"Michel" > wrote in message
1...
> "cybercat" > scripsit in
> :
>
>> "Michel" > wrote in message
>> 1...
>>> "Kent" > scripsit in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> What the phuque is happening to this NG?
>>>
>>> This question has been asked at least twice a year since I
>>> started on this group back in 1991 (as a lurker as I had so
>>> little connection time). Plus çà change, plus c'est la même
>>> chose.
>>
>> This was my point. Some people are annoyed by OT posts, I am
>> annoyed by the stock old timers whining about the good old
>> days and how the group has gone to hell.
>
> Those aren't all old timers. They've been here a few years (and in
> same cases only months) and think they know it all.
>
> They're the same sort as those who have heard of "trolls" and think
> they can apply that to people whose posts they just don't like, as
> if their opinion is as bright as the sun they think shines out
> their ass.
>
> There is only one reality, and some find it hard to accept. And it
> is this:
>
> "This is an unmoderated newsgroup."
>
> You takes the bad wif the good.
>
> Can we all say "un-mo-de-ra-ted"? I knew we could.

We might be twins, separated at birf.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Michel wrote:
<snipped for space>
>
> There is only one reality, and some find it hard to accept. And it
> is this:
>
> "This is an unmoderated newsgroup."
>
> You takes the bad wif the good.
>
> Can we all say "un-mo-de-ra-ted"? I knew we could.

Exactly. But you're farting against thunder here - remember, it works
both ways. Old timers or not, you're always gonna get the OT and/or
"good ole' days" whiners... I've said it before, and I'll say it again
- I find all the moaning about the OT posts (which usually goes hand in
hand with "this group is turning to shit" posts) even more irritating
than the OT posts themselves. In fact, some of the OT posts can be quite
interesting/amusing, unlike the "whiner" posts. What really makes me
laugh is the fact that some of the loudest whiners are just as guilty of
starting OT threads - and that's when my "irony meter" goes through the
roof...
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Garlic: the element without which life as we know it would be impossible

In article >,
(Little Malice) wrote:

> One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough > said:
> > The message >
> > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>
> > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it has
> > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have used
> > > it for years are now more savvy.
> >
> > Obviously you have not used it for years, or you would be aware of
> > how much it has changed for the worse.
>
> I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
> Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
> before then knows how much that changed things...

Before AOL, there was the September Frenzy. New college students would
get an account, and post garbage. Usenet folks dreaded September.

I've only been posting here for 15 years, so I don't remember what
happened before then.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 23:56:35 GMT, (Little
Malice) wrote:

>One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough > said:
>> The message >
>> from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>
>> > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it has
>> > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have used
>> > it for years are now more savvy.
>>
>> Obviously you have not used it for years, or you would be aware of
>> how much it has changed for the worse.
>
>I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
>Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
>before then knows how much that changed things...

i'm not so sure about that. a.o.l. may have unleashed many stupid
people, but vicious people have always been around. i know of more
than one usenet group that moved to another venue for just that
reason.

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 05:17:28 -0500, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
>"Little Malice" > wrote
>> Before that -- I'm thinking '92 or '93, but my memory isn't always the
>> best...
>>
>Maybe I missed the Good Old Days of Usenet. I was still in college then.

yeah, sugar was sweeter and ice was colder back then...

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:34:48 -0600, Melba's Jammin'
> wrote:

>In article >,
> "cybercat" > wrote:
>
>
>
>> 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>

i would submit to your kindly lash, assuming you wouldn't boot me
outta here.

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote :
>>
>>I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
>>Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
>>before then knows how much that changed things...
>
> i'm not so sure about that. a.o.l. may have unleashed many stupid
> people, but vicious people have always been around. i know of more
> than one usenet group that moved to another venue for just that
> reason.
>

Often the viciousness begins with people who have become
"proprietary" about a group. Regulars who routinely harass
new posters or otherwise try to control the group. The response
is often not pretty. Viciousness begets viciousness.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Dec 11, 1:18�pm, Dan Abel > wrote:
> In article >,
> (Little Malice) wrote:
>
> > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough > said:
> > > The message >
> > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>
> > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it has
> > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have used
> > > > it for years are now more savvy.
>
> > > � �Obviously you have not used it for years, or you would be aware of
> > > how much it has changed for the worse.
>
> > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
> > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
> > before then knows how much that changed things...

