Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!bionet!ames!ncar!noao!asuvax!mcdphx!mcdchg!ddsw1!karl From: karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) Newsgroups: comp.mail.uucp Subject: Re: Maps Subverted Summary: Mapping project: Please add "#M YES/NO" to the map fields! Keywords: short term, long term, database, sabotage, commercialism, bullshit Message-ID: <3008@ddsw1.MCS.COM> Date: 23 Feb 89 18:05:14 GMT References: <405@mjbtn.MFEE.TN.US> <399@lakart.UUCP> <3661@phri.UUCP> <453@avsd.UUCP> <2844@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <465@avsd.UUCP> <2898@ddsw1.MCS.COM> <521@avsd.UUCP> Reply-To: karl@ddsw1.UUCP (Karl Denninger) Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Mundelein, IL Lines: 225 In article <521@avsd.UUCP> childers@avsd.UUCP (Richard Childers) writes: >In article <2898@ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl@ddsw1.UUCP (Karl Denninger) writes: > >>Predatory? Again, I don't see anything predatory about the newspapers I >>received. > >If I had to call every junk company every time I wanted to tell them I didn't >want their junk, I'd be broke. Perhaps. But throwing away the material costs you nothing. It's only if you are REALLY upset that you would call/write/whatever; and if you're that upset, it only makes sense that you should bear the cost. There are a large number of people, ourselves here included, that WANT this kind of material. >>+I say that publishing the UUCP maps is inappropriate, if it's to facilitate >>+profiteering. > >>No, I disagree there. By listing your site in a public place you have lost >>that privacy. > >That's ugly. I refuse to accept that as a 'solution'. I would regard the >Usenet, not as a place where the lowest common denominator is acceptable.... Open your eyes. Usenet has been a LCD network for some time now; look at the recent ads posted by both Telebit and SST data to comp.dcom.modems recently (neither of which I complained about, and am not complaining about them here). How about "netcom" which posted an ADVERTISEMENT (oh no!) to half a dozen groups the other day? You can refuse to accept this as a solution, but you can't force others to follow your desires on a network that is, for most purposes, an anarchy. If you truly want that, then start your own network -- and CONTROL it. Usenet will never have that level of control or accountability. >>The very reason for the maps is to facilitate communication.....of both the >>computer AND human kind. There would be no need for 90% of the data if the >>only purpose was to list mail connectivity! > >Good. Let's see some Freedom of Information occur, along with the email >addresses of the parties responsible. So I can freely address them, too, >along with their being able to freely address me. What if they don't have an email address? What if the publishers of FOCUS (the AIX mag we're all getting) had an employee in marketing who had a Portal or other public access account, and used that to make the list. How do propose to find this person in a sea of 500,000 news readers?! Lastly, why would you want an EMAIL address? Try a PAPER address; after all, you should have to pay to bitch at them just as they paid to send you the material. That seems fair, no? Or is it that you want the net as a whole to bear the burden of your complaining, while the companies that compiled and/or sold the mailing list bore the cost of sending you FOCUS on AIX? The paper address for ALL of these companies can be found on the material they send out, if you care to look. If you care to comment, I'm sure someone will read your PAPER mail. >If they are unwilling to submit themselves to that which they have submitted >the rest of us, without first checking to see if we minded, then it would >seem that something is wrong with their rationalization, in that it incor- >-porates a double standard. No double standard at all. The people who did this are not publishing their mailing information in the PUBLIC DOMAIN. Remember that -- public domain. That's a very important principle, you know; the Usenet as we know it is largely dependant on PD material.... And again, no one cost you one red cent. That mail certainly didn't arrive postage-due! You now wish to send them EMAIL, at significant cost to OTHERS, because you feel aggrieved. Sorry, but I feel that you should bear the cost of complaining just as they bore the cost of sending you the original mail. >>No, you're not alone. Perhaps you and other have stepped into a public >>world without realizing it; that was, nonetheless, a choice you did make. > >Maybe the people who live for nothing more than money and mailing lists have >made that mistake. They don't seem to be acting very public, though. More of >that double standard ? What mistake? And what double standard? These people did NOT publish their information in a public database. You did! You STILL can't see the difference? If you want privacy, go crawl in a hole and pull it in after you. Then you can be completely private. If you ever buy anything on credit, if you ever give you real name on a sales receipt (useful if the warranty only applies to the original purchaser), if you ever open a business, and if you ever drive a car, information including your address and name is available to business for the purpose of sending you literature. In most of these cases, you PAY for the privilege of putting your name on the mailing list(s). >>It was pointed out, if the buyer paid more than half-hour programming time, >>they got ripped off (and we should be laughing). > >I'm not. Nobody else is, that I know of. Who cares what they paid ? Why can't >you see anything beyond dollars and increased advertising ? You don't read this group then. I've seen several opinions which concur with mine, and have received many pieces