HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bdb@becker.GTS.ORG (Bruce Becker)
Newsgroups: news.admin,alt.newgroup
Subject: Re: [PROBLEM]:  fake 'alt' groups - how to stop them ?
Date: 27 Jul 92 05:14:25 GMT
Organization: G. T. S., Toronto, Ontario

In article <20JUL199222530893@cc.utah.edu> beezer@cc.utah.edu (BEEZER) writes:
|
|Someone on the net is creating 2 to 5 fake 'alt' groups a DAY.
|
|Before I bring this to our sysop's attention, could someone explain
|how I can undercover who is propigating these fake groups?


	The concepts "fake" and "'alt' groups" do not
	intersect - anyone may create any alt group that
	they want at any time.  Although there are people
	who agree among themselves about some of the processes
	of alt group creation, they speak only for themselves
	since there are no universal rules there...


-- 
  ,u,	 Bruce Becker			Toronto, Ontario
a /i/	 Internet: bdb@becker.gts.org	Uucp: ...!web!becker!bdb
 `\o\-e	 -=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-
 _< /_	 "Usenet is never having to say you're sorry" - Handy Andy
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Copyrights on netnews articles
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 10:44:28 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.182351.7801@gtephx.UUCP> forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:
>The news group news.announce.newuser 
>has been built into the source code as a group which the new user subscribes 
>to by default

That doesn't mean he reads it, or is even told he should read it. And it's
not true for all news readers. Nor is this contract (if you want to call it
that) ever executed even if he does read it...

You're basing this on a contract that has even less validity than those
shrinkwrap license agreements. Forget it.

>The only problem I have with jj's copyright is that he tries to 
>put his own definition on what is usenet and what isn't...

Yes, that's the problem. This waffling about some implied contract you've
invented is irrelevant.
-- 
                                                                `-_-'
                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032
Xref: sparky news.admin:6185 alt.sex:25088 alt.censorship:6295 alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:2395
From: jbw@bigbird.bu.edu (Joe Wells)
Newsgroups: news.admin,alt.sex,alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
Subject: hiding sex info from minors (was: "Computers graphic when it comes...)
Date: 26 Jul 92 05:02:40 GMT
 <1992Jul21.113349.28309@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
 <1992Jul21.164722.252@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
 <1992Jul21.221517.8106@phlpa.pha.pa.us>
Followup-To: news.admin
Organization: Boston University Computer Science Department
In-reply-to: scott@phlpa.pha.pa.us's message of 21 Jul 92 22:15:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.221517.8106@phlpa.pha.pa.us> scott@phlpa.pha.pa.us (Scott Scheingold) writes:

   I agree with the point of not letting children see or read alt.sex.* ...

Why?  Do you feel it is better to keep children ignorant of some things?
Do you think sex is wrong or shameful?

I find censorship of anything at any time for any reason to be wrong,
immoral, and evil.

-- 
Joe Wells <jbw@cs.bu.edu>
Member of the League for Programming Freedom --- send e-mail for details
Xref: sparky news.admin:6375 alt.sex.bondage:14797 alt.censorship:6473 alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk:2443 soc.culture.canada:5395 soc.libraries.talk:213
Newsgroups: news.admin,alt.sex.bondage,alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk,soc.culture.canada,soc.libraries.talk
Subject: Re: "Computers graphic when it comes to porn"
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:04:48 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <Bs5otJ.FrF@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> cbs@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (Chris Syed) writes:
> In article <1992Jul29.142429.6503@u.washington.edu> tdowling@lib.washington.edu (Thomas Dowling) writes:
> >In article <1992Jul28.212836.12305@eff.org>, kadie@eff.org (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
> >> [Follow up to a newspaper article reposted to
> >> alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk, news.admin, et al. - Carl]
> >> 
> >> >....[quote from the article]  If somebody wants them they can go 
> >> >to a bookstore and buy them.  Anybody wants access to the sex groups 
> >> >on the Internet, they can buy access through a local company."
> >> [...]
> >> 
>  
>      Ah, the old fee or free equal access or access for the rich
>      only thing...:-)
> 
>      But seriously...
> 
>      Those of you who remember the short-lived SUZY system in Canada
>      will recall that there was a _moderated_ service on SUZY which
>      was run by two resepcted sexologists out of Vancouver. They
>      used the network to answer "reference" type questions, and to
>      post articles about real issues of concern mostly to young people.
> 
>      I'd hate to see this, uh, reactionist, wave swamp useful services like
>      that. 

