Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!texbell!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Tired of bogus subject lines?
Message-ID: <6115@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 10 Sep 89 14:12:38 GMT
References: <7921@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <1650@unocss.UUCP> <11509@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 24

My first reaction to Spaf's posting was "this has got to be a forgery". I
mean, surely he of all people would understand that this sort of net.terrorism
ia an amazingly bad idea. Until I hear otherwise I'll stick with this
assumption.

In article <11509@boulder.Colorado.EDU>, rsk@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Rich Kulawiec) writes:
> Actually, my solution to the problem is rather effective, too: modify
> news 2.11 so that it silently discards non-compliant articles.

This is also Evil and Rude. People have been using all sorts of weird
reply formats (Re:, re:, Re^2:, Re^N:, etc...) for longer than NN has been
around. Having NN automatically violate the RFC is uncool, but dumping NN
generated messages is worse. The NN problem has been going away as more and
more people upgrade to the new software, anyway. All you do with tactics like
this is make a bad situation worse.

I haven't seen such a flagrant violation of net ethics since some idiot set
up an auto-flame that would automatically generate a flame in response to
certain users' articles.
-- 
Peter da Silva, *NIX support guy @ Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
Biz: peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180. Fun: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com. `-_-'
"...the TV reporters, who are as intelligent as electric toasters"         'U`
	-- Clayton E. Cramer