Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!nuchat!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Death to binaries (was re: pictures in binaries)
Summary: The quality of the flames is improving.
Message-ID: <2144@sugar.UUCP>
Date: 18 Jun 88 16:18:57 GMT
References: <4398@gryphon.CTS.COM> <5560@xanth.cs.odu.edu> <2121@sugar.UUCP> <2287@antique.UUCP>
Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX
Lines: 58

In article <2287@antique.UUCP>, cjp@antique.UUCP (Charles Poirier) writes:
> In article <2124@sugar.UUCP> peter@sugar.UUCP writes:
> >however we (yes, an editorial we) believe that the purpose
> >of usenet is to support [programmers].

> From a stylistic point of view, this use of "we" rankles.  Peter is
> (are?) not the editor or publisher of Usenet.  Who does he imply he is
> speaking for here?  Using "we" strikes me as a cheap stab at multiplying
> one's authority.

You're right, it is. It seems to work for everyone else, so why shouldn't
I get to have some fun? :->

> >Over in news.admin, Chuq is asking that all comp.sources be deleted except
> >for comp.sources.unix...

> >I think that throwing the third group to the wolves first
> >might save our skins.

> This coming from a man who brought his own wolf?  ;-)  I say calm down;
> that howling noise may just be one hysterical person.

Could be... On the other hand I see heavy fragmentation up ahead.

> >Again. Usenet is not a BBS. Usenet is a resource for programmers. Let's
> >not lose sight of that.

> That may be the justification used at Peter's host for those Usenet
> phone bills, but I expect that there are many other parts of Usenet
> that have a broader view.

Actually, Ferranti gets (roughly) comp.*,!comp.sys,!comp.sources,
comp.sources.unix. We'd like to have a broader view, but it's kind of
hard to pay your bills with it.

> Another very minor rankle here.  The person goes from the royal "we
> believe" to the chummy "Let's not".  "We" means Peter, but "us" means
> everyone else?  I feel like I'm being manipulated.

You are. Isn't it fun? Other people get such good results from being 
manipulative, I thought I'd give it a try.

> I guess what really gets to me is the elitist attitude that programmers
> are supreme.  I am a programmer by the way, but I respect the rights of
> "mere" users to have Usenet as a resource, too.  Thank you, here's the
> soapbox back.

Actually, programmer's aren't supreme. But users get all those lovely BBSes
and FIDOnet and all. Usenet is the one place I can expect to get feedback
from my peers. Sources groups have long been a sore spot. By the way:

% cat /etc/motd
You're one of the few, the proud, the programmers.
% 
-- 
-- `-_-' Peter (have you hugged your wolf today?) da Silva.
--   U   Mail to ...!uunet!sugar!peter, flames to /dev/null.
-- "A foolish consistancy is the hobgoblin of little minds".