Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!elbereth.rutgers.edu!newport.rutgers.edu!waldron From: waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (James Waldron) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: misc.headlines.unitex moderator RESIGNS Summary: Additional feedback on the UNITEX 'mutiny'. A prologemena to any future misunderstanding. Message-ID: Date: 29 Nov 89 00:12:14 GMT References: <11781@cbnews.ATT.COM> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 213 In article <11781@cbnews.ATT.COM>, wbt@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker) writes: > In article waldron@newport.rutgers.edu (Dorothy Nicklus) writes: > > > >Let me introduce myself. I am Dorothy Nicklus, one of the > >original co-founders of UNITEX and a principal United Nations > >Representative for a large international organization. > >I was a major financial contributor to UNITEX ($12000 per year) [...] > > (Pardon me while I straighten my tie ...) > > >To see good research and hard work get the short-end of the > >stick in favor of the petty ego-involved personalities [...] > > Good to see that UN Reps can sling mud with the best of 'em. > > >Why did she (Pat Harring) get so outraged then when we simply > >wanted to announce a membership drive for UNITEX? > > I dunno. Do you suggest that she's opposed to promoting UNITEX ? Yeah, > that's the ticket, she only took the job so she could torpedo your group. > > Or just maybe she understood that fundraising on the net is frowned upon, > and was providing a necessary interface to accommodate the needs of UNITEX > without stepping on the ground rules of Usenet. > > >We > >were unable to post UNITEX information or even any comments > >since she flat-out refused to post our replies. > > I imagine Pat would respond to this by saying that she'd refused to > post unacceptable material, and further refused to post even less- > acceptable metadiscussion. For all I know, your response may be closer to > the truth... > > What I can't understand about your logic is this. You claim Pat only > wanted the job as an ego-trip, to fulfill her mad lust for power. I > futher deduce that she must have some affinity for your organization, > or else she'd have found a more interesting group (to her) to moderate. > > Now, why would she cause your organization so much trouble *and* lose > her position as moderator ? From your accusations, I could see her causing > UNITEX problems to ensure her continued position, or jeopardizing the > newsgroup to help UNITEX, but her actual course of action doesn't fit your > claims. Instead, it sounds like *her* story is more true; she wanted to > help UNITEX, but refused to overstep Usenet protocol, and the two finally > became incompatible. > > - - - - - - - - valuable coupon - - - - - - - clip and save - - - - - - - - > Bill Thacker AT&T Network Systems - Columbus wbt@cbnews.att.com > Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero I have kept intact a posting by Brandon Allbery since I feel that although there was misunderstood criticism, it was administered with intelligence and 'style....' a rare combination nowadays... BA> From @hal.rutgers.edu:ncoast!allbery@hal Sat Nov 25 20:09:34 1989 BA> Date: Sat, 25 Nov 89 12:47:54 -0500 BA> From: allbery@ncoast.org (Brandon S. Allbery) BA> Message-Id: <8911251747.AA19371@NCoast.ORG> BA> To: waldron@newport.rutgers.edu BA> Subject: Re: misc.headlines.unitex moderator RESIGNS BA> Newsgroups: news.groups BA> In-Reply-To: BA> Organization: North Coast Public Access UN*X, Cleveland, OH BA> Your article does not take account of one fact: the NSFnet administrators BA> frown on the use of NSFnet for the purposes of soliciting monetary donations. BA> This is very likely to be codified in the near future. And, since the Usenet BA> depends on the NSFnet for a large part of interstate message flow, Usenet BA> guidelines echo the NSFnet guidelines in this and other respects. BA> BA> If you are willing to try to convince the NSF to accept your proposed use of BA> their network and to demonstrate its acceptance of that use, you can re- BA> propose the misc.headlines.unitex newsgroup. Otherwise, it's a question on BA> our part of whether to accept the newsgroup, with the knowledge that the BA> NSFnet will cut *us* off for doing so. Which won't do your newsgroup any good. BA> We aren't trying to deny UNITEX the use of the Usenet, we're trying to make BA> sure that the Usenet won't get a very large part of its connectivity removed BA> as a result of that use. Arguing with us about it won't help, since our hands BA> are tied by the rules of the network on which the Usenet depends. BA> BA> Brandon S. Allbery BA> System Administrator (Software) BA> North Coast Public