There seems to be a trend towards taking Usenet out of the features
typically bundled with ISP services.
I have Comcast which farms their Usenet stuff out to GigaNews and that
works fine except when Comcast has a problem. As many have noted,
when you contact Comcast Tier 1 support for a Usenet problem they
don't even know what newsgroups are.
It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service through
ISP's.
I wonder if that is all bad.
Some guys I talk with think that the Golden Age of newsgroups ended
when AOL started in. I don't know; I was on CompuServe then.
Some hardcore types even think that the best days were before Gene
Spafford organized The Backbone Cabal that lead to The Great Renaming
in '87.
I don't know about that and I'm not going to get medieval about it and
start looking for my Hayes 1200 baud Smartmodem either.
The point is that the ease and transparency of access to newsgroups
may have contributed to the influx of the ignorati.
The corollary might be that an increase in the difficulty of obtaining
access, whether by necessitating a specialized provider, or by
reintroducing certain technical challenges to gaining access, might
reverse the trend and diminish the number of knuckleheads on Usenet.
Maybe it would be good to pay a few bucks a month to get newsgroups -
and maybe they should make setup and configuration sufficiently
challenging as to act as rough justice sort of bozo filter.
It's an interesting concept.
Regards, Tom.
Thos. J. Watson - Cabinetmaker
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
mac davis <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:00:01 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> I think that in the long run, it will improve the overall quality of
> UseNet..
>
> If the only folks that used newsgroups were the ones that were willing
> to pay a few bucks a month to do it, could that clean up some of the
> "static"?
>
> I know that when we moved to Mexico, we went from Comcast to a
> satellite service and had to find our own news server.. And in getting
> APN, in our case, we found out how UseNet SHOULD work, IMO..
>
> I see the dedicated news server folks getting more clients/cash flow
> and hopefully continuing a high level of service..
> If I need support or billing info, I'd rather deal with a company that
> provides my service, rather than someone who farms me out and hasn't
> got a clue what I need..
>
> mac
>
> Please remove splinters before emailing
(I hope I trimmed properly, some of the non-quoted text seems awful
familiar.)
The problem pay services have is getting people to actually do it. I
could fill up quite a bit of my time with forums and newsgroups on the
free Internet rather than pay money for a now not-free Usenet. Without
Usenet being free*, is there enough interest in it to draw people to it?
Nowadays it's rare to see an Internet message pointing to a Usenet group.
Back in the '90s, it wasn't so rare.
*free in this case refers to the need to spend no additional money for
access.
Puckdropper
--
If you're quiet, your teeth never touch your ankles.
To email me directly, send a message to puckdropper (at) fastmail.fm
> Thanks for the thoughtful post.
Wow. I'm hardly ever called "thoughtful" these days in newsgroups. You
must be an old timer and untainted! <G>
> I don't want to reply to each point, but I didn't think that Biker
> posting you mentioned was actually a newsgroup posting. I had heard
> about that as a chat room thing. I admit I could have heard it wrong and
> concede the point to you.
Ahh... The media-covered ones may have been... As the media calls
everything a chat room at times... :)
> And as for the child porn thing, I was asking cause and effect. Do you
> take the position that the existence of porn newsgroups featuring 16 and
> 17 year old young women posting self-taken photos of themselves undressed
> CAUSES the child porn posting? I guess it is a chicken or egg question.
I was talking about the posts with younger kids... As young as 6 have been
reported that I've read about...
As for the cause and effect part - I missed that context. But yes, a
chicken and an egg argument could be made.
> And while you did pose some questions I cannot answer, or debate, I claim
> I am the type of person who feels that a specific newsgroup that is found
> in violation of the law (or Law) should be specifically targeted for
> punishment, not the entire alt.* newsgroup structure. (how that
> punishment occurs (enforced? imposed?), I don't have a clue.)
And here we agree 100%! It's not the ISP's job to cancel the newsgroup at
it's source either, it's their job to not provide access if the newsgroup is
a known "violator" IMHO.
