Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!hub.ucsb.edu!piggy.ucsb.edu!jim
From: jim@piggy.ucsb.edu (Oreo Cat)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Anarchy
Message-ID: <7342@hub.ucsb.edu>
Date: 21 Nov 90 21:02:03 GMT
References: <1990Nov19.192456.3726@com50.c2s.mn.org> <173ws5w163w@cynic.wimsey.bc.ca> <523@tygra.ddmi.com>
Sender: news@hub.ucsb.edu
Organization: Laputa, Castle in the Sky
Lines: 58

In article <523@tygra.ddmi.com> jpp@tygra.ddmi.com (John Palmer) writes:
>In article <173ws5w163w@cynic.wimsey.bc.ca> curt@cynic.wimsey.bc.ca (Curt Sampson) writes:
>"craig@com50.c2s.mn.org (Craig Wilson) writes:
>"
>"I don't see any "newgroup creation 'rights'" belonging to the
>"moderator of news.announce.newgroups, either.  I have yet to see a
>"case where he has refused to post a call for discussion or a call for
>"votes when asked a second time after a refusal. 
>"
>
>FALSE. Recently, a call for discussion about a new hierarchy called
>"ads" was posted and the moderator refused to allow it through. He sent
>me a message asking for more information about the hierarchy. I replied
>and he failed to post the call for discussion. This thing is so highly
>politically motivated that you just wouldn't believe it!!
>

I'm interested in what Eliot's reasons for this is, but I bet I know
why he refused your proposal.  The core USENET groups are subject to 
the guidlines which prohibit commercial postings.  Eliot is sort-of
in charge of moderating the core USENET newgroups.  Therefore if you
want to add something to this core, you go through him.  There are 
other groups which look just like USENET, but really aren't.  These
are 'alt' 'clari' 'biz', etc...  They are not subject to the USENET
guidlines.  For instance in alt to get a new newsgroup all you have to
do is propose in alt.config and if no one complains too much you go
ahead and newgroup it.

Anyways, back to the point.  An 'ads' hierarchy would violate the policies
of USENET.  Thus Eliot could not do anything about it without getting
flack.  If you were to propose a change in the guidlines, that would be
acceptible.  If you get enough people to agree that commercial postings
should be allowed in USENET, THEN you could propose the 'ads' hierarchy.

Or what would be a lot easier:  Just go ahead and create the new hierarchy
yourself.  Chances are that many sites would not carry it, but hey, you'd
be in charge and could do whatever you want with it.  You make the rules.

Witness though that very few sites get the 'biz' hierarchy which is very
similiar (if not the same) as what you propose.

As a side note to everyone flaming Eliot.  I think he's doing a great job.
The only time he rejects anything is because it violates the guidlines.
This is NOT HIS FAULT.  This is the job we gave him to do.  We as the
Democratic Society of USENET Users are welcome to change the guidelines
or appoint someone other than Eliot to do this job.  He was very helpful
when I was collecting votes for a newsgroup last spring, even though I was
making tons of mistakes.  Keep reminding yourself that this is a democracy
and we can change it if we don't like it.  If you really think there is a
problem, make a suggestion to change things and start collecting votes.

                            Jim Lick		       
Work: University of California	| Home: 6657 El Colegio #24
      Santa Barbara		|       Isla Vista, CA 93117-4280
      Dept. of Mechanical Engr. |	(805) 968-0189 voice
      2311 Engr II Building     |	(805) 968-1239 data 1
      (805) 893-4113            |	(805) 968-2734 data 2
      jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu	|	bahamut!jim@ivucsb.sba.ca.us