Re: Great misunderstanding (or lack of caring) regarding usenet and Google

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by woo, Nov 20, 2005.

  1. woo

    woo Guest

    > > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:28:02 -0700, woo wrote:
    > > > A company archiving chit chats and private questions, answers and discussions
    > > > (personal interests online) is Orwellianism

    > >
    > > I think equating *private* discussion and the *public* usenet is more
    > > Orwellian. "War is Peace. Private is Public. Windows is Linux."
    > >
    > > --
    > > Safalra (Stephen Morley)
    > >

    > Unity is fascism.
    > Hello. What people do in their homes?
    > Springs7.jpg
    > Ay man. Personal interests. Turn to usenet. Specialized, personal interest discussion forums.
    > Forget "public". Americans think "public", Europeans think personal. Try to understand
    > it. Personal questions. Personal opinion answers. Chit chat. Archiving that, at global scales,
    > is crimes against humanity. This is a world presidential discussion.
    > Greetings away, wishing you happy, thank you correspondence, all well, and you vice prez.
    > Handshake, photos.
    > See in Europe, little people think personal, and politicians think public.
    > But in the US Bush thinks personal, and the little people think public.
    > See the problem is that if Bush would think public, he would be a dictator.
    > But that does not apply to current European leaders, who think public as
    > they don't think like say Stallin used to. They think Democratically.
    > Photos...
    > In a kingdom, everybody has to play a role, as a King plays a role, and in a
    > Kingdom, people live in a Kingdom. There, the public has to be a public,
    > and they are expected to be the public. Without others playing roles,
    > the King's role would be meaningless.
    > Clapping...
    > The public doesn't have to be the public at all times. There can be people
    > turning to usenet for personal interests. He doesn't have to abide to the
    > public, he doesn't have to have a role to contribute to the public. He may
    > have a personal question, and that's all. He, is unique. He doesn't even
    > have to care about the netiquette. 200 pages about turning to usenet,
    > asking a question and getting replies. To that he does not need a netiquette.
    > He turns to a specific interest forum, and asks a question. A question that
    > may relate to his work, or a question that may be of his personal interest.
    > Him and others may chat about the subject, of possibly common interests,
    > as others can see it, yet of personal interests of the people involved in
    > the discussions. The idea that everyone can see it, so they can contribute
    > is true, but a usenet forum is a specific place of a special interest topics.
    > If you perceive a forum as a net street, we have an instant Orwellian
    > problem. Thank you, I have no further comments, maybe one:
    > Mandatory contribution oriented thinking is a role. Beware. Kingdom.
    > Empire.

    So please tell me if your statement still holds true. Remember I am European.
    woo, Nov 20, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. David K
    David K
    Dec 12, 2003
  2. woo
  3. woo
  4. Ofnuts
    Ryan McGinnis
    Aug 10, 2010
  5. trimmpoti

    C misunderstanding

    trimmpoti, Nov 11, 2011, in forum: Software
    Nov 11, 2011