proposed destruction of net.bizarre
Michael Browne
>From: gr...@adobe.UUCP
>>YOU HAVE NO MORE RIGHT TO DESTROY A NEWSGROUP WITHOUT POLLING PEOPLE
>>THAN I DO TO CREATE ONE WITHOUT ASKING YOU.
>
>As you may recall (but probably don't), this was discussed in net.news.group
>(the correct place for that sort of discussion) and people were polled.
Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
bizarre people participated. I know that I tend to read the "frivolous"
newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I
imagine that many others do the same. As a result, a group of serious
people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup.
WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???
Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre. If anyone is interested (or
not) send me mail. Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre
could be created if there is enough interest.
P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre. So unless I
hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-)
--
UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: m...@k.cs.cmu.edu
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
Monica Cellio
>Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
>WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
>EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???
I don't have the old posts to back this up, but I think the initial message
in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well. If people can't take
enough of an interest to read net.news.group when their pet group is being
discussed, I hardly think the rest of the net is to blame. What you are
implying is that almost every message in net.news.group should be
cross-posted somewhere else as well.
-Dragon
P.S. This is obviously a vote against net.bizarre.
--
UUCP: ...ucbvax!dual!lll-crg!dragon
ARPA: monica.cellio@cmu-cs-cad or dragon@lll-crg
Michael Browne
>>Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
>>bizarre people participated. [...]
>>WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
>>EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???
>
>I don't have the old posts to back this up, but I think the initial message
>in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well.
I don't think so. If there was any mention of deletion in net.bizarre, it
didn't mention voting. (I read EVERY article in net.bizarre, so I would
remember seeing a deletion notice.)
>If people can't take
>enough of an interest to read net.news.group when their pet group is being
>discussed, I hardly think the rest of the net is to blame.
If I had known of the discussion, I would have read net.news.group and
participated. THAT'S WHAT I'M COMPLAINING ABOUT!!! I would have been
interested enough to read net.news.group IF I HAD KNOWN THAT MY "PET" GROUP
WAS SCHEDULED FOR DELETION!!! Furthermore, I'm not blaming the rest of the
net, only the people in net.news.group. :-)
>What you are
>implying is that almost every message in net.news.group should be
>cross-posted somewhere else as well.
In the case of messages about deletion, that's exactly what I'm implying.
(OK, maybe not EVERY message, but the message that calls for votes should
DEFINITELY be cross-posted.) If the voting had been cross-posted to
net.bizarre, I would not be happy about the deletion, but I would have
accepted it. But it wasn't, so I'm not and I don't.
P.S. - I noticed that net.bizarre was back this morning. Since I
"threatened" to recreate net.bizarre in a previous post, I want say that
I didn't do it. (I DO believe in following rules.)
gregory samson
>in that discussion was posted to net.bizarre as well. If people can't take
>enough of an interest to read net.news.group when their pet group is being
>discussed, I hardly think the rest of the net is to blame. What you are
>implying is that almost every message in net.news.group should be
>cross-posted somewhere else as well.
>
time now, and something like that would have caused me to jump on to
net.news.group so fast I probably would have had trouble with the Fitzgerald
contraction.
Also, how am I to know that net.bizarre is being discussed on net.news.group?
Telepathy? Word-of-mouth? From whom do I get this information?
I think that messages in net.news.group RELATING TO THE DELETION OF GROUPS
should be cross-posted to the group that is going to go. For instance,
cross-posting deletion messages to net.games.video would likely draw
little response. So? So the group gets wiped, that's what! Neat and simple,
isn't it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. T. Samson
The Evil MicroWizard
g...@wjh12.HARVARD.EDU
Edward C. Bennett
In article <6...@k.cs.cmu.edu>, m...@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes:
>
> Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
> bizarre people participated. I know that I tend to read the "frivolous"
> newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I
> imagine that many others do the same. As a result, a group of serious
> people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup.
'Silly' is an understatement, try 'worthless'.
>
> WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
> EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???
How could possibly have noticed it in there? There was SO much
GARBAGE in net.bizarre that anything of any value would be quickly lost.
>
> Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre. If anyone is interested (or
> not) send me mail. Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre
> could be created if there is enough interest.
There's an idea. Create a mailing list.
>
> P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre. So unless I
> hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-)
Please NO!! I don't care if you did use a ':-)', that's not
funny. Keep your trash to yourself. Don't pollute the net with it.
> --
> UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: m...@k.cs.cmu.edu
--
Edward C. Bennett
UUCP: ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!ukecc!edward
/* A charter member of the Scooter bunch */
"Goodnight M.A."
Michael Browne
>... In light of this, I believe that since the following groups are
>strictly for the information of the individual, and not the organizations we
>are associated with, they should be removed along with net.bizarre:
>
> net.abortion
> net.bicycle
> ...