Access *NIX BA> BA> Moderator, Usenet newsgroup "comp.sources.misc" BA> Thank you for trying to 'understand' what became an unfortunate situation regarding misc.headlines.unitex. Other postings by Phil Hughes [fyl@ssc.UUCP], Rick Burgess [rick@locke.hs.washington.edu] and Bill Stewart [wcs@ho95c.att.com] have also shown 'insight' into what UNITEX was all about and what it was trying to accomplish. Some of their replies are posted at the end of this message. UNITEX was *never* trying to blatantly solicit funds but in fact was trying to establish a membership drive to validate a need for funding from state and federal sources, including the National Science Foundation. Contrary to opinion on this net, we (UNITEX) were never consulted as how to proceed. Chuq Von Rospach never emailed me anything on this problem until all h*ll broke out and then of course we (UNITEX) were chosen as the bad guys and scapegoats for all the ills that befall the net. UNITEX has been sending information to various networks for two years and there were NEVER any so-called fund-raisers on our behalf. That is not what we were or are about. However, give most people half a chance and they will try and bring down anything they can,...especially what they don't or can't understand. The National Science Foundation wrote UNITEX a letter which complimented our effort to 'orchestrate, on behalf of the United Nations, the fast and reliable distribution of international information'....... I wonder what the purpose of all the attacks on UNITEX really accomplished? Considering that most people have such a tough time reading anmymore, I'm surprised it caused such a fuss..... Fast, irrational and rapid decisions made by Patt Haring exascerbated this situation out of control *before* we (UNITEX) had anything to say or do about it. UNITEX was not a champion of any political cause or movement per se. We were not employed by or for the United Nations. The pilot project that was undertaken was done soly to champion the freedom of information and to allow others access to this information that they would otherwise not have. That was all there was to it. Clear and simple. There are those who will make much more out of it than that. That's their problem. It only takes a few to try and ruin things. But all is not lost. Those who want to receive the kind of information that was distributed by UNITEX, certainly can. James Waldron ------------------------ TEAR HERE --------------------------- > From: RICK@locke.hs.washington.edu > Subject: Hello! I've heard some terrible news that Unitex is disolving... > To: waldron@newport.rutgers.edu > X-Vms-To: IN%"waldron@newport.rutgers.edu" > Status: RO > > Is there anything anyone can do to prevent this? I have found Unitex > very useful in the past month or so since I started getting it, and I > am very disappointed to see such a useful news source disappear so suddenly, > and right before a very important time for me, the Nicaraguan elections. > > > Sincerely, > > Rick Burgess > rick@locke.hs.washington.edu on internet ========================================================================= > From hpubvwa!ssc!fyl@beaver.cs.washington.edu Thu Nov 16 16:44:14 1989 > Subject: Unitex > To: waldron@newport.rutgers.edu > Date: Thu, 16 Nov 89 10:18:43 PST > From: Phil Hughes > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL10] > Status: RO > > I don't understand why Patt's resignation means the end of the news group. > I found it to be the most important group on the net. It seems with the > number of readers we could get a new moderator and get things back > together again. I would be willing to put some time into it. > > -- > Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155 (206)FOR-UNIX > amc-gw!ssc!fyl or uunet!pilchuck!ssc!fyl or attmail!ssc!fyl > ===================================================================== > From: wcs@ho95c.att.com (William Clare Stewart) > To: waldron@newport.rutgers.edu > Subject: Re: UNITEX & INTERNATIONAL NEWS > Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism > In-Reply-To: > Organization: Conspiracy? What conspiracy? > > I don't want to be on your mailing list (too much volume for me), > but I'd encourage a newsgroup, moderated or unmoderated, if you want > to feed it. I'd prefer unmoderated, just on general principles. > > When Patt zapped the group, she said it would be a mistake to > de-moderate it, since the original creation had been with a promise > of moderation - but I think the main reason it was decided to make > it moderated was that she thought it should be. > > Bill > --- > # Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs 4M312 Holmdel NJ 201-949-0705 api.att.com!wcs Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com