From: vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu (John S. Van Etten)
Subject: Netiquette (was Re: WOOLWORTHS; PETS)
Organization: CIE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 18:48:35 GMT

I've combined a few posts here, and if I've messed up the attributes,
then I appologize to anyone effected.

In article <BsuA67.r6@wpg.com> russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence) writes:
>From article <gn_ypd_@rpi.edu>, by vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu (John S. Van Etten):
>jve> One might ask whether or not these little blighters had the proper
>jve> scuba gear provided to them as well. ;-)  If I can't look to Ferrell's
>jve> posts as a source of meaningful information, at least they do provide
>jve> comic relief.
>
>Do you consider the bad conditions that prevail in some [not all] pet
>shops to be humorous?    Do you think that it's humorous for some of us
>to point out bad conditions when and where we find them?

Of course not.  What, pray tell, would make you think otherwise?


>jve> In case anyone feels I'm picking on poor old Ferrell, let me
>jve> merely say that I have no respect for submissions to a debating forum,
>jve> such as t.p.a, by someone that doesn't even read the group and as such
>jve> doesn't answer any replies.  Maybe I'm just too lazy about e-mailing a
>jve> copy to him after each post, but his actions strike me as rude, at
>jve> best.
>
>If you think it's rude for someone not to reply to your queries, 
>would you be willing to admit that you, yourself, are rude since 
>you've persistently declined to explain your position about the 
>rights or wrongs of hunting humans for sport.  

Russell, old pal, that's my whole point.  The wasted bandwidth causes
me to lose articles and thus be rude by not replying to peoples'
questions.  (Please note, for the record, that I no longer consider it
necessary to answer a question which I have already given a honest
answer for on numerous occasions, which seems to be what happens while
having a discussion with you.)  I do indeed appologize for replies to
Bob Black, Paul Roberts, Ted Altar, and others which I missed because
our newsserver was already swamped with Ferrell's posts and I could no
longer access the previous posts for a reply.


>Would you mind explaining why you think mailing copies of Ferrell's
>postings back to him would be a good idea?  Do you think the
>internet manager at rpi.edu would share your enthusiasm for such an 
>idea?

You seem quite confused here.  If you'll reread what I wrote, you'll
see that I was talking about mailing my followups to Ferrell, not any
of his original posts.  Although your idea is an amusing one.  Perhaps
that would be an effective way of pointing out what it means to waste
bandwidth, by having a few of us bounce all of Ferrell's posts back at
him. :-)


In article <BsvEoB.F6t@wpg.com> Russell Lawrence writes:
>From article <hv+yf3l@rpi.edu>, by vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu (John S. Van Etten):
>>      However, let me say that it's indeed nice for you to say that you
>> will stop posting here based upon a democratic vote.  That strikes me
>> as a very fair offer on your part, and I respect you for it.  And just
>> to keep you honest, how about if everyone sends *me* a carbon copy of
>> their vote?  That way I can make sure that your calculator didn't
>> accidentally have a power surge or something. ;-)
>
>I've sent my comments to Farrell, but I didn't send you a carbon 
>copy.  Farrell's free to decide for himself whether to keep my 
>message private or to share it with others, including you.  He's 
>also free to decide for himself what he will or won't post, just 
>as the rest of us are entitled to decide, as individuals, what we 
>will or won't read.   

You know, Russell, about 90% of the commercially available news
software prints a message like:

    This message is estimated to cost NNNN.NN dollars to distribute.
    Are you absolutely sure you want to do this?

    -or-

    This message will probably cost the net hundreds if not thousands
    of dollars to distribute.  Are you absolutely sure you want to
    do this?

Ever wonder why?  Or could you be one of those people that thinks the
net resources are all free anyway, and this stuff is all just funny
money?
     You see, I have this bizzare little notion that such a message is
printed specifically for people that are posting large amounts of data
that isn't really targetted for the entire readership of the group.
Traditionally, and perhaps it's just because I'm an old timer, such
distributions have been better handled by either a mailing list, or an
anonymous ftp of the archives being posted.  If people *want* the
information, fine -- go get it.  I made the suggestion to Ferrell to
either set up an anonymous ftp from his site, or start a mailing list
for his info.  Obviously I was ignored.  I even would encourage him to
post a message re: availability of his stuff in this very forum on a
monthly, weekly, or even daily basis, as he sees fit (for even the
latter would probably cut down on the volume of info he posts here ;-).
     So Russell, getting back to your little tirade about freedom to
do this, and freedom to do that (and the blood must really be in your
eyes if you've misspelled Ferrell's name), let me merely say that (as
pro-freedom as I am) it doesn't strike me as fair to see a resource be
abused.  Perhaps that's a phrase you AR-types can relate to.
     And why are you afraid to have an open and honest poll?  I'm
pretty sure I can make a good guess about that, but I'll give you the
benefit of explaining it to me yourself. ;-)


In article <94Jt02eh1dI301@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> Ted Robinson writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.050908.10258@informix.com>, proberts@informix.com (Paul 
Roberts) writes:
>> I think he posts some interesting stuff, it is at least a change
>> from the name-calling that is otherwise so prevalent here.

Paul, while I can't say that I enjoy tha name-calling either, debate
is the purpose of these talk.* groups.  Mailing lists, ftp, and other
"wire service" (as Ferrell himself calls them) types of sources should
be the primary means of dropping "unsupported propanganda leaflets"
onto the masses.  FTWI (for the world's information), I hate this
feeling that I'm some kind of bad guy trying to be the net.police (a
group for which I have less than zero respect).  However, I do see
this as a genuine abuse of resources, unlike the true net.police who
only seem to get off on saying things like "Ewww, Petey used the word
"nazis".  That's not fair.  That's not fair.  I'm gonna tell. <Wah...>"


Ted Robinson:
>I agree.  Ferrell's articles are the primary source of new and interesting 
>material on this newsgroup - most of the other threads just rehash the same 
>stuff over and over. 

I'll give you "new," but not "interesting."  I have no problem (as I
seem to have had to say at least a hundred times now) with anyone
getting access to such information or reading it.  I just see it as a
waste of net resources and a personal inconvenience since I tend to
lose *relevant* material when I am forced to wait a few days between
replies, because of other commitments.  I've no space to archive.


>I suspect he'd like to participate in subsequent discussions, but apparently 
>he doesn't have access to News. Given this, I think it's better that he 
>broadens our horizons with his articles, even though he can't participate in 
>the followup.

Odd, I suspect other things about someone that wants to put me in a
kill file after only two posts which I made challenging his
propaganda (one of which -- now blown quite a bit out a proportion --
only said that I found "humour" in images of hamsters floating around
in an aquarium).  Oh well, I guess this side of the fence must be
biasing me. :-)


John

--
******************************************************************************
               John S. Van Etten     vanetten@unix.cie.rpi.edu
       Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute  1000 MIPS GaAs F-RISC Project
       --"If sand didn't irritate oysters, there would be no pearls"--
Newsgroups: talk.politics.animals