A SERIOUS DILEMMA FOR THE NET
Allen Gwinn
Greetings. There has emerged, what I feel to be a big problem. For
a couple of weeks, the net has been plagued with postings from several
"entities" at the Portal System (tm) in California. The postings are
made from ambiguous accounts such as "Spartan", "Hijacker", "Argent",
"Ankh" etc, ad nauseum. It is my opinion that the Site Administrator's
decision to let subscribers use these "handles" (and apparently change
them at will) encourages some of them to post irresponsibly, and perhaps
not use the best of judgement when doing it. I offer as a "for instance"
the fairly recent incident of "j...@cup.portal.com" who posted a plea for
money across the entire net, cross-posting to most of the newsgroups.
This problem might be solved if the management at the Portal System would
simply replace the "XPortal-User-Id:" line with the user's real name. This
situation would perhaps force a poster to use more discretion prior to
posting, knowing that his or her *real* name would be attached to the
posting.
If the Site Administrators at the Portal System are still uncertain as
to whether or not they should implement such a thing, perhaps those of
us who feel this way could help them out by assembling as complete a
portfolio of these postings as possible. Then, mail them to
'postm...@cup.portal.com' along with your comments as to why you feel
the postings are inappropriate. This will aid their staff in resolving
the problem by presenting them with *complete* first-hand evidence.
I thank you, and Usenet thanks you...
--
Allen Gwinn ...sulaco!allen Disclaimer: The facts stated are my own.
"At the source of every error blamed on a computer you will find at least two
errors...including the error of blaming it on the computer."
William B. Thacker
To the Powers that Be on Usenet;
Recently, there has occurred on the net what I feel to be the
beginnings of a big problem. For several weeks, postings from several
individuals at the Portal System have been plaguing the net. The posters
use "anonymous" logins such as "Hijacker", "Spartan", "Ankh" etc. It
is my opinion that the Portal Administrator's decision to let subscribers
use these "handles" has encouraged some of them to post irresponsibly,
I offer as a "for instance" the fairly recent incident of
"j...@cup.portal.com" who posted a plea for money across the entire net,
cross-posting to most of the newsgroups. Many of the posters from
Portal do not seem to realize the tremendous expense this sort of
"prank" causes.
This problem might be solved if the management at the Portal System would
simply force users to use their real names. This would perhaps force these
posters to use more discretion.
It is my opinion that the Portal System itself is not really at
fault; this problem could not easily have been forseen by them. I do
hope, however, that they take some action to correct what could be
a tremendous problem for the net. If, however, the Portal administrators
are reluctant to do so, perhaps those of us who feel strongly about the
issue could help them out by assembling as complete a portfolio of these
postings as possible, then mailing them to 'ro...@cup.portal.com' along
with comments as to why we feel the postings are inappropriate.
This will, no doubt, aid their staff in resolving the problem by
presenting them with a body of first-hand data.
My thanks, and wishes that we can resolve this issue quickly to
everyone's satisfaction.
------------------------------ valuable coupon -------------------------------
Bill Thacker cbosgd!cbema!wbt
"C" combines the power of assembly language with the
flexibility of assembly language.
Disclaimer: Farg 'em if they can't take a joke !
------------------------------- clip and save --------------------------------
Patricia O Tuama
Greetings. A large problem has emerged in the past couple of weeks:
the net has been plagued with postings from several "entities" at the
Portal System (tm) in California. The postings are made from ambiguous
accounts such as "Spartan", "Ronie", "Argent", "Ankh" etc. It is my
opinion that the Site Administrator's decision to let subscribers use
these "handles" (and apparently change them at will) encourages some of
them to post irresponsibly. I offer as an example the recent incident
of "j...@cup.portal.com" who posted a plea for money across the entire net,
cross-posting to numerous newsgroups.
This problem might be solved if the management at the Portal System
would replace the "XPortal-User-Id:" line with the user's real name.
This change would perhaps force a poster to use more discretion prior
to posting, knowing that his or her *real* name would be attached to
the posting.
If the Site Administrators at the Portal System are still uncertain as
to whether or not they should implement such action, perhaps those of
us who feel this way could help them out by assembling as complete a
portfolio of these postings as possible. Then, mail them to
along with your comments as to why you feel the postings are inappropriate.
This will aid their staff in resolving the problem by presenting them with
*complete* first-hand evidence.
Netters here in Chicago are entitled to send mutiple copies in the fine
old tradition of the Daley Machine.
I thank you, Usenet thanks you and Nikola Tesla thanks you.
Secret Agent Elsie Dinsmore
Oleg Kiselev
Hello. There has emerged, what we feel to be a huge problem. For
a while now, the net has been plagued with postings from several
"people" at the Portal System (tm) in California. The postings are
made from ambiguous accounts such as "Spartan", "Hijacker", "Argent",
"ANKH" etc, ad nauseum. It is our opinion that the Site Administrator's
decision to let subscribers use these "handles" (and apparently change
them at will) encourages some of them to post irresponsibly, and perhaps
not use the best of judgement when doing it. I offer as a "for instance"
the fairly recent incident of "j...@cup.portal.com" who posted a plea for
money across the entire net, cross-posting to most of the newsgroups.
This problem might be solved if the management at the Portal System would
simply replace or augment the "XPortal-User-Id:" line with the (l)user's
real name. This situation would perhaps force a poster to use more
discretion prior to posting, knowing that his or her *real* name would
be attached to the posting.
If the Site Administrators at the Portal System are still uncertain as
to whether or not they should implement such a thing, perhaps those of
us who feel this way could help them out by assembling as complete a
portfolio of these postings as possible. Then, mail them to
'postm...@cup.portal.com' along with your comments as to why you feel
the postings are inappropriate. This will aid their staff in resolving
the problem by presenting them with *complete* first-hand evidence.
I thank you, and Usenet thanks you. It's your net. Do it now.
--
Oleg Kiselev "No regrets, no apologies" -- Ronald Reagan
(213)337-5230 ARPA: lcc....@seas.ucla.edu, ol...@gryphon.cts.com
UUCP:...!ucla-cs!lcc!oleg
Copyright 1988 by Oleg Kiselev. All rights reserved.
Quoting is allowed only if attributed.
Joe Zitt
times to net.admin?!
--
{sun!hoptoad,cmcl2!phri}!dasys1!jzitt
Joe Zitt Big Electric Cat Public Access Unix
also: uunet!wwd!joe (WorldWide Data)
The worldlines of the needle and the digit intersect -- Paul Pedersen, 1988
Steve Dyer
Other than the "JJ/Rob Noha" episode, I've either been oblivious to their
malfeasance given the general state of USENET, or I'm not reading the
right newsgroups. In any event, this "letter campaign" seems more than
a little bit disingenuous. Gad, the alt. groups are being polluted by
being lowered to the level of 15 year olds. Geez, what's a year between
friends?
--
Steve Dyer
dy...@harvard.harvard.edu
dy...@spdcc.COM aka {harvard,husc6,linus,ima,bbn,m2c,mipseast}!spdcc!dyer
Brad Templeton
about as valuable to the net as Portal.
The real message for Portal is this -- allow your site to get the bad
reputation that it is getting, so that people start putting it in their
kill files, and you are doing your own well behaved customers harm.
This will eventually come home to roost.
The solution is fairly easy. For each new user, spool all postings
into a special directory where a Portal staff memeber will examine them,
and forward them on or reject them. Once a user has got the hang of things,
the staff member can turn off their new user flag.
