Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/12/84; site aero.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!aero!kremen From: kremen@aero.ARPA (Gary Kremen ) Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.group Subject: Net censorship (PLEASE READ) Message-ID: <530@aero.ARPA> Date: Thu, 7-Nov-85 11:01:19 EST Article-I.D.: aero.530 Posted: Thu Nov 7 11:01:19 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Nov-85 05:16:04 EST References: Upon request Reply-To: kremen@aero.UUCP (Gary Kremen (5731)) Organization: The Aerospace Corp., El Segundo, CA Lines: 97 Keywords: censor, censorship, usenet, mod.computers.ibm-pc Xref: watmath net.news:4316 net.news.group:4429 During the recent net discussion on the conversion of many groups from net.* to mod.*, the specter of moderator censorship was raised. Well, censorship seems to have started already. A new moderated group mod.computer.ibm-pc has filtered its way to sites. Close examination of the group's welcoming message reveals the moderators of this group will and do censor out all information with respect to copy-protection. They state: > Two topics are taboo and are routinely edited out: > (1) ..... > (2) anything about copy-protection I am not posting this to debate the merits of copy-protection. It is not the issue. The issue is whether the moderators of any USENET moderated group have the right to censor at will. With the conversion of many (and since many sites will most likely drop the unmoderated groups) groups from net.* to mod.*, you could have bet that the issue of censorship would have come up anyway in the future. It is always easier to discuss issues of this type before a full blown controversy erupts. So, what I am proposing this this statement should be made USENET policy: "Moderators are expressedly prohibited from making ANY changes on submitted articles except for the following: i) To eliminate spelling or grammer errors. ii) To format an article's text in a physically different form. iii) To combine repetitive questions, requests, or replies into a single question, request, or reply." What should be done now to stop net censorship, you ask? 1a) Discussion of this and all future censorship acts in the proper news group(s) following USENET practices and policy. I believe the proper groups in this case are net.news, net.news.group and because emotions may run high, net.flame. Do not send send your comment to me. 1b) Ask the moderators to change their censorship policies by sending them (and any other moderators who censor) this or a similar message: "The censorship of this newsgroup is wrong and contradictory to the spirit and policies of USENET. Please refrain from actions of this type now and in the future." In the mod.computers.ibm-pc case, you should send your comments on the censorship move to: Name Username Billy Brackenridge BRACKENRIDGE Eliot Moore ELMO Richard Nelson NELSON Koji Okataki KOJI Richard Gillmann GILLMANN All the above moderators are at a site on the ARPA Internet called usc-isib.ARPA. Through UUCP I believe they can be reached by: {}!decvax!decwrl!ucbvcax!usc-isib.arpa!username, where username is one of the above username. In case these addresses do not work, use the pathname from any censored mod.computers.ibm-pc news item. But PLEASE everyone send a message protesting this censorship to the above moderators in every way you can. PLEASE, EVERYONE DO THIS!!! 2) If moderators do not stop censorship in a reasonable amount of time: a) A discussion should be held in the proper newsgroups, following USENET practices and poles to discuss the moderators actions. Possible actions on our part might include, but not be limited to: i) replace the moderators. ii) RMGROUP the group(s). iii) send comments to those who submit to the offending group(s) asking them not to do so until the censorship has ended. iv) send comments to those who are upsite (and backbone sites) to the offending group, asking them not to forward the group's mail until the censorship stops. v) Other reasonable actions. I think it is VERY IMPORTANT to make a netwide policy regarding censorship NOW. I think there are advantages to moderated groups including a better signal/noise ratio, less repeat messages, and most important (to the systems administrators) saving on phone bills. But to insure the moderated group concept works in the long run, anti-censorship guidelines should be implemented now. Thank you for your time. -- Name: Gary Kremen Address 1: kremen@aerospace.ARPA Address 2: {sdcdcf,trwba,randvax}!aero!kremen Quote:"Everybody loves to see justice done...on someone else" - Bruce Cockburn Theory: "Computers suck, but they pay the bills" Contrapositive: "To Live and Die to live and die in LA" Disclaimer 1: "The company does not know what I am doing" Disclaimer 2: "Both the company and I have great lawyers"