Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!rpi.edu!tale From: tale@turing.cs.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Creative (?) Use of Internet Message-ID: Date: 28 Aug 90 03:47:55 GMT References: <894@beguine.UUCP> <1990Aug25.170503.21457@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <7851@gollum.twg.com> Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Computer Science, Troy NY Lines: 55 dfiled@uncmed.med.unc.edu: >>We now feel that an electronic conferencing system is the answer to >>this type of need--indeed is tailor-made to address this sort of >>thing. However, with electronic conferencing, all the conference >>members need to be able to access the same host system--the one that >>is running the conference software. Greg Lindahl: >Not necessarily. There are several "chat" programs out there which are >distributed, such as Internet Relay Chat. All you need to access it is >a machine which can speak TCP/IP to the Internet at large. In article <7851@gollum.twg.com> david@twg.com (David S. Herron) writes: IRC and ForumNet both aren't appropriate -- "electronic conferencing system" in this case means long term storage and retrieval of TEXTUAL conversations. Neither IRC nor ForumNet don't archive the discussion, and are not long term. Perhaps something like IRC or ForumNet (a distributed conversation system) could be a part of their solution. Aren't appropriate for what? For dfiled's application? That doesn't matter much as far as Greg's reply is concerned. Even if you don't want to count IRC and ForumNet then you still have USENET, as you pointed out. At any rate, IRC and/or ForumNet could also be useful for their application. Why limit them? "electronic conferencing system" can mean just about anything that the blanket "Computer Mediated Communication" covers. CMC systems take a variety of forms, from real time interactive discussion systems to longer term article systems to, arguably, talking to your cronie through /dev/audio on two sparcstations. A comprehensive CMC system will offer all of this and more, making the guidelines the EFF wants to get nailed down all the more important for when such a system is used en force. There is no reason to limit "electronic conferencing system" to just "long term storage and retrieval of TEXTUAL conversations" since there is nothing at all inherent in either the words or the concept that implies such a limitation. Incidentally, just because IRC and ForumNet don't directly archive the discussion hardly means it will be lost. I've have logged a few interesting discussions in interactive conferencing systems, with the knowledge and approval of those involved. It was not hard at all, and some were cleaned up of spurious other crap (which also appear in "long term storage ...") and make very interesting records of what transpired. In fact it was even easier for me than taping a telephone call would be; presumably rules for directly logging such conversations would be akin to those which govern taping of telephone lines. This however is one of the reasons the EFF now exists -- to take the presumptions out of these things and help us clearly define policies for effective use and societal advancement with CMC of the future. -- (setq mail '("tale@cs.rpi.edu" "tale@ai.mit.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet")) The most remarkable thing about looking at a picture of myself was the sudden realisation that my hair is in fact parted on the left and not the right.