🚀 go-pugleaf

clance@koro.connect.com.au (Kate Lance) writes:

>A journalist MADE UP the story that the cost would be $1 per IP
>address, there was no proposal at all from AIR that any fees would be
>charged.  Due to the mis-information, aus.net.aarnet went ballistic
>with self-righteous indignation.  No-one bothered to get any facts
>about the situation.

Speaking as one of the more notorious participants in that flap (having
been reckless enough to title an otherwise innocuous article, "RFD
aus.flame.geoff-huston" ...) I am regretful about this incident. My
recollection is that the trouble involved a fair number of factors

 - the $1 fee described in the newspaper
 - a post by kre throwing in with AIR but not denying the fees
 - silence from Geoff, Hugh and Andy for a few days, subsequently
   explained as a real-life fishing expedition, I seem to recall.

a.n.a certainly did go off its nut, but I don't think that was
unpredictable given these circumstances. This was back in those antique
days when Australian ISPs were not floated on US stock markets for
hundreds of millions of dollars, Aarnet was pretty much the whole
ballgame, and people were worried that the old guard were going to try
to lock out the independents ...  I reckon that was around about the
time that the gaslight and the horse-drawn carriage fell out of favour too.

>But it's not insoluble, and it's possible that in the near future the
>Australian Internet community might have recovered enough from the
>severe self-inflicted injuries of 18 months ago to manage a bit of sane
>and constructive communication.  Getting the history right might be a
>good start!

FWIW, should anyone obtain the consensus required to start a private
concern to do this now, I for one would keep my yap firmly shut and my
mind firmly on my own business.

-- 
mailto:pete@zip.com.au        | Don't let Big Brother destroy the Net in NSW!! |
http://www.zip.com.au/~pete/  | Read http://www.anatomy.su.oz.au/~danny/march/ |