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 hoptoad.uucp Path: utzoo!hoptoad!tim From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney) Newsgroups: alt.flame Subject: Re: Illegal Flame Message-ID: <3002@hoptoad.uucp> Date: Sun, 20-Sep-87 12:32:22 EDT Article-I.D.: hoptoad.3002 Posted: Sun Sep 20 12:32:22 1987 Date-Received: Mon, 21-Sep-87 05:38:28 EDT References: <315@cc5.bbn.com.BBN.COM> <3967@well.UUCP> <2983@hoptoad.uucp> <8709190834.AA00278@chex> Reply-To: tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) Organization: Sun Microsystems, TOPS Division, Berkeley Lines: 71 In article <8709190834.AA00278@chex> chex!gsmith (Gene Ward Smith) writes: > It seems to me that people should have a right to post articles >without other people writing to their sysadmins with claims that >they are engaging in an illegal conspiracy by doing so. Gene, I'd really like to hear your answer to something. I have been on USENET about six years. In this time, I have been flamed by some of the most extreme jerks ever to walk the planet. Yet only in one case did I complain to the system administrators. It was not about Larry, it was not about Ray, it was not about Charley, it wasn't even about Yakim or Chuck. It was about you and Matthew. Have you any ideas what made your behavior worthy of this honor, while other quite obnoxious people did not earn it? Could it be that no one else followed me to practically every newsgroup I participated in, posting messages which clearly had as their primary intent to harass and annoy me rather than to state a disagreement? Could it be that everyone else (save one) disagreed with what I said and attacked me only incidentally in the course of disagreement, rather than attacking me as their primary aim and mentioning disagreement only incidentally in the course of attack? Could it relate to the fact that none of the others, even at their most obnoxious, adopted a habit of always referring to me by deliberately derogatory nicknames? Could it be that no one else has ever flamed me every day for weeks at a time? Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that in one of your collaborative attacks, an idiotic song to the tune of "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" on rec.arts.comics, you admitted that you were trying to force me to leave the network, and therefore were escalating the conflict beyond what anyone else had done in six years? You remember that message, don't you, Gene, the one with the line "Won't you leave the net tonight?" Have you got the gumption to post the stanza that contained it? Doesn't it bother you in the least that you overtly tried to force me off the network, then acted the innocent when I returned the favor? The fact is that if you had simply stopped attacking me after I complained, that would have been the end of it. Instead, you stepped up the attacks. Even after Matthew was told by the department chairman that his account was in jeapordy, he didn't stop. This smacks of deliberate self-destruction to me. Any rational person would have known that to increase obnoxiousness after being warned would make it virtually certain that one's account would be removed. There is every sign that Matthew got what he wanted. Now, here's an offer. If you and Matthew promise to pretend on the network that I don't exist, mentioning not my name nor any epithet you may come up with as a synonym nor any message of mine nor any opinion commonly identified with me, I will recommend to Dr. Addison and Peter Rauch that Matthew's accounts be reinstated. Because you have shown that you cannot handle disagreement without these extreme lapses, it is not enough to agree not to attack me; such an agreement would be violated within the first week. I will require the agreement to be written, and to include an explicit forfeit of account in case of breach. If you post even one message saying, for instance, that you would find it enormously funny to strike me repeatedly on the head with a hammer (this is from talk.religion.newage), or a "Captain Carnage IQ Test" (this from talk.religion.misc), then your accounts will be permanently removed. If you act like adult human beings, then you will encounter no further difficulties from me. And please, keep in mind that I don't have to do this. You started a war and lost. The sysops here are well aware that my complaint was justified. Your messages have received support only from people who were already against me for other reasons, and only a few of those. I have received not a single letter complaining about my behavior. There is no pressure on me to lift a finger on Matthew's behalf, and there is every reason not to. I am simply trying to be a nice guy. I doubt you understand or believe it, but there it is. I don't hate either of you, though you do make me angry, a you intend. -- Tim Maroney, {ihnp4,sun,well,ptsfa,lll-crg}!hoptoad!tim (uucp) hoptoad!tim@lll-crg (arpa)