It's a slippery slope... Who is the judge? Who determines whether a
newsgroup is punished for the actions of the few or the one? What if I post
something illegal here? Does that mean all woodworking folks miss out on
the newsgroup because I spammed the group with this or that which was
illegal?
One thing is certain. Change is here and also coming.... And that's the
only constant in the electronic communication realm. Before the "Internet"
as we know it, there were BBS systems and there was plenty to love and hate
there... After the internet as we know it will be something else. Those
who like what they have will always fight to hold on to it and those who
change things will always improve / mess up what is already there.
Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com
V8013-R
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
"Joe AutoDrill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Agreed. I didn't think you were making an argument for a different
> approach as much as I thought you were looking for concrete examples.
> Thus my post.
>
Sorry Joe - my reply confused you because I just inserted comments and
didn't position myself. My previous post was my only post to this thread,
and I was just throwing my two cents into the mix - I'm not the originator
of the comments you had earlier replied to.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
>> Agreed. I didn't think you were making an argument for a different
>> approach as much as I thought you were looking for concrete examples.
>> Thus my post.
>>
> Sorry Joe - my reply confused you because I just inserted comments and
> didn't position myself. My previous post was my only post to this thread,
> and I was just throwing my two cents into the mix - I'm not the originator
> of the comments you had earlier replied to.
No worries! Well, lots of worries at times actually but the only people
who want to hear about them charge by the hour...
Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com
V8013-R
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
> But just asking... has anyone ever heard of a trial or conviction of
> anyone who went bad or committed any crime JUST because the read any
> specific newsgroup? Any evidence submitted in a trial that the cause of
> a crime was rooted in reading newsgroups????
>
> I am aware that IRC chat rooms have been used to facilitate, or aid, in
> the commission of crimes; and instant messaging services I read a rumor
> have also been used as an aid. But have anyone read or heard where a
> newsgroup was used?
In the forums that showcase death photos, there have been times when people
post photos evidence photos before they are to be used in trials... Where
the leaks come from, nobody knows, but a piece of info released like that
can (but may never have been) used to argue that information was not handled
properly and cause a mistrial, etc...
People have threatened each other with harm or worse - which is a crime...
Some in the motorcycling or street racing groups have posted about when /
where a little ralleye will take place in order to either facilitate street
racing or other questionable activities...
On the far edge of society and in the hardcore porn newsgroups, the locals
and feds very often report anonymous and sometimes even non-anonymous
posters putting up porn of kids, etc. Google "NAMBLA" and see what kind of
oxygen thieves are living on our planet.
I don't think that is what you had in mind when you asked, but it is all a
crime under all or some circumstances involved - at least here in the USA...
Being a youth leader for almost 20 years has exposed me to lots of fringe
stuff through the kids I work with. It's amazing how well balanced some
kids are and how much trouble others can get into in a very short amount of
time. Working with the authorities and their parents has led me to believe
that a lot of it could be avoided if the parents didn't set the example for
a bad lifestyle in the first place... From porn to drugs to gangs to a
simple lack of manners or respect... It almost always starts with the
parents IMHO.
I personally won't miss many of the forums that disappear - even if it is
censorship. But I also understand the push by the providers to "clean up"
their service regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Now that the
crackdown has started, many of the "legitimate" newsgroup forums are
suffering badly. the only good thing may be if the spammers are also sent
off to never-neverland... Maybe there will be 2 of us here a year from now
discussing the on-topic stuff.
Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com
V8013-R
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
"Joe AutoDrill" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> In the forums that showcase death photos, there have been times when
> people post photos evidence photos before they are to be used in trials...
> Where the leaks come from, nobody knows, but a piece of info released like
> that can (but may never have been) used to argue that information was not
> handled properly and cause a mistrial, etc...
Ok - but those would more likely be published to web sites than to usenet
groups.
>
> People have threatened each other with harm or worse - which is a crime...
Guess we should kill the spoken word and all forms of written communication
then.
>
> Some in the motorcycling or street racing groups have posted about when /
> where a little ralleye will take place in order to either facilitate
> street racing or other questionable activities...
