At 09:02 AM 8/23/97 -0400, you wrote: >> My first suggestion for the charter would be that profanity should not be >> tolerated: no matter whom it comes from. > >Just English profanities or those of any language? Who's going to maintain >the list of forbidden words? Not only is that ridiculous, I find it offensive.
O, come on! There's been a _____long_____ tradition of mutual respect and courtesy in fairly _public_ Internet communications. There is a wide diversity of taste, backgrounds, preferences, sensitivities. The purpose of discouraging profane language, I think, is so that persons who do not enjoy its use and would otherwise have something to contribute to the continuing discourse, will not be discouraged from doing so. I personally don't enjoy any profanity in public discourse. That's personal taste, although I know it may raise accusations of prudishness. But I find that abusive language rarely helps any difficult situation. Whatever happened to netiquette? There are numerous examples of "appropriate" deportment in the various introductory articles on various newsgroups. As I say, I think these expectations are generally understood and honored. If a person wants to do otherwise, let him/her go private or find a 'flame' group, where the expectations are different. At any rate, I don't think there are any 'unspoken' rules in this regard. I think Jim Pick's idea of _not_ responding, even to 'correct' someone, is an excellent approach. The volume of messages (including this one, I guess) on this topic has been incredible, compared to 'user' concerns. Cheers Vernon Hamberg System Software Programmer Old Republic National Title Insurance Company 400 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55401 (612) 371-1111 x480 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .