Xref: utzoo alt.flame:1465 soc.women:8995 misc.legal:3455
Path: utzoo!hoptoad!uunet!labrea!agate!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-pcd!uoregon!dboyes
From: dboyes@uoregon.UUCP (David Boyes)
Newsgroups: alt.flame,soc.women,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Yet Another Forgery!
Message-ID: <1478@uoregon.UUCP>
Date: 25 Jan 88 03:00:47 GMT
References: <229*manis@instr.camosun.bcc.cdn> <6466@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <2939@killer.UUCP> <2623@dasys1.UUCP> <3089@killer.UUCP>
Reply-To: dboyes@drizzle.UUCP (David Boyes)
Organization: University of Oregon, Computer Science, Eugene OR
Lines: 80

//SYSIN DD *
In some article in alt.flame, Mark Ethan Smith writes:

>... the style is not mine

Hmph. I respectfully beg to differ.

>The netnews administrators have ignored this forgery problem
>in their typical nonchalant fashion.  They are uninterested in determining
>the cause of the problem or preventing it from reoccuring.  They are also
>peculiarly hostile to any effort to find the culprit.

Perhaps they have more important things to do than play Mike Hammer,
detective, for someone who shows no sign of being appreciative of
any of their efforts? Perhaps they have significant gainful work assigned to
them by their employers that they must do in order to keep their jobs?
Perhaps they consider the problems of a public-access system to be
less important than the systems they are paid to maintain?

Mark, in the past when people have gone out of their way to assist
and/or aid you in investigating your claims, you've simply turned
around a few months later and posted articles like the one referenced
in this article. Speaking for myself only, putting in a lot of time
for no returns at all is a pretty silly thing to do. I'm certainly not
going to go out of my way to help someone who places epsilon value on
my help and proceeds to denigrate it in a public forum in the manner
quoted above.

>Yes, it is very refreshing to compare the attacks of the straight men in
>soc.women with the positive remarks of others like Mike Robinson and
>others who have worthwhile things to say. 

Worthwhile on whose scale? Are they worthwhile simply because they
happen to fit your personal Weltanshauung? Their opinions are just as
valid as yours -- as is their privilege to post them to the newsgroups
that they see as appropriate (provided, of course, that their choice of
newsgourps is at least marginally appropriate).

>The agenda of the straight
>man in soc.women is oppressing women, continuing male-dominated political
>charades to keep us where we are, and impishly asking "What's wrong" as if
>everyhting was fine and dandy.

//FLAME EXEC PGM=HIGH

Funny you should say that, Mark. Read the above again. Do you believe
it? If you do, you are one of the most audacious hypocrites I have
ever had the misfortune to speak to. You claim that stereotypes are
evil and promote the status quo. Pardon me, but just what do *you*
call the above paragraph?

I don't see any qualifiers -- no 'some', no 'many' there. Some of us
*are* trying to understand your position -- IF YOU GIVE US A CHANCE,
OK? Stuff like that paragraph is just as evil as the stereotypes you
whine and complain about in most of the rest of your articles.

//FLMETERM EXEC PGM=QUENCH

>... shows his own homophobic and femophobic tendencies ... 
           ^^^

Bit of a big assumption, don't you think, Mark? Especially since you
don't know who 'forged' those articles in your name? Or have you
forgotten about your crusade for non-gender specific pronouns?

>Typical of the fascist strategy to set oppressed groups against each
>other.
>--Mark

No comment. Just no comment. Just say 'No.'

/*
/&


-- 
David Boyes         | ARPA: 556%OREGON1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Systems Division    | BITNET: 556@OREGON1
UO Computing Center | UUCP: dboyes@uoregon.UUCP
'How long d'ya think it'll be before just us oldtimers remember WISCVM?'