webber@klinzhai.RUTGERS.EDU (Webber) (04/26/87)
In article <213200002@mirror>, rs@mirror.UUCP writes: > /* Written 3:15 am Apr 23, 1987 by webber@aramis.rutgers.edu */ > >THE BASIC SOLUTION: > >The most natural solution would be that if the a site cannot expend > >more than a certain amount of resources toward supporting the net, > >then it should just support the net to the extent that it can and then > >cease for that day. > Well, they're doing something very similar: they're supporting the net > to the extent they feel they can, in terms of giving preference to what > THEY want: moderated groups first, and "high-content" groups last. Basically, it is the difference between giving $200,000 to your favourite hospital and giving $200,000 to your favourite hospital on the condition that they name a wing after you. Now it seems to me that in the later case, it is no longer a gift, you have simply found the cheapest way to buy a wing with your name on it. So, what is happening, is that `they' are going from making substantial donations to making no donations. This is quite different than just cutting back one's donations to what one can afford. (One wonders why they don't keep close enough tabs on what they are doing so that they don't over expend in the first place!) > Ultimate anarchy. It is not a requirement of Usenet that you read -- > let alone believe -- the group listings posted by spaf@gatech, or the > group creation/deletion messages posted by rick@seismo. Most people > and sites just find it in their best interests to do so. If you have > a problem with this, then perhaps a discussion with your SysAdmin might > be worthwhile. I haven't any idea as to how that related to the previous discussion. Non sequitur? > /* Written 2:39 am Apr 23, 1987 by webber@aramis.rutgers.edu */ > >Incidently, it is interesting that you didn't come up with an > >alternative source of uncensored opinion/dialogue on the scale of > >usenet... > What about GENie, CompuServe, etc: uncensored, pay-as-you-go, with lots > of people there talking about lots of things. It's silly to get all > misty-eyed because something's evolving away from what you like, > especially when more equitable alternatives available exist. I strongly doubt that any of the services you mention carry anywhere near the number of users that usenet does. Also, the interface for users is quite different (particularly in terms of the amount of time a typical user stays connected). Furthermore, by placing the cost directly on the user, you tend to get the opinions of those that can afford to pay for such services, as opposed to the more egalitarian structure of the usenet (prior to its current death). I assure you that I had these in mind when I proclaimed usenet unique. As mentioned earlier, it is not evolving this way. To steal an analogy from a recent issue of the Economist: the patient has a cold, but instead of prescribing a few asprin, the doctor is prescribing a lobotomy -- the patient is nervous. ------------------- BOB (webber@aramis.rutgers.edu ; BACKBONE!top*Wdondond
sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) (04/27/87)
In article <191@brandx.klinzhai.RUTGERS.EDU> webber@klinzhai.RUTGERS.EDU (Webber) writes: >In article <213200002@mirror>, rs@mirror.UUCP writes: >> /* Written 2:39 am Apr 23, 1987 by webber@aramis.rutgers.edu */ >> >Incidently, it is interesting that you didn't come up with an >> >alternative source of uncensored opinion/dialogue on the scale of >> >usenet... >> What about GENie, CompuServe, etc: uncensored, pay-as-you-go, with lots >I strongly doubt that any of the services you mention carry anywhere >near the number of users that usenet does. Also, the interface for >users is quite different (particularly in terms of the amount of time Last statistics I saw printed (Info World or similiar type weekly news rag, sometime late last fall) place register users of Compuserve EMail at about 275,000 users. Telemail was in third place with about 80,000. -- Stuart Lynne ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532
brad@looking.UUCP (04/29/87)
In article <676@van-bc.UUCP> sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) writes: > >Last statistics I saw printed (Info World or similiar type weekly news rag, >sometime late last fall) place register users of Compuserve EMail at about >275,000 users. Telemail was in third place with about 80,000. And why do these large nets manage to work well? Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that people pay as they use? There is no illusion of a free net on these networks, nor any talk about how people have a right to post what they want at other peoples' expense. -- Brad Templeton, Looking Glass Software Ltd. - Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
mjr@well.UUCP (Matthew Rapaport) (04/29/87)
In article <676@van-bc.UUCP> sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) writes: > >Last statistics I saw printed (Info World or similiar type weekly news rag, >sometime late last fall) place register users of Compuserve EMail at about >275,000 users. Telemail was in third place with about 80,000. I subscribe to CIS and the Source, and they are not at all the same thing as this net even if they do have more users strictly speaking! Imagine if you will that CIS DISTRIBUTED ALL THEIR TRAFFIC to local machines around the world, and not just to individual terminals as they demanded small fractions of the CIS material... Then you would have some idea of what is going on...
elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (05/03/87)
in article <676@van-bc.UUCP>, sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) says: > > In article <191@brandx.klinzhai.RUTGERS.EDU> webber@klinzhai.RUTGERS.EDU (Webber) writes: >>In article <213200002@mirror>, rs@mirror.UUCP writes: >>> /* Written 2:39 am Apr 23, 1987 by webber@aramis.rutgers.edu */ >>> >Incidently, it is interesting that you didn't come up with an >>> >alternative source of uncensored opinion/dialogue on the scale of >>> >usenet... >>> What about GENie, CompuServe, etc: uncensored, pay-as-you-go, with lots > Last statistics I saw printed (Info World or similiar type weekly news rag, > sometime late last fall) place register users of Compuserve EMail at about > 275,000 users. Telemail was in third place with about 80,000. That's EMAIL. Besides, the question is amount of material. Not the number of users. I seriously doubt that they get 10 megabytes worth of postings every week (based upon 20 megs sitting in our /netnews directory right now, with a 2 week expiration period). I have participated in some discussions on national services. And found that I really could not justify talking about education, the ieal BBSprogram, or whatever, when I was paying $7/hour for the privilige. And I certainly would not be able to get the large amount of Unix information available via USENET, not to mention things like comp.arch and mod.os and other technical newsgroups of that sort. The EXXX-Tasy Channel sends hard-core porno-flicks over a satellite link, I really don't see what the problem is with the Stargate Project sending uncensored material over a satellite link. Except that the idea offends sensitive sensibilities ("Oh my GAWD! Spending all that money to ship TALK.POLITICS!"). After all, what The EXXTasy Channel does is uplink their stuff to the satellite, which broadcasts it, then individuals with dishes & decoders decode it at the other end.... sound like a familiar scheme? -- Eric Green elg%usl.CSNET CS student, University of SW Louisiana {cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg Apprentice Haquer, Bayou Telecommunications Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 BBS phone #: 318-984-3854 300/1200 baud Lafayette, LA 70509 Clever quote goes here, but I'm out of room!
tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (05/13/87)
In article <832@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
<> Last statistics I saw printed (Info World or similiar type weekly news rag,
<> sometime late last fall) place register users of Compuserve EMail at about
<> 275,000 users. Telemail was in third place with about 80,000.
<
< That's EMAIL. Besides, the question is amount of material. Not the number of
< users. I seriously doubt that they get 10 megabytes worth of postings every
< week...
On CIS, I currently read some of the Comic forum, the audio parts of
the Consumer Electronics Forum, and sometimes the Mac forumes. I
download messages from these forums about once every week, and get
anywhere from 200k to 600k or so. Considering the huge number of
forums, I wouldn't find 10 meg a week that unreasonable.
I will watch more carefully over the next few weeks and try to get
a more accurate estimate.
--
Tim Smith "Froh wie seine Sonnen fliegen
sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim Durch des Himmels praecht'gen Plan,
Laufet, Brueder, eure Bahn,
Freudig wie ein Held zum Siegen"