningless guff. What is, after all, a newsgroup? Is it news about a
group? Or is it, as others claim, a group of news?
Why do you say?
I don't know. I suppose I'm just trying to spew out some pointless text.
Is it because of your plans that you say?
No, I don't have a plan.
Maybe your life has something to do with this.
You could be on to something there, Doc.
What makes you believe?
That they are all out to get me? I just think that
they are all out to get me.
Can you elaborate on that?
I could, but—you know, the idea is, this isn’t supposed to be such
hard work. Your endless questions are making me do much more typing
than I hoped I could get away with.
I would appreciate it if you would continue.
Maybe, but our readers wouldn’t, I’m beginning to suspect.
Go on, don't be afraid.
Have you ever seen a man with as many ears as noses?
What do you think?
I think you have, but you’re not admitting it. Go on, spill the beans.
I need a little more detail please.
That's your defence mechanism, isn’t it? Deflect every enquiry with a
question of your own.
Is it because of the people you hang around with that you say?
Yes, it certainly is.
Perhaps problems at school have something to do with this.
I'm sure you’re right, but I think that’s enough for now. According to
theory, this is the start of a really compelling thread. Bye bye!
You're being a bit brief, perhaps you could go into detail.
Can you are more explicit?
> It's dead, Jim.
…and never called me Mother.