Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 SMI; site sun.uucp
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!sun!dcj
From: dcj@sun.uucp (Don Jackson)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: Causes on the net...
Message-ID: <2750@sun.uucp>
Date: Tue, 3-Sep-85 02:34:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: sun.2750
Posted: Tue Sep  3 02:34:46 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 5-Sep-85 00:46:54 EDT
References: <205@kepler.UUCP> <774@vortex.UUCP>
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Lines: 38

I think Lauren has raised a very good point.

Everyone burns a bit of disk space, cpu time, and phone
charges to participate on USENET. It seems to me that most of
the larger sites contribute more than their "fair share"
(I don't consider my site to be large).

It is easier to justify
this expense when you think the groups are all net.unix-wizards
and net.lang.c, etc.  Next, everyone (including me) subscribes to
all the "hobby" type groups that interest them (music, sports, 
their favorite personal computer).  Then there are the "opinion"
groups (religion, abortion, politics, and flame come to mind).
Now a group for organization of political activity by a group 
of people with a not universally shared (Universality isn't really
the point, it just doesn't make things any easier) agenda.

I'm glad I don't have to get my management to sign off on USENET
related expenses, especially if they had seen the entire contents
of even one days messages.  I think the net is pushing it's luck
if more and more non-technical groups proliferate.  It is just making
it more difficult to justify the expense. Many large sites
are for-profit publicly-owned corporations, these are the kinds of 
places where cover-your-??? type decisions are made daily.
What are we going to do if some of the big players pull out?

One other thing.  If person/company "a" gives somebody "b" an account
on their computer, fine.  If person "b" sends a message from a's computer
to z's, there is a very good chance that other nodes helped to pay for
that message.  It seems that some respondents to this topic are confusing
their right to give somebody an account versus the cost to others of allowing
that person the priviledge of sending USENET mail.

Sorry this is so long.
I'm not "anti-peace".
I'm speaking only for myself, not my company.

Don