🚀 go-pugleaf

Jim Mercer (jim@reptiles.org) wrote:
: In article <1994Mar28.005005.10626@sizone.pci.on.ca>,
: Sickly Boat Harm <root@sizone.pci.on.ca> wrote:
: >Jim Mercer (jim@reptiles.org) wrote:
: >As much as I think the original poster is a TWIT, I dont agree with you
: >by a mile. Makes me think that you are one of those 'administrators' or
: >'management' types. You're missing something.

: no, i think that netnews systems should be classed as common carriers.

YAHOO! Please push this heavily, cause its going to be decided very soon. I
run a public site on my own machine and cant afford to lose it cause I have
to be responsible for all 6-10 megs that come onto it every day in the
form of news. (I have a small feed, and still dont have enough time in my
day to read the groups _I_ want, never mind the govt wants me to read.)

Why am I allowed to own a tv? Actually, thats not a good example, since
there are only some 60 odd channels. Sattelite dishes should be banned
tho, if they were being consistent.

: what i'm beefing about is that people are intentionally posting holmonka stuff

Question thats kinda trite and off topic: Do you cut n paste "holmonka" from
some file everytime you have to type it? Its "Homolka" with or without the
capital "H".

: to canadian groups and mailing lists with the express purpose of pissing off
: the management types.

I think they're just testing the net. Good thing fax machines were tested
before Tiannamen(sp) Square. I think its good. Good thing its now before
something REALLY important happens and we need the net.

: some of them are childish "nah nah, you can't stop me"

Nah nah, excercising my constitutional rights. So what. There's no law that
says you cant be a twit journalist when excercising your right to free
press, but it sure happens alot. The SUN wouldnt exist if this were true. Ha,
neither would Wired be allowed into Canada before they goofed. (Oops, I mean
with the Homolka info specifically, sorry - that was kinda ambiguous.)

: some of them are idealist "information should be free, so i'm going to
: forcefeed it until management/government bends to my ideals"

Cool idea. I'd love to have the time and money running around creating
test cases of the law to find out what I can and cant do and what needs
to be changed in my eyes. Why do you think fundamentalists band
together with large lobbying powers and money to push the US Govt
around? Same reason. Same reason, thank god, the EFF exists in the US,
in part. (God? Wait a sec...)

: the net result is that netnews is being shutdown or censored.

WOOHOO! I think there'd be riots in the streets. Well, at least on the
existing and _NOW ILLEGAL_ UUCP nets. That would be an amazing day. The
net's destiny would be polarized and completely secured. It would never allow
the govt to be trusted again, and would re-instate itself in an even more
govt-resistive form. Its pretty tough now, what with no one corporation
or govt agency owning/watching it with any sort of special jurisdiction,
but if it somehow went down, and then came back, it would be deadly resistive.

Hell, the original net was intended to help communications after a
NUCLEAR WAR! What do you expect? 

However, the power of the net is too gigantic for the commercial sector to
leave it in the hands of hobbyists, activists and tek-heads. They'd want
a piece of it, and they'd push the govt in that direction. And concessions
would be made, and they WILL be made. I say the net will remain free, but
i want to see it happen NOW, not after a series of avoidable disasters.

Please note, I still sleep at night. :)

: sysadmins are being forced to do things they don't want to do, or face
: possible reprecussions.

Oh no. This never happens in any other kind of work. Never. If the disclaimer
"my opinions have nothing to do with my employer's" then they can voice
their protest on the net (even away from their employer's eyes, via
anonymous servers, or care in posting...)

: commercial operators are forced to censor, or risk being closed down
: by a government seizure.

Good stuff. Like I said, if everything went down, it would only look down
to the govt. Everyone else would find it soon enough. Someone might go to
jail. I think they'd get alot of support tho. And, again, the net will
eventually reflect the wants of the people. Sure seems like everyone wants
the gory Homolka details.

Too bad we have to use this kind of thing to get support for the net's
freedom - glorified violence and disgusting crimes - but imagine if we
suddenly weren't allowed to talk about cryptography on the net? What then?
No one would care a bit, and bad things a la Clipper would start appearing
as official govt policy. (Whats happening with our govt's proposals on
crypto? Why arent the papers talking about it? Case in point.)

: users are losing access to groups that have nothing to do with holmonka, except
: that some childish idealist had to screw it up for them.

Oh no. No more Jays n Leafs. Who cares. They do. GOOD! Let them rally with
us again the idea that carrying newsgroups constitutes publication.

: the people ordering the shutdowns probably don't use the systems, so for them
: it is no big deal.

AHA! EXACTLY! So, tho its no big deal for a couple dozen administrators and
management types at as many Canadian universities, can you imagine 20,000
usenet using/reading undergrads at those universities and another 10,000
(???) commercial users in Ontario alone screaming at the govt and getting
coverage in the papers that the usenet was shut down?

Actually, what would probably happen is this: a rumour that the usenet might
get shutdown for this unrealistic ban surfaces, and things gety very
sticky regarding the net and the ban for the AG. They waffle over it and
make concessions and dont shut down the entire usenet, but publish some
official stance on the alt.fan.k-h and alt.pub-ban groups. This makes sure
they dont have to make any laws they'll regret, such as either "the usenet
is illegal" (unrealistic, since they'd last 1 day with that in place) or
"carrying usenet newsgroups does not constitute publishing" which would be
great, but they'd hate themselves forever for it. (Can you see the RCMP
agreeing with the latter? Ha!)

: users are being fucked over, not always by sysadmins, but by self-righteous
: pinheads out to cause havoc.

Wait til _YOU_ think its important. Imagine you went on and on about strong
crypto being a right and all I wanted to talk about was the damn Leafs.
Say its illegal to publish PGP on newsgroups but you do it and then you
lose the Leafs discussion in ont.general. Now _I_'m pissed off at you
for getting the group banned, but its not really your fault, its the
govt's fault for classifying carrying groups as publication.

(I hope you think that strong crpto should be a right, otherwise you're
a twit (insert disclaimer here) and my example is shot.)

: as far as i know, the government has not ruled on the holmonka USENET
: stuff.

So even as now, a.f.k-h still really isnt illegal but the govt has us
cowering without so much as lifting a pen. Shux. Wait til they do make
it illegal to post on subject _X_. We'll be going back to cancel our old
articles with enthusiasm.

: all shutdowns have been voluntarily, in fear of government action.

_I_ would have to. I should, tho a.f.k-h is a crossposting haven anyway
that i'd have to lose ont.general, etc. I have warned my users to remove
banned info from their files tho, pending account removal. I HATE that
shit, but I have to. I cant afford to go to court and I rather like my
email (more so than my news, by a large factor) and dont want to lose
my machine.

As much as I'd like to see hemp legalised, I still dont walk the streets
with 5 kilos in my pocket.

However, I'd like to see these so-called bastions of free-speech (universities)
stand up and fight with all my taxpaying money for this since no one else is.
(Who can I call? Does my MP care? Is this an issue yet?)

: also, as far as i know, the government as not actually charged anyone with
: breaking the ban.  they have confiscated materials from various people
: who were intending to distribute info, but i don't think anyone has been
: charged.

Gordon Domm has been charged.

Abdul might be. And Neal?

I wish someone like a university department would be. That would be
great. Suddenly, alot of money would come out of nowhere and this would
be settled.

/kc

-- 
Ken P. Chasse -- Sysadmin, Sonic Interzone   "Carrying netnews does not a 
Public Access email/Usenet -- 416-968-7292    publisher make." - something
spooge@sizone.pci.on.ca --  Toronto CANADA    I'd like to see. Support it.