"Rigorous and objective" (if at first...)

[Tim May]

On Friday, November 16, 2001, at 03:42 PM, Faustine wrote:
>
> Good question. I guess it's just that I love to argue, and you could 
> hardly
> ask for a better assortment of intelligent and colorful characters to 
> mix it up
> with. I enjoy the back-and-forth; putting out documents people here 
> might find
> useful and interesting--and most importantly, being able to give my 
> unvarnished
> opinion without, well, worrying too much about being rigorous and 
> objective.
>
> For instance, if anyone wants to tell someone here to go fuck 
> themselves,
> they just come right out and tell them to go fuck themselves. How 
> refreshing,
> positively theraputic! Expressing a little heartfelt hostility isn't 
> always a
> bad thing...LOL

The list has only 5% of the content it had in its glory years, 1992-95. 
And perhaps only 10% of its content in its declining years, 1996-98. 
It's now at about half the level of its senile years, 1999-2000. This 
past year has been the worst.

There are many reasons for this decline, discussed as early as 1994.

Any newbies who think this list is now interesting or exciting has my 
sympathy.


--Tim May
"If I'm going to reach out to the the Democrats then I need a third 
hand.There's no way I'm letting go of my wallet or my gun while they're 
around." --attribution uncertain, possibly Gunner, on Usenet