This should be the case at all sites of any size, but Portal would be
an excellent start.
--
Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
loci!clb
> To the members of Usenet:
This is an interesting concept: Usenet members! You make it
sound so organized.
>
> Greetings. There has emerged, what I feel to be a big problem. For
> a couple of weeks, the net has been plagued with postings from several
> "entities" at the Portal System (tm) in California. The postings are
The net has a perfectly good mechanism for dealing with postings
that cause aggravation; the reader merely doesn't read whatever
they find offensive. If it's too extreme, unsubscribe.
>
> I thank you, and Usenet thanks you...
>
> --
> Allen Gwinn ...sulaco!allen Disclaimer: The facts stated are my own.
If you seriously want to do something constructive to reduce
the trash posting on the net, try setting a good example.
However, if posters are going to assail others with flames,
insults, lies, etc., etc., it really makes no difference
whether they use a handle or their name.
In addition to setting a good example, another effective means
of dealing with juvenile behavior is to simply ignore it.
Without acknoledgement, these children get bored and look
for something else to do. Your posting merely fans their flames
by admitting that they are being heard, so chill out.
--
CLBrunow - KA5SOF
Loci Products, POB 833846-131, Richardson, Texas 75083
c...@loci.uucp, lo...@killer.uucp, lo...@csccat.uucp
Bill Fenner
but you *could* just say "I agree!" instead of posting the (basically) same
article with minor changes multiple times.
Bill
--
Bitnet: w...@psuhcx.bitnet Bill Fenner | "Ain't got no cash,
Internet: w...@hcx.psu.edu | Ain't got no style
UUCP: {gatech,rutgers}!psuvax1!psuhcx!wcf | Ain't got no girls
Fido: Sysop at 263/42 (814/238 9633) \hogbbs!wcf| To make me smile"
Ken Wallich
>Could someone fill me in on what some of these "Portal" folks have done?
>Other than the "JJ/Rob Noha" episode, I've either been oblivious to their
>malfeasance given the general state of USENET, or I'm not reading the
>right newsgroups. In any event, this "letter campaign" seems more than
>--
>Steve Dyer
I must agree.
Allen Gwinn, William B. Thacker, Patricia O Tuama, Oleg Kiselev,
John F. Haugh II and others write:
A form letter (with some individual quips) telling us of grave problems at
Portal.
A form letter of protest posted to the net? Perhaps next we can post chain
letters. Considering the reputation of some of the folks who appear to have
authored this stuff, one wonders whether it is just a big forgery. I find
it difficult to believe (although not impossible) that all of these folks
suddenly lost the capacity for independent thought. I could understand
individually crafted letters of concern, but not something like this.
Like Steve I've also noticed no abnormally heavy abuses from Portal lately,
just seems like the same noise level they usually maintain (although I must
admit that '/portal/h:j' is in more than one of my local killfiles). If
you have become disgusted with the level of noise on the net (like me), this
doesn't seem like the most intellegent way of solving it.
Have we decided that xeroxed (tm) group intimidation works better than
individual discussion? Actually, considering how many of the discussions
have digressed lately.
Humm....
To the members of Usenet:
Nawww.
--
Ken Wallich
Ardent Computer Corp uunet!ardent!kmw
Sunnyvale, California, USA "Slimey? Mud hole? My HOME this is!"
G. Murdock Helms
from various individuals:
>To the members of Usenet:
>
>Hello. There has emerged, what we feel to be a huge problem. For
>a while now, the net has been plagued with postings from several
>"people" at the Portal System (tm) in California. The postings are
>made from ambiguous accounts such as "Spartan", "Hijacker", "Argent",
>"ANKH" etc, ad nauseum. It is our opinion that the Site Administrator's
>decision to let subscribers use these "handles" (and apparently change
>them at will) encourages some of them to post irresponsibly, and perhaps
>not use the best of judgement when doing it.
[ text deleted ]
Is this truly a 'huge problem'? The various facilities for reading news
all include the 'kill file' option to each user, i.e.: the ability to
filter out specific postings. If a user finds postings from Portal to
be such a problem, then that user can implement his kill file to eliminate
them. For those who do not use kill files (such as myself), it is a
relatively simple matter to skip postings that do not appeal to the reader.
There has recently been a tendency towards suppression on the net that is
chilling in its implications. I am referring specifically to the removal
of at least one person's net access, perhaps even his account, due to
several complaints about his postings. The unpleasant aspect of this is
that the person in question was not posting overtly offensive material to
the net. Yes, he produced a lot of articles, and yes, he could be
somewhat irritating, but there are other individuals in many groups who
can be accused of the same faults. The point is: someone was able to convince
the sysadmin of that machine to remove a user who had not done anything
explicitly 'wrong'.
And this could happen to you....or me.
There have been discussions on removing specific people from the net, cutting
people's newsfeed (or a machine's newsfeed), and now various discussions on
what to do about Portal. Is this suppression neccessary? Why is it that
so many people with net access cannot act responsibly and solve their
differences with people/machines/newsgroups without first becoming rude
and insulting, and then demanding suppression of the 'offending' party?
The rule in social interaction that applies here is: If you have a problem
with an account, machine, or newsgroup, then it is YOUR problem, not the
entire world's, and therefore you alone must solve it. That may mean the
creation of a kill file, or the exercising of patience, but it still remains
*your* problem.
It has been suggested by various parties that some of the 'irresponsible'
posters from Portal are youngsters of various ages. From my experience
working with children of various ages, I can assure you that the approach
that has been taken thus far towards 'controlling' these children is
entirely incorrect. People of any age younger than yourself have a desire
to be treated as an equal. In working with them, greater progress is made
with helpful comments and suggestions than with a slow roast over spiteful
and degrading flames. A simple, *polite* mail message to an 'offender'
suggesting how to access the manual pages on news readers, and how to edit
a posting for inclusion in a followup should suffice to fix the problem.
As you may note, my login is not my real name. My name listing is not
my real name either. The fact that I possess the ability to change my
'name' at whim has not in any manner influenced me to post irresponsibly.
If there are any questions about the events I have mentioned or other comments
that you wish to discuss with me, I can be contacted via email at
time...@eos.arc.nasa.gov, and would be interested in exchanging mail with
you.
-Murdock time...@eos.arc.nasa.gov
Was...@cup.portal.com
were totally uncalled for. Gentlemen, alt.flame is the proper group
for that sort of drivel. Please remember that in the future.
Also please remember that the "Site Administator" at Portal promptly
cancelled JJ's account as soon as he discovered what JJ had done.
JJ went on to even greater fame from another site.
Your campaign is not without merit: humor. However, news.admin was
not created for humor.
Cheers,
John Thomason
Was...@cup.portal.com
Allen Gwinn
> In article <2...@sulaco.UUCP>, al...@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes:
> > To the members of Usenet:
> This is an interesting concept: Usenet members! You make it
> sound so organized.
I'm sorry, Chucky... I almost forgot about you. Administrators
please pardon me while I take care of this...
> > Greetings. There has emerged, what I feel to be a big problem. For
> > a couple of weeks, the net has been plagued with postings from several
> > "entities" at the Portal System (tm) in California. The postings are
> The net has a perfectly good mechanism for dealing with postings
> that cause aggravation; the reader merely doesn't read whatever
> they find offensive. If it's too extreme, unsubscribe.
