SPAM - RFC from list admin

From: William Donzelli <aw288_at_osfn.org>
Date: Thu Feb 21 11:42:13 2002

> Not to be picky, but:

OK, here we go...
 
> AOLs early (still bad) software ran on _on topic machines_
>
> Microsofts early (still bad) software ran on _on topic machines_

I said nothing about the old software. The bashing refers to complaining
about some relatively new Windows bug, slamming AOLers because they are
such "losers", and pot shots at Bill Gates. There are plenty of other
places to rip these people to shreds. On this list, it is just plain old
_noise_.

> PeeCees (I assume in the IBM sense) older than 10 years, are,
> according to the FAQ, and no matter how much you or I may dislike
> them _on topic machines_

The term "PeeCee" generally means cheap clone. Real IBMs get better
respect that that. I am talking about crappy 386plus machines. Talking
about them really dilutes the interest in this list.

> The spark computer in an older car is arguably an _on topic machine_

With this argument, almost _anything_ electronic can be related to classic
computers. You have to draw the line somewhere. Are digital watches
included? Microwave ovens? Alarm systems? Radios and Radars? CD players?
Audio amps? All of these _could_ be called "computers", simply because
they have some sort of analog computation or digital electronics, but
I think that might really be going over the line.
 
> Linux runs on _on topic machines_

The problem here is that _almost_invariably_ the threads turn to "Linux is
so great, Windows sucks, I have Linux running on such-and-such Pentium".
This is NOT classic computing at this point, and should be moved to an
appropriate forum (and there are several hundred of them, at least). This
is _not_ a Unix sysadmin list. If you want to run Linux on an old machine
- great (although I don't see why - the fastest way to cheapen a VAX is
to have it run Unix - personal opinion) - but keep the topic
focussed on the old machine, _not_ the newest version of Linux. Linux
_itself_ is basically off topic, as only a tiny percentage of the talk
about it refers to the early releases.
 
> Well, anyway, my point is that you can't just unilaterally ban
> all of those topics; it would require some very careful reading
> on the moderator's part.
>
> It may not be feasible.

It just might be common sense, however. I am _not_ saying that these
threads should be nipped off at the bud. If a moderator was to exercise a
little control when the threads get out of hand, perhaps throwing the
offenders in the "penalty box" for a short amount of time, the noise on
the list would go way down. List members would start to control
themselves. This plan works - I am on several lists that are moderated in
this fashion, and they are very clean, on-topic, non-drivel forums.

_William_Donzelli_
aw288_at_osfn.org
Received on Thu Feb 21 2002 - 11:42:13 GMT