In article >,
"cybercat" > wrote:

> "Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
> ...
(Barb's opinions snipped)

> Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it has
> always been.

Are you sure it has always been a free-for-all? I don't think so.

> It has not changed at all, except those who have used
> it for years are now more savvy.

It has changed considerably. There are more computer users and maybe
more posters. There is no way to know if the number of lurkers has
increased. That there are more computer users is no guarantee that they
are savvy about proper and improper use of them. The advent of the
World Wide Web on the internet changed computer use dramatically and
made all these wonderful things available to damn near anyone who wanted
to partake but didn't quite know how.

> In any case, nothing has changed. I'm willing to bet you and Goomba and
> others who feel the same way were singing the same tune in your first
> month on Usenet.

Bet, huh? What's your wager?

> If you want moderation, go to a moderated group. If you want a
> free-for-all, Usenet is for you.

If I want moderation, I'll go to a moderated group. If I want a
free-for-all, I'll enter a mud-wrestling contest. Rec.food.cooking
used to be more civilized * neither a free-for-all nor a moderated
group. There was plenty of discussion that did not turn to vulgarity
and name-calling. And more that never started out that way, either.
There was plenty of give and take and it was about cooking. And the
"savvy" folks posted their questions to the appropriate groups for such
questions, where they would be ON topic instead of OFF.

Kent asked why the group has gone to shit. I gave him my opinion and my
reasons. Would I like it to be my way? Sure ‹ I'm a benevolent
dictator. <grin>
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
Notes about our meals in Tuscany have been posted to
http://www.jamlady.eboard.com; 10-16-2007