Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site umn-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!chaiklin
From: chaiklin@umn-cs.UUCP (Seth Chaiklin)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: The Truth about Net.Flame
Message-ID: <774@umn-cs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 12-Jul-85 18:49:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: umn-cs.774
Posted: Fri Jul 12 18:49:55 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Jul-85 11:18:22 EDT
Reply-To: chaiklin@umn-cs.UUCP (Seth Chaiklin)
Organization: Computer Science Dept., U of Minn, Mpls, MN
Lines: 27
Summary:  net.eulogy

It is amusing to read the copious replies to the question
about the purpose of net.flame.  Yet, no one has identified
the real reason that everyone is dissatisfied (save one
person who suggested that net.flame is better than net.jokes
for occasional high-quality humor).  

Clearly, it was hoped that net.flame would become an electronic 
Monty Python where rowdy ripostes would roll onto CRT's around 
the world, leaving raptured readers rolling on the floor.  Instead, 
we are subjected to tirades about hostage-takers and Madonna where 
the level of emotion displayed in the text is positively correlated 
with the number of incorrect spellings. Flamers quickly move in for 
the kill as they point out these errors.  But come on.  Would you
watch Monty Python if their jokes consisted mostly of people
foaming at the mouth, followed by collective criticism of 
grammar and diction?

Let's face it, we are simply not up to snuff.  We don't have
the goods.   Better to admit that we are professionals or
training to be professionals as Daniel Faigin argues, and not
pretend that we are capable of serious humor.  Why force system
administrators to slowly choke net.flame to death?  Let's admit
we're licked, pack up, go home, and spare ourselves further
embarrassment from our inabilities.

Seth Chaiklin
"Minds are like parachutes.  They only function when they are open."