Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site jhunix.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!aplcen!jhunix!ecf_awjb From: ecf_awjb@jhunix.UUCP (William J. Bogstad) Newsgroups: net.news.group Subject: Re: Re: Fear and Loathing on the Clouds Message-ID: <1139@jhunix.UUCP> Date: Sat, 9-Nov-85 19:58:00 EST Article-I.D.: jhunix.1139 Posted: Sat Nov 9 19:58:00 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 11-Nov-85 05:41:25 EST References: <1094@trwrdc.UUCP> <1138@jhunix.UUCP> Reply-To: ecf_awjb@jhunix.UUCP (William J. Bogstad) Organization: Johns Hopkins Univ. Computing Ctr. Lines: 47 Summary: Some non-flames on what people don't have to do [I added net.news.group back to the newgroups line. I don't consider this to be a flame.] In article <1138@jhunix.UUCP> ins_aaaw@jhunix.UUCP (Adlai A. Waksman) writes: >>> Hold it right there. SDC volunteered their site as a backbone because we >>> thought USENET was a good thing. We have given our time, money and >>> equipment... >> If you completely ignore the needs of other sites then you won't be a backbone >> much longer. This is hardly a solution. Sensitivity to other people's needs >> is a first step to discovering a solution, not this isolationist "well we >> pay the bills so we can do as we damned well please." >IF you volunteer your site as a backbone site (or as *any* link on >Usenet that other sites rely on), you ARE obligated to relay >EVERYTHING. > >(Of course, you may not wish to waste your time and money on Usenet. >In that case, don't offer your site as a link AT ALL.) >-- >Adlai Waksman I think that the problem here is that people are assuming that if you receive any news you must receive everything, and must be willing to let others "feed at the trough". When a site joins USENET they do not sign anything, and in fact do not have to advertise the fact that they exist. The only thing required is obtaining the right software and finding a machine willing to let you receive news from them. I think that any site that does serve as someones feed should make it clear what they do and do not intend to receive. If you are looking for a feed and don't like their list you can go elsewhere. It is very possible to use more than one feed in order to get the groups that you want. I will agree too some extent that the backbone sites should try to arrange ways to deal with their overload. I would be surprised, however, if they haven't already tried to do so. One easy way to do so, would be to just silently refuse to accept messages in the "unacceptable" groups. Would you prefer that they did so without letting you know about it? Bill Bogstad bogstad@hopkins.arpa umcp-cs!aplvax!aplcen!jhunix!ecf_awjb P.S. I may be biased about this. I once served as an administrator for a machine that received USENET. We finally had to quit since it took too much of our time and disk space.