Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site sdcc7.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc7!ln63fac
From: ln63fac@sdcc7.UUCP (Rick Frey)
Newsgroups: net.games.pbm
Subject: Re: Abuse of net.games.pbm?
Message-ID: <176@sdcc7.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 22-Nov-85 12:30:38 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcc7.176
Posted: Fri Nov 22 12:30:38 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 25-Nov-85 07:34:21 EST
References: <2020@phri.UUCP> <2930012@csd2.UUCP>
Organization: U.C. San Diego, Academic Computer Center
Lines: 30
Summary: Net abuses

In article <2930012@csd2.UUCP>, squires@csd2.UUCP (Charles S Squires Jr) writes:
> Sir,
> 	Your complaint about people posting complete game results on
> net.games.pbm is ridiculous:
> 1) Traffic is low.

I'm coming from UCSD, and I've already received warnings from a number of the 
computer staff people here that Net usage (in general) is too high.  A number
of locations have started dropping non-technical news groups and the major
concern of the original arrticle was to use a little common sense and not
abuse something that for now is frree and unrestricted to hopefully keep it
that way.  What is ridiculous about that?

> 2) Some people care.
> I suggest not reading the notes you don't care for.  After all, pbm stands
> for "play by mail."  We're playing by mail, we're all USENET subscribers,
> and this is our forum.

There's a big difference between playing by email and reading postings in the
net.  People don't read notes they don't care for and I don't think that was
the point that the original article was making.  Just a request for a little
thought as to the necessity of a posting.

> 	I think a bigger waste and disturbing trend is the number of
> meta-discussions (this is my first and lst posting of a metadiscussion
> nature) discussing the validity of discussions.  

Would you care to discuss that?   :-)

Rick Frey