rayd@laidbak.i88.isc.com (Ray Dueland) (08/22/89)
In article <21361@paris.ics.uci.edu> David A. Honig <honig@ics.uci.edu> writes: >ATT = SPINELESS CENSORSHIP Come on everybody, cross post to comp.sys.att!!!! For those not familiar with cross-posting, edit the "Newsgroups:" line and put "comp.sys.att," FIRST! (with no spaces; only a comma separating the groups) If att is going to deny us alt.drugs, let us deny them comp.sys.att!
eesnyder@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Eric E. Snyder) (08/22/89)
In article <1989Aug22.045207.26952@i88.isc.com> rayd@i88.isc.com (Ray Dueland) writes: >In article <21361@paris.ics.uci.edu> David A. Honig <honig@ics.uci.edu> writes: >>ATT = SPINELESS CENSORSHIP > >Come on everybody, cross post to comp.sys.att!!!! For those not familiar >with cross-posting, edit the "Newsgroups:" line and put "comp.sys.att," FIRST! >(with no spaces; only a comma separating the groups) If att is going to deny >us alt.drugs, let us deny them comp.sys.att! Might it now be time to "legitimatize" alt.drugs by creating a new news.group, perhaps something like sci.pharmacology or sci.drugs? Lately, alt.drugs has been a little heavy on legal issues, dumping on the police and so forth.... Sci.med continues to be a forum for discussion of drugs for medical use (as opposed to recreational).... A new group could bring together discussion from both groups and significantly increase signal-to-noise ratio for those interested pharmacology, recreational or medicinal. Additionally, this would extend the reach of the net to facilities which do not support alt.* newsgroups. If you think this is a good idea, please write or post; if there is sufficient interest, I will look into what it takes to initiate news.group-genesis.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- AAGGTGCAATGATGAGGAATTTTATCGTAGTTATGAATAATCCTGCAAGAGGTGCAAAACCCAGAGTACCTCA Eric E. Snyder Department of Molecular, I thought it was rain for a minute; Cellular and Developmental Biology I thought the game had been called. University of Colorado, Boulder TTCCACGTTACTACTCCTTAAAATAGCATCAATACTTATTAGGACGTTCTCCACGTTTTGGGTCTCATGGAGT -------------------------------------------------------------------------
tonyg@merlin.cvs.rochester.edu (Tony Giaccone) (08/22/89)
In article <1989Aug22.045207.26952@i88.isc.com> rayd@i88.isc.com (Ray Dueland) writes: >In article <21361@paris.ics.uci.edu> David A. Honig <honig@ics.uci.edu> writes: >>ATT = SPINELESS CENSORSHIP > >Come on everybody, cross post to comp.sys.att!!!! For those not familiar >with cross-posting, edit the "Newsgroups:" line and put "comp.sys.att," FIRST! >(with no spaces; only a comma separating the groups) If att is going to deny >us alt.drugs, let us deny them comp.sys.att! Give me a break. Can't we be adult about this. ATT has made a choice. A choice that given the current political climate concerning drugs is hardly unreasonable. It's there right to make that choice. Sure we can all cross post to comp.sys.att and prove we're not going to take this shit anymore. Damnit we'll force those shitheads to give us our alt.durgs. Doesn't that seem to you to be the same type of attitude that prevents you from using the recreational drugs you choose. I thought that's what the counter culture was all about, the right to make choices for yourself. Sure some folks who may read this newsgroup inside ATT may not be able to read it any longer. However, most folks won't notice the change. And those folks who really need to get there alt.drugs will find some way of reading what goes on here. That's just my 2 cents worth of pontificating. The rest of you can do as you choose. I just think it's not that big a deal, then again maybe I'm wrong. Tony Giaccone tonyg@cvs.rochester.edu
doug@marque.mu.edu (08/23/89)
I can perhaps understand that there is an argument whether AT&T should "censor" alt.drugs, although the very meaning of alt.anything is that it can be censored. But to foul up comp.sys.att is not to deny anything to AT&T, it is to deny something to those of us who are interested in AT&T computers. Our purchase and continued use of those machines is not related to whether or not AT&T uses its corporate facilities to transfer alternate newsgroups. If you wish to try to persuade AT&T to change this decision (good luck :-) please pursue appropriate avenues that do not trample on the rights of others. Douglas Harris doug@marque.mu.edu uunet!marque!doug
bill@inebriae.UUCP (Bill Kennedy) (08/23/89)
