Lars.Ericson%CMU-CS-A@sri-unix.UUCP (12/05/83)
I don't think that discussing the rates of what is obviously a non-profit club should be considered as "advertising", especially in the context of a special-interest forum like AVIATION, and especially since other rates and prices have been discussed on this list. In general, other lists, such as WorkStations, have discussed prices of things, where that bears qualitatively on some topic (i.e., can I ever afford to do X?). If discussing costs of lessons on AVIATION is inappropriate for the ARPAnet, then AVIATION itself is inappropriate, for whatever the same reasons are. On the other hand, maybe all those with UseNet access (including the poster of the message offending CStacy) should simply post only to "net.aviation", since the UseNet is funded differently (anarchically), and hence has far fewer constraints. -- Lars Ericson
CSTACY%MIT-MC@sri-unix.UUCP (12/05/83)
From: Christopher C. Stacy <CSTACY @ MIT-MC> Thanks for your comments. I am not planning (at this point anyway) on doing anything drastic to AVIATION, but here is what is going through my mind about it. As Lars guessed, AVIATION is in fact not appropriate for the ARPAnet and should probably not be allowed to exist. We allow it to exist on the theory that it will not attract much attention. I only skim through the material that comes on the list, and so haven't noticed it misbehaving myself. It was the recent rash of $$ signs flying by that made me notice it and become nervous. Should the list come to the attention of the Government authorities managing the ARPAnet, they would likely find it a harmless but inappropriate use and demand that it be removed. But if they were to see lots of dollar signs going by, they might perceive it as commercial use of the network -- not harmless. This would cause my site alot of trouble. AVIATION is not a huge list, so there is a good chance it can go by completely unnoticed. It's something to keep in mind though. Chris
Lars.Ericson%CMU-CS-A@sri-unix.UUCP (12/05/83)
I personally do not feel that Aviation is inappropriate for the Arpanet, nor Workstation, nor Space, nor a variety of other mailing lists. I think this whole business of policing the content of the Arpanet has gotten way out of hand: let military sites hassle themselves, but leave the academic sites alone, is my theory. My real (implicit) comment is simply something that I was quite surprised to discover: that in terms of information services in the category of news groups like Aviation, UseNet sites are in fact about 20 times better off: there are that many more active newsgroups, and probably that many more accessible sites, if you were able to accurately map them all.