Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!tjw
From: tjw@unix.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood WA3VQJ)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Skinhead newsgroup
Message-ID: <21878@unix.cis.pitt.edu>
Date: 25 Jan 90 21:22:36 GMT
References: <1231@rsiatl.UUCP> <48215758.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> <4316@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk> <483f1f78.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Reply-To: tjw@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Terry J. Wood)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh, Comp & Info Services
Lines: 69
Keywords:

First of all, Robert, this isn't a flame or personal attack on you!  Far
from it, as I've thought the very same thing that you have.  However,
your article got me to thinking! 

In article <483f1f78.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> moynihan_r@klingon.UUCP (Robert Moynihan) writes:

>I believe in the right of free speech.  However, speech on Usenet is not
>free.  Each company or school pays for storing and transporting the
>messages that are sent out.  I don't want HP lowering its profits by so
>much as one cent by handling the racist and anti-semetic slurs that 
>groups such as the KKK,  the american Nazis, or the latter skinheads
>espouse.  Therefore, I will resist any attempt to get them their own
>newsgroups to spread their propaganda.  I would, however support a group
>for the original skinheads, but there will have to be some pretty 
>convincing evidence that those are the people that the group would be for. 

Of course, there's nothing stopping anyone (let alone the "Nasty" Skinheads)
from posting anything they want, where ever they want, on unmoderated USENET.
USENET is a "Gentlemen's agreement" between sites to exchange articles.

Now, should some "Nasty Skinheads" come along and politely ask for a
newsgroup and get voted down, do you (the general USENET user) really
think they would go away, just because USENET told them to?  Wouldn't it
be more likely that they would, instead, take over an existing
newsgroup?  The name would hardly matter.  The transmission media would
be their most important goal.  Even if you RMGROUPED every newsgroup
they took over, it wouldn't matter, for they would just switch to
another group.  The only way to silence them (or anyone using these
tactics) would be to sever their site(s) from USENET.  So they can't
really be silenced (nor should they or anyone else be).


The people we've seen on the nightly news aren't going to ask USENET's
permission -- they'd hardly be the type to ask!  So, what does that
leave us?  Well I see the following possiblities:

	* The original article on this subject was a joke/forged/lark.
	* The original article was sincere and probably from a "nice"
		skinhead (who happens to be a 35 year old Ham radio
		Technician Class operator).
	* The original article is from someone who's interested in
		skinheads and is looking for other skinheads on the net.
	* Some other point which you (the USENET public) can point out to
		me or FLAME if that's more your style!

Even if the original article was full of hate and spite I'd recommend
giving them a newsgroup.  (WHAT you say, is he mad?).  We'll let's just
say there's more than one way to skin a ummm, head! ;-)

I don't think we're dealing with a lot of skinheads anyway, or they'd
have made themselves know in other USENET groups, long before this.
Skinheads of all the net, stand up and be counted!

USENET will have to deal with a problem of this type, someday.  Even if
a group is voted down, a minority of determined posters, could make life
hell.  Perhaps the very fine ALT network, has shielded USENET from this.

Oh well, food for thought.

I've enjoyed this discussion anyway -- for once I've actually learned
something from this.  (Didn't think it possible, didja Greg! ;-)

Terry "Longhair hippy" Wood

-- 
INTERNET: tjw@unix.cis.pitt.edu  BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS  CC-NET: 33802::tjw
UUCP: {decwrl!decvax!idis, allegra, bellcore}!pitt!unix.cis.pitt.edu!tjw
 And if dreams could come true, I'd still be there with you,
 On the banks of cold waters at the close of the day. - Craig Johnson