>
Yeah, but I don't think that's really a big concern for law enforcement. At
least I hope that's not one of their bigger concerns...
> On the far edge of society and in the hardcore porn newsgroups, the locals
> and feds very often report anonymous and sometimes even non-anonymous
> posters putting up porn of kids, etc. Google "NAMBLA" and see what kind
> of oxygen thieves are living on our planet.
Yeah - but again, the web is full of a lot more of this than usenet is. A
better approach is to tackle the source of the problem.
>
> I personally won't miss many of the forums that disappear - even if it is
> censorship. But I also understand the push by the providers to "clean up"
> their service regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Now that the
> crackdown has started, many of the "legitimate" newsgroup forums are
> suffering badly. the only good thing may be if the spammers are also sent
> off to never-neverland... Maybe there will be 2 of us here a year from
> now discussing the on-topic stuff.
>
I won't necessarily miss the stuff that disappears either, but I do find
myself riling up at the supposed reasons for these things.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
Tom Watson <[email protected]> writes:
> It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
> ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service through
> ISP's.
>
> I wonder if that is all bad.
Get rid of the normal people, and keep the spammers?
Tom Watson wrote:
> It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
> ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service through
> ISP's.
> I wonder if that is all bad.
Nothing is ever all bad or all good. The fact that most anyone on the
internet can very easily participate in any newsgroup they want is quit
interesting in itself, and along with all the crap, you can be pretty
certain that many, many opinions will be heard on any given subject.
This to me is what makes Usenet a winner. Of course the bad side is all
the crap like trolls, spammers, porn freaks and so on, but with very
little effort, most of that can be filtered or otherwise skipped.
> The corollary might be that an increase in the difficulty of obtaining
> access, whether by necessitating a specialized provider, or by
> reintroducing certain technical challenges to gaining access, might
> reverse the trend and diminish the number of knuckleheads on Usenet.
> Maybe it would be good to pay a few bucks a month to get newsgroups -
> and maybe they should make setup and configuration sufficiently
> challenging as to act as rough justice sort of bozo filter.
I'm not sure there would be enough providers around to make it all work.
Certainly in the days of the BBS, plenty of Sysops were around to make
it work in a small scale of what is going on today, but will that work
now via the internet? Not sure but my guess is most of the providers
like Giganews would disappear and traffic would drop to the point only a
few nut cases would be around to provide service for free. I know in
the days of the BBS's, about NO ONE knew what a BBS was, and certainly
nothing about echo mail. Today, almost no one knows anything about
newsgroups, even though they are usually free and right at their fingertips.
> It's an interesting concept.
I will say that historically, if there is a need for something, someone
will find a way to fill it. Fidonet was great, and the internet killed
it. What I don't like is government or big business pulling the plug
just to pull the plug. Fidonet died due lack of need/interest, Usenet
dying because of some hackney's whim has a bad taste to me.
--
Jack
http://jbstein.com
Tom Watson wrote:
>
> The corollary might be that an increase in the difficulty of obtaining
> access, whether by necessitating a specialized provider, or by
> reintroducing certain technical challenges to gaining access, might
> reverse the trend and diminish the number of knuckleheads on Usenet.
>
> Maybe it would be good to pay a few bucks a month to get newsgroups -
> and maybe they should make setup and configuration sufficiently
> challenging as to act as rough justice sort of bozo filter.
>
> It's an interesting concept.
Maybe...
Good thought.
It is not that easy.
It is a violation of the Verizon trems of use to gran alt.binaries any where
else.
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There seems to be a trend towards taking Usenet out of the features
> typically bundled with ISP services.
>
> I have Comcast which farms their Usenet stuff out to GigaNews and that
> works fine except when Comcast has a problem. As many have noted,
> when you contact Comcast Tier 1 support for a Usenet problem they
> don't even know what newsgroups are.
>
> It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
> ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service through
> ISP's.
>
> I wonder if that is all bad.
>
> Some guys I talk with think that the Golden Age of newsgroups ended
> when AOL started in. I don't know; I was on CompuServe then.