The so-called "sex" groups are just people like you and me talking about sex.
No one is publishing for profit or exploiting anyone - not that I have ever
seen, anyway. They are discussion groups like any other - just some folk have
a hard time dealing with the topic. 
 
As usual, what someone else wants to read is "unacceptable". The folk who want
to can these discussion areas don't read them. Why should they be allowed to
sit in judgement on others in this way? 
 
This politically correct crap is getting out of hand. It started off as proper
and correct consideration of minority views and has ended up with a minority
imposing their views on all the other minorities (I say there is no such thing
as a Majority these days......:-))
 
I pity the folk who have prissy farts like this in control of their netowrks
censoring what they think is inappropriate. 
-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | "But the glory kept shining
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |  and bright in my eyes, 
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            |  And the stars going round in 
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       |  my head." R. L. S.
Xref: sparky news.admin:6316 comp.org.eff.talk:4948 misc.legal.computing:1568
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
Subject: Re: Copyrights on netnews articles
Date: 29 Jul 92 00:49:16 GMT
Organization: Taronga Park BBS

In article <1992Jul28.161343.12432@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> whs70@dancer.UUCP () writes:
>In article <08QHG06@taronga.com> peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>I don't know, but apparently Amateur Radio repeater operators have been
>>held liable for the contents of messages they relayed

>The recent situation with Amateur Radio had nothing to do with
>copyright (nor with "liabel or slander" for that matter).

Yes, but it DID hold repeater operators liable for the contents of
messages they relayed, even though they had no mechanism for controlling
those contents. The details of the messages themselves are not relevant:
the fact that they were responsible for them is.

I was not making an analogy. I hate people trying to explain Usenet by
means of analogy. I was pointing out a VERY relevant precedent. And a
very scary one, too.
-- 
                                                                `-_-'
                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: The Great Floating USENET Copyright War (was: NetNews/CD - USENET News Available)
Date: 28 Jul 1992 18:16:21 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

One thing that struck me after I posted my previous reply:

>>2) I strongly doubt that "alice!jj" is a legally acceptable way to identify
>>that particular person.
>Questionable, but it *does* identify a computer address that one
>person (presumably) could show "ownership" of.  It would be sort 
>of like saying "Resident of 10 Downing St."  If the date is included,
>this would be more than enough to identify the author.....

Actually, this may well be a sticking point, unless he's obtained the legal
right to represent himself with that name. In Texas, that right is obtained
through something called an Assumed Name Certificate; you go down to the
county courthouse, verify that the name is unique, and pay $10 to register it.
The registration is good for 10 years.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by a .sig virus.
"Right now, because of you, this city is being overrun by baboons." "Don't
 you think that's the responsibility of the voters?" -- _Naked Gun 2-1/2_
From: bjones@weber.ucsd.edu (Bruce Jones)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Archive of news.admin???
Date: 31 Jul 1992 16:06:46 GMT
Organization: U.C.S.D. Department of Communication
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: weber.ucsd.edu

Is anyone archiving this newsgroup?  I would like to retrieve the
NetNews on CDROM discussion from the past few months, and all
related threads.  I tried saving it but the expire on this machine
combined with my own travels, left so many holes in the file that
it was useless.

