Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pasteur!ames!killer!rpp386!jfh From: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (John F. Haugh II) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: New compromise position on rec.humor.funny Summary: Getting better ... Message-ID: <12389@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US> Date: 7 Feb 89 21:32:16 GMT References: <2732@looking.UUCP> Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (John F. Haugh II) Organization: River Parishes Programming, Dallas TX Lines: 74 In article <2732@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes: >Well, I never expected such a backlash to my clarification of compilation >copyright. Sorry about that folks. Not to worry. To err is human, to moo bovine. [ Now for the disclaimer ... ] > This newsgroup sometimes contains material some consider > offensive, and material that may not be suitable for some > minors. As such, all redistributors should make sure that > nobody reads the group other than by personally requesting it, and > all redistributors should take whatever precautions they feel are > necessary with regards to newsgroup access by minors. >and > No warranties ae made about the accuracy of warning keywords > or rotation schemes. Uh, how am I supposed to insure that the newsfeed I just added to my sys file is free of morons and minors? Ultimately the burden should rest with the site administrator. Had this understanding existed in the beginning, it would have been the administration at Waterloo who would have been responsible. The USENET administrators should know damned good and well WHAT they are requesting. A much better disclaimer would admit that the newsgroup contains humor which individuals may find to be racist or bigotted, but that the SITE ADMINISTRATOR OF THAT SITE has chosen to receive the newsgroup based on the humor value of the postings. I know none of my users will object. What I don't know is how many users on how many of the sites I exchange news with will. >Let's face it. The last thing that I or the net need is for a site to >give accounts to a pile of ten year olds and then complain at us about >how bad we were. Also, if a newspaper ever prints something like this again, >as the Boston Herald did: Right. And the last thing I need is to be sued because some moron turned on HIS computer which HE requested a newsfeed for and read a joke YOU approved. Presumably the site administrator knows what a USENET is. Some stupid user, for example Jonathan Richmond as the perfect example of a moronic pinhead, may have NO idea what a newsgroup is. He didn't ask to be insulted - but the site administration must have because no one gives out newsfeeds for kicks. >Now we all knew that was false, but it sure is nice to try to make sure it >will always be false. (Richmond had to subscribe, ignore a warning that >said "Jonathan Richmond don't read this" and then decrypt a coded joke to >get that message on his screen.) I wasn't aware that `Offensive to Jews' meant `Jews don't read'. It should mean `It's your fault if you are offended because I said you would be.' But that is a mute point. You need to admit people will be offended and point them at the person who provided them with the newsgroup. If their policy is to hide their heads in the sand, let THEM remove the newsgroup. Better still, let them give Jonathan Richmond a f*cking frontal lobatomy. >E) Compilation copyrights exist, and should be allowed on USENET, but not > to you because I don't like you. What happened to D)? I might say that it would be a good idea for Brad to step down so the newsgroup will be free of the repressive and moronic laws which the Canadian government imposes upon their populace. I _might_ say that, but it is probably illegal to transmit a message which suggests the Canadian government enter the twentieth century, so I won't. -- John F. Haugh II +--Quote of the Week:------------------ VoiceNet: (214) 250-3311 Data: -6272 | "Get it through your head: InterNet: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US | CARS ARE THE ENEMY." UucpNet : !killer!rpp386!jfh +------ -- Bob Fishell ----------