Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 01:08:21 EDT
From: Rick Broadhead <YSAR1111@VM1.YorkU.CA>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Misc.Disaster.* Newsgroups (was Disaster Reporting on Usenet)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 690, Message 3 of 10

First of all, I'd like to clarify that I am *not* suggesting that
Usenet be used to *coordinate* disaster assistance.  I realize this
contradicts an earlier statement I made in TELECOM Digest.  For many
of the reasons already stated here in the Digest, it would not be
practical nor feasible to coordinate disaster relief activities on
Usenet, and it was never my intention to do so.  I clarified my
proposal and submitted it to news.groups.  I apologize for any
confusion.

What I am suggesting is a MISC.DISASTER.* group to disseminate
information on disasters, whether they be man-made or natural.  During
catastrophes/calamities, such a group would be a place where reports
could be posted, and information could be exchanged.  And, as I have
already pointed out, a misc.disaster.* group would be used to publish
the addresses and phone numbers of agencies accepting donations and
enquiries from the public, enquiries about the welfare of friends and
relatives, for example.  The point that was made about this group not
being a good place to ask about specific people is well-taken, and I
agree.

One need look no further than TELECOM Digest itself to see the need
for a disaster group.  Not one disaster has slipped by without
requests from readers for updates and information.  And similar
requests appeared on other Usenet groups too (i.e. soc.culture.caribbean 
for Hurricane Andrew).  I am proposing that we create a newsgroup
devoted to this type of traffic.

The success of disaster newsgroups does not depend on communication in
and out of the affected areas.  First of all, not everyone has access
to the same sources of information.  Remember that Usenet is carried
nationally and internationally.  Information that you may have may be
information that someone else is looking for.  Secondly, it is evident
 from TELECOM Digest and elsewhere on the net that you don't have to
be directly in the disaster area to share information and/or report on
how the disaster has affected you personally.

I am aware of alt.hurricane.andrew.  But many people are not.  More
importantly, such alt.* groups are created *after-the-fact*.  For a
disaster group to be effective, it has to be in-place and ready-for-use.
This means having a permanent group on Usenet devoted to disaster
traffic, and not creating temporary groups to deal with separate
crises, groups which would only be created *after* a hurricane,
earthquake etc. hits, and removed several months later.  Note that a
disaster group could also deal with emergency preparedness and related
issues.

I am not worried about the slow propagation of articles to some sites.
I have posted articles to Usenet and had responses arrive less than an
hour later.  Take a look at any Usenet group to see that replies are
often posted within 24 hours of the date of the original article (and
these are only the *public* replies).  This is really a weak argument.

I truly believe that the Usenet community would benefit from one or
more newsgroups that would act as a clearinghouse for disaster
information, but it won't happen (at least not right now), unless
someone picks up this idea, and carries it through the various stages
of the Usenet group-creation process.  If I didn't have classes
starting next week, I would take it on myself.

Thanks to those people who took the time to send me their comments.


Rick Broadhead                        ysar1111@VM1.YorkU.CA    (Internet)
Faculty of Administrative Studies     ysar1111@yorkvm1         (Bitnet)
York University                    ...!bitnet!yorkvm1!ysar1111 (UUCP)
Toronto, CANADA