Funny... this was never your stance before. Seems to me that you went
around threatening to contact people's employers (and raise political
hell in the case of NASA) when they posted something that offended you.
Why this quick turn-around?
> If you seriously want to do something constructive to reduce
> the trash posting on the net, try setting a good example.
> However, if posters are going to assail others with flames,
> insults, lies, etc., etc., it really makes no difference
> whether they use a handle or their name.
What, exactly, in my posting was a flame, insult or a lie? You didn't
find anything along those lines to post, did you Chucky? Know why?
Cuz you are an A+, number one, slobbering, maggot-ridden-brained twit!
> In addition to setting a good example, another effective means
> of dealing with juvenile behavior is to simply ignore it.
> Without acknoledgement, these children get bored and look
> for something else to do. Your posting merely fans their flames
> by admitting that they are being heard, so chill out.
Oh my... Chucky's getting into the 80's now... "chill out". Why don't
you go soak your head in the toilet Chucky... Seems like such a nice
sport for you to take up.
> CLBrunow - KA5SOF
^^^^^^-Look Ma! A technician!
> Loci Products, POB 833846-131, Richardson, Texas 75083
> c...@loci.uucp, lo...@killer.uucp, lo...@csccat.uucp
Would you buy a Loci Product from this man?
--
Allen Gwinn ...sulaco!allen Disclaimer: The facts stated are my own.
Richard Sexton
>
>There has recently been a tendency towards suppression on the net that is
>chilling in its implications. I am referring specifically to the removal
>of at least one person's net access, perhaps even his account, due to
>several complaints about his postings. The unpleasant aspect of this is
>that the person in question was not posting overtly offensive material to
>the net. Yes, he produced a lot of articles, and yes, he could be
>somewhat irritating, but there are other individuals in many groups who
>can be accused of the same faults. The point is: someone was able to convince
>the sysadmin of that machine to remove a user who had not done anything
>explicitly 'wrong'.
>
You're overlooking the obvious. He moved, and is still on the net
posting from a different site.
--
One of Olegs psuedofriends
ric...@gryphon.CTS.COM {backbone}!gryphon!richard
Allen Gwinn
> There has recently been a tendency towards suppression on the net that is
> chilling in its implications. I am referring specifically to the removal
> of at least one person's net access, perhaps even his account, due to
> several complaints about his postings.
I don't think that you will find anyone involved in the mass-posting that
advocates net.censorship. Matter of fact, based on past history, the
very people who posted the letter have stood up and complained when other's
accounts were removed.
We are simply advocating "taking responsibility for one's own actions". The
'pseudo' abuses from Portal are reaching record proportions. How long is it
going to be before someone pulls another "jj" because he thinks nobody can
find out who he is?
I would probably be the first to complain if one of those little pseudo-twits
lost his/her/its net access over this thing... and I think that my complaining
would be followed closely by Trish, Richard, Oleg, John, John, Bill, and
everyone else posting the letter.
Patricia O Tuama
>There has recently been a tendency towards suppression on the net that is
>chilling in its implications. I am referring specifically to the removal
>of at least one person's net access, perhaps even his account, due to
> The point is: someone was able to convince
>the sysadmin of that machine to remove a user who had not done anything
>explicitly 'wrong'.
In the first place, it wasn't a "someone" who was able to convince the
sysadmin of that machine, it was a whole bunch of "someones." Secondly,
our group posting did not advocate that the portal.people be suppressed
or censored. We simply suggested that portal.admin require their users
to put their real names in their postings.
>The rule in social interaction that applies here is: If you have a problem
>with an account, machine, or newsgroup, then it is YOUR problem, not the
>entire world's, and therefore you alone must solve it. That may mean the
>creation of a kill file, or the exercising of patience, but it still remains
>*your* problem.
On an individual basis perhaps, certainly it depends on the circumstances.
But if a student at a particular university insists on posting his termcap
to the net, not just once but twice, then I think that sort of behavior
affects the net at large and not just the individual user.
> People of any age younger than yourself have a desire
>to be treated as an equal. In working with them, greater progress is made
>with helpful comments and suggestions than with a slow roast over spiteful
>and degrading flames. A simple, *polite* mail message to an 'offender'
>suggesting how to access the manual pages on news readers, and how to edit
>a posting for inclusion in a followup should suffice to fix the problem.
Several people tried this with no success. Furthermore, although there
are a few under-age portal.people around, I think it's pretty obvious
that the worst offenders are actually youths in their late teens or
early 20's who have made it quite apparent that they care very little
about accessing manual pages or editing postings for inclusion.
>As you may note, my login is not my real name. My name listing is not
>my real name either. The fact that I possess the ability to change my
>'name' at whim has not in any manner influenced me to post irresponsibly.
Well, quite personally, "Murdock," I don't think *anyone* including you
should be posting to the net unless his or her real name appears in either
the headers or in a .signature file.
But since you brought it up, why don't you use your real name?
Richard Childers
>Could someone fill me in on what some of these "Portal" folks have done?
Could we also see something besides form letter opinions ? Every thing I've
seen with the subject line defined as "A SERIOUS DILEMMA FOR THE NET" has
been the same message, minus tweaks here and there, down to the char count.
-- richard
--
"The leech's kiss, the squid's embrace, ..!{amdahl,ames,oliveb,pacbell}!
The prurient ape's defiling touch: chil...@chaos.unet.pacbell.COM
And do you like the human race ?
No, not much." -- Aldous Huxley, 'Ape And Essence'
Michael T Sullivan
Why, oh why did these people post form letters. Like we aren't going to
notice that they're all the same letter. Who is worse, the people using
handles at PORTAL or these bozos insulting our intelligence ("Really, we,
er I mean I, did this all on my own!"). Talk about net.rude.
--
Michael Sullivan {uunet|attmail}!vsi!sullivan
V-Systems, Inc. Santa Ana, CA sull...@vsi.com
whump, whump, whump, whump, whump, whump, whump, whump, whump, whump, whump
Werner Uhrig
> > In article <2...@sulaco.UUCP>, al...@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes:
[ disgusting slime-throwing contest deleted ]
I consider it a personal offense to be made a witness to a slime-throwing
contest, and posting this kind of crap in news.admin falls into that
category. if you guys don't like each other, please be assured that
news-admin doesn't want to know about it - so why don't you tell each
other in private e-mail? and think about it, do you really care that little
about the impression you make on readers of news.admin?!
> The net has a perfectly good mechanism for dealing with postings
> that cause aggravation; the reader merely doesn't read whatever
> they find offensive. If it's too extreme, unsubscribe.
I've seen this argument over and over again, and cannot help but refutiate:
> the reader merely doesn't read whatever they find offensive.
how do you determine that an article is offensive without
reading it?
whereas one can unsubscribe to a group with an "offensive"
purpose or trend (some consider alt.flames in that category)
I do not really accept the concept that some news-groups are
by definition offensive, and no complaints should be made
about the contents of any articles posted there. in the jokes
groups it has become a custom to use rot13 to encrypt what might
be considered offensive and it has worked quite well, it seems.
in other groups, some people have the good sense of indicating
in the Subject, Keywords, or Summary, that some people might
be offended; sometimes that works, but most of the time
it has me question the good sense of the poster to post the
article anyway...
> If it's too extreme, unsubscribe.
that's like giving up the playground to the bullies...