In article <1989Aug22.045207.26952@i88.isc.com> rayd@i88.isc.com (Ray Dueland) writes: >In article <21361@paris.ics.uci.edu> David A. Honig <honig@ics.uci.edu> writes: >>ATT = SPINELESS CENSORSHIP > >Come on everybody, cross post to comp.sys.att!!!! For those not familiar >with cross-posting, edit the "Newsgroups:" line and put "comp.sys.att," FIRST! >(with no spaces; only a comma separating the groups) If att is going to deny >us alt.drugs, let us deny them comp.sys.att! So somehow the abduction of a newsgroup, in a fit of righteous indignation, will bring AT&T to its knees for deciding what groups they will pay to propagate. Neither this site nor my home site carry alt.drugs because there isn't a soul at either site or downstream that wants to read it. Both sites carry comp.sys.att because there are numerous readers at each site and downstream. As the one who pays the LD for the sites I administer, I reserve the right to not carry a group that nobody wants to read. Both inebriae and ssbn carry groups that I don't read, but that others do. I arbitrarily do not carry some groups (talk, rec, soc, alt) that only downstream sites want because they can pick them up from a site who does carry them. I won't pay for them at the sites I pay for. I see this as analogous to AT&T's decision. Admittedly, AT&T has deeper pockets than I do, but I don't see the substance of the issue as all that different. So you're going to punish the rest of us who choose not to read alt.drugs but want to read comp.sys.att by crossposting. You're going to assert your rights by depriving us of ours. You're going to teach AT&T a lesson and punish them for deciding how they will allocate their corporate resources. It appears to me to be similar to demanding unpaid equal advertising time in one periodical because another refuses to carry your unpaid advertising. I don't suggest that alt.drugs is advertising, it's just an analogy. You can not claim censorship unless someone actively restrains your freedom of speech. AT&T isn't doing that at all, they are just refusing to pay for its propagation. You can speak all you want, anyone who wants to can propagate it, anyone who doesn't want to propagate it (on their money, not yours) doesn't have to. If you would pay for propagation within AT&T and they refused your money I think you'd have a beef. In the mean time, please do not confuse your freedom of expression with our freedom of choice. I'm not remotely affiliated with AT&T other than a monthly telephone bill and a reader of comp.sys.att. -- Bill Kennedy {texbell,att,cs.utexas.edu,sun!daver}!ssbn!bill bill@ssbn.WLK.COM or attmail!ssbn!bill
hlr@well.UUCP (Howard Rheingold) (08/23/89)
sci.drugs sounds like a good idea, if it doesn't serve to limit the
scope of discussion
--
Howard Rheingold hlr@well.UUCP
{ucbvax,pacbell,apple,hplabs}!well!hlr
hlr@well.sf.ca.us
>>what it is is up to us<<jessea@dynasys.UUCP (Jesse W. Asher) (08/28/89)
In article <1989Aug22.045207.26952@i88.isc.com> rayd@i88.isc.com (Ray Dueland) writes: >In article <21361@paris.ics.uci.edu> David A. Honig <honig@ics.uci.edu> writes: >>ATT = SPINELESS CENSORSHIP > >Come on everybody, cross post to comp.sys.att!!!! For those not familiar >with cross-posting, edit the "Newsgroups:" line and put "comp.sys.att," FIRST! >(with no spaces; only a comma separating the groups) If att is going to deny >us alt.drugs, let us deny them comp.sys.att! It iritates me to no end when jerks with only their own self interest in mind have the audicity to hinder the rest of us in our daily lives. For this reason, I for one will make sure that my systems stops carrying alt.drugs and that all articles that come in to comp.sys.att that have been cross-posted to alt.drugs are killed. I and my system have nothing to do with AT+T's decision not to carry alt.drugs and yet you are punishing me by requiring that I expend my time and money on your crying. Get the hell of the net if you can't take it.
upl@puff.cs.wisc.edu (Future Unix Gurus) (08/28/89)
In article <6047@lynx.UUCP> neal@lynx.UUCP (Neal Woodall) writes: >In article <10937@boulder.Colorado.EDU> eesnyder@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Eric E. Snyder) writes: >>In article <1989Aug22.045207.26952@i88.isc.com> rayd@i88.isc.com (Ray Dueland) writes: > >>>Come on everybody, cross post to comp.sys.att!!!! >>>If att is going to deny us alt.drugs, let us deny them comp.sys.att! > >>Might it now be time to "legitimatize" alt.drugs by creating a new news.group, >>perhaps something like sci.pharmacology or sci.drugs? > >I kind of like the idea of cross posting to comp.sys.att.....it shows the >fools at ATT what a boner their idea of "shutting down" alt.drugs is. It fits >in well with my philosophy of life: If you cannot win by the rules, then >change the rules! By posting to comp.sys.att, we indicate that merely [Stuff Deleted] >Neal Neal, by posting to comp.sys.att, you just piss off a bunch of people who have nothing whatsoever to do with AT&T. Speaking for myself, (and it's reasonable to assume others), I own an AT&T computer. I don't work for them, nor do I care to. I have one of their computers because it was the cheapest real Unix that I could find. I don't care about whether or not AT&T is fascist, sexist, racist anti-drug supporting, or anything as concerns the news group comp.sys.att comp.sys.att is a bunch of USERS!!! Just like you. Only we use AT&T computers. We want to talk about AT&T computers. Please, gripe about AT&T elsewhere, we don't care. What's more important is we CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT!!! NADA, NICHTS, ZILCH. So, being blunt, leave us alone. - sparkie. p.s. please send any hatE-mail to sparkie@uhura.cs.wisc.edu