At 12:34 PM 8/20/1997 -0500, Mary Schweitzer wrote:
>I don't really think this is the right place for this, either.

Amen.  And as just posted, I'll not comment publicly on any of the personal
crappola, rules, interpretations, etc, etc.

>However, the context was the frustration over not being able to
>gate a discussion list to USENET -- particularly since I purchased
>the list specifically TO gate it to USENET.  So now we're faced
>with two problems we did not think we would have to encounter --

If the usenet is that vital, it should have been checked out before
spending any money, I'd think.

>other problem (the bigger one) is that the American U gateway is
>dying.

It appears that is a nonissue, as INN server has been reliably reported as
doing this....so find a site that has it, pay what, if anything, you must,
and be done with it on list.

>In the context of diminishing access to resources, the person who
>already has them can have a virtual monopoly.  One of the

No monopoly.  You pays your money and you takes your choices.  Talk to your
ISP.

>run ours our way (participatory democracy).  But we don't get the
>opportunity to offer a comparable alternative.

Of course you do.  Nobody guarantees free lunches any more.

>we can go ours.  But the only way to GET such a list is to
>publicly demonstrate that HIS lists are not enough.  Which leads
>inevitably to pretty unpleasant situations -- as you just saw

No, not necessary.  Find your INN server....maybe even your current ISP.
Set it up.  Pay if you have to.  As long as you make it
bit.listserv.listname or something in the alt.* hierarchy, no problems of
politics.  THEN once it is going well, if folks want to play the political
game, then fine, do so, and try to move to whatever hierarchy you need to
be in.

>I'm having enough trouble trying to get a USENET site without
>having to deal with disinformation being spread and no way to
>correct it.

As long as you're arranging it with your ISP or other provider, they won't
care about whatever BS in the past has or hasn't happened.  In fact, I'd be
sure NOT to mention a word of it to them, as it may scare them off since
they'll be afraid of being embroiled in some hassles.

>The LARGER problem is one that all of us on Internet will have to
>face at one point or another -- which is how to distribute access
>to an increasingly scarce resource -- who does the distributing,
>what are the standards, and how do you control for disinformation?

NOT a problem.  We can all pay whatever we need to do put whatever we want
on the web.  There are many places that don't CARE AT ALL what your content
is as long as you pay the bills....Nazi, porn, anti-gay, atheist, whatever.
 Not their interest or problem.  Sure, some care.  That's fine too.

The whole point of the nets is that it IS FREE and that NO ONE, most
especially the government(s), is controlling content.  One person's
information is another one's disinformation.  If you wanna see that game
played in spades, join flight-800 for examples.

Again, law of supply and demand will determine the costs.  If lots of
little ISPs croak, which they will, then costs may go up.  Or they may
anyway.  But as of now the costs are fairly standard for most fairly
standard services.  And there ARE standards.....they are what make the nets
work.  Some people don't follow all of them, and they have problems.
That's up to them.  Remember, freedom of the press is guaranteed only for
the one who owns the press.  All after that is business decisions.

>Thanks to L-Soft, I can offer a different kind of a product with
>regard to discussion lists.  But I am blocked from doing the same
>with a USENET site.  Those of you who think you don't need USENET
>are apparently not dealing with the same set of constituents I am.

Once again, there are no usenet SITES, as there are websites.  You just
need to find someone who will distribute/link/gateway your messages between
the two formats/services/types of access.

>It may eventually be a moot point as our constituents get
>computers with better capabilities and can work off the WEB as
>easily as they can read USENET.  Right now, though, it matters.

True enough on the getting better computers.  But most who don't have high
end computers aren't cut out.  If you can't use a typical web browser, use
Lynx.  Free.  Easy to deal with.  Only does text, no fancy graphics, but
that shouldn't be a problem for your folks if you're only dealing with web
archives.

And, since you're on netcom, have you asked THEM about gateway services?
They just might see it as a future profit center, as Eric has done with
providing LISTSERV services for a price.

cheers

dan

Dan Lester
[log in to unmask]
In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.  Erasmus, 1534