From: ap.2558@layout.Berkeley.EDU
Newsgroups: alt.personals
Subject: A Reply to Scott's "Supporters"
Date: 9 Apr 92 00:45:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: agate.s043eINNol0
Reply-To: ap.2558@layout.Berkeley.EDU
Followup-To: poster
Organization: Anonymous Contact Service @ layout.Berkeley.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: layout.berkeley.edu
X-ACS2-Version: 2.1 mmt-PL2
Originator: daemon@layout.Berkeley.EDU

In article <rmf06INNp2o@agate.berkeley.edu>, ap.358@layout.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>>I think I might be able to distinguish, if we shared the same definition of
>>-use- and -waste-.  Apparently we don't.  I think passing hundreds of
>>megs of GIF pictures around the world as part of the newsfeed is a waste,
>
>If you think it is a waste, you should post to alt.binaries.pictures and
>tell them your opinion!! But the truth is, there are a sufficient number of
>people in the net who think there is a need for establishing the
>alt.binaries.picture.* newsgroups. And there are a number of people
>reading the group. But I think if someone posts the *same GIF file* every
>single day, it is a waste!! From my observation, I have never seen anyone
>doing that in those groups. I have voiced my opinion about what I think is
>someone wasting bandwidth. Are you going to tell the people in alt.binaries.
>picture.* that you think what they are doing is a waste? If you think it
>is a waste, are you doing anything about it?

It seems that the definition of "waste" comes down to whether the use of
the bandwidth has any beneficial result.  For example, posting a GIF file
has the result of making it available to people who like such things;
posting it a second time has no effect, the assumption being that everyone
who wanted it got it the first time, ergo it's a waste.  Agreed.

Now, in Scott's case, if he ever actually encounters the sought-after
Tight Little Nympho [tm], then all the bandwidth will have been spent to
good purpose, and he won't have wasted anything.  If not, it's waste, sure
enough.  Will we ever know?  Probably not.  My guess, for what it's worth,
is that he's going about this in an entirely wrongheaded way and will have
no luck whatsoever; of course, I thought the same thing about a former
roommate of mine, who operated on the theory that one woman in a thousand
is actually crazy enough to go for a line like "Wanna fuck?", so all you
have to do is be prepared for 999 rejections.  Not my style, but it
actually seemed to work for him.

Consider a more typical a.p posting: "Sensitive caring SWM, 23, 5-4,
165#, MS candidate in Computer Science, but not a nerd, really, honest,
I'd tell you if I were, seeks slim, athletic, sympathetic SWF, 21-23, to
ease the pain of being dumped by former girlfriend."  I truly believe that
even Scott has a better chance of success than this (hypothetical) guy.
Does he get flamed for wasting bandwidth?  Not that I've ever noticed.
Does he get results?  I doubt it.

Folks, Scott has stated definitively for the record that he won't stop
posting no matter what anybody says.  The barrage of postings insisting
that he stop are _guaranteed_ to be ineffective; Scott said so, and I see
no reason to doubt him.  So who's wasting what, exactly?

I think that the vociferous anti-Scott clamorers ought to take a moment to
wonder what it is they find so offensive.  It's news to you that there are
jerks in the world?  One more post per day out of a hundred or so is such
a big deal?  You can't be bothered to figure out how to use a kill file?
(Hint: /NYMPH/h:j)  Or is it just that you think he's making all the rest
of us look bad?  If that's the problem, try thinking about it from the
other perspective: do you think that a couple of "Attractive SWF seeks
sugar daddy" postings would make all women look bad?

I think Scott is an idiot, and I'm quite sure I'd dislike him intensely in
the unfortunate circumstance that I ever met him in person.  On the other
hand, if everybody I felt that way about stopped posting on Usenet in
general, or a.p in particular, there'd be virtually nothing left to read,
and I'd have to spend my time doing honest work.  I find Scott amusing, in
a vulgar sort of way akin to Krystyne Kryttre comix or Saturday Night Live
sketches about barfing; as far as I'm concerned, he can post as much as he
damn pleases.
 
 

--
To use this service, send EMAIL to:
Anonymous posting:		ap.post@layout.Berkeley.EDU
Anonymous reply:		<user's alias>@layout.Berkeley.EDU
Test path/get alias:		ap.ping@layout.Berkeley.EDU
ACS administrator:		ap.admin@layout.Berkeley.EDU