[net.news] Perhaps a solution to net.jokes:

gill (09/02/82)

#N:physics:18700003:000:2241
physics!gill    Sep  2 02:26:00 1982

After "consulting" with some "collegues" (i.e. flaming at length
via uucp mail throughout the night), I would like to propose the
following as a solution to the obscene/degrading joke uproar:

Three news groups should be partially created:

	jokes.g for safe jokes (as in G rated "take the kids" films)

	jokes.x for obscene jokes (as in X rated films)

	jokes.d for degrading jokes (as in class D movies)

These groups should not be created in the normal fashion. Instead, they
would only be created by a specific systems administrator on his/her
own system. I don't believe many outside BTL systems have btl.X groups
on their system. The jokes.X network would work the same way.

Since jokes.X is not part of the standard netnews release, the default
state would be no jokes at all. I hope net.jokes continues to exist, 
but if it doesn't, jokes.X will be there.

The forwarding and acceptance of messages in this group will also be system
specific.

As this "other" network topology will not be simply one of connecting to any
present netnews system, a map keeper may be needed for these groups. 
If no one else does, I volunteer for jokes.x. Until someone does some
hacking, it will proabably be necessary to have human "connectors"
for each of these three groups.

These news groups will not officially be part of usenet. The use of
usenet programs to read/write and route these groups will be the sole
responsibility of each individual system. Besides sharing common
utility programs, they will not be part of the same network.

I would like to propose the regualr net contain the meta-group
net.link, which will carry announcements of new ways to link
up to the "alternative" networks (the name "link" doesn't only
mean that, you know ...). This should be harmless enough.

I don't think this is hard to implement, given the example of how 
the btl.XXX network exists intertwined with the net.XXX network. 

	Comments?

		Gill Pratt

	...alice!gill OR gill@mc

p.s. I would propose that attempts at central administration and censorship
be banned in the jokes.X charter. Though I had originally resigned myself
to withdrawng from a censored network, it seems there is another way to
squirm out from under the forshadowed beurocracy. 

pcl (09/02/82)

Regarding the creation of a new distribution topology "jokes.*", why
not use the existing prefix for that purpose ("ug")?  This idea was
advanced sometime ago for just this purpose (the "ug" stands for
"underground"), and has been at least partially implemented.  The only
newsgroup in this category to date is "ug.jokes".  All 50+ netnews
sites at here IH/IW/IX receive/forward "ug.all" (without any official
endorsement), and I urge others to at least forward these groups,
if at all feasible.  In conjunction with carrying the "ug" category,
we are changing our default subscription list to "all,!ug.all", so readers
only see the "ug" stuff if they ask for it.

				Paul Lustgarten
				ixn5c!pcl
				Bell Labs - Indian Hill South

mark (09/02/82)

Gill Pratt has what on the surface appears to be a reasonable
solution to the jokes problem.  I do worry, however, that the
newsgroup net.jokes would continue to exist, and the same
problem that net.jokes.q had would affect net.jokes.d and
net.jokes.x, namely, people who subscribed to net.jokes
would get the rest by accident.  Since it would probably not
be possible to kill net.jokes completely (especially among
the readers who have references to it in their .newsrc files)
I would suggest going with ug.jokes instead.  If ug want to
subdivide into x and d categories, fine.

I urge those sites that want ug.all to contact each other and
set up links.  Sites that have censors downstream (this appears
to include physics and idis) should be encouraged to set up
links for ug.all directly to other sites that want this kind
of material.  However, we are all bound by economics - if a site
wants ug.all but has no dialer, it is up to that site to find
someone willing to call them and send them ug.all.

If you want a newsgroup to discuss setting up these connections,
it should probably be called ug.news, or perhaps ug.general.
Since there are obvious initial startup problems, I propose that
someone offer to be a central contact point and directory keeper.
I discourage creation of net.link for this purpose - if such a
newsgroup is really needed to get started, please use net.wanted.

Again, I am (speaking for the USENET silent majority, if I may be
so bold) not condoning racist or degrading jokes, nor am I condoning
censorship.  I am encouraging a solution where both sides are happy:
sites wanting free speech at all costs can have their forum, but the
average person who does not want to read this type of material (or
flames about this type of material) has the inalienable right to
not have to read this stuff, even by accident.

As to a person who wants this kind of material whose account is on
a machine that does not allow it, perhaps a guest account on a
machine getting ug.all can be arranged.  (No, I'm not offering,
we don't get it here.)

	Mark