From: gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell)
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess
Subject: Re: rec.games.chess.etiquette
Date: 17 Apr 92 17:06:17 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <23412@life.ai.mit.edu>, cracraft@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu (Stuart Cracraft) writes:
> In article <1992Apr16.224829.10510@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> albert@sevenlayer.cs.wisc.edu (Joseph Albert) writes:
> >In the last several days, we have seen this tradition of treating people
> >with mutual respect, a tradition that has existed on this forum for over
> >a decade, be broken. Let's not let rec.games.chess go the way of other
> >newsgroups. Rather than pointing fingers at who may or may not be to blame,
> >
> As the originator of net.chess, I feel a need to comment. Mr. Albert is
> absolutely right. People who use a public forum for other than its 
> original intended purpose must have either a very good reason or 
> some ulterior motive. It saddened me to see some of the posts that
> prompted Mr. Albert to then have to use his valuable time from probably


Sorry to burst your bubles folks but this is a public forum and as such
Mr. Baker was not only well within his rights to request the info he
requested, but his "netiquette" (stupid concept) was also well within bounds.
This group is designed to discuss chess - its history, its theory, its
players. As for Mr. Albert's "valuable" time, you'll please excuse
me if I find *my* time as important as his and/or yours. It is nice to
know that some of you appear to own this group but I for one am not impressed.
The question was legite - if someone felt the need to defend Mr. Reshevsky
from the negatives that were posted, they were free to do so. The fact
that he is dead means nothing - if we used that as a guideline, the concept
of history would not exist.
  
> To those of you who Mr. Albert is talking about: you know who you are.
> Further, you are aware that at least two people will be observing you.

 Oh yes - these are the people we should all try to emulate - geezuz
Stuart, I've come to realize that you find it difficult to present 
yourself in a non-pompous way, but this takes the cake. What are you
going to do Stuart? Sneak into my home and steal my first-born male
child? You don't own the group - you and your thought-police can take
a flying leap as far as I'm concerned.

> There are basic rules of decorum and procedure which should be 
> informally adhered to so that a good atmosphere for intellectual
> exchange can be maintained.

 Yes - and one of these concepts is freedom of speech, another is an open
forum where people are free to query and respond without fear of some
net-gestapo attempting to undermine their rights.

> Chess as a field is rife with petty politics and we have been fairly
> fortunate to avoid much of it here on the network. 

 And you are proud of that? I find it disappointing that a group designed
to discuss a topic which is "rife with politics" seems to shy away
from addressing any of the politics.

> Please give us
> all a break, you posters to whom we are speaking, and "Get a life."
> If you don't know how, then use its correllary and "Improve our lives"
> by keeping your comments sedate, reasonable, and accurate.


and my request to you and the others who lay claim to this group is
that you learn to accept that others may have ideas/views/beliefs which differ
from your own and which have just as much right to be here - and
learn that making childish threats at those who disagree with you is
considered poor-netiquette as well....

			gln