Help??

bjones@ucsd.edu

-
Xref: sparky news.admin:6221 comp.org.eff.talk:4854 misc.legal.computing:1505
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Changing follow up ( was Re: Can We Get Off This ^#$! Subject?
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 01:37:29 GMT

In article <2A6FF4A4.78C2@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>According to sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart):
>>What [if a person] almost lost his job as a result of the email
>>(which his company paid for by the byte, and which almost hosed an
>>important disk) generated by accidentally posting to misc.test?
>
>Inconvenience, sure.  Terror?  Riiiight....

Some people can be very scared about losing their jobs.
Xref: sparky news.admin:6282 comp.org.eff.talk:4915 misc.legal.computing:1545
From: Lyle_Seaman@transarc.com
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
Subject: Re: What is "pay-per-read"?
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:03:26 GMT
Organization: Mail to News Gateway at Wang Labs

forda@gtephx.UUCP (Andrew Ford @ AGCS, Phoenix, Arizona) writes:
> Yeah, right!  Like how many subscribers do you think these 
> pay-for-access-to-my-computer companies would get if there were
> not information in the computer?  
> 
> Face it, nearly everybody on the net gets charges for 
> transmission: nearly nobody would be on the net if there were
> no informaion (I say nearly cuz I seriously think you might
> be here anxiously reading nothing anyway): therefore, people
> are paying for the information.  

Hmp.  There hasn't been information on USENET in years.

Lyle		Transarc		707 Grant Street
412 338 4474	The Gulf Tower		Pittsburgh 15219
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
From: duggan@cc.gatech.edu (Rick Duggan)
Subject: Re: NetNews/CD - USENET News Available
Keywords: copyright
Organization: College of Computing
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 16:03:24 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.073636.24592@ms.uky.edu> sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.171232.22802@pica.army.mil> drears@pica.army.mil (Dennis G Rears (FSS) <drears>) writes:
>:  Point 3)  A company that puts out USENET on CD isn't so much charging
>:  for the information content as he is charging for the act of
>:  compilation, pressing into CD, etc.  It is similiar to a copy charging
>:  a modest packaging fee to put PD software on a tape or disk.
>
>Hmmm that makes me wonder... what is the modest packaging fee for
>getting Usenet on CD-ROM? A musician friend of mine can get 1000 CDs
>pressed for about $3000. So what does one of these Usenet CDs cost?
>$10? $20?

It seems like you are implying that if these CDs cost more than
$10 or $20 then the distributors are no longer charging just
a modest packaging fee.  But what is your musician friend going
to press on those CDs?  Is he going to press 1000 blank CDs?
Or is he going to write some music, buy some instruments to play
that music on, and pay for some studio time to record it?
Let's see.  If he gets a full band together, buys a few grand in
instruments, pays a couple hundred dollars an hour in studio
time, he's looking at a large amount of money to produce
those $3000 CDs.  What if he had to pay salary to his bandmates?
It's not a simple matter of cost for the CDs only.

-rick

"Random acts of violence just don't do it for me anymore.  It must be
 maturity." - Cactus Jack WCW Saturday Night 07/04/92
Rick Duggan | duggan@cc.gatech.edu | CS1410 TA - Section A
Office Hours (CC 103): Tue 1:30-3:00 Thu 1:30-2:30
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Subject: Re: This newsgroup
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 16:33:18 GMT

In article <1587ksINNdnb@early-bird.think.com>, barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes:
|> Since it seems that this group is mostly a flamefest, *is* there a group
|> like what I thought this would be?

If the reorganization of this newsgroup that is currently in the voting stage
succeeds, then there will be.

|> I have a similar question about news.groups.  I subscribed to that so I'd
|> know which newgroup control messages are probably legit.

The best way to do that is to read news.announce.newgroups, not news.groups.