With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
the back of the bus... you don't like change. People repeat nonsense
often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself convinced
that your shit doesn't stink.



> Before AOL, there was the September Frenzy. �New college students would
> get an account, and post garbage. �Usenet folks dreaded September.
>
> I've only been posting here for 15 years, so I don't remember what
> happened before then.
>
> --
> Dan Abel
> Petaluma, California USA
>

One time on Usenet, Sheldon > said:

> > In article >,
> > (Little Malice) wrote:
> >
> > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough > said:=
>
> > > > The message >
> > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
> >
> > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it=
> has
> > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have used
> > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
> >
> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObviously you have not used it for years, or you wo=
> uld be aware of
> > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
> >
> > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
> > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
> > > before then knows how much that changed things...

<snip>

> With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
> the back of the bus... you don't like change.

What strange logic! Have you ever had a CAT scan?

> People repeat nonsense
> often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself convinced
> that your shit doesn't stink.

Spoken like a true AOLer...

--
Jani in WA

One time on Usenet, blake murphy > said:
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 23:56:35 GMT, (Little
> Malice) wrote:
>
> >One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough > said:
> >> The message >
> >> from "cybercat" > contains these words:
> >
> >> > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it has
> >> > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have used
> >> > it for years are now more savvy.
> >>
> >> Obviously you have not used it for years, or you would be aware of
> >> how much it has changed for the worse.
> >
> >I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
> >Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
> >before then knows how much that changed things...
>
> i'm not so sure about that. a.o.l. may have unleashed many stupid
> people, but vicious people have always been around. i know of more
> than one usenet group that moved to another venue for just that
> reason.

I wasn't talking about "vicious" people, Blake, just those who
couldn't bother to learn about Usenet before using it...

--
Jani in WA

"Little Malice" > wrote in message
...
> One time on Usenet, Sheldon > said:
>
>> > In article >,
>> > (Little Malice) wrote:
>> >
>> > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough >
>> > > said:=
>>
>> > > > The message >
>> > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>> >
>> > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and
>> > > > > it=
>> has
>> > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have
>> > > > > used
>> > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
>> >
>> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObviously you have not used it for years, or you
>> > > > wo=
>> uld be aware of
>> > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
>> >
>> > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
>> > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
>> > > before then knows how much that changed things...
>
> <snip>
>
>> With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
>> the back of the bus... you don't like change.
>
> What strange logic! Have you ever had a CAT scan?
>
>> People repeat nonsense
>> often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself convinced
>> that your shit doesn't stink.
>
> Spoken like a true AOLer...
>

You misspelled "ASSHOLE."

(stolen from Blake)



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

One time on Usenet, "cybercat" > said:
>
> "Little Malice" > wrote in message
> ...
> > One time on Usenet, Sheldon > said:
> >
> >> > In article >,
> >> > (Little Malice) wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough >
> >> > > said:=
> >>
> >> > > > The message >
> >> > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
> >> >
> >> > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and
> >> > > > > it=
> >> has
> >> > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have
> >> > > > > used
> >> > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
> >> >
> >> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObviously you have not used it for years, or you
> >> > > > wo=
> >> uld be aware of
> >> > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
> >> >
> >> > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
> >> > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
> >> > > before then knows how much that changed things...
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
> >> the back of the bus... you don't like change.
> >
> > What strange logic! Have you ever had a CAT scan?
> >
> >> People repeat nonsense
> >> often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself convinced
> >> that your shit doesn't stink.
> >
> > Spoken like a true AOLer...
> >
>
> You misspelled "ASSHOLE."
>
> (stolen from Blake)

Heh! FWIW, I don't specifically dislike AOL users, just the ones
who refused to learn the rules of Usenet and the trolls who took
advantage of AOL's fluid "screen name" policy. (Get your account
yanked? Grab a free bisk* and you're back in the saddle.) And while
I do wish things were a bit more structured (like using OT for off
topic stuff), I don't particularly long for the old days. For one
thing, I'd miss many of the folks who post here now...

