berman@ihuxm.UUCP (berman) (02/24/84)
Polli makes some good points about the jungle that is the net, but I don't think there are any easy solutions. In a certain sense, the net is just one step above CB radio. The real difference is that CB is open to anyone with $60 to spend, and the net requires you to have access to some sophisticated computer equipment through work or school. Additionally, the anonymity of CB is nearly complete, while the net pegs identification of some sort to all submissions. Just as on CB radio, the intelligence is hard to discern above the chatter. Just as with CB radio, snappy short submissions get more attention than longer ones. Just as CB radio, the levels of consciousness, sensitivity and common sense vary on the net considerably. But both media are reflections of society, or at least of the constituency that make up the user communities. The chatter and discussions on the net are probably a reasonably accurate portrayal of the conscious of the computer user community in the US and other nations that the net reaches. That in itself, in my opinion, makes the net absolutely fascinating and a worthwhile sociological tool. If you listen to CB radio, you will here a tremendous mix of idle chatter, useful information, racist and sexist garbage, etc. You will also learn something about how a lot of ordinary people perceive things. What could be more fascinating? To reform the net? To make the exchanges more coherent? I'm not certain that's possible. Administrative restrictions can be implemented to screen submissions and reception (i.e. censorship), but that probably would interfere with the worthwhile material on the net at least as much as with the chaff. Consider the chaff the price of free exchange of ideas. Let a thousand flowers bloom.... and don't be upset by the weeds that sprout... Andy Berman