🚀 go-pugleaf

ZdoutenZ@supernews.com wrote...
:
:Marcus Brutus wrote:
:
:::"D Outen" <ZdoutenZ@supernews.com> wrote:
:::
::: -I'm an ex-IBMnet customer.
::
::  So am I.  Tried them out for several months and 
::finally gave up on them in disgust--really.
::
::  There exceptionally poor usenet feed, and the very
::frequent downtimes on their very slow news servers
::was the primary reason I gave up on them.  I always
::have multiple accounts to compare and contrast
::newsfeeds--there's is very heavily censored on content
::not spam (like they claim).  Even for posts that did
::manage to appear they expired so quickly that you'd
::have to stay current every two days or so.  I was
::very surprised--I've always had a high opinion of
::IBM and continue to do so in most other areas.
:
:
:Your comments would be true of IBMnet if you are describing 
:last years Usenet service.    

  Yes--it was last year.

:They changed and are first class now.   I just left
:recently.

  That's very good to hear--as I said I've always had a
very high opinion of IBM in all other areas.


::  And you've chosen yet another heavily filtered feed
::so you probably won't even see this message as
::it is critical of IBM and will be forged cancelled.
:
:
:I did see this message on Supernews.   I have seen messages 
:in the Supernews general group using descriptive adjectives 
:to describe the tech support staff.    The free for all that 
:Usenet offered was appealing to me.   Now that I've been there 
:I realize that Usenet was built as a cooperative venture with 
:all parties exercising some restraint.    Like all good things, 
:some people are abusing their welcome.    

  Mostly news admins and their groupies who fawn over them.  

:To keep Usenet as a viable option for discussion it is
:therefore necessary to use a sledgehammer to keep some posters 
:under control.    

  Well I agree except the sledgehammer is needed for some
rogue news admins and self appointed net.cops (like 
Rosenthal and Bellomy)--and a sledgehammer may not be enough-
one must always be willing to take it to the next level no
matter where that leads.  And speaking of control--if you're
on an ISP that rejects cancels--as the majority of users are
now-Mr. Rosenthal has ruined austin.internet for anything but
the discussion of his own censorship and it'll remain that
way until he leaves it.


:Usenet won't survive with massive canceling and it won't
:survive without it.    For now, cancels are a necessary evil.

  Not really--HipCrime has made them quite irrelevant in the
austin.* groups and news.admin.* groups and they are rejected
by AOL, Earthlink--in fact the majority of users are on ISPs
that are completely unaffected by the Rosenthal cancels.

:    Do you have a solution?

  No solution can every be perfect Dave but whatever solutions
are tried must ensure that all have a right to freely express
themselves where they like and when they like without any
fear of repercussion--any solution that does not have that
as a foundation will be rejected, undermined and tossed in the
trash.

  The best solutions involved empowering the individual user.
For example you'd obviously like to filter out some of the 
news--and you have your own personal criteria which differs
from others criteria--we are all individuals.  

  For a newsreader try Anawave Gravity--it has excellent 
filtering capabilities designed to be exceptionally easy
to create and customize for the individual user.  There's
even a built in filter that you can CHOOSE to apply if
you want that will zap anything with more than X amount
of groups in the crosspost--you defining X--not someone
else doing it for you.

  There's also NoCem--they are specific types of filters
and there are many NoCem--a majority of it is on content--
not spam.  Some less than ethical ISPs apply them globally
to their newsfeed thus denying consumers choice and 
censoring many--including those critical of the creators
of the NoCem of coures.

  In terms of solutions an ISP honestly interested in
Free Speech but addressing the very legitimate concerns
you express could quite easily create a Menu of NoCems
that its users could individually select if they chose
to do so.  This is a very fair and logical solution except
that for a majority of those doing the filtering they
really have no interest in empowering the individual user
go giving them any control over what they'll read.

                       Steve
                       news.admin.censorship
:
:Dave
: