Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!hoptoad!amdahl!gam
From: gam@amdahl.UUCP
Newsgroups: alt.config
Subject: Re: At last: alt.flame
Message-ID: <14461@amdahl.amdahl.com>
Date: Thu, 17-Sep-87 04:02:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: amdahl.14461
Posted: Thu Sep 17 04:02:04 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Sep-87 04:59:06 EDT
References: <14297@amdahl.amdahl.com> <7366@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>
Reply-To: gam@amdahl.amdahl.com (Gordon A. Moffett)
Distribution: alt
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 24

In article <7366@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>In article <14297@amdahl.amdahl.com> gam@amdahl.amdahl.com (Gordon A. Moffett) writes:
>|I've always enjoyed the old net.flame and also felt it
>|served a valuable purpose both as a catharsis and also
>...
>Next we'll have alt.bizarre. Why have two groups for people to "express
>themselves freely?" This is not a flame, an honest question.

net.flame had a lot of history behind it and was ruefully missed
when The Authorities removed it.  I honestly claim that it serves
a useful purpose in network communications, for example by presenting
hot (truly hot!) issues that the People which to rail about.
See how the Pope's visit to SF is being received, for example.

I have no interest in creating an alt.bizarre and I hope we
never see such a thing.  If someone wants to create it I hope
they can convince me that it is worth carrying, as I might
not want to.  But likewise, sites that don't want to carry
alt.flame don't have to, either.
-- 
Gordon A. Moffett                             gam@amdahl.amdahl.com

 ~ Let us break these bonds assunder! ~
 ~ Let us cast these yokes away from us! ~