I will gladly abandon any group that gets voted into existence
for the purpose to harbor offensive messages; other groups
I will refuse to unsubcribe to in response to such a consideration.
alt.flames? well, I have better things to do than to correct
some peoples' lack of education and social graces ...
I'm glad the group exists, though, to me, "flame" does not imply
to mean that "offensive" is acceptable ...
--
--------------------> PREFERED-RETURN-ADDRESS-FOLLOWS <---------------------
(ARPA) wer...@rascal.ics.utexas.edu (Internet: 128.83.144.1)
(INTERNET) werner%rascal.ics...@cs.utexas.edu
(UUCP) ..!utastro!werner or ..!uunet!rascal.ics.utexas.edu!werner
Dermot Tynan
It seems to me, that there is little benefit to Portal listing the users
*real* name. I mean, what are we going to do? Find someone local to
throw a brick through their window? Seriously, the problem is deeper than
that. In a way, systems like Portal are in essence ''bending the rules''
when it comes to Usenet. This network is supported by the contributions
of the associated companies and users. Portal is then making a profit from
these contributions. Sort of like a PBS station with commercials. I'm
not suggesting that services not be allowed to charge fees for reading news.
Although I do believe that sites 'pay' for their newsfeeds by contributing
valid information to the net. Something that perhaps, Portal is not doing.
Anyway, my basic point here, is that it should be defined clearly, that
"world distribution, in fact, any distribution other than local, is a
priviledge, not a right." Up to this time, we have been self-regulated,
with the fear of losing a newsfeed if netiquette isn't followed. With the
advent of pay-newsfeeds like uunet, this becomes a lot harder. We need to
impress upon the administrators at Portal the sanctity of "world distribution".
In fact, I would suggest that most of their stuff be kept locally, and perhaps
perused by someone at that end as to form and content, and then allowed
external distribution. This is tantamount to censorship, and not something
that easily fits within the usual framework of this net. The alternative,
however, is grim. Given the cost of distribution, a lot of companies may be
looking at this forum, and evaluating it for possible elimination. With a
quick examination of some of the output from Portal (not all, by any means),
and the knowledge that the company is funding the distribution of this data,
we may end up saying goodbye to some sites. In summary, I don't think a
real user-name will accomplish anything. Not being able to change 'handles'
would facilitate people in ignoring/killing certain articles, but in the long
run, Portal MUST be held accountable for its output. I think that this is a
subject which will probably be glued to this newsgroup for some time to come.
At least a whole pile of inflamed cross-discussions is better than apathy.
Comments, as usual, by email please.
- Der
--
Reply: dty...@sultra.UUCP (Dermot Tynan @ Tynan Computers)
{mips,pyramid}!sultra!dtynan
Cast a cold eye on life, on death. Horseman, pass by... [WBY]
Patricia O Tuama
>I'm sorry, form letters don't impress me. I agree with your sentiments,
>but you *could* just say "I agree!" instead of posting the (basically) same
>article with minor changes multiple times.
You know, we expected people to flame us for the cross-postings (thank
you, Gil) and we expected people to misunderstand what we were saying
(thank you, "Murdock") but I don't think any of us expected that people
would complain about the fact that we all used the same basic message.
I mean it's almost as though people are accusing us of having violated
some secret net.code of creativity or originality.
The reason for the same message was to draw a lot of attention to what
we were saying. Portal.admin appears to ignore virtually everything
their users write here or how they say it. And, of course, the reason
we all used the same subject line was so that people who didn't want to
read about this could quickly and easily kill all of the subsequent
postings at once.
I must admit I am somewhat gratified, however, that so many people appear
to have read them all the way through. I put a very small joke at the
end of mine about machine politics here in the windy city and frankly I
figured no one would see it.
Sean McCollister
Before attempting to remove the speck from portal's eye, perhaps we
should remove the beam from our own (well, what did you expect from a guy
who names his computer aquinas? :-))
Vulgar, obnoxious, vituperative postings filled with name-calling,
threats and ad-hominem attacks are commonplace. Who can blame the "Portalets"
for trying to fit in?
This would seem to be a good time for all of us to take a few minutes
and read through "news.announce.newusers" one more time. PEOPLE read, and
post to, the net. People will inevitably have disagreements. If they can't
be resolved, shall we not politely "agree to disagree," and leave it at that?
Why carry on like a bunch of schoolyard bullies? Why?
<EOS>*
______________________________________________________________________________
* End of Sermonette
se...@aquinas.UUCP or ....killer[!rpp386]!aquinas!sean
Mark Brader
> (although I must
> admit that '/portal/h:j' is in more than one of my local killfiles).
As of now, "/portal/a:j" is going in *my* kill file for news.admin.
This, of course, kills all articles that even *mention* the p-word.
[No, I'm not a news-admin at the moment. News.admin these days is
just a second news.misc. No, I don't like this state of affairs.]
Mark Brader, Toronto "Those who mourn for 'USENET like it was' should
utzoo!sq!msb remember the original design estimates of maximum
m...@sq.com traffic volume: 2 articles/day" -- Steven Bellovin
The Beach Bum
>In article <18...@spdcc.COM> dy...@spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) writes:
>>Could someone fill me in on what some of these "Portal" folks have done?
>
>Could we also see something besides form letter opinions ? Every thing I've
>seen with the subject line defined as "A SERIOUS DILEMMA FOR THE NET" has
>been the same message, minus tweaks here and there, down to the char count.
childish you ignorant twit. you DID NOT actually check. had you actually
looked at all of them you would have noticed that mine was not a cheap
imitation copy of the form letter but a full blown paraphrase in the same
tradition as stolen high school termpapers. HAD YOU LOOKED you would have
seen this. but instead you open your asshole and insert your head.
boy, you gotta get your head outa your butt. if you don't stop putting
your head up your ass people will start thinking you have shit for brains.
--
John F. Haugh II (j...@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US) HASA, "S" Division
"Why waste negative entropy on comments, when you could use the same
entropy to create bugs instead?" -- Steve Elias
Oleg Kiselev
>Why, oh why did these people post form letters. Like we aren't going to
>notice that they're all the same letter. Who is worse, the people using
>handles at PORTAL or these bozos insulting our intelligence ("Really, we,
>er I mean I, did this all on my own!"). Talk about net.rude.
Yes, you may have noticed a single message. But it would have done as little
good as all previous single postings and e-mail messages trying to attract
attention of PORTAL administration and the USENET community to the serious
problems created by PORTAL et al.
Only by doing something exteremely in bad taste (and I agree with you -- a
mass posting of nearly identical message all accross the NET is extremely
rude) could we have possibly hoped to get a large enough reaction to both our
message and to the problem it adressed. We have, I believe, succeeded -- in
some way.
The PORTAL administration has failed to realize what was being asked of them.
NOT censorship, NOT abolishing all flames, NOT kicking posters off -- what we
called for was user education and user responcibility.
Before PORTAL appeared, the most common violations of Nettiquette were
freshmen and other new users at educational institution sites. The simple
reminder that they will be very likely to meet the people they offend now
when they start looking for a job in a few years -- probably in a capacity of
interviewers and managers -- had been most sobering and effective.
This trick will not work with PORTAL...
Brad Templeton
a conspiracy to distract attention away from Portal and save it from net
censure.
By carefully making a series of annoying, obnoxious anti-portal postings
from a wide variety of sites, these users (or whoever did the posting) have
actually caused many on the net to rally to the defence of Portal.
