[alt.paranormal] Charter FAQ
Sherilyn
Posting-Frequency: Every ten days to alt.paranormal,alt.answers,news.answers
Last-modified: 1998/04/07
Version: 1.1
URL: http://www.sidaway.demon.co.uk/paranormal/charter.txt
Copyright: (c) 1998 Sherilyn <sher...@sidaway.demon.co.uk>
Maintainer: Sherilyn <sher...@sidaway.demon.co.uk>
Latest updates:
98/04/07, 1.1: Correct copyright notice, add approval header.
CONTENTS
0. Introduction
1. Original newgroup messages for alt.paranormal
2. Does alt.paranormal have a charter?
3. Big 8 newsgroups and charters.
4. The alt.* hierarchy
5. The use of charters in the alt.* hierarchy
6. Another idea about charters.
7. Conclusion
0. Introduction.
This FAQ exists to clarify any possible misunderstandings that might
occur owing to Dan Kettler's attempt to represent some lines of text in
his FAQ, "paranormal/faq" as a newsgroup charter. Dan has made it clear
that he wants to persuade ISPs to enforce his document as a charter for
the newsgroup, and this document is intended as a resource for two sets
of people:
1) ISPs wanting to know whether it is appropriate to enforce
the document by, say, persuading their users to observe the
restrictions imposed by the document as an extension of the
AUP.
2) Users finding themselves threatened in any way and uncertain
what to do about it.
To the former, I'd say "read this, read Dan's FAQ, and make up your
mind." To the latter, I'd say "give the URL of this document to your
ISP and ask him to read it."
For reference, Dan Kettler's FAQ is available from
http://www.psicounsel.com/altparfaq.html
with the latest revision at
http://www.psicounsel.com/altparfaqr.html
1. Original newgroup messages for alt.paranormal
About the only evidence we have of the true reason alt.paranormal
was founded is this set of newgroup messages from the early 1990s,
stored at: ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control/alt/alt.paranormal.Z
The most complete statement of the intention of the newsgroup in these
messages is:
"For the discussion of extra-ordinary phenomena. Per the
discussion in alt.config."
This is clearly a very wide brief, and fits the normal running of
alt.paranormal to this day. So, in effect, it is the charter of
alt.paranormal, not the restrictive document Dan Kettler wants to
impose.
From slo...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Fri Aug 2 01:07:47 1991
Path: rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!kuhub.cc.ukans.edu!
sloane
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal.ctl
Subject: newgroup alt.paranormal
From: <slo...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
Date: 11 Dec 90 13:26:28 CST
Control: newgroup alt.paranormal
Approved: slo...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Lines: 1
Per the discussion in alt.config.
From ne...@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM
Fri Aug 2 01:07:50 1991
Path: rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!
gvlf3.gvl.unisys.com!gvlv2!news
From: ne...@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM (The NEWS user)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal.ctl
Subject: newgroup alt.paranormal
Date: 17 Dec 90 16:44:41 GMT
Control: newgroup alt.paranormal
Organization: Unisys/Great Valley Labs, Paoli, PA 19301
Lines: 3
Approved: ne...@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM
For the discussion of extra-ordinary phenomena. Per the discussion
in alt.config.
From ne...@tumif.UUCP Wed Jun 19 22:11:52 1991
Path: rpi!think.com!samsung!caen!ox.com!math.fu-berlin.de!
fub!ivcmd!tumif!news
From: ne...@tumif.UUCP (News-Administrator)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal.ctl
Subject: newgroup alt.paranormal
Message-ID: <9...@tumif.UUCP>
Date: 18 Jun 91 20:15:25 GMT
Control: newgroup alt.paranormal
Distribution: UniDo
Organization: IVC Magdeburg
Lines: 0
Approved: we...@tumif.UUCP
From st...@gandalf.UMCS.Maine.EDU Sun Apr 26 10:54:34 1992
Path: rpi!usenet.coe.montana.edu!decwrl!bu.edu!dartvax!
mars.caps.maine.edu!gandalf!steve
From: st...@gandalf.UMCS.Maine.EDU (Steve E. Goldsmith)
Newsgroups: alt.paranormal.ctl
Subject: newgroup alt.paranormal
Message-ID: <15...@gandalf.UMCS.Maine.EDU>
Date: 25 Apr 92 23:15:26 GMT
Control: newgroup alt.paranormal
Distribution: umcs
Organization: University of Maine Department of Computer Science
Lines: 0
Approved: st...@gandalf.UMCS.Maine.EDU
2. Does alt.paranormal have a charter?
This is the wrong place to provide a history of USENET, Big 8, and
alt.*, but the short answer is "For the discussion of extra-ordinary
phenomena." The long answer is as follows.
3. Big 8 newsgroups and charters.
All of what follows can be confirmed from various FAQs in
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/by-newsgroup/alt/alt.config.html
I'll assume that anyone reading this knows that the alt.* hierarchy is
in some way "different." Some people think it means you can say
anything you like (the "anarchists, lunatics and terrorists" theory) but
the truth of the matter is that you can say anything you like anywhere
on the net, as long as your comment fits the newsgroup. To this end,
newsgroups in the Big 8 hierarchy are only formed after long discussion
and voting where interested parties decide whether or not a new
newsgroup is really required to discuss the subject. The newsgroup
always has a charter, and it is this charter which gives a Big 8
newsgroup some legitimacy--after all, it is a record of the principles
upon which the newsgroup was voted into existence.
4. The alt.* hierarchy
Now at about the time of the Great Renaming, some people objected to
this whole idea and went off to found what became the alt.* hierarchy.
The idea behind this is that anybody can send a newgroup message,
subject to a small number of technical limitations, and it is up to each
individual news admin to decide whether to accept it or reject it. It
is this ease of newsgroup creation alone that makes alt.* different.
Certain technical requirements are imposed to keep the system running
smoothly, and to prevent people just going on mad newgroup sprees (it
happens) there is a guideline that the newsgroup should have been
discussed in alt.config, the nearest thing to and alt.* equivalent of
news.groups.
5. The use of charters in the alt.* hierarchy
Where do charters come in here? Ah, because even with all of the above
satisfied, there is no guarantee that a new newsgroup will gain good
propagation--some people may rmgroup it, some admins may not accept it,
and so on, _unless the purpose of the newsgroup is clearly known and it
is made clear to all that there is a good demand for the newsgroup_. So
the idea of a charter has been adopted as a means of doing this.
6. Another idea about charters.
What Dan Kettler is trying to do is quite different--he is trying to use
the idea of a charter to restrict the opinions that can be discussed on
alt.paranormal--in effect, to treat alt.paranormal as if it were a
closed chat room on a BBS. Dan claims the support of Steve Reiser, who
claims to be the "founder" of alt.paranormal, but Steve hasn't posted to
alt.paranormal regularly in living memory--he is a ghost from the past.
The attempt to impose a charter has also divided some of Dan's natural
allies, with skeptic and paranormalist alike uniting against his
campaign.
7. Conclusion
The alleged new charter does not square with the de facto charter of
this newsgroup. Discussion of extraordinary phenomena necessarily
involves skepticism, even cynicism, and attempts to rule them off by
proclaiming a change of charter are ill-conceived.
--
Sherilyn
Lou Minatti
>
> Archive-name: paranormal/charter
> Posting-Frequency: Every ten days to alt.paranormal,alt.answers,news.answers
> Last-modified: 1998/04/07
> Version: 1.1
> URL: http://www.sidaway.demon.co.uk/paranormal/charter.txt
> Copyright: (c) 1998 Sherilyn <sher...@sidaway.demon.co.uk>
> Maintainer: Sherilyn <sher...@sidaway.demon.co.uk>
Thank you for posting the alt.paranormal FAQ, Sherilyn. Yours is the
only FAQ we have to guide us. Good work.
--
We're watching you at SpOOk Central.
http://www.watchingyou.com
Includes the brand-new Bullshit Detector and fresh hate mail!
John Fitzsimons
>Sherilyn wrote:
< snip >
>Thank you for posting the alt.paranormal FAQ, Sherilyn. Yours is the
>only FAQ we have to guide us. Good work.
I agree that it is a good FAQ but I would suggest that unless Bruce
starts posting here again Sherilyn consider getting rid of the
comments about "charters".
New readers to this newsgroup who are unaware of the past long, boring
and pointless "my charter vs your charter" threads aren't interested
in talk of charters.
Getting rid of irrelevant stuff in a FAQ tends to encourage "newbies"
to read it in full IMO.
Regards, John.
****************************************************
,-._|\ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
/ Oz \ http://www.vicnet.net.au/~johnf/welcome.htm
\_,--.x/ http://www.alphalink.com.au/~johnf/
v
alt.paranormal.moderated - flame-free discussion of the paranormal.
Lou Minatti™
>
> On 25 Feb 1999 16:50:11 PST, Lou Minatti <loumi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Sherilyn wrote:
>
> < snip >
>
> >Thank you for posting the alt.paranormal FAQ, Sherilyn. Yours is the
> >only FAQ we have to guide us. Good work.
>
> I agree that it is a good FAQ but I would suggest that unless Bruce
> starts posting here again Sherilyn consider getting rid of the
> comments about "charters".
I agree. Sherilyn's FAQ seems pretty even-handed, and there doesn't seem
to be any disagreement over it.
Sutrice
jo...@melbpc.org.au (John Fitzsimons) wrote:
>
> I agree that it is a good FAQ but I would suggest that unless Bruce
> starts posting here again Sherilyn consider getting rid of the
> comments about "charters".
Thanks for the reminder. I have instructed the MIT bot to suspend posting of
the Charter FAQ. Phil Harrison will no doubt continue to post his excellent
Posting FAQ.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own