From: dawson@willard.UUCP
Newsgroups: alt.bbs,comp.bbs.misc,comp.misc
Subject: Re: The bogus Nixpub Posting
Date: 27 Aug 92 21:58:53 GMT
Organization: Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814

jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

> dawson@willard.UUCP writes:
> 
> >If by "public access" one refers to Usenet/email access, there
> >are tons of Waffles, Citadels, uuPCB's, (and, yes), UNIX systems other than
> >the two to which John De Armond refers.
> 
> >Might I offer my own little MS-DOS system as just one example of a publicly
> >accessible, nay, even FREE to all users, system that provides exactly this
> >sort of connectivity.  
> 
> >But, to say that there are only two "public access" systems in Atlanta is
> >a bald-faced lie... or a gross exaggeration, at the very least.
> 
> Sorry, guy.  I've yet to encounter a person who wants usenet public access
> who is interested in a bbs running on a toy OS.  Public access in the Usenet
> context inplies certain conventions, one of which is that there is 
> a Unix-like system underlying  it.  

I've encountered more than a few persons who are interested in a bbs running
on MS-DOS.  That you've not only demonstrates to the rest of the world what
a truly limited environment you live in.  I suggest that you may find it to
be a contracting universe.

"Public access in the Usenet context implies certain conventions" ??  Your
problem seems to be that you cannot to convince the net world that your
ideas of what "public access" means is the same as the generally accepted
meaning.  In fact, almost everyone who has posted follow-ups has disagreed
with your apparent beef with the NIXPUB list composer and with your tactics
in posting his email to you.  Why should anyone consider you to be an
authority on what is "convention" in the Usenet world?

The fact that many systems on the Usenet have been Unix platforms has nothing
at all to do with what people expect of "public access" Usenet sites.  That
is in fact of little relevance to the topic of "public access Usenet."  It
has EVERYTHING to do with "public access Unix."  You will kindly note that
I questioned, at the very beginning of my post, what it is that people are
looking for in a "public access" site.  Please note that your reference was
to "public access," not "public access Unix."  This genericity allows me the
opportunity of saying up front which subset I refer to.  If your ideas of
public access happen to be different from mine, please do not assume that
the whole of the Usenet is going to agree with you.

While you're at that, please don't assume that the whole world even WANTS to
be on a Unix system.  Most people don't consider it economical to study the
use of a new operating system merely to enable them to send email, or to
participate in message conferencing.  This is why services like Compuserve,
Delphi, and an absolute plethora of DOS, TOS, AUX, etc., ad nauseum...,
BBS systems have sprung up over the past few years.. to ISOLATE users from
the intricacies of the OS.

> As I recall your announcement a few months ago, yours is a single line
> system you run as a hobby.  Correct?  probably OK for other hobbyists
> who don't mind demon-dialing for hours to get in.  "Public", maybe but 
> accessable?  

Yes, my system still runs on a single line.  Yes, my system is still in place,
alive and kicking, and still works quite well as a Usenet/email site.  No, one
does not require a demon dialer to get into my system.  I'm successful on the
first attempt about 4/5 times when I call in from work.  This is due to several
things, not the least of which is that I've not made a point to aggressively
market my system.  How does this invalidate any of my comments?

> Face it, you're simple one of the literally THOUSANDS of hobby
> systems that take advantage of this LATA. And like a large
> percentage of those systems, you'll probably disappear once the
> novelty wears off.  I have no problem with that, of course. I do
> have a small problem with your masquerading as a public access
> site. I have a real problem being called a bald-faced liar by
> such an imitator. 

Do you have a problem with me advertising myself as a FREE site?  That would
seem to me to be the issue here; that you don't like others offering stuff for
free when you'd like to CHARGE people for similar services.

< Heavy sarcasm mode on > Certainly, if your (system name of your choice) has
all these fantastically wonderful services, just put a few inexpensive ads
about, and people will break down your door just to pay you for the privilege
of using your system.  < off; sane, rational guessing mode on >  Perhaps you're
bitter that this is not the case?

So, you have a problem with my calling my system a "public access site."...
We should start making a list "John's Top Ten Problems."  Perhaps, it would
be as entertaining as David Letterman's...

So, you have a problem with my insinuation that your assertion was a lie...
I did offer the alternative:  that you might have exaggerated a bit when you
declared that there are only two "public access" sites in Atlanta.  Perhaps my
language WAS a bit strong... and if it has instilled any ill will, I certainly
apologize for that.

> If there are any other public access systems here in Atlanta, I'd love
> to know about them.  Toys don't count.

< Tire of it all... frustrated young poster gives in to temptation...>

Yawn.  Only YOU seem to matter to yourself.  You're so full of yourself that
you don't listen to what anyone says.. as is evident to me (perhaps others?)
from your recent posting activities on comp.unix.sysv386 and these groups.

I'm not interested in defending my views to you, as I believe that would be
similar to arguing with a stone wall.  The only thing I've possibly achieved
by following-up to your post is to present to the public that I certainly
won't sit still for smear tactics.  The probability that I will henceforth
ignore your future comments on this matter is extremely high, so by all means,
smear me and my system to your heart's content.

< ... and in a blinding fit of remorse... >

Or, to put it somewhat more politely, .. we may just have agreed to disagree.
Certainly, I must question what I have to gain by challenging your definitions
of "public access" when I do not charge for public access to my system?  (It
should be obvious that I have no hopes of increasing revenue when there is
none to increase.)  What would prompt me to continue this discussion?

For those interested in pursuing alternative Usenet / email access in Atlanta,
allow me to suggest that you send me email, or refer to the ABBL listing that
was recently posted to alt.bbs.lists.

For those interested in pursuing "Public Unix access" in Atlanta, ... I'm not
sure that I'd care to make any recommendations in this arena.. perhaps John
De Armond would like to offer his views...  oops, he already has.

For those of you who question whether this has gone beyond the charters of
comp.bbs.misc or alt.bbs, I join you in asking that question...
     ^^^             ^^^

> 
> John
> -- 
> John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility
> Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |
> Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high tech and computers? 
> jgd@dixie.com                        |Write me about PE Magazine
> Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.


-- 
dawson@willard.UUCP (Willard Dawson)
Willard's House BBS, Atlanta, GA -- +1 (404) 664 8814
Xref: sparky alt.bbs:5526 comp.bbs.misc:778