On Thursday, July 2, 1987 at 10:53:44 AM UTC-7, s...@cs.ucla.edu wrote:
> In article <22...@sun.uucp> chuq%pl...@Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) writes:
> > ... But the volume is getting rather annoying, as is the
> >strident wailing of everyone involved. I'm tired of it. It isn't making
> >and progress, and it isn't getting any more intelligent.
> >
> >so I make the following, hopefully useful comment:
> >
> > If you don't have something intelligent to say, shut up.
> >
> I looked up "irony" in the dictionary and it said "See 22...@sun.uucp".
>
> Scott R. Turner
> UCLA Computer Science "The spinning nexus of reality"
> Domain: s...@ucla.cs.edu
> UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt
Can't we all get along?

On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 13:43:52 -0700 (PDT), Ken Par wrote:

> On Thursday, July 2, 1987 at 10:53:44 AM UTC-7, s...@cs.ucla.edu wrote:
> Can't we all get along?

I'm not sure whether to be amused or annoyed at responses to nearly 35-
year-old Usenet articles.

_
JE

In article <3R8LK.1885364$70_9.1025104@fx10.ams1>,
Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 13:43:52 -0700 (PDT), Ken Par wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, July 2, 1987 at 10:53:44 AM UTC-7, s...@cs.ucla.edu wrote:
>> Can't we all get along?
>
>I'm not sure whether to be amused or annoyed at responses to nearly 35-
>year-old Usenet articles.

I find it amusing and pleasing to see that we get along much better today
than we did 35 years ago.

Although I never thought I would say it, but I miss Carasso...
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 18 Aug 2022 14:02:25 -0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> I find it amusing and pleasing to see that we get along much better
> today than we did 35 years ago.
>
> Although I never thought I would say it, but I miss Carasso...
> --scott

We still have one troll who pops into this group every so often, but he
is easy to ignore. Aside from the spammers, people have been genuinely
very nice and helpful (albeit sometimes a bit curmudgeonly) on the news.*
hierarchy.

__
JE

Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
>On 18 Aug 2022 14:02:25 -0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> I find it amusing and pleasing to see that we get along much better
>> today than we did 35 years ago.
>>
>> Although I never thought I would say it, but I miss Carasso...
>
>We still have one troll who pops into this group every so often, but he
>is easy to ignore. Aside from the spammers, people have been genuinely
>very nice and helpful (albeit sometimes a bit curmudgeonly) on the news.*
>hierarchy.

I am still suffering flashbacks from the rec.ponds battle.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
>Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
>>On 18 Aug 2022 14:02:25 -0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:

>>>I find it amusing and pleasing to see that we get along much better
>>>today than we did 35 years ago.

>>>Although I never thought I would say it, but I miss Carasso...

>>We still have one troll who pops into this group every so often, but he
>>is easy to ignore. Aside from the spammers, people have been genuinely
>>very nice and helpful (albeit sometimes a bit curmudgeonly) on the news.*
>>hierarchy.

>I am still suffering flashbacks from the rec.ponds battle.

Oh, gawd. You had to remind us. The endless flame war about the socmen
herding proposal was around the same time as well. I forgot which was
first. Both moderated groups failed, but the two flame wars were
successful, the intent all along.

Greetings.

On 17/08/2022 18.39, Jason Evans wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 13:43:52 -0700 (PDT), Ken Par wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, July 2, 1987 at 10:53:44 AM UTC-7, s...@cs.ucla.edu wrote:
>> Can't we all get along?
>
> I'm not sure whether to be amused or annoyed at responses to nearly 35-
> year-old Usenet articles.

The same poster's been doing it on many other groups, apparently
trolling for perplexed responses.

Regards,
Tristan

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Tristan Miller
Free Software developer, ferret herder, logologist
https://logological.org/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 14:01:40 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman wrote:

> Oh, gawd. You had to remind us. The endless flame war about the socmen
> herding proposal was around the same time as well. I forgot which was
> first. Both moderated groups failed, but the two flame wars were
> successful, the intent all along.

Adam,

We missed you! When we were discussing your suggestion about moving
discussions from news.groups.proposals back to news.groups, you were
nowhere around. We expected a good argument from you in favor of having
no moderation, but you were gone.

I genuinely hope you're doing well!

__
JE

Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 14:01:40 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>>Oh, gawd. You had to remind us. The endless flame war about the socmen
>>herding proposal was around the same time as well. I forgot which was
>>first. Both moderated groups failed, but the two flame wars were
>>successful, the intent all along.

>We missed you! When we were discussing your suggestion about moving
>discussions from news.groups.proposals back to news.groups, you were
>nowhere around. We expected a good argument from you in favor of having
>no moderation, but you were gone.

>I genuinely hope you're doing well!

I wasn't reading news.groups during that period. It would have been
the same arguments I made to you earlier about removing
news.groups.proposals and returning to unmoderated configging
discussions.

You were either persuaded when I first made those arguments or you weren't.

Dear Adam,

On 22/08/2022 17.19, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Jason Evans <jsevans@mailfence.com> wrote:
>> We missed you! When we were discussing your suggestion about moving
>> discussions from news.groups.proposals back to news.groups, you were
>> nowhere around. We expected a good argument from you in favor of having
>> no moderation, but you were gone.
>
> I wasn't reading news.groups during that period. It would have been
> the same arguments I made to you earlier about removing
> news.groups.proposals and returning to unmoderated configging
> discussions.
>
> You were either persuaded when I first made those arguments or you weren't.

We were persuaded enough to write and publish the RFC to get wider
feedback on the idea. Had we not received so many persuasive arguments
against it, we might have gone through with the plan.

Regards,
Tristan

--
Usenet Big-8 Management Board
https://www.big-8.org/
board@big-8.org