Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version VT1.00C 11/1/84; site vortex.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!vortex!lauren From: lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) Newsgroups: net.news Subject: Re: The cost of moderating satellite News Message-ID: <483@vortex.UUCP> Date: Thu, 27-Dec-84 18:44:24 EST Article-I.D.: vortex.483 Posted: Thu Dec 27 18:44:24 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 28-Dec-84 08:04:37 EST References: <1314@eosp1.UUCP> Organization: Vortex Technology, Los Angeles Lines: 51 I don't consider software to be adequate or desirable for netnews screening. From the standpoint of avoiding the transmission of libelous, copyrighted, or otherwise unsuitable materials, no software could be designed that would handle such tasks except in the most obvious of cases. Such software could also be easily circumvented through techniques that should be obvious to all of us. From a legal standpoint, even if human moderators occasionally let things slip through, we would at least have shown we made a good faith effort to do things rights if we had people watching over the material. If we had some silly software doing it, any court would laugh itself sick over the premise that THAT, given the state of the art, represented any real sort of screening. Apart from screening for unsuitable materials, it is my hope that the groups sent by satellite will eventually represent a better quality of material. And just like the editor of Time Magazine doesn't publish every piece of material that crosses his desk or that people send in, this service doesn't need to either. In fact, nobody would read Time if he did. This service is not to REPLACE Usenet, but rather is to provide an alternative for people who do not have the time, inclination, or money to handle the ever increasing volume of calls (which will get far worse as the net grows) with a smaller and smaller percentage of messages representing useful information to them. People who want to carry on their rapid fire discussions in such groups as net.religion and net.singles can go ahead -- but there are quite a few people who could live quite nicely without those groups (and some other groups like it) and would really like to spend their time reading material with a higher percentage of usefulness. The idea is to give these people a choice -- the full, growing dialup network for those who want it (sort of analogous to standing at a sewer outfall), and something a little more controlled and filtered for people who can't afford the time or money to wade through all that. One point is certainly true -- careful consideration must be given to the flow paths toward stargate to avoid undesirable delays. However, my own concept is that most of these materials would be MAILED directly to the moderator, not passed slowly through the netnews links. The current experimental model does not represent the long term picture that would be necessary to make things really work. Also, it would seem reasonable that, ultimately, moderators/screeners/editors would be compensated in some way for their time. I don't think a nationwide news broadcasting service can operate totally on volunteer labor forever! Remember, what you see right now is an experiment, not the shape of any possible future production system. --Lauren--