> et cetera
>If recreational groups like net.bizarre are so terrible, I believe that for
>Justice's sake all of them should be removed.
> Harold H Gaines
I agree. I vote to remove ALL of these groups, AND net.flame. Net.bizarre
may have been "silly" and "worthless", but it was rarely offensive.
Net.flame IS offensive. (Remember this summer's discussion of "Women and
the Consumption of Toilet Paper"??) If net.bizarre deserves to die, then
net.flame deserves to die a thousand times over.
--Mike
--
UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: m...@k.cs.cmu.edu
"It came time to move, so I packed up my Salvador Dali print of two
blindfolded dental hygienists trying to make a circle on an Etch-a-Sketch..."
Kenneth Adam Arromdee
>[Yes, I know this is in three groups.]
>In article <6...@k.cs.cmu.edu>, m...@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes:
>> Yes, there was a discussion in net.news.group, but I doubt if most of the
>> bizarre people participated. I know that I tend to read the "frivolous"
>> newsgroups and avoid the "serious" groups, such as net.news.group, and I
>> imagine that many others do the same. As a result, a group of serious
>> people decided (25-9) that they didn't like a silly newsgroup.
>
> 'Silly' is an understatement, try 'worthless'.
If someone is an extremist who thinks net.religion.jewish is worthless,
should it be removed? Regardless of whether you think it's worthless,
deciding that a group should not exist because it is "worthless" is
censorship. You can say that all non-technical groups are "worthless",
but once you have agreed that some such groups should exist, you should
not use "I think it's worthless" as a reason to selectively decide that
some should exist and some should not.
>> WHY DIDN'T YOU CROSSPOST THE DELETION DISCUSSION TO NET.BIZARRE SO THAT
>> EVERYONE COULD PARTICIPATE???
>
> How could possibly have noticed it in there? There was SO much
>GARBAGE in net.bizarre that anything of any value would be quickly lost.
This is patently ridiculous. Don't post it because nobody will read it anyway?
You have based a totally unwarranted conclusion on your prejudicial
viewpoint of net.bizarre (i.e., it's full of garbage). If you feel that
it's garbage, that's your opinion, but don't use that as an excuse not to
inform its readers of something you know will affect them.
Furthermore, I am located at a university which does not permit me to read
net.news.group. Leaving discussions about a group's fate out of the group
whose fate is being discussed is not fair to those who will not, or in
my case, CANNOT, access those discussions otherwise.
>> Well, I propose that we recreate net.bizarre. If anyone is interested (or
>> not) send me mail. Even if net.bizarre isn't recreated, maybe mail.bizarre
>> could be created if there is enough interest.
>
> There's an idea. Create a mailing list.
This seems to be inconsistent with your remark below not to "pollute the
net". Mail does go over the net, you know! True, you don't have to read
someone else's mail, but you don't have to read net.bizarre either if
you don't want to. Furthermore, the original net.bizarre deletion announcement
also said "DON'T consider setting up a mailing list that would end up
passing the equivalent of 'net.bizarre' through the mail..."
>> P.S. - So far, the vote is 2-1 for the creation of net.bizarre. So unless I
>> hear otherwise, I'll create net.bizarre later this week. :-)
>
> Please NO!! I don't care if you did use a ':-)', that's not
>funny. Keep your trash to yourself. Don't pollute the net with it.
>Edward C. Bennett
As I already said, if you think something is trash, that is not a sufficient
justification for not letting someone else who doesn't think so read it.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If you know the alphabet up to 'k', you can teach it up to 'k'.
Kenneth Arromdee
BITNET: G46I4701 at JHUVM and INS_AKAA at JHUVMS
CSNET: ins_...@jhunix.CSNET
ARPA: ins_akaa%jhu...@hopkins.ARPA
UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!umcp-cs!aplvax!aplcen!jhunix!ins_akaa
Michael Browne
>In article <6...@k.cs.cmu.edu> m...@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes:
>>... If there was any mention of deletion in net.bizarre, it
>>didn't mention voting. (I read EVERY article in net.bizarre, so I would
>>remember seeing a deletion notice.)
>
>remember anything at all....:-)
Actually, I was this way long before I started reading net.bizarre. :-)
>I am very sure that there was a mention in net.bizarre of the debate in
>this group.
I am equally sure that there wasn't. Does anybody know for sure? Did
anybody archive net.bizarre?
>I presume the reason why this group was not
>swamped by net.bizarrers demanding that it be retained was either (for some
>of them) they didn't have enough sense to figure out what was going on
>[suppose I'd better :-) here too] or (for most) they could see they were
>just fooling around and couldn't honestly claim the group should stay alive.
