Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!cica!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!coolidge From: coolidge@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu (John Coolidge) Newsgroups: news.sysadmin Subject: Re: clarinet?????? Summary: Voting, clarinet, ad nauseum Message-ID: <1989Oct26.174711.16205@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu> Date: 26 Oct 89 17:47:11 GMT References: <331@lawnet.LawNet.Com> <2962@splut.conmicro.com> <333@lawnet.LawNet.Com> Sender: news@brutus.cs.uiuc.edu Reply-To: coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu Organization: U of Illinois, CS Dept., Systems Research Group Lines: 101 greg@lawnet.LawNet.Com (Gregory G. Petersen) writes: >In article <2962@splut.conmicro.com> jay@splut.conmicro.com (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard) writes: >>> Am I amazed to see that clarinet is now on the network with its comeerical >>>venture? No -- what I am is angry that it is here. When Brad decided to >>>announce this idea on the net many of us said this would happen and >>>we were told that it would not. The question is "now what"? I >>>am deleting his newsgroups from this system and I suggest that is the >>>only way to keep him off the net with clarinet! >>ClariNet is *not* on the regular Usenet. He is, instead, providing a >>sample of his service on the (parallel) Biznet - the biz.* hierarchies. >WRONG! If that were the case I would not complain. It is clari - not biz.clari >that I am complaining about. If you're getting clari, and the articles don't show crossposting to biz.clari, then send mail to Brad --- as Jay pointed out, there's probably a reward. Clari is a commercial service --- what possible reason could Brad have for sending it to you for free? >Show me the rules that he followed. I am not aware that alt.* is a normal >usenet hierarchy. This must be a typo. Alt is definitely _not_ a 'normal usenet hierarchy' in the 'has rules' sense. >I recall that most groups created on the network are usually voted on. That >is the rule that I am used to following. I don;t remember any vote for >what Brad did OUTSIDE the biz. groups -- thats my complaint. It seems >that he just decided to send out the create group message and create it without >any vote at all -- is that compliance with the rules? Only groups created in the following hierarchies need be voted on: comp,misc,news,rec,sci,soc,talk (the big 7) Other hierarchies can be created pretty much at will, and run as their creators wish them to be run. Of course, the rest of the net need not support your pet hierarchy and can refuse to propogate it. Creation, though, is pretty much a free-for-all. Many sites have a local hierarchy (here we have uiuc.* for university-wide groups), and there are lots of state and regional hierarchies. For most of these there's no voting at all; rather, one or a few individuals control the hierarchy and do what they will. So, yes, sending out a newgroup for clari.* is entirely within the rules. >>Brad is *not* using the Usenet to distribute his service, except for >>links between two systems who are both his customers, and have agreed to >>use the link for that purpose. >If that is true what is the /usr/spool/news/junk filing up with clari.* files >for on this system??? We never asked for the stuff and clari. is not >a usenet hierarchy to my knowledge. Either: one of your upstream feeds is deleting the biz.clarinet.sample part of the crossposting, or one of your upstream feeds is letting clari.* loose. If the first, you've got a bad neighbor and should complain. If the second, Brad has someone to police. >>If you think that commercial use of the net is eeeeeeeevil, then I >>suggest you get your upstream feeds to not send you the entire biz.* >>hierarchy - for that's what it's there for. >REPEATING -- I don't get biz.clari - I get clari. [note the absence of biz. >in the front of the clari.] Clarinet postings to biz.clarinet.sample are crossposted to the appropriate clari.* group. Thus you could be getting the groups due to rabid header rewriting. >As to "commercial use" of the net that is common place in some degree for >everyone on the net. To use the net as advertising medium or to carry >on a constant business venture is a different matter altogether. 'The net' is a misnomer. It's well nigh impossible to reason about 'the net' when what you mean is a group of individual sites agreeing to pass news around. Those individual sites who _want_ Clarinet pay Brad for it and agree to pay the bills for transmission. No sites who _don't_ want Clarinet are supposed to be involved in carrying the groups to sites who do subscribe. Thus, the resources of 'the net' aren't being misused. In your case, either: an upstream site is sending you biz.clarinet.sample (with or without header rewriting), or an upstream site is sending you clari.*. In either case, someone is sending you something you don't want. _Complain to them!_ Tell them you don't want these groups. >PS -- your correction message saying that the group you are talking about >is "biz.clari" is another matter altogether. biz.clari does not get to this >system so your follow up does not alter the complaint that I have, to wit: >that .clari exists. Limited to biz.clari would not bother me and would >be an optional hieracry. clari.* is also an optional hierarchy. _Everything_ besides comp, misc, news, rec, sci, soc, and talk are optional hierarchies. In fact, those are optional too --- you don't _have_ to carry all the groups, or indeed any of them. If you don't like a hierarchy, or just a group, delete it. Of course, you should tell sites downstream of you that you're deleting things so they can find alternate suppliers if they want the groups. --John -------------------------------------------------------------------------- John L. Coolidge Internet:coolidge@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP:uiucdcs!coolidge Of course I don't speak for the U of I (or anyone else except myself) Copyright 1989 John L. Coolidge. Copying allowed if (and only if) attributed. You may redistribute this article if and only if your recipients may as well.