The seven stages of Usenet posting:

1. Innocence

HI. I AM NEW HERE. WHY DO THEY CALL THIS TALK.BIZARRE? I THINK THAT
THIS NEWSGROUP (OOPS, NEWSFROUP — HEE, HEE) STUFF IS REAL NEAT. 🙂
[dead chicken joke deleted]

This sort of joke DOES NOT BELONG HERE! Cant you read the rules? Gene
Spafford _clearly_ states in the List of Newsgroups:

rec.humor.dead.babes Dead Baby joke swapping

Simple enough for you? Its not enough that the creature be dead, it
*must* be a baby — capeesh?

This person is clearly scum — theyre even hiding behind a pseudonym.
I mean, what kind of a name is FOO, anyway? I am writing to the
sysadmin at BAR.BITNET requesting that this persons net access be
revoked immediately. If said sysadmin does not comply, they are
obviously in on it — I will urge that their feeds cut them off
post-haste, so that they cannot spread this kind of $#!T over the net.

4. Disgust

In message (102938363617@Wumpus), James_The_Giant_Killer@Wumpus writes:

> Q: How do you fit 54 dead babies in a Tupperware bowl?

> ^L

> A: La Machine! HAHAHA!

Are you people completely devoid of imagination? Weve heard this joke
*at least* 20 times, in the past three months alone!

When we first started this newsgroup, it was dynamic and innovative. We
would trade dead baby jokes that were truly fresh; ones that no one had
heard before. Half the jokes were *completely* original to this group.
Now, all we have are hacks who want to hear themselves speak. You
people are dull as dishwater. I give up; Im unsubscribing, as of now.
You can have your stupid arguments without Me. Goodbye!

5. Resignation
In message (12345@wildebeest) wildman@wildebeest complains:

>In message (2@newsite) newby@newsite (Jim Newbs) writes:

>>How do you stuff 500 dead babies in a garbage can?

>>With a Cuisinart!

>

> ARRGGHH! We went out and created rec.humor.dead.babes.new specifically

> to keep this sort of ANCIENT jokes out! Go away and stick with

> r.h.d.b until you manage to come up with an imagination, okay?

Hey, wildman, chill out. When youve been around as long as I have,
youll come to understand that twits are a part of life on the net.
Look at it this way: at least they havent overwhelmed us yet. Most
of the jokes in rec.humor.dead.babes.new are still fresh and
interesting. We can hope that people like newby above will go lurk
until they understand the subtleties of dead baby joke creation, but we
should bear with them if they dont. Keep your cool, and dont let it
bug you.

6. Ossification

In message (6:00@cluck), chickenman@cluck (Cluck Kent) crows:

> In message (2374373@nybble), byte@nybble (J. Quatermass Public) writes:

>> In message (5:00@cluck), chickenman@cluck (Cluck Kent) crows:

>>> In message (2364821@nybble), byte@nybble (J. Quatermass Public) writes:

>>>> In message (4:00@cluck), chickenman@cluck (Cluck Kent) crows:

>>>>> Therefore, I propose the creation of rec.humor.dead.chicken.

>>>> Before they go asking for this newsgroup, I point out that they

>>>> should follow the rules. The guidelines clearly state that you

>>>> should be able to prove sufficient volume for this group. I have

>>>> heard no such volume in rec.humor.dead.babes, so I must conclude

>>>> that this proposal is a sham, and a fraud on the face of it.

>>> The last time we tried to post a dead chicken joke to r.h.d.b, we

>>> were yelled at to keep out! How DARE you accuse us of not having

>>> the volume, you TURD?

>> This sort of ad hominem attack is uncalled for. My point is simply

>> this: if there were interest in telling jokes about dead chickens,

>> then we surely would have heard some jokes about dead *baby* chickens

>> in r.h.d.b. We havent heard any such jokes, so it is obvious that

>> there is no interest in chicken jokes.

> That doesnt even make sense! Your logic is completely flawed. Think a

It should be clear to people by now that this Cluckhead is full of it.
There is no interest in rec.humor.dead.chicken, so it should not be
created.

People like this really burn me. Doesnt he realize that it will just
take a few more newsgroups to bring this whole house of cards down
around us? First, we get rec.humor.dead.chicken (and undoubtedly,
rec.humor.dead.chicken.new). Next, theyll be asking for rec.humor.ethnic.
Then, rec.humor.newfy. By that time, all of the news admins in the
world will have decided to drop us completely. Is that what you want,
Cluck? To bring about the end of Usenet? Humph!

I urge everyone to vote against this proposal. The current system
works, and we shouldnt push at it, lest it break.

7. Nostalgia

Well, theyve just created rec.humor.ethnic.newfoundland.bizarre. My,
how things have grown. It seems like such a short time ago that I
first joined this net. At the time, there were only two newsgroups
under the humorous banner: rec.humor and rec.humor.funny. Im amazed
at how things have split. Nowadays, you have to have twenty newsgroups
in your sequencer just to keep up with the *new* jokes. Ah, for the
good old days, when we could read about it all in one place…