At the same time, since the postings come from a variety of sites, there is
no one site to draw the ire. The ire against Portal is thus diffused into
the net. If they had been smart, they would have limited the use of
"gryphon.CTS," but perhaps that was just to further cloud the conspiracy.
Well guys, it worked. You saved Portal from attack. But we've seen through
it the next time you try.
Chuck Brunow
>In article <2...@sulaco.UUCP>, al...@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes:
>> In <55...@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, lo...@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (loci!clb) writes:
>> > In article <2...@sulaco.UUCP>, al...@sulaco.UUCP (Allen Gwinn) writes:
>
> [ disgusting slime-throwing contest deleted ]
>
>I consider it a personal offense to be made a witness to a slime-throwing
>contest, and posting this kind of crap in news.admin falls into that
>category. if you guys don't like each other, please be assured that
>news-admin doesn't want to know about it - so why don't you tell each
>other in private e-mail? and think about it, do you really care that little
>about the impression you make on readers of news.admin?!
Get this, one and all: there was nothing offensive, abusive,
profane, insulting or otherwise objectionable about my posting
to which you refer. Nothing. The fact that Allen Gwinn responded
with a completely unprovoked attack is his problem, but I had
no part in it. None.
Further, I don't know Allen Gwinn, have never sent e-mail to
him or responded to any of his posting prior to this occasion.
Never. Are you getting the gist of this? NOTHING, NONE, NEVER.
Allen Gwinn has taken it upon himself to flame me on several
occasions, sends gobs of junk e-mail and otherwise take
various licenses to attack me. Don't ask me why, I don't know.
But it is strictly unilateral, and any one who says different
is a liar. Is that clear? If you show me one message from me
to him, I'll show you a forgery.
>
>> The net has a perfectly good mechanism for dealing with postings
>> that cause aggravation; the reader merely doesn't read whatever
>> they find offensive. If it's too extreme, unsubscribe.
>
Several months ago I posted a call to the net to set minimum
standards for language and conduct and to take the responsibility
for enforcing them. While my e-mail responding to that call
was uniformly favorable, nothing was said or done by anyone.
That is to say that no one is willing to be responsible for
basic decency, claiming rights loud and long but ignoring the
fact that rights always imply responsibility.
Now, I take that to mean that the Usenet policy is "reader beware"
and that any sort of obnoxious behavior will be tolerated.
That doesn't mean that I like it or think it's a good idea,
but I can only do so much myself. If Allen Gwinn is free to
post slanders and lies about me, there is no way you can tell
me that I haven't the same right: no way. But I don't choose
to stoop to those depths and some people seem to think that
that's a sign of weakness or something, and gives them the
right to publicly post ridiculous lies. If you want to see
for yourself, let me know: I've archived the lot.
Now the net is having gang wars. You asked for it, each and
everyone who has stood by while they harrass and disrupt
group after group. You can't blame me for it, I have been
too busy doing real work to have anything to do with it.
But there it is. Usenet is the casaulty, as is truth, decency,
and responsibility. You've made your bed, now lie in it.
>> If it's too extreme, unsubscribe.
>
> that's like giving up the playground to the bullies...
>
It's too late to worry about that. This recent fray is the
result of a gang of bullies who got insulted because they
couldn't pick on others who emulate them. They want to get
people disconnected the same way they tried to get me,
but without real names they were thwarted. Too bad.
I don't know whether they got their methods from Joe McCarthy
or Adolf Hitler; both had a similar disregard for others,
but the bad part is that they're allowed to continue.
Well, I did what I could and spoke out. What did you do?
>--------------------> PREFERED-RETURN-ADDRESS-FOLLOWS <---------------------
>(ARPA) wer...@rascal.ics.utexas.edu (Internet: 128.83.144.1)
>(INTERNET) werner%rascal.ics...@cs.utexas.edu
>(UUCP) ..!utastro!werner or ..!uunet!rascal.ics.utexas.edu!werner
>
>
--
CLBrunow - ka5sof
c...@loci.uucp, lo...@csccat.uucp, lo...@killer.dallas.tx.us
Obnoxious Math Grad Student
>No, I'm not a news-admin at the moment. News.admin these days is
>just a second news.misc. No, I don't like this state of affairs.
I had been invited to join in the original mass posting. I tried to
convince the list to post to news.misc instead. Honest, I did.
There are certain brands of obnoxiousness I just won't touch.
ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
Robert J. Granvin
even mentioned at all (or else it was too obvious, so I passed right
over it :-), but has anyone, who has problems with Portal (or any
other site, for that matter) ever bothered to _call_ them?
It just seems a simple direct approach that yields amazing results, or
in the absolute least, a much clearer understanding of what is going
on, or going to be going on...
Since portions of the Portal map have been used as "ammunition" here,
and the name(s) and phone numbers of contacts are on that map, and
since Portal answers their phones, except when they're not around,
where they leave an answering machine on (and have been known to reply
to messages :-), I'm sure that actually having a short, complete and
perhaps even gratifying conversation wouldn't be a terrible task.
--
"The greatest minds in physics Robert J. Granvin
were stumped- Tom Cruise, John National Information Systems, Inc.
Cusack and Rob Lowe all tried r...@sialis.mn.org
and failed." ...{{amdahl,hpda}!bungia,rosevax}!sialis!rjg
Patricia O Tuama
> I would like to start out by saying that I am a new newsadmin(4 days!)
>and I thought this group was for discussing issues relevant to running a
>USENET/uucp node. My apologies in advance if I step on any toes.
> I think what people are flaming is that the information content of
>the messages in question is redundant and serve no use, except providing
>revenue for the phone companies. This is one sentiment I agree with,
>having visually monitored the modem when transferring news; it bothers
>me that I am paying for five copies of the same thing, which to my mind,
>translates to getting the information for five times the cost which
>cheapens the (whatever good) intentions behind the message(s).
Well, all I have to say is boy, are you in for a surprise. Postings
saying the same thing abound on Usenet. Post a simple question to any
of the rec.groups for instance, and at least five or six netters will
post answers most of which will say exactly the same thing. And look
what happened right here with our articles. There have been what, ten
replies from people all saying the same thing, all complaining about
the fact that we all said the same thing. It goes on all the time.
> Yes, and I hit "k" when I saw the same message with the same subject
>line for the fourth time, and saw 2 dozen killed articles. I finally looked
>at one of the "killed" articles and saw that it was not the original article
>but someone's response to the original. I then quickly hit "x" and
>re-started rn, and saw that a lot of the responses felt similarly to me;
>I was initially dismayed when I saw all the articles that I killed that I
>thought were simply duplicates. So, we still have to sort through the chaff
>to get the wheat; that's why rn has KILL files.
Well, yes, that's sort of how the software works, dear. Typing "k"
gets rid of the original article and all subsequent discussion.
Hmmm.... I don't mean to be rude or anything but are you sure you're
ready to be a sysadmin?
at that point trish, bemused
Oleg Kiselev
> Several months ago I posted a call to the net to set minimum
> standards for language and conduct and to take the responsibility
> for enforcing them.
Such "standards" will violate the basic freedom of speech previously enjoyed
by the NET. In the last 4.5 years I have been on the NET news groups have
been able to establish their own conduct and language guidelines and have
managed to deal with the unavoidable periodic disruptions caused by new users
and hot tempers.