>
> Some hardcore types even think that the best days were before Gene
> Spafford organized The Backbone Cabal that lead to The Great Renaming
> in '87.
>
> I don't know about that and I'm not going to get medieval about it and
> start looking for my Hayes 1200 baud Smartmodem either.
>
> The point is that the ease and transparency of access to newsgroups
> may have contributed to the influx of the ignorati.
>
> The corollary might be that an increase in the difficulty of obtaining
> access, whether by necessitating a specialized provider, or by
> reintroducing certain technical challenges to gaining access, might
> reverse the trend and diminish the number of knuckleheads on Usenet.
>
> Maybe it would be good to pay a few bucks a month to get newsgroups -
> and maybe they should make setup and configuration sufficiently
> challenging as to act as rough justice sort of bozo filter.
>
> It's an interesting concept.
>
>
>
> Regards, Tom.
>
> Thos. J. Watson - Cabinetmaker
> http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
Joe:
Thanks for the thoughtful post.
I don't want to reply to each point, but I didn't think that Biker
posting you mentioned was actually a newsgroup posting. I had heard
about that as a chat room thing. I admit I could have heard it wrong and
concede the point to you.
And as for the child porn thing, I was asking cause and effect. Do you
take the position that the existence of porn newsgroups featuring 16 and
17 year old young women posting self-taken photos of themselves undressed
CAUSES the child porn posting? I guess it is a chicken or egg question.
And while you did pose some questions I cannot answer, or debate, I claim
I am the type of person who feels that a specific newsgroup that is found
in violation of the law (or Law) should be specifically targeted for
punishment, not the entire alt.* newsgroup structure. (how that
punishment occurs (enforced? imposed?), I don't have a clue.)
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> There seems to be a trend towards taking Usenet out of the features
> typically bundled with ISP services.
>
> I have Comcast which farms their Usenet stuff out to GigaNews and that
> works fine except when Comcast has a problem. As many have noted,
> when you contact Comcast Tier 1 support for a Usenet problem they
> don't even know what newsgroups are.
>
> It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
> ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service through
> ISP's.
>
> I wonder if that is all bad.
>
> Some guys I talk with think that the Golden Age of newsgroups ended
> when AOL started in. I don't know; I was on CompuServe then.
>
> Some hardcore types even think that the best days were before Gene
> Spafford organized The Backbone Cabal that lead to The Great Renaming
> in '87.
>
> I don't know about that and I'm not going to get medieval about it and
> start looking for my Hayes 1200 baud Smartmodem either.
>
> The point is that the ease and transparency of access to newsgroups
> may have contributed to the influx of the ignorati.
>
> The corollary might be that an increase in the difficulty of obtaining
> access, whether by necessitating a specialized provider, or by
> reintroducing certain technical challenges to gaining access, might
> reverse the trend and diminish the number of knuckleheads on Usenet.
>
> Maybe it would be good to pay a few bucks a month to get newsgroups -
> and maybe they should make setup and configuration sufficiently
> challenging as to act as rough justice sort of bozo filter.
>
> It's an interesting concept.
>
>
That sound good in theory Tom. But one of the big problems with newsgroups
is that an ancient group of dinosaurs determine if anybody gets to make a
new one. We are basically stuck with what we got.
I worked with a number of individuals to create a new newsgroup once, It was
a descent into hell. You have to "prove" the existence of a "need" of the
new newsgroup. And a poll is taken of present newsgroups with all the
spammers and bozos. They are living in another universe. And do not care
about the present dysfunctionl state of things.
Until which newsgroups can be created and in some fashion filter out the
bozos, there isn't much hope for a viable alternative to the present
situation.
{snip}
>
> It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
> ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service through
> ISP's.
>
{snip some really good points}
I don't know...maybe, but it is more likely that any NG with the words
"erotic", "erotica", or "porn" will soon be gone. This is just pure
censorship by another name.
I had thought the first to go would have been the IRC chat rooms before
they got around to newsgroups. Was I ever wrong.
