🚀 go-pugleaf

dane  <dane@sonic.net> wrote:
>In ba.internet q@q.com <q@q.com> wrote:
>: Wal-Mart's cleaning contractor was busted for using illegal
>: immigrants.  They are also in violation of building codes for
>: locking ALL exits will there are people on the premises.
>
>This has little to do with Bay Area Internet - please check your
>newsgroups line!

Dane,

With your posh position of having done many right things and
succeeding at it and it being very relevent to this USENET group
(ba.internet), I can see how you can be one of the people who thinks
this.

Internet connectivity is one of the many measures some of us use in
order to guage how healthy an area and society is.  USA is way behind
in this area, and in education, jobs, etc.  Also, a lot of ba.internet
users have been having to deal with these issues lately as a result of
dealing with Internet issues.  While the path to that discussion is
often long and meandering, it is there, and often not as long.

However, there may be *more* appropriate USENET groups; I don't mind
people suggesting the topic list be refined somewhat.  One of USENET's
failings has always been its rigid categories.  Of course, new posts
have the best opportunity to be correct, and therefore SPAM is not
allowed, however, the natural path of discussions can *never* stay
exactly within the bounds of the original USENET group.  We could more
aggressively edit the newsgroups lines.  Yes, it says british up
there, but at the same time, when I leave my house, I see illegal
immigrants.  Does that suddenly make them legal, since they shouldn't
be here?  No, it doesn't; they are here, and that is not a fact I can
ignore.  Likewise, this discussion is relevent, even if distantly, to
ba.internet.  Yes, we need to consider removing it from the group
line.  But it was originally brought up in this group because we were
discussing the cost of services, economics of delivering that service,
getting service, and other items like that.  How can you possibly say
that just because Sonic doesn't outsource to India, Sonic tries to
deliver decent costs, and Sonic doesn't fire everyone in California
and replace them with Texans and Indians (that I know of), that no one
else has to deal with that experience?  For instance, even Sonic
customers have to deal with the prospect that economics not in the Bay
Area are affecting their Internet (Inter-network) service.

Tomorrow I'm going to have to borrow money just to pay for a
loss-leader promotion you are offering to me.  While I intend to find
work, and eventually get enuogh resources to start my own business
(while still supporting myself with a main job), and of course pay
back that loan, how can I possibly ignore the relevance of that to
this group?  I don't want to hear that I shouldn't try to upgrade to
3mbit/s in, either; it will still be cost competitive, even though my
budget is really depressing.  Spending according to current assets is
the same sort of idea that says let thieves steal my money, and then
because I don't currently have what they stole, I shouldn't bother to
try to eat, and therefore just die, and that's what I'm supposed to
do.  No, it isn't.  I'm not Ethiopian, so I don't have to suffer the
consequences of their bad planning, and I most certainly shouldn't eat
all the food on my plate (which would just make me less healthy if I
overeat or eat something bad!).

Sure, I could be technically ba.internet and say "hey, I just set up a
really neat ISP that is really ba.internet relevant", but in order to
do that, I'd have to have millions of dollars.  Meanwhile, I have to
fend in here looking for what is available while I haven't yet chosen
to become one of your competitors.  In that process, some of the above
issues are raised.

When I look at that newsgroups line, nowhere in there do I see
"soc.design"; which newsgroups should I subscribe to in order to discuss this further?  

alt.computer.consultants:  I'm not one.
soc.culture.indian:  not one.
alt.politics.economics:  Perhaps, but this is a
   very large topic.
ba.internet:  yes
soc.culture.british:  not one.

Ahh, ok, so I'm supposed to subscribe to alt.politics.economics.

Ok.  So, I'll remove ba.internet from followups, and try to read
alt.politics.economics, even though I think this discussion transcends
politics.  But, still, it makes sense to me that it was in ba.internet.