Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site houxu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!houxu!welsch
From: welsch@houxu.UUCP (Larry Welsch)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Flame Flame Flame
Message-ID: <256@houxu.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 10-Dec-83 11:20:13 EST
Article-I.D.: houxu.256
Posted: Sat Dec 10 11:20:13 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Dec-83 06:07:36 EST
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 50

Flame for the sake of flamin -- not for the weak of heart.  No claim is
made that the following flames are consistent, meaningful, or otherwise
socially redeeming.

This is a flame against all people who flame with four letter words and
other cuss words. Their point gets lost amongst the <edited for the sake
of not having to worry about censors - see paragraph 3, but if you
substitute your favorite 4 letter words not much will be lost in
translation> that the flame becomes colorless and dry, kind of like a
warmed over stale breaking of wind. It just lacks the pizzazz of a Baldwin
or Cleaver. No creativity. If you must cuss at least make it original and
attention gathering.

This is a flame against all those who post response articles to the net
saying the original article belongs in the mail.  Somehow it never seems
to occur to the responders that if the original article belonged in the
mail, then that must go doubly for the response.  Why.. Cann't they see
past their own egoes.  It looks to me like another do as I say not do as I
do type of person.

This is a flame against all those who must censor. First, we have the
rationalizers, who argue "Well its my machine and if you don't adhere to
my rules then I will take my machine away." Second, we have the thou shalt
not offend group, who argue "Minority group, <pick your favorite, after
all almost everyone sometime or other has been discriminated against> will
see this and might be offended and as an affirmative action employer we
must see to it that the work environment is like sitting in a dentist's
chair listening to the Beatles, played by some imitation of the London
Symphony." Third, we have the naughty, naughty group, who argue, "NAUGHTY,
NAUGHTY, you used a swear word in polite company and I'm going to tell
your boss and see to it you are disciplined." Fourth, we have the finger
pointers who argue, "Well I wouldn't censor this article if it was up to
me but all those other censors force me too."

Why cann't the censors see that about the ONLY things that should be
censored is yelling fire in a crowded theater, auditorium, stadium and
libeling people who cannot adequately defend themselves.  

This is a flame against all those who complain of the drivel on the net.
Nothing like drivel on drivel to clean up the drivel. I mean really, what
is net.flame meant for, but flamin drivel. Seriously, how many profound,
meaningful, articles have you read on the whole net. net.tv, net.jokes,
net.games, net.rec ... are devoted to drivel. Instead of usenet this  
should be called drivelnet.  Instead of drivelling on drivel how about
adding something non drivel.

All that drivel put out the flame.

				Larry Welsch
				houxu!welsch