of mail concurring as well. As for seeing beyond dollars and the like, did you read my recent postings regarding the Brad Templeton fiasco? I guess not. >>+Why >>+do they have to shit in our uupond ? > >>It's only you and a few others who feel it's "shit" in "your" pond. Lots of >>others like the material (or at least heat their homes with it) :-) Yes, OUR pond. Some of the inhabitants (such as myself) LIKE this evolutionary phenomena in the use of the maps. We've actually learned of a couple of products that will be useful to us in our work through this "money grubbing capitalistic enterprise". I want the magazines and ads, and the firms who publish them are WELCOME to use our map info to find us. Some others feel the same way. If you don't, then take responsibility for yourself and your privacy rather than asking the net.police to do it for you. >>Heh, here we go! A new field: >> #M YES (for ok on mailing list) >> #M NO (you send it, I'll bitch and/or sue 'ya :-) >> >>Would that satisfy everyone? > >This would satisfy me. But I'd rather come up with a policy that's acceptable >to a visible and recognizable majority, that attempts to determine what place >if any commercially-motivated broadcast traffic has on the Usenet. WHY? Why not take the action you feel is necessary to protect your god-blessed privacy? Is it not your responsibility to do so? I argue that it is, especially when you take the first step and list your name and address in a public domain database! I am all for a "#M" field in the maps; it's simple, cheap to implement, and easy for those who would use the maps for mailing lists to check. Firms are motivated to check it too -- see, if you send to a "#M NO" person you KNOW he/she/it will can your material instantly -- why waste the money? Can someone from the UUCP mapping project pick up on this and include the "#M" field or an acceptible substitute in the next posting on the maps? >>I, for one, _condone_ companys using my name and address info from here for >>mailings and such. I laugh at those that are stupid enough to pay for such >>a list when it's freely available, but nonetheless, I don't mind getting >>these things in the regular mail. > >I agree, it's a trivial thing to get upset about. I'm worried about the >principles involved, though. I'd like to see this stopped - or resolved - >in the bud. What principles? You haven't listed any that I can see apply. If you really feel that the net should not be used for profit, then you had better find a way to disconnect EVERY COMMERCIAL SITE -- believe me, they feel that it's profitable to be connected to the net or they WOULD NOT BE HERE. >>No no no no no. You divulged your address of your own free will. No one >>coerced you into doing so. You published it without a request or anything >>else asking that others not use it (ie: public domain, remember?). > >So I've got to explicitly put an explicit notice in my map, a la public >domain software, declaring what it may and may not be used for. Multiply >this by several hundred thousand sites. Isn't it cheaper to evolve a policy ? Public domain software can't have any notices attached restricting it's use, or it's not PD. What's the problem with "#P Deleted so dirty capitalists can't mail me"? Is it that you don't like to take responsibility for your own actions and privacy? (this is a common problem today, and not just on the net....) I think I understand. You want a net.police to do your work for you. Sorry, but there's no net.police on Usenet. >>+I'd like to hear what people say about a misc.commercial newsgroup before >>+I go #P'ing all over my map entry. > >>It already exists. It's called biz (the distribution). Ask your news >>person to get it for you... > >I *am* the newsperson. I've never heard of any newsgroup starting with 'biz' >in over three years of approximately daily reading of the Usenet, at half a >dozen different sites. Maybe I'll inquire upstream. > >But the fact that I've never heard of it suggests how popular it is. No, the fact that you've never heard of it suggests you don't read news.* or are using selective memory. There was a largish discussion about a year ago, and the distribution was established. We're one of the originating sites for this distribution. If you wish to poll us, you're more than welcome to a feed. I just sent out a "sendsys" for the distribution and will be posting a list of current recipients of the distribution soon. I get really fed up with all the anti-capitalists here, especially those in the USA. Like it or not, the US's economic system is capitalism. As long as it is, PROFIT is not a dirty word -- it's the way we ALL live. That's right -- your salary and mine are both paid for by PROFIT. If you are a US citizen, and truly feel that PROFIT is an evil concept, then you should move to the USSR (whoops - they're trying out the concept of "profit" now too... darn!) I see nothing wrong with any firm making use of public domain information in any way they see fit. Yes, that includes SELLING that information (if you can find a buyer who believes it has value and is willing to pay). I only raise an objection when there is deception or fraud involved, and even the most ardent of complainers on this subject will be hard-pressed to find any instance of deception or fraud in the use of the maps. Heck, I've never even seen a notice on the maps that would indicate that list-making is "verboten" or "not recommended", much less a Copyright notice. I've been a sysadmin here now for more than two years, and was on the net for a year or so as a user as well....... (Obviously these are my own opinions :-) -- Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, ddsw1!karl) Data: [+1 312 566-8912], Voice: [+1 312 566-8910] Macro Computer Solutions, Inc. "Quality solutions at a fair price"