[net.news] On the Removal of Newsgroups

sjb (12/14/82)

Well, it has now been a bit over a week since the apocalypse,
and I'd like to make one BIG point:  Has the net suffered?
I admit, I may have made a mistake with net.wines and
net.info-terms, but these groups are now back.  The others
have NOT reappeared (with the exception of net.trivia,
which will take some time...) and are not being missed.
Instead of complaining for the sake of complaining or
maybe doing so because you feel I may be overstepping my
bounds, PLEASE think about this:  The groups that have not
come back obviously don't have the traffic to make it.  Did
it hurt to remove them?  The groups that did come back are
living on.  Did it hurt to remove them?  The answer is 'no'
is both cases.

We live on.

z (12/14/82)

Adam, you say "Did it hurt to remove the newsgroups which were still
being used?", and then answer "No", with the implication that the fact
that they're back means that all is well once again.  Unfortunately,
this is not the case.  When these newsgroups were deleted, all of their
subscribers lost all of their unread messages in them.  Were these
messages important?  Were they unimportant?  We'll never know.  It's
bad enough that this happened once, but your message displays the
attitude that this is not a serious problem, and one is left to wonder
about how careful you'll be in the future.

To everybody else:  There have been objections to a centralized policy
on newsgroups on various grounds, and many of these objections have
merit.  However, I think that what is being largely overlooked is that
there is already a centralized policy.  It is designed and implemented
by Adam Buchanan, who was not elected or appointed by anyone, nor has
any mandate from the net.  The mere fact that he has a fair amount of
vocal support is meaningless; the fact that the New Right is quite vocal
does not and should not give them the authority to make the laws in this
country.  What it comes down to is that it is time for the net to
develop a rational policy about how it wants to conduct itself, and
until it does, no one should presume the authority to make netwide
policy themselves.  I would propose that at the January Usenix meeting,
the suggested BOF session on Usenet be held and that it decide on
various policy alternatives for Usenet.  These alternatives could then
be voted on by a formal netwide referendum shortly after the conference.

	Steve Zimmerman
	decvax!cca!z
	z@cca