-- 
Jonathan Kamens						jik@MIT.Edu
MIT Information Systems/Athena		    Moderator, news.answers
    (Send correspondence related to the news.answers newsgroup
	{and ONLY correspondence related to the newsgroup}
		 to news-answers-request@MIT.Edu.)
Newsgroups: news.admin,alt.censorship,alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
From: sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey)
Subject: Re: "Computers graphic when it comes to porn"
    <1992Jul21.221517.8106@phlpa.pha.pa.us> <1992Jul22.175643.15218@cs.sfu.ca> 
    <1992Jul23.122034.28066@phlpa.pha.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 06:42:07 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

scott@phlpa.pha.pa.us (Scott Scheingold) writes:

|Ok. Would you let your seven year old read it? Can a seven year old get into
|an adult book store? Do you call not letting a seven year old go into a
|adult book store censorship as well? I grew up in an very open family sex
|was NOT an issue to hide. We would talk about sex in a very open matter. I
|still do not belive that an seven year old can really understand what is
|going on. in alt.sex.* or reading penthouse ect. 

Well if he doesn't understand it, my reaction is: So?  Not
understanding something is not the same thing as being harmed by it.

Access to information is only going to get easier and easier. Parents
aren't going to be able to reasonably limit access. They might as well
start explaining things if they are worried about it.

Sean
-- 
                  |``Wind, waves, etc. are breakdowns in the face of the
Sean Casey        | commitment to getting from here to there. But they are the
sean@s.ms.uky.edu | conditions for sailing -- not something to be gotten rid
U of KY, Lexington| of, but something to be danced with.''
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: OK to cancel? (was Re: Talking about Beals)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:43:52 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL
Keywords: situational ethics, appropriate cancels, Guido and Luigi

According to red@redpoll.neoucom.edu (Richard E. Depew):
>It isn't simple to distinguish between a personal whim and a
>service to the net...

So true.

>What follows is a series of situations in which a cancel by
>someone (perhaps only the author), perhaps accompanied by an
>explanation, may be justified.

I'm sorry, but I don't think a Talmud-like list of shalls and
shall-nots will be helpful.  We must deal with situations as they
arise, so as to allow adequately for extenuating circumstances.

>P.P.S.  And where is BIFF when we need him?  :-)

Has anyone ever seen Andrew Scott Beals and BIFF in the same place?
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
   "Do Rush place weird subliminal backmasked messages in their songs to
 compel unwilling geeks to commit evil .sig atrocities?"  -- Dean Engelhardt
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
From: ppessi@vipunen.hut.fi (Pekka Pessi)
Subject: Re: Copyrights on netnews articles
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
	<1992Jul24.075115.9397@clarinet.com>
	<8411.Jul2521.20.3292@virtualnews.nyu.edu>
	<mwm.1b85@contessa.palo-alto.ca.us>
Date: 30 Jul 92 03:13:25

In article <mwm.1b85@contessa.palo-alto.ca.us> mwm@contessa.palo-alto.ca.us (Mike Meyer) writes:
>2) Providing a mechanism that allows people who *don't* want certain
>forms of USENET reproduction to happen (for instance, to cdrom) to
>flag their articles. This shouldn't change that the poster is
>responsible for any copies made by older software in spite of those
>wishes. In additions, the document describing the mechanism is a good
>place to state the interpretation for future reference.

	I thought that there is such a mechanism. One simply leaves
	Newsgroups: header empty. At least local implementation of
	Inews restricts any unwanted reproduction very efficiently.


--
Pekka Pessi	/	ppessi@niksula.hut.fi
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: Citadel site reposting old articles
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:42:16 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Jul25.112004.27326@ms.uky.edu> kherron@ms.uky.edu (Kenneth Herron) writes:

>Mind.overmind.org, a Citadel site (Fidonet?) has been reposting articles
>with new Path:, From:, Message-ID:, and other  headers.  We have over 270 
>articles from this site; every one I spot-checked was a repost.

