Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!lll-lcc!qantel!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020 From: mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller) Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.group Subject: Re: Comments on Reorganization Message-ID: <1031@gilbbs.UUCP> Date: Tue, 23-Sep-86 16:02:58 EDT Article-I.D.: gilbbs.1031 Posted: Tue Sep 23 16:02:58 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 24-Sep-86 00:00:45 EDT References: <4558@gatech.CSNET> <158@rayssd.UUCP> <923@gilbbs.UUCP> <230@hao.UUCP> Organization: Gil's Place, Santa Rosa CA Lines: 77 Summary: horse-puckey Xref: mnetor net.news:2045 net.news.group:3485 In article <230@hao.UUCP>, woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods) writes: > > You miss one of the MOST important things about reorganization: it will > make it EASIER to create, delete and rename newsgroups, not harder. Calling > this "doing away with [net] freedom", which is CLEARLY implied in the above, > is just plain incorrect. That article is a total fallacy. Yes, you disclaimed So you say, Mr. Woods. On the other hand, you also claimed to be making assignations of groups on the basis of a stated set of criteria, yet in fact such assignments were made at the whim of the reorganizers. In as much as the issue is *NOT* the specifics of any particular assignment, but rather of mis-representation (a point which has been made repeatedly, and which you have consistently ignored, while hammering away at people making it), and in as much as you have shown yourself to be guilty of misrepresentation in this matter, *WHY* should we blithely accept your protestations of good will now? > comparing us to Hitler; Bull. That's the entire message in the above. > I would personally like to THANK Darryl for some public support (finally!) In fact, I support what the SAs have done, for the most part, and I even publicly point out that the backbone sites have the right to do as they choose. I have also repeatedly pointed out that they should cease mis-representing what they do (and interestingly enough, Mr. Woods, *YOU* seem to be the single most frequent backbone SA found to be misrepresenting the facts). I honestly was *NOT* comparing the re-organization to Hitler. I *WILL*, however, compare *YOU* to Hitler. You refuse to acknowledge legitimate complaints about your misbehaviour, and continuously harp on how much good *YOU* are doing for *US*. I doubt seriously if the net would fall apart without *YOUR* efforts, sir. I urge you to the experiment. Drop out and let us see for ourselves. > All the bitching I've been hearing is almost enough to get me to suggest that > we just forget the whole thing and let the net collapse under it's own weight > (which may happen anyway, but a better organization would sure help). Most > of what I have seen is massive flames over a couple of low-volume newsgroups, > with absolutely NO recognition of what a monumental task reorganizing this > network is. Is it any wonder a couple of mistakes have been made? (Yes, > the deletion of wobegon was an ERROR, not an intentional slight as has > been repeatedly insinuated by some not-so-shy people, and in all likelihood > it will be reinstated before the "rec" groups are created). No, I don't mind > people pointing out mistakes that have been made; all I ask is that it be > done in a reasonable way while acknowledging that a mistake in a task of > this magnitude is understandable. Comparing us to Hitler is the last straw. Mistake? Saving net.singles, while moving obviously technical groups into the talk.* domain is a *MISTAKE*??? Come now, Mr. Woods. I suppose that you will argue that Charles Manson made a "mistake" in murdering Sharon Tate? Your arrogant posturing on this issue is growing quite tiresome, frankly. You openly stated that "what WE define as technical is technical". I suppose that was a "mistake" too? > Flaming us will NOT get your desires implemented. Requests and reasonable > discussion very well might. Think for a minute what it would be like to be > in our shoes and read all this crap on the net every day. After this, it's > awfully tempting to REALLY be like Hitler and implement first, explain > later (if at all). In your case, what would be new or different? I suggest that you in no way represent the opinions or positions of the majority of the backbone SAs. I suggest that you are pretty much a singleton, seeking to maximize his personal power over the net. Your arrogance and complete lack of consideration for anyone else's point of view, regardless of the manner in which they were stated, suffices as prima facie evidence, from my point of view. I would like to hear from the rest of the backbone SAs, and a lot less from you, sir. You have certainly had more than ample say in this matter. Why not let someone else speak to the issues? -- Disclaimer: Disclaimer? DISCLAIMER!? I don't need no stinking DISCLAIMER!!! tom keller "She's alive, ALIVE!" {ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020 (* we may not be big, but we're small! *)