From: EIVERSO@cms.cc.wayne.edu
Subject: Re: proposal for alt.music.techno
Organization: Wayne State University, C&IT
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 18:18:29 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.154308.18752@bradley.bradley.edu>
pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman) writes:
 
>In <16848858F.EIVERSO@cms.cc.wayne.edu> EIVERSO@cms.cc.wayne.edu writes:
 
>[ pompous techno is better than >sneer< rave crap deleted ]
 
Is that how you read it?
Is that the kind of insightful criticism I should expect my posts to be
  given in alt.rave - a newsgroup that supposedly is "more than ready"
  to accept non-rave techno postings?
Is this an example of the spirit of brotherhood and unity behind rave?
 
>>In any event, why think of alt.music.techno as "taking my ball and going"?
 
>Because it's clearly what you want.  "If you want to play with me,
>you have to come to *my* sandbox."
 
Whereas you seem to be saying "*My* sandbox was here first and you
don't need to have your own!"
 
>>Think of it more as a group that you could monitor to get more
>>pure techno music information--a group that will bring greater visibility
>>to matters of interest to ravers, and contribute to the rave cause by it's
>>mere existence.
 
>I already monitor far more groups than I really have time for.  I don't
 
Not my problem, dude!
>care about "pure techno music information"--I am just interested in things
 
Some of us do care, dude!
>about styles of music that interest me--I don't want to have to read
>alt.music.orb, alt.music.derrick-may, alt.music.future-s-o-london,
>alt.music.hard-techno, alt.music.trancey, and alt.music.deep-house
>just to keep up with things I might want to listen to.
 
Precisely. You listed alt.MUSIC.* groups. All these and much more
could fall under the alt.music.techno banner.
The alt.rave group can handle the demand for various partying sub-groups
(like there's no need for an alt.rave.smart-drinks, for instance)
because it's party-centric, but not so for music.
 
>>If you don't like our seperatist attitude, then you can just stay the
>>heck out of our group! ;-)
                         ^^^
>If you can't see what stupidity it is to have this kind of attitude problem,
>I don't see why you need a group.  This "possessiveness" about Usenet
>groups is utterly ludicrous, since NO ONE owns a newsgroup.  I could
 
Please don't lecture me about Usenet philosophy if you don't know what a
smiley is. ;-)
 
>simply crosspost everything I post to alt.rave to alt.music.techno,
>and there's really nothing you can do about it (this is a for-instance,
>not a threat--I wouldn't bother).  The point being--just because you think
 
Yes, that would be:"If you make your *own* sandbox, I'm gonna ruin it!"
 
>you can create your own special sandbox to meet your exclusive tastes
>doesn't mean you'll succeed.  People most likely *will* talk about rave
>in alt.music.techno, and information that *just might* fit your tastes
>most likely *will* get posted to alt.rave, and you'll miss it if you can't
>be bothered to use your brain instead of your newsgroup name to filter the
>info.
 
With all due respect, I'd say the same applies to you if you can't handle
a second newsgroup with a related interest. The success of usenet is in
the capacity to address different interests and encourage new ones.
No doubt there will be persons who become interested in alt.rave after
exposure to alt.music.techno. If someone wants to talk rave in a.m.techno,
I know *my* brain can handle it.
 
>Pete Hartman                   Bradley University       pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
I hope I wasn't too pompous. ;-) Perhaps just pompous enuf?
 
--Eric
 
********************
This .sig is shareware--You may read it and copy it free of charge.
After 30 days, if you decide to keep it, you must send me $5.