🚀 go-pugleaf

[can.config and news.admin.hierarchies added to newsgroups line]

On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 04:00:45 -0400, Unit 4 <UnitIV@SPUTUM.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 24 Jun 2000 21:53:37 -0500, Henrietta K. Thomas <usadmin@wwa.com>
>wrote, in alt.native:
>
>}I'd really like to talk to some real native people about creating native
>}groups in the us.* hierarchy.

>I was just about to broach the subject, Henrietta. I was thinking those same
>thoughts just days ago, and thought it through a bit.
>
>Fact is us.* isn't appropriate, because it's based on national lines that
>don't apply. There's plenty of nations that live on both sides of that
>border. I don't reckon you'd suffer a great deal of crossposting with can.*
>just to satisfy that.

Cross-regional crossposts are appropriate only when the subject
matter is directly relevant to both countries, say, problems with NAFTA.
This probably would not apply to native tribes.  Native tribes in Canada
are subject to Canadian law; native tribes in the USA are subject to US
law.  Although there may be similarities in culture, there are also many
differences between the tribes in Canada and the tribes in USA, which
are probably best handled separately.  For example, treaties made
with their respective central governments.

>We've got a top level domain in the works, so I reckon the next step is a top
>level hierarchy. It'd be "regional" in that it wouldn't be a big 8, but not
>in the geographic sense -- it'd get limited distribution by request. Can't
>rightly hold someone else's map lines up as rationale against it.

Limited distribution = limited participation.  Is that really what
you want?

>I'm thinking na.* would go over good. It's not taken as far as I can
>determine. Not unless there's some unregistered regional out there.

na.* = North America.  That would mean Canada, USA, Mexico.
I believe there was some discussion of this in news.admin.hierarchies
once upon a time, but I don't think there's much demand for it.  Your
topics would be limited to only what would be of interest to all three
countries, i.e., something like NAFTA.  And you'd have to figure out
a way to get around the language thing with Mexico.

>I approached Usenet 2 but too many systems were refusing it because they're,
>well they're jerks pretty much.

Not so much jerks, IMO, as that they are completely isolated from the 
rest of Usenet, and they *are* an international hierarchy

>Knowing that a new hierarchy can have troubles propgating I was going to
>approach Jeremy and ask him to add it to RemarQ so they can access it even if
>their system doesn't carry it. IF everyone goes for it.

I think you should first read Simon Lyall's Config Files FAQ, and follow
his suggestions for creating a new hierarchy.  And I think you should
discuss your plans with the news admins who read news.admin.hierarchies.
That's what I did before I started working on us.*.

>A primary issue here (in the nesgroup, not with respect to this discussion)
>is sovereignty. No offense, but us.* kind of smacks that in the face, and
>can.* does only margially better. Forcing a cross between the two would be
>picking at a scab. Essentially, US is the name of a nation. There's about 800
>nations on this continent, and most of the rest aren't necessarily happy with
>having to wear that tag.

If all you want to do is cover native nations, na.* might not be the
best name for your hierarchy.  Why don't you call it native.* instead?
Then you could cover all the native tribes in the world.  There are
quite a few.

>I appreciate your thinking of us Henrietta, and don't mean any offense.

I wasn't thinking of you, Dennis.  Didn't know you were of native ancestry.

>Others may well disagree and think a us.* newsgroup is a fine idea. Who
>knows, they might both work out.

I talked to a Native American in email recently, and he said he
didn't want any native groups at all.  Nevertheless, I'm still interested
in talking to real natives as to their needs and desires in relation to
the us.* hierarchy.

>You know, we had such a thing at one time. One of the regulars here started
>it. It was NativeNet, based on the old Fidonet software. Frosty did a damn
>fine job on that. I reckon it's time we had something like that for usenet.
>There's a full time satellite distributed music and news network and now a TV
>network, I think it only makes sense that we get our own hierarchy.

There is no law that says you can't.  You're only limited by what
your prospective users want and what the news admins will accept.  
But I *do* recommend that you go to news.admin.hierarchies and 
follow standard procedure for creating new hierarchies.

Whatever you do will have no bearing on the us.* hierarchy.  
Native tribes within the United States are still welcome to open
newsgroups here geared to meet their own specific needs as
citizens who are counted among the 'people' of the United States.

Followups to alt.native and news.admin.hierarchies.

Henrietta