Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ucbcad.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!ucbcad!notes
From: notes@ucbcad.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: How about net.religion.flame? - (nf)
Message-ID: <976@ucbcad.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 4-Dec-83 13:58:28 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbcad.976
Posted: Sun Dec  4 13:58:28 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 8-Dec-83 20:44:07 EST
Sender: notes@ucbcad.UUCP
Organization: UC Berkeley CAD Group
Lines: 16

#R:umcp-cs:-412200:ucbesvax:6600010:000:610
ucbesvax!turner    Dec  4 07:21:00 1983

Re: net.religion.flame

Funny, I always thought that the only reason why net.religion and net.politics
weren't explicit branches of net.flame (i.e., net.flame.religion and
net.flame.politics) was because of the short-newsgroup-names problem.
Any finer distinctions are, in view of content, quite beyond me.  Why are
rational discussions on religion/politics/etc. any more of a legitimate
use of network bandwidth than flaming discussions?  It's all just a joyride
on other people's (albeit freely-offered) resources.

Flaming in net.politics, politicking in net.flame,
	Michael Turner (ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner)