David Nebenzahl wrote the following:
[META = meta-discussion. Similar to OT in that no on-topic material to
a.h.r in message]

Apropos the ongoing discussions in various places here about
killfiling, plonking, etc., a serious question to y'all:

Why killfile or plonk at all?

Because when someone comes into the dance hall and takes a **** in the
middle of the floor, you want to clean it up rather than dancing around
it, or stepping in it and spreading it.around. Simple enough for you?


I'm asking this earnestly and hoping to get some good answers to this
question.

My take on the whole situation is this: There's no good reason to use
a killfile at all. Even if there are lots of objectionable messages in
a newsgroup, meaning messages that you don't want to read.

Why do I say this? Well, it's because even if one uses a killfile to
remove such objectionable messages from one's sight, one *still* has
to exercise judgment--that is, actually use one's brain--in deciding
which messages to read.

Especially in a group as active as this one. Look at it this way:
let's say for the sake of discussion that somehow, by some miracle,
all the spam, all the off-topic messages, etc., just disappeared from
here overnight. All that's left are postings that are on-topic to a.h.r.

So what now? Even in this new utopian situation, you're *still* gonna
have to decide which messages to read and which to skip (well, unless
you're some kind of total home repair omnivore or something). To me,
most of the threads here are of little interest to me, so I don't
bother reading them. Obviously, they're of interest to someone else,
so I have no problem with their being here; I just choose to skip over
them. Simple.

I do the same with spam, which is very easy to recognize, and a lot of
the off-topic threads. And some of our resident trolls, like Harry,
even make this very easy by thoughtfully labeling such threads "OT".

So what's the big problemo? Simply read what you want and ignore the
rest. No need to rant and rave, to complain about all the people
abusing the group, etc., etc. Hey, folks, this is Usenet, not the
Algonquin Round Table, for chrissakes.

As I've stated elsehere, this group is nowhere near "wrecked" as some
claim. I've seen wrecked newsgroups, and this one is a long way away
from that sorry state. Sure, the spam gets a bit thick here--that's
because it's one of the more active groups around, and spammers like
traffic--but it could be much worse. And surprisingly, there's little
of the really malicious types of postings, where people impersonate
other posters and post really vile crap under their names (for an
example, check out recent postings in sci.electronics.repair). These
sorts of concerted attacks occur in various groups from time to time,
but we've been spared for the time being.

Discuss amongst yourselves.




--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
In the original Orange County. Est. 1683
To email, remove the double zeroes after @