Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Date: Thu,  9 Apr 1992 15:19:40 -0400 
From: Sudha Neelakantan <sn00+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Netiquette


FYI
I received about 15 pieces of "personal" mail in response to my initial
post[not counting all the mail that just said that was nice or whatever
and is not what I object to].  I and most netters would agree that the
appropriate time for personal responses is when a thread has degenerated
into nit picking between a couple of people farther on down the line.  I
did not forward these to the bboard since the original senders did not
so deem their responses fit.  But I wish that if they really thought so
little of their opinions that they did not deem them fit for public
consumption, they might have extended that consideration to me.

N.B all those sensitive ruffled feathers and hate mail made me think
when I looked at the ratio of responses to the net vs responses to just
me personally that either they don't take their own opinions seriously
enough to think them worthwhile for other people to read or maybe I can
be confirmed in my opinion that womens opinions are not considered
seriously or perhaps even start thinking that these men [all of them
*were* men] consider it demeaning to actually acknowledge in public that
they might have read a womans post! :-)

You conveniently forgot to include the piece that I was responding to
when you write:
Excerpts From Captions of netnews.soc.culture.indian:
 9-Apr-92  Re: Netiquette                 Vijay Rangarajan@ncsa.ui (1058)   
>In article <cdsvYjm00WB58NaI4M@andrew.cmu.edu> Sudha Neelakantan
><sn00+@andre>w.cmu.edu> writes:
>> 
>>I agree and I would appreciate people posting their replies to the net
>>If they think what they have to say is not appropriate amybe[maybe] they
>>shouldn't bother to say it
> 
>Probably, but this is not George et al had to say. They were talking about
>posting personal email on the net. Apart from the fact that it is not
>appropriate to do that without permission from the sender, concern for
>other netters should be evaluated before doing this. as MTV folks would
>say, "Like we care."
> 

Excerpts From Captions of netnews.soc.culture.indian:
 8-Apr-92  Netiquette                     George W Chacko@magnus.a (362)    
>In many ways I agree with udcrusd@meaddata.com. I've been receiving a stream
>of half-witted e-mail all day from various illiterates and I'm getting tired
>of it. I'm going to start dumping it on the net if I think it's unusually 
>stupid because that's where it belongs since it was my posting(s)
>that aroused the need to communicate in these persons.
> 
> 
>George

The above excerpts speak for themselves and for the rationality(or not)
of my response.  Perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension
before you post further misinterpretations.  George was clearly(clear to
all but you?) referring to those who resort to personal junk mail in
response to POSTINGS rather than rational responses to the original
forum.
This kind of obnoxious mail should be a violation of netetiquette if it
ain't already so
>>
>>N.B.  I replied to the only reasonable mail I got
>>
> 
>a.k.a., the only mail you agreed with. All this apart, posting stuff instead
>of emailing (much worse posting stuff that was emailed) is such a waste of
>resources, unless it is permitted to be posted and it is something that the
>rest of the gang would be interested in. If I had posted every "appropriate"
>request for H-1 tips on the net, you guys would've killed me by now.
> 
>Vijay.
>-- 
> 
>Vanitas vanitatum et omnia vanitas!

Actually I replied to someones query on the origins of the quote in my
.sig file. Does it matter anyway?  I see more unwarranted assumptions on
your part here.

I was also wondering what you meant by "permitted to be posted" Is there
a thought police or Big Brother out there that I am not aware of?  Or is
it just a persons self perception of what should be an appropriate post?
 {I was referring to the latter when I mentioned appropriate posts}  I
do not think personally that censorship even of trivial opinions is
justifiable since I agree that all assessments are subjective and I also
believe that the 5th amendment quarantees an important right.

Further,
does the reference to "guys" mean that you are addressing an exclusively
male audience? or that the female netters are incapable of participation
in a flame war? NOT!!!
 



Sudha

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 Sudha K. Neelakantan     < Clouds come floating into my life,  
       School of           \ no longer to carry rain or usher storm  
 Urban & Public Affairs     \ but to add color to my sunset sky.
    Carnegie Mellon          >    - Rabindranath Tagore -
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>