*http://www.anti-aol.org/faqs/aas/faq3.html

--
Jani in WA

"Little Malice" > wrote in message
...
> One time on Usenet, Sheldon > said:
>
>> > In article >,
>> > (Little Malice) wrote:
>> >
>> > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough >
>> > > said:=
>>
>> > > > The message >
>> > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>> >
>> > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and
>> > > > > it=
>> has
>> > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have
>> > > > > used
>> > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
>> >
>> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObviously you have not used it for years, or you
>> > > > wo=
>> uld be aware of
>> > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
>> >
>> > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
>> > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
>> > > before then knows how much that changed things...
>
> <snip>
>
>> With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
>> the back of the bus... you don't like change.
>
> What strange logic! Have you ever had a CAT scan?
>
>> People repeat nonsense
>> often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself convinced
>> that your shit doesn't stink.
>
> Spoken like a true AOLer...
>
> --
> Jani in WA


CT scan.
Dee Dee

"Little Malice" > wrote in message
...
> One time on Usenet, "cybercat" > said:
>>
>> "Little Malice" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > One time on Usenet, Sheldon > said:
>> >
>> >> > In article >,
>> >> > (Little Malice) wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough >
>> >> > > said:=
>> >>
>> >> > > > The message >
>> >> > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>> >> >
>> >> > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is,
>> >> > > > > and
>> >> > > > > it=
>> >> has
>> >> > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have
>> >> > > > > used
>> >> > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
>> >> >
>> >> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObviously you have not used it for years, or
>> >> > > > you
>> >> > > > wo=
>> >> uld be aware of
>> >> > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
>> >> >
>> >> > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a
>> >> > > "free-for-all".
>> >> > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
>> >> > > before then knows how much that changed things...
>> >
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> >> With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
>> >> the back of the bus... you don't like change.
>> >
>> > What strange logic! Have you ever had a CAT scan?
>> >
>> >> People repeat nonsense
>> >> often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself convinced
>> >> that your shit doesn't stink.
>> >
>> > Spoken like a true AOLer...
>> >
>>
>> You misspelled "ASSHOLE."
>>
>> (stolen from Blake)
>
> Heh! FWIW, I don't specifically dislike AOL users

I wasn't busting on AOL users, I was busting on Sheldon.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

One time on Usenet, "cybercat" > said:
>
> "Little Malice" > wrote in message
> ...
> > One time on Usenet, "cybercat" > said:
> >>
> >> "Little Malice" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > One time on Usenet, Sheldon > said:
> >> >
> >> >> > In article >,
> >> >> > (Little Malice) wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough >
> >> >> > > said:=
> >> >>
> >> >> > > > The message >
> >> >> > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is,
> >> >> > > > > and
> >> >> > > > > it=
> >> >> has
> >> >> > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have
> >> >> > > > > used
> >> >> > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObviously you have not used it for years, or
> >> >> > > > you
> >> >> > > > wo=
> >> >> uld be aware of
> >> >> > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a
> >> >> > > "free-for-all".
> >> >> > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
> >> >> > > before then knows how much that changed things...
> >> >
> >> > <snip>
> >> >
> >> >> With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
> >> >> the back of the bus... you don't like change.
> >> >
> >> > What strange logic! Have you ever had a CAT scan?
> >> >
> >> >> People repeat nonsense
> >> >> often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself convinced
> >> >> that your shit doesn't stink.
> >> >
> >> > Spoken like a true AOLer...
> >> >
> >>
> >> You misspelled "ASSHOLE."
> >>
> >> (stolen from Blake)
> >
> > Heh! FWIW, I don't specifically dislike AOL users
>
> I wasn't busting on AOL users, I was busting on Sheldon.

I know, but my previous post may have given some the impression that I
was...