IF there was any mention that net.bizarre might be deleted (and I don't
admit that there was), it was very brief and was probably thought to be a
joke. (Come to think of it, I seem to remember a message suggesting that
net.bizarre should be the first newsgroup to commit suicide. Was THAT the
mention that you are thinking of??? If so, are you surprised that no one
responded?)
I dare say that net.bizarre had as much reason to exist (if not more) than
net.flame, net.jokes, or a lot of other newsgroups. (Net.bizarre was
originally created illegally, but it WAS eventually accepted by the Powers
That Be. I can't believe that anyone is actually trying to argue that
net.bizarre was deleted because it was illegally created 3 MONTHS AGO!!?) If
everyone is so interested in reducing net traffic, why do we still have
net.flame???
I'm still interested in hearing from anybody who wants to save net.bizarre
and/or create mail.bizarre.
Actually, I'm not certain that I need net.bizarre any more. Net.news.group
is almost as much fun! :-)
--
UUCP: ..!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb ARPA: m...@k.cs.cmu.edu
"It came time to move, so I packed up my Salvador Dali print of two
John Allred
>may have been "silly" and "worthless", but it was rarely offensive.
>Net.flame IS offensive. (Remember this summer's discussion of "Women and
>the Consumption of Toilet Paper"??) If net.bizarre deserves to die, then
>net.flame deserves to die a thousand times over.
> --Mike
If you don't like such discussions, Mike, why are you here? You *do* know
where your 'u' key is, right?
--
John Allred
General Computer Company
uucp: seismo!harvard!gcc-milo!john
^^^^
note new path-------------||
Mark Aden Poling
elaborate execution, while groups that have been sitting around for
months with less than a hundred articles to their names are seen as
"beneficial".
"God is on the side with the largest artillery."
Mark!
Michael Browne
>In article <6...@k.cs.cmu.edu> m...@k.cs.cmu.edu (Michael Browne) writes:
>>
>>I agree. I vote to remove ALL of these groups, AND net.flame. Net.bizarre
>>may have been "silly" and "worthless", but it was rarely offensive.
>>Net.flame IS offensive. (Remember this summer's discussion of "Women and
>>the Consumption of Toilet Paper"??) If net.bizarre deserves to die, then
>>net.flame deserves to die a thousand times over.
>> --Mike
>
>If you don't like such discussions, Mike, why are you here? You *do* know
>where your 'u' key is, right?
>
1) Why do you expect logic from a admittedly bizarre person?
2) My terminal does not have a 'u' key.
P.S. - I'm still looking for people for mail.bizarre. (There were over
1200 articles posted to net.bizarre in 2 or 3 months. Where the hell is
everybody?)
Roy Smith
> net.flame, net.jokes, or a lot of other newsgroups.
I would have said "net.bizarre has as little reason to exist as net.flame,
net.jokes, and a lot of other newsgroups".
--
Roy Smith <allegra!phri!roy>
System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
P. Kirsch
For those of you that are still interested in net.bizarre someone wrote to
me regarding a possible bizarre mailing list. If any of you are interested
his name is Michael Browne and the e-mail address I have for him
is: allegra!seismo!k.cs.cmu.edu!mcb
If you can't reach that address send it to me and I'll pass it along.
I am dying for the recreation of net.bizarre but if a mailing list can be
organized that would be almost as good.
--
Another wunnerful letter from the semi-intelligent rotting brain of:
Paul Kirsch
St. Joseph's University
Philadelphia, Pa
{ astrovax | allegra | bpa | burdvax } !sjuvax!kirsch
Warning: Objects in Terminal Room are Closer than they Appear...
Donn Seeley
From: cjs...@watrose.UUCP (Carlo Sgro)
... WITHOUT getting into the argument as to whether or not
net.bizarre should exist or not, I would like to know how an
institution on the net can justify carrying net.bizarre and NOT
net.news.group. ...
Let's do a bit of comparison shopping here. Since net.bizarre is no
longer with us, we'll pick on net.flame, another one of those tacky
rebel planets from the Lucasfilm production RMGROUP WARS.
+ Type of material: Both groups seem to carry the same sorts of
articles; in fact cross-posting is not uncommon. The articles
are almost all concerned with petty putdowns of people or their
interests (newsgroups).
+ Educational value: net.flame is a study in human psychology --
you wouldn't believe what human beings would do or say unless
you read net.flame! net.news.group is very similar, but less
appealing.
+ Entertainment value: Again, this one has to go to net.flame.
Brian Reid is the only reason I still read net.news.group.
+ Volume of garbage:
% du net/flame
533 net/flame
% du net/news/group
1005 net/news/group
%
I think that says it all.
The prosecution rests. Let's rmgroup net.news.group!
Donn Seeley University of Utah CS Dept do...@utah-cs.arpa
40 46' 6"N 111 50' 34"W (801) 581-5668 decvax!utah-cs!donn