Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bbnccv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!bbnccv!sdyer
From: sdyer@bbnccv.UUCP (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: net.followup,net.jobs,net.news
Subject: Re: Headhunters in net.jobs
Message-ID: <324@bbnccv.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 8-Feb-85 20:51:02 EST
Article-I.D.: bbnccv.324
Posted: Fri Feb  8 20:51:02 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 10-Feb-85 04:02:23 EST
References: <290@bbnccv.UUCP> <1108@amdahl.UUCP> <2331@nsc.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 37
Xref: watmath net.followup:4434 net.jobs:994 net.news:3120

> Rule? Usenet? Rule? (vicious, hysterical laughter.....) Lets create a
> rule-- no headhunters on the net. Lets create a rule-- Chuqui can't post
> any more. Lets create a rule-- No redheaded blue eyed Polish people with
> lefthanded traits can post the to the net in net.jokes on alternate
> Thursday. Better yet, lets TRY to enforce these rules.

I'm afraid that Chuqui is suffering from advanced "stargate" sickness,
so overwhelmed he is with the discussion over "freedom" that he's
completely forgotten how the net has been run for the last few years.

Why don't we just roll over and play dead while people post everything
to net.general?  Hell, why bother to comment at all on ANYONE's behavior
on the net, geez, they can just continue to do anything they want anyway,
so why waste the typing strokes?

Luckily, there is such a thing as persuasion in the face of public
sentiment.  Luckily, there are individuals who have had the respect
of the users of the network who, when they make a comment, are taken
seriously.  In this group I would count Mark Horton, and yes, even
Chuqui (usually :-))  The network works AT ALL because usually people
are glad to defer to intelligent advise.  When enough people say
"X isn't appropriate in net.Y" usually that sentiment wins out.
To insist that the lack of statutory rules or effective sanctions
prevents any kind of control over the behavior of sites on the network
is simply untrue and flies in the face of our experience so far.

I am sure that "The Solution" does not want to create bad will by
allowing some of its users to flout the "rules" of net.jobs or whereever.
That is, if there are any such "rules"--this isn't a discussion of the
specifics of this case, but to remind Chuqui and others that we have had
such rules operating successfully in many newsgroups: for example,
no commercial ads in net.micro (due to forwarding onto the ARPAnet),
no StarWars discussions in net.movies (that's what net.movies.sw is for).
-- 
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbnccv.ARPA