Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!math.lsa.umich.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!iuvax!maytag!looking!brad From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) Newsgroups: news.software.b Subject: Re: Who pays the bill? Message-ID: <1990Aug02.203405.40@looking.on.ca> Date: 2 Aug 90 20:34:05 GMT References: <3275.26b54aab@mccall.com> <1990Jul31.211125.11451@mlb.semi.harris.com> <818@toaster.SFSU.EDU> <1990Aug1.201232.23136@ccu.umanitoba.ca> <1990Aug1.230858.3264@iwarp.intel.com> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >Well, it's a simple choice: you can enforce your ideas of purity and >cleanliness, at the price of shafting a lot of users who have primitive >software and can't do anything about it, or you can leave things the >way they are. I'm not sure what the change is supposed to buy us. Well, Path is not a great example. But I'm for this general principle. I'm all for shafting a lot of users who have primitive software. The net is too big as it is, I would rather have a better, smaller net by cutting dead wood. I would guess that 99% of users can do something about it if they really want to. If commenting to the people who can update only brings a 'it's only usenet, who cares?' response, then these sites are pretty non-serious participants, and we can live without them. -- Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473