[news.admin] Public Access Usenet Sites

karl@sugar.UUCP (Karl Lehenbauer) (06/25/88)

I like Usenet a lot and I think most people who are on would like to stay
on.  So, people against public access sites, have you ever given thought 
to how you'll get on Usenet after you leave school or change jobs?  
Will providing Usenet access be a prerequisite when choosing your next
employer?  If not, you'll either have to make use of your extensive contacts
throughout the usenet community to wrangle a signon from somebody, buy your
own Unix system, or get on a public access system.

There have been public access sites on the net for a long time and many have 
a long history of positive contributions to the net.  I believe the de-facto 
backbone killer would qualify as such a system.  

I think a public access site that was truly "public access" would inherently 
have a "lower common denominator" than usenet as a whole, because the users
of most usenet sites are either in college or have been in college and are
typically employed in some professional, technical capacity which would be less
true for the public at large.  Note that there is still a certain technical 
competence required to get on in that one must purchase or have access to
a computer or terminal and modem and learn how to use it.  If one were to put 
public access terminals in truck stops, I presume the ratio of postings that
most usenet people would find offensive would be higher even than on 
full-priveledges-on-first-call Fido boards :-)

I don't think it's impossible to have non-controversial public access sites 
on the net.  I think the policies of some public access systems have allowed
flagrantly innappropriate and irresponsible postings to be disseminated
because the siteops don't monitor their system closely enough and don't
make their policies clear (if they have any) before turning neophytes loose
with full network posting priveledges.  The JJ fiasco would have been way
less severe if:  1) the site admins at portal had quickly posted a cancel 
message and pulled his access, 2) the inevitable scores of people who 
posted followups flaming the guy (rather very deservedly torching him and
maybe portal through email) had restrained themselves, 3) it could have been
ignored rather than beaten to death, but since that's how we come to a
consensus on the net, I guess this part has to be done.

Although "JJ" did post from a PA site, one would not have to think very
hard to imagine similar postings originating from a university or business.

Our policies at sugar, plus I suppose that we're a pretty small site,
have, so far (knock on wood), kept us from having similar problems.  We 
require that people apply for access via postal mail and supply a return 
address that is not a P. O. box.  Thus, barring their use of a blind mail 
drop, we know and they know that we know a physical address where they can 
be found.  Along with their password, they receive in the mail a letter making 
quite clear what their responsibilities are, the extent of the network they'll 
be posting to, and various permutations of what will happen happen to them
if they don't abide by our rules ranging from losing their access to our
full cooperation and assistance to any government agencies wishing to
prosecute them.  We originally had two levels of access, where well-behaved 
local-only users would be upgraded to full net access, but we've had so little 
trouble that dropped it.

I do like the idea of holding messages posted to inordinately large numbers
of newsgroups for review by the siteop, where postnews would say something
like "hmm, you've crossposted that to an awfully large number of groups,
I'll hold it until the sysop can have a look at it." or maybe just do it
silently.
-- 
-- uunet!sugar!karl

erict@flatline.UUCP (j eric townsend) (06/28/88)

In article <2180@sugar.UUCP>, karl@sugar.UUCP (Karl Lehenbauer) writes:

> Although "JJ" did post from a PA site, one would not have to think very
> hard to imagine similar postings originating from a university or business.


I've noticed several postings from AT&T places that were blatant
ads for business operated by friends or spouses or just "good buddies".

Nobody flames them.

While I disagree with the intent of "JJ", I disagree even more with
the volumes of garbage spawned by what virtually everybody agreed
was a "bad thing" to post.

-- 
                                        Skate UNIX or go home, boogie boy...
"But why should I type "rm -r $HOME" if I want to play trek???"
J. Eric Townsend ->uunet!nuchat!flatline!erict smail:511Parker#2,Hstn,Tx,77007
             ..!bellcore!tness1!/