Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!usc!apple!bionet!ames!eos!shelby!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!kksys!com50!craig
From: craig@com50.c2s.mn.org (Craig Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Anarchy
Message-ID: <1990Nov22.141550.6617@com50.c2s.mn.org>
Date: 22 Nov 90 14:15:50 GMT
References: <1990Nov19.192456.3726@com50.c2s.mn.org> <173ws5w163w@cynic.wimsey.bc.ca>
Organization: Com Squared Systems, Inc.
Lines: 37

As examples of centralized authority on the Usenet, I provided:
   Moderated newsgroups and the newgroup creation "rights" consolidated in the
   hands of the moderator of news.announce.newgroups; to list the most obvious.

In article <173ws5w163w@cynic.wimsey.bc.ca> curt@cynic.wimsey.bc.ca (Curt Sampson) 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.  (In the recent
>controversy he turned down a rather stale call for votes and the
>poster turned around and started flaming away rather than asking a
>second time.)  And again, there's nothing stopping me from generating
>a newgroup message any time I want.  

I think that it would be an interesting exercise for you to do this.  I would
like to see the results.  I contend that your newgroup would be nullified
immediately because you did not adhere to the guidelines.  

As a question: Do all news posters on your system have unrestricted newgroup
ability?

>If enough people go along with
>it, it will be created no matter what any "central authority" or
>moderator has to say.  And of course there's always the alt.* groups.

The majority of the system administrators (a level of authority) would not
honor the newgroup because it would violate the guidelines.  They have 
willingly decided to follow the guidelines for the betterment of the Usenet.
This doesn't make them sheep (as indicated in another person's post), it 
makes them responsible.  They are exercising the authority they have and are 
submitting to the authority they have agreed to follow.

With respect to the alt.* hierarchy, even there, sending out a newgroup without
notification in alt.config will generate some response from people who feel you
have not followed "procedure".

/craig