[net.micro] For Sale Messages

FJW@Mit-Mc@sri-unix (10/21/82)

From: Frank J Wancho <FJW@Mit-Mc>
Please do not use INFO-MICRO (or INFO-CPM) to sell anything either
privately owned or commercially available.  Continuing to do so will
be reason to disband the list.  Sorry.

--Frank

sdyer@Bbn-Unix@sri-unix (10/22/82)

From: Steve Dyer <sdyer@Bbn-Unix>


I noticed your anti-"for sale" message.  You should realize that
that message came from the "net.micro" news group on USENET,
which apparently is forwarded onto the ARPAnet without screening
from BRL.  USENET is a voluntary, dial-up Bboard, and its members
can do anything they might please, including posting "for sale" messages.

Clearly, the problem is with BRL's policy of forwarding all net.micro
submissions without screening.  I'm not sure what the solution should be,
but is is clearly not harpo!npoiv!alice!mhtsa!mh3bs!rjbu's problem.

Steve Dyer
decvax!wivax!dyer

FJW@Mit-Mc@sri-unix (10/22/82)

From: Frank J Wancho <FJW@Mit-Mc>
I understand the USENET situation.  I also understand that there are
news groups established expressly for "for sale" messages which do not
leak into ARPA.  Such messages should go there.

The problem of not screening net.micro mail from USENET through BRL is
NOT BRL's policy, it is mine.  In our recent discussions about
digestification of mailings to this list, which would have included as
a byproduct, such filtering of for sale mail, we surveyed the group
and received something like six requests to receive digests.  That was
"clearly" not enough to justify the time and effort of some volunteer
to act as moderator.  It is likewise not worth the effort to screen
all the messages from USENET for the occassional for sale message that
does leak over to ARPA.

In general, the participants of this list have been well-behaved and
have followed the unspoken (until now) ground rules of a discussion
list.  My message was meant to be a reminder of the ground rules that
ARPA activities must abide in order to continue to exist.  If the
USENET portion of this list wants to ignore our situation, then I will
simply sever the connection in both directions - an admittedly drastic
step that I will not undertake lightly.

--Frank

ron@BRL@sri-unix (10/22/82)

From:     Ron Natalie <ron@BRL>
Since the USENET micro and the ARPAnet micro areas have been
merged, the guide lines that Frank suggested should be upheld
by both the ARPAnet and USENET submitters.  To do otherwise would
cause the link between the two INFO-MICRO nets to be forced to
terminate.

Ron

goldfarb.ucf-cs@Udel-Relay@sri-unix (10/23/82)

From:     Ben Goldfarb <goldfarb.ucf-cs@Udel-Relay>
Frank, you are missing the point.  "The USENET portion of this list" is 
an entity unto itself, not a subentity of this list.  Net.micro serves
many readers via uucp who have no ARPANET connections.  The connection
through BRL to ARPANET expands the coverage of the group and is highly
desirable.

Unfortunately, being a volunteer network, there is no good, clear-cut
way to impose rules upon a specific newsgroup, particularly when the 
attempt comes from another network.  Indeed, the sponsors have tried 
to promulgate rules at times with only limited success.  It usually 
comes down to individuals taking action to survey opinions about the
proposed changes, then to implement them.  The solution to your problem
would be to establish a subgroup of net.micro for commercial messages
which brl-bmd would have the option of either ignoring or not forwarding
to BRL.  We could call it net.micro.d  (inside joke for USENET folk).

					Ben Goldfarb
					ARPA:  goldfarb.ucf-cs@Udel-Relay
					UUCP: ...!duke!ucf-cs!goldfarb

CSTROM@Mit-Mc@sri-unix (10/24/82)

From: Charlie Strom <CSTROM@Mit-Mc>
Ben, I understand your point, but it seems to me that it is USENET's
responsibility to adapt to FJW's ground rules in this case. It is not
his problem, but theirs, in other words. I for one do not want to see
the appearence of an avalanche of commercial messages on the list.
There are enough items of dubious value that I must wade through
already. I appreciate FJW's diligence in responding so quickly; it
can be likened to the little Dutch boy keeping the dike from crumbling
with his finger. I would not like to see the USENET people severed
from the list, as no one would be served by that in the long run, but
there must be some ground rules adhered to in that quarter!

goldfarb.ucf-cs@Udel-Relay@sri-unix (10/24/82)

From:     Ben Goldfarb <goldfarb.ucf-cs@Udel-Relay>
OK, I realize Frank's position is valid, but I wanted to stress  
that as atomistic as Usenet is, there will be difficulty in enforcing
any such sanctions.  I, too, would feel the loss if the ARPA connection 
were severed.  But, remember, new people join Usenet all the time and
there is no rule book, no briefing, no single person to serve as an
information source for problems and general queries.  Thus, someone is
liable to make the same blunder again.

I guess Frank has done the right thing by issuing a stern warning.  At
least a few folks on net.micro have no doubt taken notice.  
					Ben

dave (10/29/82)

Why not have a filter that automatically strips out messages with
"for sale" in their header strings from going to the ARPAnet? It's not
too onerous to request from USENET people to make sure they put
that string into their header. (Look at recent for sales: they pretty
well all do anyway.)

FJW@mit-mc.arpa (02/05/83)

From:  Frank J. Wancho <FJW@mit-mc.arpa>

Once again I would like to remind people reading INFO-MICRO to NOT
send For Sale messages to this list.  Not only do such messages
present problems for me to justify sponsoring this list on the
ARPANET, it defeats the general intent of the list as a discussion
forum on micros and related topics and clutters the net traffic and
mailboxes with undesired messages.

For those of you reading INFO-MICRO on non-ARPANET machines, please
look around for another net.whatever to send such For Sale messages -
I believe there is such a list set up just for that purpose.

Thanks,
Frank