--
Jani in WA

"Little Malice" > wrote in message
...
> One time on Usenet, "cybercat" > said:
>>
>> "Little Malice" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > One time on Usenet, "cybercat" > said:
>> >>
>> >> "Little Malice" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > One time on Usenet, Sheldon > said:
>> >> >
>> >> >> > In article >,
>> >> >> > (Little Malice) wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > said:=
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > > > The message >
>> >> >> > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it
>> >> >> > > > > is,
>> >> >> > > > > and
>> >> >> > > > > it=
>> >> >> has
>> >> >> > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who
>> >> >> > > > > have
>> >> >> > > > > used
>> >> >> > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > > =EF=BF=BD =EF=BF=BDObviously you have not used it for years,
>> >> >> > > > or
>> >> >> > > > you
>> >> >> > > > wo=
>> >> >> uld be aware of
>> >> >> > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a
>> >> >> > > "free-for-all".
>> >> >> > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was
>> >> >> > > reading
>> >> >> > > before then knows how much that changed things...
>> >> >
>> >> > <snip>
>> >> >
>> >> >> With that kind of comment you must think black folks should ride in
>> >> >> the back of the bus... you don't like change.
>> >> >
>> >> > What strange logic! Have you ever had a CAT scan?
>> >> >
>> >> >> People repeat nonsense
>> >> >> often enough they believe it... I'm sure you have yourself
>> >> >> convinced
>> >> >> that your shit doesn't stink.
>> >> >
>> >> > Spoken like a true AOLer...
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> You misspelled "ASSHOLE."
>> >>
>> >> (stolen from Blake)
>> >
>> > Heh! FWIW, I don't specifically dislike AOL users
>>
>> I wasn't busting on AOL users, I was busting on Sheldon.
>
> I know, but my previous post may have given some the impression that I
> was...

It didn't. You don't come across as petty or stupid. I cannot stand AOL but
it is juvenile and stupid to sneer at people because of the way they access
the Internet.

Then again, I guess those who want to sneer can always find a reason.

ChattyCathy > scripsit in
:

> Michel wrote:
> <snipped for space>
>>
>> There is only one reality, and some find it hard to accept.
>> And it is this:
>>
>> "This is an unmoderated newsgroup."
>>
>> You takes the bad wif the good.
>>
>> Can we all say "un-mo-de-ra-ted"? I knew we could.
>
> Exactly. But you're farting against thunder here

The fact that it seems pointless does not mean that it is, in fact,
counterproductive.

Little Malice wrote:

> One time on Usenet, Gregory Morrow > said:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Little Malice wrote:
> > > One time on Usenet, Gregory Morrow > said:
> > > > On Dec 10, 5:56 pm, (Little Malice) wrote:
> > > > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough > said:
> > > > > > The message >
> > > > > > from "cybercat" > contains these words:
> > > > > > > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it
> > has
> > > > > > > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have used
> > > > > > > it for years are now more savvy.
>
> > > > > > Obviously you have not used it for years, or you would be aware of
> > > > > > how much it has changed for the worse.
>
> > > > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
> > > > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway.
>
> > > > Let's not forget WebTV...
>
> > > > ;-)
>
> > > I'm trying to, really I am... ;-)
>
> > Well, I had the thing for three years in the late 90's...it was LOTSA
> > fun to throw that unit and it's shabby keyboard down the garbage
> > chute.
>
> I never had one, but I *was* an AOL user for a bit. Then a cow-orker
> told me about our local ISP. To say it was an improvement would be an
> understatement.
>
> > The "interesting" thing is that Microsoft - owned WebTV, now known as
> > "MSN TV" *still* provides Usenet for it's customers, but the MSN ISP
> > (or is it just a mail service now?) dropped Usenet years ago...
>
> > There are still some clueless WebTVer's around, I'm thinking
> > specifically of the infamous Maryanne "Loafhead" Kehoe...
>
> You are? Why, trying to diet..? ;-)



A source of mine at Earthlink told me that Kehoe had contacted their
abuse dept. over __100__ times complaining about me, they finally got
SO tired of her pestering them that they blocked her email address,
lol...

She single - handedly did more to destroy the already - tarnished rep
of WebTVer's than anyone, and after 10 years and 33K posts she
continues to descend ever deeper into stupidity...in fact I'm working
up a Wiki entry about her, she is one of Usenet's more notorious
trolls...Kehoe has degraded the atmosphere of every Usenet group in
which she's
posted.

If you wanna really HURL, click the link below and scroll down to see
a pic of Loafie on her wedding day. Some hapless UK musician actually
stooped to marrying her! The poor mope died of brain cancer, I joked
that he probably died just to get away from her...

