Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ut-sally.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!hao!kpno!ut-sally!riddle
From: riddle@ut-sally.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: net.gay
Message-ID: <238@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 11-Sep-83 13:16:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.238
Posted: Sun Sep 11 13:16:52 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 12-Sep-83 19:53:38 EDT
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 27


 
     This is neither a "yea" nor a "nay" vote for net.gay .  It sounds to
me like a reasonable idea.  My only doubt is whether or not it could ever
transcend the pro/con arguments going on in net.singles.

     I don't, however, like Robert Wahl's suggestion that the group be
moderated and anonymous.  I think that the moderate lack of anonymity on the
net ("moderate" because one is never forced to reveal more of one's identity
than a userid and sitename) exerts a civilizing force.  If you flame too
brutally, you know that you can get flamed back.  Of course, if the moderator
of an anonymous newsgroup chose to, he could censor items that went too far;
but I don't think that any of us like the idea of censorship.  I find the
precedent of an anonymous, formally moderated newsgroup rather unattractive.

     So how about this:  if net.gay is set up, let it be a normal, unmoderated
newsgroup.  If there are people who are afraid to 'fess up to the views they
want to express, they are free to send their contributions to Robert Wahl
(...csu-cs!denelcor!rob) and let him file off the serial numbers and repost.
This is, however, a private matter between the two parties and not required
to be the only channel of communication in the newsgroup.  It also means that
an anonymous contributor is open to criticism for failing to take responsibility
for his opinions.

                                    -- Prentiss Riddle
                                       {ihnp4,ut-ngp}!ut-sally!riddle
                                       riddle@ut-sally.{UUCP,ARPA}