I just noticed this, and sent mail to postmaster@overmind.mind.org,
just in case it might make a difference.  This has happened before from
this same site (end of April, 1991 - I have the mail I sent then, too),
and I really do think it's time to talk about unplugging the fool.  I
don't care what software he's running, it shouldn't mangle the headers
or repost duplicates.  It doesn't look like the problem got resolved
in the last year.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
Heaven knows / No frontiers
And I've seen heaven in your eyes			- Jimmy McCarthy
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: an288@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Hittinger)
Subject: has anyone else noticed.....
Reply-To: an288@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Hittinger)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 14:58:39 GMT



I seem to be seeing a small number of posts which contain flames get
crossposted to an unintended group.  Misc.jobs.offered seems to be a
favorite.  At first I thought the poster was doing it but I'm starting
to believe that we have the opposite of a crosspost cancel out there.

Could there be a site that is adding an extra group to flame messages
before forwarding them?
-- 
--------
NO DAD!! You're supposed to type it in with downer case letters!
From: mwm@contessa.palo-alto.ca.us (Mike Meyer)
Subject: Re: OK to cancel? (was Re: Talking about Beals)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: Amiga Yarn 2.0, 1992/06/25 01:41:36
Keywords: 
Summary: 
Date: 23 Jul 92 02:45:56 PST
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica

In <134@ulogic.UUCP>, hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) wrote:
> In article <Brpt62.65u@redpoll.neoucom.edu> red@redpoll.neoucom.edu (Richard E. Depew) writes:
> >6.   When a "pyramid scheme" chain letter is posted,
> 
> Pyramid schemes *are* illegal (in the US).
> 
> >8.   When an article violates the accepted charter of a newsgroup,
> 
> This one is pretty much self-regulating by the members of the
> group. [...]
>
> >14.  When a cascade appears outside of alt.cascade,
> 
[...]
> As a general rule I would have to suggest that illegal postings 
> (pyramid schemes, copyright violations) *may* be cause for a news 
> admin originated cancel, but what is illegal in Canada may not be 
> illegal in the US

Note that in the US, #8 and #14 are both illegal. After all, if you
believe that "unauthorized" cancels are illegal destruction of data,
then it's clear that "unathorized" cross-posts are illegal use of
resources - telecom bandwidth, disk space, and CPU cycles. Unless you
subscribe to the appropriate group, of course - in which case you've
"authorized" such use on your machine.

The only way for a site to protect itself from such illegal resource
usage is to make sure that the articles are never transmitted to their
site. Unfortunately, the only way this can be done with the current
generation of netnews software is by cancelling the article.

So, is it ok for an admin to protect their machine from unathorized
use in this way?

	<mike

P.S. - are any of those who are so out of touch with reality as to
think that "unathorized" posting of any kind warrent court action
willing to take the cascaders to court?
Xref: sparky news.admin:6002 comp.org.eff.talk:4730 misc.legal.computing:1408
From: dunnett@mala.bc.ca (Malcolm Dunnett)
Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal.computing
Subject: Re: NetNews/CD - USENET News Available
Date: 21 Jul 92 12:23:04 -0700
Organization: Malaspina College

In article <1992Jul21.160401.4364@cirrus.com>,
     dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
> 
> And get the analogy right!  Usenet is not a transmission mechanism...it
> is a distributed bulletin board system that uses various transmission
> mechanisms, telephone services included.  Perhaps you could think of
> Usenet at the Application and Session levels in the ISO model.  Telephone
> service would be near the bottom.  UUCP and ntp would be in the middle
> somewhere.

  I think Usenet is even more general than that. It's a group of individuals,
functioning as an anarchy, who are cooperating for the purpose of sharing
information. The fact that the current implementation mostly relys on
computer bulletin boards is simply because that's the most readily available
technology to accomplish this goal, that these boards mostly communicate
via nntp or uucp is even less relevant.

  By this definition "usenet transmission" is the process of taking the
information ( a posting ) and conveying it to one or more other
individuals, each of whom may ( but is not required to ) repeat the process.

========================================================================
Malcolm Dunnett    Malaspina College         Email: dunnett@mala.bc.ca
Computer Services  Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA        Tel: (604)755-8738