But just asking... has anyone ever heard of a trial or conviction of
anyone who went bad or committed any crime JUST because the read any
specific newsgroup? Any evidence submitted in a trial that the cause of
a crime was rooted in reading newsgroups????
I am aware that IRC chat rooms have been used to facilitate, or aid, in
the commission of crimes; and instant messaging services I read a rumor
have also been used as an aid. But have anyone read or heard where a
newsgroup was used?
>> In the forums that showcase death photos, there have been times when
>> people post photos evidence photos before they are to be used in
>> trials... Where the leaks come from, nobody knows, but a piece of info
>> released like that can (but may never have been) used to argue that
>> information was not handled properly and cause a mistrial, etc...
>
> Ok - but those would more likely be published to web sites than to usenet
> groups.
That is a fact... But a web site is more easily tracked than a newsgroup so
the really fringe folks may choose a newsgroup... And get a lot less
exposure.
>> People have threatened each other with harm or worse - which is a
>> crime...
>
> Guess we should kill the spoken word and all forms of written
> communication then.
Shh... There might be a political candidate reading this and you might
plant an idea!!! Be careful what you say...
>> Some in the motorcycling or street racing groups have posted about when /
>> where a little ralleye will take place in order to either facilitate
>> street racing or other questionable activities...
>
> Yeah, but I don't think that's really a big concern for law enforcement.
> At least I hope that's not one of their bigger concerns...
Depends on the city. NYC - No. Bucksnort, Arkansas might be a different
story where they count raccoons at night to stay awake.
>> On the far edge of society and in the hardcore porn newsgroups, the
>> locals and feds very often report anonymous and sometimes even
>> non-anonymous posters putting up porn of kids, etc. Google "NAMBLA" and
>> see what kind of oxygen thieves are living on our planet.
>
> Yeah - but again, the web is full of a lot more of this than usenet is. A
> better approach is to tackle the source of the problem.
Agreed. I didn't think you were making an argument for a different approach
as much as I thought you were looking for concrete examples. Thus my post.
>> I personally won't miss many of the forums that disappear - even if it is
>> censorship. But I also understand the push by the providers to "clean
>> up" their service regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Now that
>> the crackdown has started, many of the "legitimate" newsgroup forums are
>> suffering badly. the only good thing may be if the spammers are also
>> sent off to never-neverland... Maybe there will be 2 of us here a year
>> from now discussing the on-topic stuff.
>>
>
> I won't necessarily miss the stuff that disappears either, but I do find
> myself riling up at the supposed reasons for these things.
Same here. You, if you are a techie of sorts, may enjoy Emmanuel
Goldstein's writings. Google 'em and the quarterly he puts out.
Regards,
Joe Agro, Jr.
(800) 871-5022
01.908.542.0244
Automatic / Pneumatic Drills: http://www.AutoDrill.com
Multiple Spindle Drills: http://www.Multi-Drill.com
V8013-R
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:00:01 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
I think that in the long run, it will improve the overall quality of UseNet..
If the only folks that used newsgroups were the ones that were willing to pay a
few bucks a month to do it, could that clean up some of the "static"?
I know that when we moved to Mexico, we went from Comcast to a satellite service
and had to find our own news server.. And in getting APN, in our case, we found
out how UseNet SHOULD work, IMO..
I see the dedicated news server folks getting more clients/cash flow and
hopefully continuing a high level of service..
If I need support or billing info, I'd rather deal with a company that provides
my service, rather than someone who farms me out and hasn't got a clue what I
need..
>There seems to be a trend towards taking Usenet out of the features
>typically bundled with ISP services.
>
>I have Comcast which farms their Usenet stuff out to GigaNews and that
>works fine except when Comcast has a problem. As many have noted,
>when you contact Comcast Tier 1 support for a Usenet problem they
>don't even know what newsgroups are.
>
>It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
>ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service through
>ISP's.
>
>I wonder if that is all bad.
>
>Some guys I talk with think that the Golden Age of newsgroups ended
>when AOL started in. I don't know; I was on CompuServe then.
