Re: Off Topic - But Heinous

[wdstarr@xxxxxxxxx (William December Starr)]

In article <0e2ks5trgnpn4rtp6gssjbp4hr5mg8fjcm@xxxxxxx>,
G. Morgan <usenet_abuse@xxxxxxxxx> said:

> Nope, I just dislike self-appointed Net-cops.  I known Joe from
> his postings for years, and felt like he was treated unfairly by
> "David DeLaney".  In my opinion he (David) should have said
> nothing at all instead of classifying Joe's post as SPAM (which it
> clearly is not).  I don't see anyone else calling the OP "SPAM".

I say that with regard to rec.arts.sf.written it was spam.

> It's a very personal issue for him (and me).  Since the two .alt
> groups he posted to don't give a rat's ass about off-topic stuff
> (I don't read the other one), I think he should have been given a
> "pass",

I don't follow the logic there: if an action is acceptable in
newsgroup_1 and newsgroup_2, it should be in any given newsgroup_3
as well?

> rather than being chastised by someone who doesn't like what he had
> to say.

That's a misrepresentation.  What David disliked, quite validly, was
not "what he had to say" but the juxtapposition of the topic and the
rec.arts.sf.written newsgroup.

-- wds