In the latest installment of the There's-gotta-be-a-better-way discussion,
Dr. Solari wrote:
>
> I do not agree, Sir. If EARN board of chiefs has taken the care to write
> down some guidelines they should be considered by every one and a follow
> up discussed.
>
....
>
> That is a conceptual way to accept the partial waste of an infrastucture
> which cost billions. Beyond any nationalistic bigotry I would like to
> suggest that Americans (from Canada to Argentina) take the concepts of
> "freedom and control" too far. If things will work, and if Internet/Bitnet
> will serve humanity, there must be some rules - which do not necessarily
> imply "control" in a political context whatsoever.
>
 
EARN does not speak for the planet, as much as I respect the people who
run it. I think that it "serves humanity" quite well to have a flexible
network which offers different levels of access and control in different
contexts. No one group has written the definitive book of rules, nor do
I think one can be written. The basic golden rule, echoed by all world
religions and most philosophies, of respect for the other person and other
points of view, is probably the only thing all of us can be certain we have
in common.
 
One point which needs to be made every so often is that some countries
offer wider network access than others to their (e.g.,) undergraduates
and others who are being acculturated to the net. The value in having
many ways of using the net (from IRC to moderated newsgroups and lists)
helps the socialization process along. I don't know if this view is
shared on the more sophisticated Continent but I believe all people
should (resources permitting) have access to the net, and should have
the opportunity to learn how to use it. ( This naive view of mine is
probably written down somewhere in some UN document, it's platitudinous
enough.)
 
If you want a list which runs the way you want it to, and you want tight
controls over content/topics, then moderate it and don't complain if
relatively few people stay on it. If you want to tolerate a bit more
diversity, then use persuasion (not gatekeeping) to keep a broader and
more open discussion on track. If you don't like the danger of unwanted
and undisciplined posters from gatewayed newsgroups, then keep your list
strictly email w/o gateways.
 
I don't mean to waste peoples' time on this, but I'm also on Fish-Ecology
and have already suffered through the same kind of discussion there.
Enough, please.
 
Regards,
 
-Dave Phillips