> Now, I take that to mean that the Usenet policy is "reader beware"
> and that any sort of obnoxious behavior will be tolerated.
There are a number of tools available to the USENET users to allow them to
skip articles from or in reply to the offending users. More often than not,
the problems go away by themselves.
> I don't know whether they got their methods from Joe McCarthy
> or Adolf Hitler; both had a similar disregard for others,
> but the bad part is that they're allowed to continue.
Speaking of Hitler -- there is a censorship mechanism built into the NET.
A system administrator can disallow postings from certain users or may limit
their NET access to certain groups. This kind of police action should not be
delegated to anyone other than the sys admin of the site where the person in
question posts.
Don't play "NET.god" or the "NET.conscience" when you have
neither the power nor the talent for either role.
Eliot Lear
Oleg Kiselev argues that setting minimum standards for language and
conduct violates some form of freedom of speech. He then goes on to
explain that there are tools to help a user avoid the cruft.
What Oleg is missing is that we all agree there is cruft out there.
The point at which an article is not cruft is hazy but we all agree
that it is out there. What I would like to see is a moderator who has
a good idea of what most people consider cruft. That way, only one
person has to wade through the garbage, as opposed to all of us.
As to whether this inhibits someone's freedom of speech, there is such
a thing as disturbing the peace. Through moderation, a person who
thinks he has an important point to make, WHO MIGHT OTHERWISE FLAME
HIS POINT THROUGH will have an incentive to keep his posting in line
with (at least) the minimum guidelines of the group. ( Hallelujah ;-)
--
Eliot Lear
[le...@net.bio.net]
n...@eris.berkeley.edu
>
>Well guys, it worked. You saved Portal from attack. But we've seen through
>it the next time you try.
>--
>Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
No form of humor should EVER be posted, especially in news.admin,
unless followed by explicit humor-indicators*. If we moderate
news.admin, this sort of reprehensible behavior would never
occur.
nj
* Humor-indicators: also known as "smiley faces" on trash groups
like talk.bizarre. Described by the following grammar:
<smiley-face> ::= ':-)'
See [Knuth80] for a discussion of the efficiency of smiley
faces and a refutation of Hofstadter's disgusting and vile
argument that they are "too cute, too silly, and just plain
too stupid."
Richard Childers
>childish you ignorant twit. you DID NOT actually check. had you actually
Ho, hum, this 'childish' stuff is ... well, childish, y'know ?
>looked at all of them you would have noticed that mine was not a cheap
>imitation copy of the form letter but a full blown paraphrase in the same
You barefaced liar. They were so similar I'd have to study for longer than
is worth my time to find the differences.
>tradition as stolen high school termpapers. HAD YOU LOOKED you would have
Speak for yourself, peckerwood. I quit high school to go to college.
>seen this. but instead you open your asshole and insert your head.
Ah, now we get to the intellectual substance of the communique ...
>boy, you gotta get your head outa your butt. if you don't stop putting
>your head up your ass people will start thinking you have shit for brains.
There we go. John F. Huhhh? II at his shining, whining best. Impressive, huh ?
>John F. Huhhh? II (j...@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US) HASA, "S" Division
Oleg Kiselev
Those who have been on the NET for any length of time have grown accustomed
to the regular calls for some form of censorship on the NET. It seems the
time for another such call has arived.
In article <Sep.22.21.50....@NET.BIO.NET> le...@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear) writes:
>Oleg Kiselev argues that setting minimum standards for language and
>conduct violates some form of freedom of speech. He then goes on to
>explain that there are tools to help a user avoid the cruft.
>What Oleg is missing is that we all agree there is cruft out there.
>The point at which an article is not cruft is hazy but we all agree
>that it is out there. What I would like to see is a moderator who has
>a good idea of what most people consider cruft. That way, only one
>person has to wade through the garbage, as opposed to all of us.
That is what moderated groups are for. Introducing moderation into a number
of groups has failed -- notably, some groups had DIED because of moderation.
The usual USENET policy has been to allow a news.group to determine its
"cruft" tolerance. No single moderator can successfully scan all the
megabytes of postings in all groups every day. Nor can any one moderator be
capable of justly detemining what is allowable for all groups.
There is, by the way, a number of mechainsms for fitering out the offending
material. one could, for instance, suffer a one-time horror of typing all
offending words into a KILL file and flushing any and all articles that
contain those words. Personally, I would like to see words like "boobies"
and "discombabulation" purged from the NET -- they greatly offend me. Yet
words like "fuck" etc. do not at all bother me. Go figure...
>As to whether this inhibits someone's freedom of speech, there is such
>a thing as disturbing the peace. Through moderation, a person who
>thinks he has an important point to make, WHO MIGHT OTHERWISE FLAME
>HIS POINT THROUGH will have an incentive to keep his posting in line
>with (at least) the minimum guidelines of the group. ( Hallelujah ;-)
USENET is a very broad set of forums, with varying purposes and linguistic
borders. If you are poroposing moderation of ANY ONE group -- why not ask
the posters and readers of that group to VOTE on that proposal? If you are
merely trying to crussade for your personal agenda and your personal sense of
"propriety" -- something tells me you will find precious little support.
Jordan K. Hubbard
I must agree with Ken. It certainly is a problem when an entire
organization [Portal] practically encourages net.abuse and gives voice
to those who would probably be better off standing on a folding chair at
Speakers Corner. This form letter, however, seems to be little more than
a page torn from the same book. Granted, it's better written than the average
portal prose and was probably actually run through spell before posting [grin],
but it's still pretty dry reading after the 5th incarnation. Who are you
trying to punish, the portal people or the rest of the net?
Something most Americans don't realize (and I speak from experience) is that
a lot of this stuff goes all over the world. Us expatriate American folks
living abroad get a real kick out of being able to read the alt.stuff
and would be very unhappy if it got yanked because of a far-too-low SNR.
Once someone downstream yanks something, it's pretty hard to convince
them to put it back. The Germans are stubborn that way. So, please, flame
where flaming is due, but realize that every byte costs significant bucks
over-all. Why not send those form letters to postmaster@portal? It seems
to me that's where they'd do the most good. Better yet, talk to the sites
that feed them. Perhaps the possibility of total isolation would
serve as a more effective deterrent.
Jordan
Eliot Lear
moderation of a particular group - this one. I have asked for
discussion on the subject. I think you should get a copy of that
message and get back to me before I reply.
Kill files are nice when it comes to individuals who are offended by
particular people. There are two arguments, still to use moderation.
One is mentioned in my other article, the other is that not all news
readers have facilities to handle kill files. Would you believe me if
I told you that not all those people out there read these groups using
UNIX? This is a lesser argument, however, as in the long run, better
software should be developed, so again, go read my first article.
I do not argue for stringent moderation. That is - I want to see
articles not posted that are CLEARLY out of place in this news group.
Specifically: I would like to see messages that are NOT abusive and
somewhat germane to the subject of news administration. I think we
can come up with a set of rules for a moderator.
The other idea that was posted which I think is interesting is the
monthly posting of such rules. I am not sure how effective that
solution is, however, so I hesitate to endorse it completely.
--
Eliot Lear
[le...@net.bio.net]
Brandon S. Allbery
+---------------
| In article <69...@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US> j...@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (The Beach Bore) writes:
| There we go. John F. Huhhh? II at his shining, whining best. Impressive, huh ?
Nothing like a cure that's worse than the disease, huh? At least Naha's
noise had some entertainment value.
