Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!pyramid!hplabs!hao!woods
From: woods@hao.UUCP (Greg Woods)
Newsgroups: net.followup,net.rumor,net.news.group
Subject: Re: The elimination of certain non-technical newsgroups by so called "powers-that-be"
Message-ID: <2079@hao.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-May-86 13:35:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: hao.2079
Posted: Tue May  6 13:35:58 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 8-May-86 20:48:13 EDT
References: <588@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> <183@brl-sem.ARPA> <2697@jhunix.UUCP>
Organization: High Altitude Obs./NCAR, Boulder CO
Lines: 35
Xref: linus net.followup:5229 net.rumor:1903 net.news.group:4768

> >> The discussion is taking place without the general knowledge
> >> of the USENET community.  It is being done in an attempt to reduce the
> >> ever increasing costs of USENET, particularly to these backbone-sites.
> 
> I apparently missed the original article that contained this quote, but I
> would like to know some more details about this.  If true, it would seem
> that the powers-that-be are hardly playing fair.

  To try and discuss serious reorganization of the net with the entire net
participating would be a waste of time and would rapidly degenerate into
a flaming match (we know, it's been tried before). USENET is not "fair".
Our site (and the other backbones) pay a disproportionate amount of the
COST of this net, so it's only "fair" that we also make a disproportionate
amount of the decisions. 
  Secondly, in the current plan under discussion, NO GROUPS WOULD BE CREATED
OR REMOVED, simply renamed. Every site would still be free to accept or
reject any group as they choose, as they are now. Therefore the title of this
article is a misnomer. No one is talking about deleting any groups. While it
is true that a certain class of groups would become EASIER to drop as a whole
from a site, and each site would be forced to decide to explicitly accept
this new category of groups (which consists of the highest volume non-technical
groups), there is nothing to stop them from doing so if they wish. Anyone who
doesn't like the choices made by the backbone to not carry certain groups
is free to set up their own set of connections to carry those groups (and
pay the cost, too). That is the anarchical nature of USENET, and I do not see 
anything "unfair" in this.

--Greg
--
{ucbvax!hplabs | decvax!noao | mcvax!seismo | ihnp4!seismo}
       		        !hao!woods

CSNET: woods@ncar.csnet  ARPA: woods%ncar@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA

"The darkness never goes, from some men's eyes"