Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84 chuqui version 1.7 9/23/84; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.flame,net.net-people
Subject: Re: To: persons offended by ucla-cs!alex
Message-ID: <2896@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 00:09:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.2896
Posted: Mon Jun 24 00:09:49 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 25-Jun-85 02:55:27 EDT
References: <1666@amdahl.UUCP> <131@ucla-cime.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach)
Followup-To: net.news
Organization: Plaidhenge
Lines: 71
Xref: watmath net.news:3479 net.flame:10730 net.net-people:603

[note: this has been crosslinked to net.news and further followups are
 being pointed there as this is the most appropriate group for this
 discussion]

In article <131@ucla-cime.UUCP> kyle@ucla-cime.UUCP (Kyle D. Henriksen) writes:
>>From: gam@amdahl.UUCP (G A Moffett)
>>I am beginning to feel that ucla-cs!alex has "gone too far".
>
>>It may interest you to know that the Usenet contact person
>>at ucla-cs is Doris McClure, ihnp4!ucla-cs!doris.
>	Well I'm glad to see that someone out there is stupid enough to start
>giving out system administrator's addresses.  Thats right, these people have
>nothing better to do than deal with idiots who decide that they don't like
>what a particular user is posting to the net.  I wish that you and the rest
>of net fascists would find something better to do with your time besides
>occupying the time of people who actually work.

Well, I'll start by pointing out the obvious and say that part of being the
System Administrators job at a site is taking complaints off of the net
when one of the users steps beyond the bounds of proper use of the network.
Anyone has the right to make a formal complaint, if they so wish,
especially when discussing the incident directly with the transgressor
doesn't help. (This is especially true when the screwup is because the
person thinks that the network is a right and not a priviledge, and thinks
they can do anything they want). If the SA doesn't want a lot of screaming
fascists filling their mailbox, they should make sure that the people on
their site aren't acting like mongoloid idiots with a lobotomy. Not that
I'm accusing anyone at UCLA of acting that way, of course.... (I'm just
implying it heavily...)

As an official net fascist, and as usenet manager here at nsc, I did send a
letter off to the ucla SA suggesting that she take a look at a couple of
specific articles and see if she wanted that kind of material to be
considered represtentative for her site. I do not read net.flame, I gave up
on that cesspool long ago, but I got a couple of complaints from readers on
my site and checked up on it. 

The situation in net.flame has degraded to the point where I'm not
considering simply removing it from distribution on my site. I saw a number
of articles (many from ucla-cs, but also from other locations) that I
considered very close to libel/slander and a number of others that were
simply disgusting.

Since I'm always looking for ways to keep my phone bills in line, I
find I'm tired of spending my company's money so that people like Scott
Turner can shoot off his mouth in public. A final decision hasn't been
made, but I think that between the recent postings coming out of ucla
and other places on the net into net.flame (and sliming into better
groups) and the ever growing volume of Usenet are going to force me
into a decision to simply take the groups with the lowest volume of
useful information and highest volume and send them into the great bit
bucket in the sky.

I'm very hesitant to make a decision of this sort, because it sets some
rather nasty precedents, but at the same time I wonder if it might be time for
such precedents to be set. I've been talking with a number of people on the
net about ways to keep costs and volumes in line, and we simply haven't
found any useful solutions [I keep Stargate separate from this discussion,
because Stargate is really a separate network]. I think it is time for the
network to shrink a bit and restructure itself to be more productive and
professional in character. Since I can't find a group of people who are
willing/able to coordinate this shrinkage, the best I can do is be
arbitrary about it and try to shrink the net for my own site and my
downstream neighbors and only accept the subset of the network that we feel
serves our needs.
-- 
:From the misfiring synapses of:                  Chuq Von Rospach
{cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui   nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

The offices were very nice, and the clients were only raping the land, and
then, of course, there was the money...