++Brandon
--
Brandon S. Allbery, uunet!marque!ncoast!allbery DELPHI: ALLBERY
For comp.sources.misc send mail to ncoast!sources-misc
"Don't discount flying pigs before you have good air defense." -- j...@clinet.FI
Patricia O Tuama
> My view of the situation is:
> 0. It's either be newsadmin, or shut down net access
> 1. We all have to learn sometime, and I, along with a few other
> newsadmins, think I'm doing all right.
> 2. Besides, since I view the whole world as basically a circus and
> would find the whole Portal thing amusing, if I and a lot of other
> <decent> systems weren't paying for it.
0, 1, 2 ?? oh my goodness, this is truly amazing.
Kchula-Rrit, you don't have to justify you're being a sysadmin to me or
anyone else. I just thought what you wrote was funny. And of course all
of Usenet is a circus. Don't forget the famous Honeyman/North theorem:
Usenet is a slow-moving parody of itself
and it's equally famous corrollary:
Usenet is like walking into a crowded movie theater and
yelling, "CAR FOR SALE!"
And besides, despite all that stuff Ray Dunn wrote (and say, there was a
man on a search and destroy mission) most of the portal stuff that went
on in alt.flame over the past couple of weeks was much funnier than any-
thing that gets into any of those silly rec.humor.* groups. So my advice
is keep the alt.groups and dump soc.sin and .humor et al. There, that
should even out your costs a bit.
at that point trish, esprit present
Oleg Kiselev
>Apparently, Oleg, you missed my other message. I am calling for the
>moderation of a particular group - this one. I have asked for
>discussion on the subject. I think you should get a copy of that
>message and get back to me before I reply.
Eliot is probably right. If his "other article" was one of "Moderation of
news.admin" series, I have indeed missed it. That is because I have not been
reading those articles -- I exercised my "k" key. WHY? Because I have no
problem with this group being moderated -- iff the group votes for moderation.
Next time, Eliot, please be more specific.
Werner Uhrig
[ this article is cross-posted to news.admin and news.misc ]
[ but follow-ups are directed to news.misc, exclusively ]
recent articles from such sites as "serene" and "gryphon" may have caught
your attention also, enough to make me curious to want to learn what sites
*.CTS.COM are all about. Am I mistaken in the impression that there are some
kind of commercial time-sharing/BBS type of machines, possibly competing
with PORTAL in some ways? Please send me Email and I'll summarize and either
post or mail what I learn, depending on the number of requests I get.
I post this in the hope that readers will add to the sparse info I can find
in the maps and at NIC while at the same time indicating what I know already...
also to benefit those who may not have ready. easy access to this info...
Here is the information I found in the SRI-NIC database and UUCP-maps:
werner> telnet sri-nic.arpa
.....
SRI-NIC, TOPS-20 Monitor 6.1(7341)-4
@whois cts.com
Whois: cts.com
Crash TimeSharing (CTS-DOM)
1274 Vista Del Monte
El Cajon, CA 92020-6830
Domain Name: CTS.COM
Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Blue, Bill (BB167) bb...@CRASH.CTS.COM
(619) 444-7004
Domain servers in listed order:
RUTGERS.EDU 128.6.4.7
AOS.BRL.MIL 128.20.1.2, 192.5.25.82
HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU 10.0.0.9, 128.103.1.1
No known hosts under this secondary domain.
@whois host crash.cts.com
No match for host "crash.cts.com".
and the information in the maps:
UUCP mail information for host gryphon (#USENET lines show USENET news links):
#Name gryphon
#System-CPU-OS SCO Xenix SV
#Organization TE Technology
#Contact Gregory M. Laskin
#Electronic-Address gr...@gryphon.CTS.COM
#Telephone +1 213 513-1100
#Telephone +1 213 372-1294
#Postal-Address 1165 E. 230th St., Carson, CA 90745
#Latitude-Longitude 33 54 N / 118 18 W
#Remarks gryphon is located in Redondo Beach, CA.
#Remarks gryphon has 2400 baud and Telebit Trailblazer + available.
#Written-by gr...@gryphon.CTS.COM Fri Aug 26 18:58:03 PDT 1988
#USENET elroy desint aztec pande
#USENET mejac cadovax crash lakesys ddsw1 pnet02 lll-winken
#USENET marque ksala vector anb02
#
pnet02 = pnet02.cts.com
gryphon =gryphon.cts.com
gryphon pnet02(LOCAL)
pnet02 PNET(DIRECT)
gryphon amy(POLLED), anb02(DIRECT), aztec(DIRECT),
....etc....
UUCP mail information for host serene (#USENET lines show USENET news links):
#Name serene
#System-CPU-OS Fast AT clone; Xenix 286 2.2.2
#Organization RF Engineering
#Contact Rick Farris
#Electronic-Address !serene!rfarris
#Telephone (619) 259-6793 (voice)
#Postal-Address POB M, Del Mar, CA 92014
#Latitude-Longitude 33 5', 117 41'
#Remarks Unix and MS-Dos C programming. GPIB Device drivers.
#Written-by serene!rfarris (Rick Farris); Sat Aug 13 11:00:41 PDT 1988
#
serene bang(DIRECT), btree(DIRECT), crash(DEMAND), del(DEMAND), ncr-sd(DEMAND)
UUCP mail information for host bang (#USENET lines show USENET news links):
#Name bang
#System-CPU-OS AT Clone, Xenix 2.2
#Organization Internet Communications Co.
#Contact Bret Marquis
#Electronic-Address {hplabs!hp-sdd, crash, sdcsvax}!bang!bam
#Telephone 619/452-2110
#Postal-Address P.O. Box 12051, La Jolla, CA 92037
#Latitude-Longitude 32 44 N / 117 11 W city
#Remarks Host for public access P-Net, +1 619 450 0052
#Written-by crash!bblue (Bill Blue);
#USENET
#
bang crash(DEMAND), chem(DEMAND), ucsd(DEMAND), blia(DAILY),
gryphon(DAILY/2), serene(DEMAND), pnet08(LOCAL), datel(DIRECT)
bang = bigbang
bang = bang.cts.com
UUCP mail information for host crash (#USENET lines show USENET news links):
#Name .cts.com, crash
#F nosc.mil
#Organization Crash TimeSharing
#System-CPU-OS Symmetric s/375, BSD 4.2/3
#Contact Bill Blue
#Electronic-Address bb...@crash.cts.com
#Telephone +1 619 444 7004
#Postal-Address 1274 Vista Del Monte, El Cajon, CA 92020-6830
#Latitude-Longitude 32 47 N / 116 56 W
#USENET ncr-sd telesoft (full)
#USENET cacilj sdsu vixie stag gryphon pnet01 rush xroads jack elgar (partials)
#Remarks registered
#Remarks gateway to P-Net and ProLine networks
#Remarks Host to public access P-Net, +1 619 444 7006
#Written-by crash!bblue (Bill Blue); Sun Aug 28 09:21:40 PDT 1988
#
< long list of PNET-sites deleted > .... Pnet =?= PUBLIC access net?
--
Norman S. Soley
> In article <20...@looking.UUCP> br...@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
> >
> >Well guys, it worked. You saved Portal from attack. But we've seen through
> >it the next time you try.
>
> unless followed by explicit humor-indicators*. If we moderate
> news.admin, this sort of reprehensible behavior would never
> occur.
Somehow I don't think Brad was joking.