>
>Some hardcore types even think that the best days were before Gene
>Spafford organized The Backbone Cabal that lead to The Great Renaming
>in '87.
>
>I don't know about that and I'm not going to get medieval about it and
>start looking for my Hayes 1200 baud Smartmodem either.
>
>The point is that the ease and transparency of access to newsgroups
>may have contributed to the influx of the ignorati.
>
>The corollary might be that an increase in the difficulty of obtaining
>access, whether by necessitating a specialized provider, or by
>reintroducing certain technical challenges to gaining access, might
>reverse the trend and diminish the number of knuckleheads on Usenet.
>
>Maybe it would be good to pay a few bucks a month to get newsgroups -
>and maybe they should make setup and configuration sufficiently
>challenging as to act as rough justice sort of bozo filter.
>
>It's an interesting concept.
>
>
>
>Regards, Tom.
>
>Thos. J. Watson - Cabinetmaker
>http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
>tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
mac
Please remove splinters before emailing
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:12:06 -0400, "Lee Michaels"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>That sound good in theory Tom. But one of the big problems with newsgroups
>is that an ancient group of dinosaurs determine if anybody gets to make a
>new one. We are basically stuck with what we got.
>
>I worked with a number of individuals to create a new newsgroup once, It was
>a descent into hell. You have to "prove" the existence of a "need" of the
>new newsgroup. And a poll is taken of present newsgroups with all the
>spammers and bozos. They are living in another universe. And do not care
>about the present dysfunctionl state of things.
>
>Until which newsgroups can be created and in some fashion filter out the
>bozos, there isn't much hope for a viable alternative to the present
>situation.
>
>
I'd agree that the process is cumbersome but a smurf like Vito Kuhn
went through it and created a newsgroup that nobody participates in.
I think that the point of some of the oldtimers is that newsgroups
were better when you had to be technically competent to even get on
them.
I've talked with guys who think that the whole game went to hell when
we got away from BBS's.
I'm not saying that I agree but I understand their argument.
We often joke about the Cabal here on rec.norm but the real Cabal was
the group of guys who created the architecture of Usenet in its
transition to what we have now.
I'll bet most of the survivors don't even use it anymore.
Talk to a guy who remembers when The Well was a hot item.
I'll bet most of the original group stay in contact with each other
via email.
Regards, Tom.
Thos. J. Watson - Cabinetmaker
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
Phil Again wrote:
> {snip}
>>
>> It looks to be the case that binaries will go first but there may
>> ultimately be a reduction or elimination of all Usenet service
>> through ISP's.
>>
> {snip some really good points}
>
> I don't know...maybe, but it is more likely that any NG with the
> words
> "erotic", "erotica", or "porn" will soon be gone. This is just pure
> censorship by another name.
>
> I had thought the first to go would have been the IRC chat rooms
> before they got around to newsgroups. Was I ever wrong.
>
> But just asking... has anyone ever heard of a trial or conviction of
> anyone who went bad or committed any crime JUST because the read any
> specific newsgroup? Any evidence submitted in a trial that the
> cause
> of a crime was rooted in reading newsgroups????
>
> I am aware that IRC chat rooms have been used to facilitate, or aid,
> in the commission of crimes; and instant messaging services I read a
> rumor have also been used as an aid. But have anyone read or heard
> where a newsgroup was used?
Well, downloading one "kiddy porn" image is a crime, even if you
didn't know what it was, as is recieving one in the mail even if you
didn't order it.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Perhaps the major telcos should take action to limit the use of telephones
for criminal purposes.
Oh wait, unlike eliminating usenet from their internet services, that would
cost them money, not saev them money.
--
There is always an easy solution to every human problem -- neat,
plausible, and wrong." (H L Mencken)
Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org
Tom,
I don't always agree with you. Hell, I seldom do. But this time what
you have said makes sense.
We'll have to sit back and see...
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 16:00:01 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Maybe it would be good to pay a few bucks a month to get newsgroups -
>and maybe they should make setup and configuration sufficiently
>challenging as to act as rough justice sort of bozo filter.