Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!sun!kevin
From: kevin@sun.uucp (Kevin Sheehan)
Newsgroups: net.news.stargate
Subject: benefit/cost
Message-ID: <1952@sun.uucp>
Date: Wed, 16-Jan-85 00:58:38 EST
Article-I.D.: sun.1952
Posted: Wed Jan 16 00:58:38 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Jan-85 01:58:51 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 41



	Having just recently starting to follow the stargate experiment,
it occurs to me that some of the arguments regarding the content of
transmission (ie, moderation of postings) fails to regard the practical
nature of the problem.
	The news I read here at sun is by the good graces of those of
you who type, the systems that relay that info, and sun for letting
me use it.  The folks who type presumably pay with their work, and the
unwitting work of their fellow employess (with some benefit expected),
the relay sites with their disk/cpu/phone time and costs with the same
expected benefit, etc.  A given site even has some of the cost borne by other
sites on the way (and vice versa, or they are kind folk indeed).
	I do not want to sound humble here, but this is GRAVY boys and
girls!!  I don't remember paying for this lately, and I doubt most of you
have either. We rely on the good graces of some who plan to benefit
indirectly, some who are nice guys, and so on.  The point here is that
Lauren (I believe this is the proper person) is conducting an experiment
that has great benefit, NO COST to us so far (so far as I know), and has every
right (and some real good reasons) to do with it as he pleases. If I said
I would carry folks over a river, and a few folks took me up on it,
fine. If the city of philadelphia showed up, I'd decide to find another
river, thank you.  Lauren has a large set of artificial constraints to
deal with, and seems to be living with those while trying to provide
a service to the net as a whole.  He has to deal with technical problems,
legal problems (thank you US law...), and the net opinion that stargate
should be this or that.
	In summary, the notion that moderation is censorship in a
completely private venture done for the benefit of the net as a whole
is perhaps too utopian a view of things. I cannot believe that there
is anyone who could not find something they dont think should go over the
gate for various reasons (bandwidth, content, bad breath, whatever) and
SOMETHING has to make that decision. Surely the proprietor of this
establishment has the right to decide that method without undue hassle.
I will defend your right to say it to the death, but he doesnt have to
publish it at his peril.
			l & h,
			kev

PS no flame, no blame, just thought he deserved a break while we all think
about things a little bit more.