[net.news.group] ads on the net

aron (10/24/82)

Recently, there has been some discussion about ads on the net.  This
has mainly been of the "I do/don't" like it variety.  But now this
issue has the potential to become a more serious problem, and for this
reason I am calling it to the attention of the general readership.

Net.micro is currently gatewayed to Arpa's mailing list info-micro.
Some people have been posting (innocently) 4sale messages on
the usenet.  These have been shipped over to Arpa, which is of
course a big no-no.  If this continues (even innocently) the
gateway may have to be severed.  This would be a great loss to both
Arpa and Usenet.  Moreover this potential problem exists in other
gatewayed lists.

I know this has been suggested before, but I urge that it finally
be implemented.  Let's have a net.ads, with appropriate subgroups
like net.ads.4sale, net.ads.jobs etc.  All commercial messages should
be restricted to these groups.  Net.wanted should be for non-commercial
"wants".  This will solve both the aesthetic and gateway problems.

					aron shtull-trauring
					harpo!presby!aron

thomas (10/26/82)

I thought that was one of the purposes of net.wanted.
=Spencer

mark (10/26/82)

No commercial use of the ARPANET?  Are you sure?  There is lots of
commercial use of the ARPANET, there are entire companies who do
their business making heavy use of the ARPANET.  BBN and RAND are
two examples that come to mind.

I do know that, technically, any "use" of the ARPANET by someone
who is not a DOD contractor is illegal.  Some people interpret
this to include netnews articles originated by a person who is
not a DOD contractor, others (including myself) feel that anything
two consenting DOD contractors decide to send each other over the
ARPANET in order to help do their DOD contract (and netnews, as a
whole, helps them do their jobs) is OK.

If there really is a problem with the ARPANET, and the ARPANET sites
are worried that ads might be politically a bad thing to have appear
on their machine, those sites should speak up.

	Mark

smith@umn-cs.UUCP (06/06/83)

#R:utah-gr:-60000:umn-cs:7700001:000:22
umn-cs!smith    Oct 29 16:34:00 1982

q: Command not found.

smith@umn-cs.UUCP (06/06/83)

#R:utah-gr:-60000:umn-cs:7700002:000:696
umn-cs!smith    Nov  8 10:45:00 1982

Concerning commercial use of Arpanet:

  You're misunderstanding the meaning of the word "commercial".  Non
commercial use is work on government contracts; commercial use means
using the net for non government related work.  Believe it or not,
places like BBN take the distinction seriously.  When I was there they
had several 10's and 20's with megabytes of routine mail traffic
between them.  None of this traffic used Arpanet lines; they had a
local switch to handle all of that.  If you look at SIGSOFT's
"Software Engineering Notes" you'll see the distinction again.  You
can submit articles via Arpanet FTP as long as the work in the article
was supported by a government contract.

Rick.