levasseur@morgan.DEC (Ray EMD & S Admin 223-5027) (08/21/85)
Ron Rizzo >I was glad to see Owen Rowley's encouragement to contribute. My guess >is that hundreds (thousands?) of people read net.motss, and that many >are heterosexual. Here at BBN quite a few straight employees read it >regularly, & some even contribute occasionally. Because of its topic, >net.motss probably generates more curiosity than a lot of other Usenet >newsgroups. I agree that there are probably more straight readers of net.motss at DEC than gay ones. I also agree that there's probably a high curiosity factor involved. It's like being able to visit a gay bar or attend a gay social function without having to be seen there. I subscribe to net.sing- les, mostly out of curiosity to see if they have the same problems as gay singles do. I've had a few requests to cross post some Jason material to net singles but havn't yet. >In a cooperative open enterprise like Usenet, what results is only the >sum of participants' contributions. If no one posts, nothing happens. >If Owen wants to see the level of discussion improved in some way, he >should by all means start an exchange of the kind he wants. This is the same issue that comes up at gay social/support groups I've belonged to, if everyone stays away or just sits silently, the group stag- nates. One group that I still belong to NAG (Nashua Area Gays) stagnated for years because the same topics got tossed around. We spent a couple of evenings brainstorming what would make the group interesting. Maybe readers of this newsgroup could do a little brainstorming, what do youy want to talk about. Since I joined the group last October, I've recieved upwards of 250 personal mail messages regarding my Jason postings. The vast majority of the respondants have never posted but only read. I've asked quite a few off line why they never contribute and the responses are varied: (a) Closeted at work and fear of their postings falling into the wrong hands. (b) Feelings that they have nothing to contribute that would be of interest. (c) Not wanting to share themselves with people they've never met. (d) Apathy, why bother? It's much easier to read than to contribute. (e) Not knowing how to post. If they can send mail they should be able to post to the net. I have used some of the postings to this group as discussion material for a gay support group I sometimes attend. The group tends to be polit- ical and enjoy the postings by Ron Rizzo in particular. One question that some group members have raised is, "how big is the gay readership of net motss worldwide?" My personal belief is that there are probably thousands more gay men and women who have access to the net and don't even know it! I learned of USENET newsgroups through a third party who sent me ARPANET jokes. She showed me the proper channel to subscribe through and the ad- ministrator sent me a list of active USENET groups. There was an article in the Advocate last year about hi-tech and gay computer BBS's, no ment- ion of any worldwide newsgroups though. I wonder how gay people could be educated to the group's existance?? >I have to disagree with Owen's opinion of the Jason postings. I think >they're substantive and address very real issues in a productive way >(they're also funny). Long ago I disparaged the first Jason posting, >mainly because of how I thought it would affect others' perception of >net.motss. Now I think I was completely wrong in my judgment then, & >consider the attitude of others toward something like net.motss to be >a consideration almost not worth taking into account (or as an aged' Since I missed the posting with Owen's comments I can't say much except this is an easy medium to misinterpret what other posters are saying unless you personally know them (Ken Arndt aside). Some Jason articles are meant to be serious, others tongue in cheek. If you don't know me you have to be able to read between the lines. The group would get quite boring if all that was discussed was AIDS or Ronald Reagan. I look at the group like a daily subscription to the Advoacte; some people only read the Washington report, others the feature articles and some the pink pages and cartoons. I discard the pink pages and go for the features and world news, then finally the Donelan cartoons. Some people could be insulted by Donelan, since he does illuminate some gay stereotypical behavior, but I take it in the spirit it's presented and get a few chuckles. >One last point: working in a homophobic environment poses a real >problem for many potential posters. True, they can post anonymously >through another Usenetter, & many large corporations like DEC and >AT&T (I believe) have anti-discrimination clauses; but there's still In DEC the attitudes towards gay people varies from group to group, facility to facility. To the best of my knowledge there is no corporate anti-discriminatory clause. For the most part there is an atmosphere of live and let live, do your job and don't let your personal life interfere with your job performance. The reason some people may not post could stem from feelings of using company time for non-work related activities. I may be wrong. Ray