Notice even though the link is a memorial site to the guy, her
comments are all of the "I, ME, MY..." variety. What can one say
about a mouth - breathing fatuous sociopath like Loafie... <sigh/> :


http://www.strawbsweb.co.uk/related/hford/klobit.asp


"Maryanne, Ken's wife writes:

From myself and Sarah (Ken's mom), I wish to thank all of you who
emailed, called and made expressions of concern. It's hard to think of
what to say at a time like this, but I have found strength that there
are many people grieving along with me. Hud, John, Chris and Mickey
have all contacted me and I can assure you, they are just as shocked
and in grief as we all are at this sad news.

Ken was the kindest and most generous man I have ever met. He made me
laugh, and comforted me in the dark days of his illness. Right before
he died, he assured me that he would always be watching over me and
that I didn't have anything to worry about. He was there to dry my
tears, listen to me when I would vent, and when it was all said and
done at the end of the day, hold me and tell me things were going to
be OK.

It is likely there will memorial service in London later on in the
year - a celebration of the life and of the kind of man Ken was:
talented musician, great friend to many and to me, a man that gave me
the best 3 1/2 years of my entire life and who brought me great joy
and happiness.

Thank you so much to everyone and when you go home tonight, tell that
special person you love them!"

</>

cybercat spits:

> "Gregory Morrow" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > cyberOVUM wrote:
>
> >> "Little Malice" > wrote> Before that -- I'm
> >> thinking '92 or '93, but my memory isn't always the
> >> > best...
>
> >> Maybe I missed the Good Old Days of Usenet. I was still in college then.
>
> > Wow, still young and fertile I see...
>
> > ;-P
>
> > --
>
> Stop leering at me, you nutbag. I am not young, I was just in school late.
>


Don't be so dismissive...mebbe I want you to be MY WOMAN...!!! :

"Wanted: A WIFE

Must be round - heeled, have wide hips for birthin' babies, and must
be highly skilled in the domestic, culinary, and oral arts...

Reply ONLY if yer name is 'cybercat'..."


R U game, cyberPUSSY...???

;-p


--
Best
Greg

" I find Greg Morrow lowbrow, witless, and obnoxious. For him to
claim that we are some kind of comedy team turns my stomach."
- "cybercat" to me on rec.food.cooking

Little Malice wrote:

> One time on Usenet, Gregory Morrow > said:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Little Malice wrote:
>
> > > One time on Usenet, "cybercat" > said:
>
> > > > "Little Malice" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > > One time on Usenet, Janet Baraclough > said:
> > > > >> The message >
> > > > >> from "cybercat" > contains these words:
>
> > > > >> > Usenet IS a free-for-all. Whether it should be or not, it is, and it
> > > > >> > has
> > > > >> > always been. It has not changed at all, except those who have used
> > > > >> > it for years are now more savvy.
>
> > > > >> Obviously you have not used it for years, or you would be aware of
> > > > >> how much it has changed for the worse.
>
> > > > > I had a similar thought. Usenet has NOT always been a "free-for-all".
> > > > > Not until AOL was loosed upon it, anyway. Anyone who was reading
> > > > > before then knows how much that changed things...
>
> > > > I began reading in 1994. When did the AOL thing start?
>
> > > Before that -- I'm thinking '92 or '93, but my memory isn't always the
> > > best...
>
> > It was '93:
>
> >http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/S/S...ver-ended.html
>
> > "September that never ended
>
> > All time since September 1993. One of the seasonal rhythms of the
> > Usenet used to be the annual September influx of clueless newbies who,
> > lacking any sense of netiquette, made a general nuisance of
> > themselves. This coincided with people starting college, getting their
> > first internet accounts, and plunging in without bothering to learn
> > what was acceptable. These relatively small drafts of newbies could be
> > assimilated within a few months. But in September 1993, AOL users
> > became able to post to Usenet, nearly overwhelming the old-timers'
> > capacity to acculturate them; to those who nostalgically recall the
> > period before, this triggered an inexorable decline in the quality of
> > discussions on newsgroups. Syn: eternal September."
>
> Yeah, "Eternal September"! That phrase was hiding in the back of my
> mind. Thanks, Greg.
>
> ObFood: DH & DS want *shudder* jarred spaghetti sauce tonight. I
> really hate that stuff, but whatever makes them happy. Personally, I
> prefer tomato sauce with ground beef, onions, Worchestershire,
> garlic, and chili powder, like my mom used to make...


I have a coupla jars of spaghetti sauce in the pantry, I think I'll
use them for pizza topping...


--
Best
Greg