Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 + RN 4.3; site inset.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!stc!inset!jr From: jr@inset.UUCP (Jim R Oldroyd) Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.flame Subject: Re: Fear and Loathing on the Clouds Message-ID: <756@inset.UUCP> Date: Fri, 25-Oct-85 07:36:51 EDT Article-I.D.: inset.756 Posted: Fri Oct 25 07:36:51 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 26-Oct-85 19:28:44 EDT References: <614@h-sc1.UUCP> Reply-To: jr@inset.UUCP (Jim R Oldroyd) Distribution: net Organization: The Instruction Set Ltd., London, UK. Lines: 49 Keywords: internat, newgroups, spafford, dictatorship Xref: watmath net.news.group:4006 net.flame:12506 Xpath: stc stc-a In article <614@h-sc1.UUCP> thau@h-sc1.UUCP (robert thau) writes: > >It seems that Gene Spafford has recently taken to reorganizing USENET >to suit his tastes. At first, he simply deleted a number of small, >inoffensive newsgroups which had practically no traffic anyway. Nobody >particularly cared. (This has been defended as follows: "even small >(local) volume adds up to a large amount net-wide." But what does small >global volume (1-2 messages per week) add up to?) > >Recently, however, Spafford has taken it upon himself to delete two >thriving, busy newsgroups --- net.internat and net.bizarre. The case >of net.internat is especially distressing, as this newsgroup's >signal-to-noise ratio has reached heights heretofore undreamt of on USENET. > I entirely agree. It appears to me that Spafford has quite overstepped any authority that MAY have been invested in him this time. It is very useful for someone to be willing to divest their time and other resources to administer the network - although EUNET/USENET was founded on the basis that there was NO central administration, some attention is necessary. >On top of the fact that two busy newsgroups are going away, the fundamental >character of the net is being changed, I think, for the worse. >Spaf may not have created the rules he cites, but his *centralized* enforcement >of them, with a literal-mindedness rarely seen outside of fourth-grade >classrooms and the IRS, is something entirely new. > I beleive that this the NET does not want a centralised network as this will completely kill the spirit of the thing. I have NEVER sent an article to a moderator, and probably never will. What attracts me to this network is EXACTLY that which Spafford has decided to remove from us all - the freedom of speech and the right to communicate without a censor. Do his actions not seem somewhat DICTATORY to you? If not, just look what I received this morning: a newgroup for MOD.POLITICS. MOD.POLITICS????? MOD.POLITICS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? EH?!?! WHAT!! It's about time, Spafford, that you pay some attention to all the personal flames directed at you and stop playing GOD. -- These are MY personal comments - not those of my sheep. -- ++ Jim R Oldroyd ++ jr@inset.UUCP ++ ..!mcvax!ukc!inset!jr