--
Norman Soley - Data Communications Analyst - Ontario Ministry of the Environment
UUCP: uunet!attcan!lsuc!ncrcan!ontenv!soley VOICE: +1 416 323 2623
OR: so...@ontenv.UUCP
Greg Laskin
>your attention also, enough to make me curious to want to learn what sites
>*.CTS.COM are all about.
If you care, I responded to this in news.misc.
--
Greg Laskin gr...@gryphon.CTS.COM <any backbone site>!gryphon!greg
The Beach Bum
>a conspiracy to distract attention away from Portal and save it from net
>censure.
>
>By carefully making a series of annoying, obnoxious anti-portal postings
>from a wide variety of sites, these users (or whoever did the posting) have
>actually caused many on the net to rally to the defence of Portal.
far from the truth. allen has been speaking with the management at portal.
he has made considerable progress towards getting the management to
contribute more to the net as well as police their users better.
brad simply doesn't have the facts. since the form letter posting there
have been many changes made to how portal users are expected to behave.
this is a good thing. brad and others attempts to minimize what has been
accomplished is foolishness. the facts will be borne out.
Jordan K. Hubbard
Bob Mosley III
>In article <14...@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, n...@eris.berkeley.edu dictates:
>> In article <20...@looking.UUCP> br...@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) warns:
>> >
>> >Well guys, it worked. You saved Portal from attack. But we've seen through
>> >it the next time you try.
>>
>> No form of humor should EVER be posted, especially in news.admin,
>> unless followed by explicit humor-indicators*. If we moderate
>> news.admin, this sort of reprehensible behavior would never
>> occur.
>
>Somehow I don't think Brad was joking.
>
>
...neither do I.
...next thing you know, these geeks will get tehir daddie's lawyers in on this,
and try to invoke the First Amendment on Usenet.
Gah. Just remove their access for a week. That will straighten them out.
(this was not meant as humor, either)
6
Henry Spencer
>Such "standards" will violate the basic freedom of speech previously enjoyed
>by the NET. In the last 4.5 years I have been on the NET news groups have
>been able to establish their own conduct and language guidelines and have
The net has changed, and continues to change. Speaking as someone who's
been on the net for 7.5 years, it is a mistake to think that mechanisms
which cope adequately at one time will suffice for all time. The net's
problems are steadily getting worse.
"`Freedom of speech' means that most postings are worth what their author
paid to post them."
--
NASA is into artificial | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
stupidity. - Jerry Pournelle | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry he...@zoo.toronto.edu
Peter Honeyman
>Don't forget the famous north/honey thesis:
> Usenet is a slow-moving parody of itself
>
>and it's equally famous corrollary:
>
> Usenet is like walking into a crowded movie theater and
yo, trish, don't forget the toronto variation: everyone stands up and
shouts "WRONG THEATER!"
peter
ps: i made some minor corrections to trisha's note, begging your pardon.
Werner Uhrig
Freedom of Speech is not endangered if some/all groups are moderated,
but it may well prevent USENET from losing in value or, maybe, fall apart
completely.
Freedom of Speech means just that: I am free to say and publish what
I want (and I'll ignore community standards and national security, etc,
for the moment)....
...but not WHEREEVER I WANT.
I print, I pay!! and I should not be prevented from making my information
and opinions AVAILABLE to others (NOT FORCE ON THEM)
- in PUBLIC places to whoever is interested
- in PRIVATE places to which I am invited!
PRIVATE places will of course want to know about me before they are going
to invite me in; on the net, I'd be invited to submit to the moderator
who'd "invite me in" by distributing my submitted article.
Of course, given my ideological preferences within a democratic framework
towards anarchy, wherever SAFELY possible, I would even argue that the
net should always have ONE forum, at least, where the only limitation imposed by
the moderator on any one individual should be the size and number of submissions
accepted and distributed (and personally, I have no problems with either
secrets or pornography, but acknowledge that one would have to worry about it
somehow - but who would want that job?), but I would not mind if some/all
backbone sites ON THIS EXISTING NET would refuse to carry such a group.
However, knowing that there actually exist a certain, respectable number of
machines that distribute such a "barely moderated" group would certainly make
this "old-timer" feel proud of being part of it all ...
thank you for taking time to read this "melancholic drivel" ...
Jordan K. Hubbard
Jordan K. Hubbard
Jordan K. Hubbard
Jordan K. Hubbard
Jordan K. Hubbard
Jordan K. Hubbard
David_Ca...@cup.portal.com
From Jordan....
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I must agree with Ken. It certainly is a problem when an entire
organization [Portal] practically encourages net.abuse and gives voice
to those who would probably be better off standing on a folding chair at
Speakers Corner. This form letter, however, seems to be little more than
a page torn from the same book. Granted, it's better written than the average
portal prose and was probably actually run through spell before posting [grin],
but it's still pretty dry reading after the 5th incarnation. Who are you
trying to punish, the portal people or the rest of the net?
<alot deleted to satisfy others...>
Jordan
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I don;t know about other people, but this is the THIRD copy of the
same letter we have received here on PORTAL. I am not FLAMING Jordan,
but reading the same stuff over and over must be costing some sites
alot of time and money.
Also, I take offense that he does say that PORTAL encourages its
users to abuse the net. I have never seen or heard anyone who runs
PORTAL encourage its users to abuse USENET. In fact, the times we have
gotten together, we laugh and joke about others on USENET and their
fun/weird/stupid/bright... postings.
Well, enough of this. I know I will get flamed just because I am a
PORTAL user, but send me mail anyways, because I like getting it.
David Ehlert
David_...@cup.portal.com
.SIG file...
We don;t need no stinkin' .SIG file...!!!
Esmond Pitt
>
> I must agree with Ken. It certainly is a problem when an entire
Brilliant. So far this message has appeared 8 times, and it gets more
boring every time. This appears to be deliberate:
Posted: Mon Sep 26 14:56:15 1988
Posted: Mon Sep 26 14:56:15 1988
Posted: Fri Sep 30 12:16:16 1988
Posted: Fri Sep 30 16:08:22 1988
Posted: Mon Oct 3 12:48:51 1988
Posted: Mon Oct 3 13:15:05 1988
Posted: Mon Oct 3 13:19:07 1988
Posted: Mon Oct 3 18:15:45 1988
Could somebody stop the rot please. Thanks.
(German thoroughness? :-))
--
Esmond Pitt, Austec International Ltd
...!uunet.UU.NET!munnari!ausmelb!ejp,e...@ausmelb.oz
Jordan K. Hubbard
I must agree with Ken. It certainly is a problem when an entire
to those who would probably be better off standing on a folding chair at
Speakers Corner. This form letter, however, seems to be little more than
a page torn from the same book. Granted, it's better written than the average
portal prose and was probably actually run through spell before posting [grin],
but it's still pretty dry reading after the 5th incarnation. Who are you
trying to punish, the portal people or the rest of the net?
Something most Americans don't realize (and I speak from experience) is that
Jordan K. Hubbard
Bob Mosley III
[yet another "I agree with Ken about the Portal idiots" reposting expurgated]
...anyone have an idea as to WHY this is getting reposted again? Could it be
something along the lines of someone having some sort of autokill & autosend
file installed?
...either way, can the sender be prevented from wasting bandwidth like this in
the future?
(yeah, it's the same old "Gee, how *DO* you get rid of idiots on the net?")
OM