Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!husc6!panda!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar
From: barmar@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: net.med,net.nlang,net.news
Subject: Re: Flame etymology clarification
Message-ID: <1953@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU>
Date: Mon, 12-May-86 23:16:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.1953
Posted: Mon May 12 23:16:04 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 14-May-86 08:07:45 EDT
References: <2466@aecom.UUCP> <340@pilchuck.UUCP>
Reply-To: barmar@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Distribution: na
Organization: MIT, EE/CS Computer Facilities, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 15
Xref: linus net.med:3791 net.nlang:4198 net.news:3982


The term flame is not necessarily tied to news or even electronic
communication.  At MIT (where this use of the term may have originated),
we often talked about flaming in person.  Anyone arguing excessively was
considered to be flaming.  It didn't have to be insulting, nor did it
even have to be directed at anyone in particular.

I suspect that this use originated because a person who was arguing was
getting hot and bothered.  Later, the transitive version of the term
came into use, because a flamer could be directing his flames (like a
flame thrower), so you could "flame at" someone.
-- 
    Barry Margolin
    ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics
    UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar