Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!wugate!uunet!ateng!chip From: chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: Is USENET stagnating? (long) Message-ID: <254F42E2.10896@ateng.com> Date: 1 Nov 89 19:24:16 GMT References: <40056@looking.on.ca> <1989Oct30.040015.3272@alembic.acs.com> <9499@max.u.washington.edu> Organization: A T Engineering, Tampa, FL Lines: 62 Boy, oh, boy. Some people just set themselves up _so_ well... According to wcn@max.u.washington.edu (W C Newell Jr): >It is painfully obvious that very few people on the UUCP side >understand how the Internet works. Well, maybe. But read on... >Usenet must come to terms with the fact that it is no longer an experiment, >or a club for state-of-the-art technologists, but rather a public service >catering to disparate interest groups with conflicting needs. It is obvious that Mr. Newell doesn't understand what Usenet is. Usenet is not a "public service", nor does it "cater" to anyone. Rather, it is a collection of sites, each of which has its own access policy. Some sites are public access, and some cater to one group or another. But the Usenet as a whole cannot be so characterized. >1) It should be possible to add/modify/rename groups by a consensus of >expert users rather than by a popular vote. He wants another Backbone Cabal. A real forward thinker, this one. >... official Usenet by-laws ... >... governing body with elected representatives ... Without a funding source and enforcement mechanism, you can forget it. And what site will permit some outsiders to decide their Usenet access policy? Certainly not any site I administer. >2) The major security holes now in place must be dealt with ASAP. Technical ignorance as well. Why does this not surprise me? >5) Every established newsgroup should have a moderator and an archive >site... Hahaha... Please, stop... I can't stand it... >The consequence of not implementing these changes is that the academic side >of the network will, in all probability, explore the idea of maintaining a >separate distribution hierarchy with its own administrators, and as the >software evolves to meet the high volume of academic users, the public sites >will be left behind. Here we get to the crux of Mr. Newell's misunderstanding. The largest portion of Usenet, at least by site count, is: >> COMMERCIAL << That's right, folks: The academics are the >minority<. And Mr. Newell didn't even mention us! If Mr. Newell is correct about the academic community abandoning Usenet -- which I don't believe for a minute -- the Usenet they leave behind won't die. It will live on and prosper. -- You may redistribute this article only to those who may freely do likewise. Chip Salzenberg at A T Engineering; or "'Why do we post to Usenet?' Naturally, the answer is, 'To get a response.'" -- Brad "Flame Me" Templeton