From: utzoo!decvax!yale-com!death
Newsgroups: net.followup
Title: Re: Proper use of net.followup
Article-I.D.: yale-com.281
Posted: Wed Nov 10 10:54:29 1982
Received: Fri Nov 12 02:12:59 1982
References: uofm-cv.138 cbosgd.2787

So if a discussion gets old on net.followup, it should be moved to net.misc,
and when it gets old there does it have to move again, to maybe
net.beating.dead.horse?

Discussions on the network seem to follow a common progression:
1. First article appears.
2. First rebuttals appear.
3. By now, it has been distributed to all sites, and all sorts of things
   start to happen; things are interesting.
4. Time passes...intrest wanes. However, people who only read news once a 
   week or so keep responding to month old articles. Discussion gets old.
5. Discussion gets very old; people start to say, "maybe this should not
   continue on the network", others who are still interested keep discussion
   going, and say "let's hear it for the 'n' key! If you aren't interested,
   unsubscribe!"
6. Everyone finally gets tired of it all and discussion ceases.

We are now into phase 5 of Burger Wars; Mark Horton just said that
net.followup was the wrong place for such a discussion and called for
a halt to it all. Now, me, I happen to prefer stupid cheap thrills 
like burger debates instead of long diatribes on highly morally charged
issues; not because of any preference for the shallow over the profound,
but after months of maudlin orations, a lighter discussion about
injection-molded burgers is a welcome change. So "let's hear it for
your 'n' key" and all those other things, give it two weeks, and it'll 
go away.


				== death ==