Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: nz.waffle
From: dgd@kcbbs.gen.nz (David Dix)
Date: 6 Oct 92 05:21:31 GMT
Organization: Kappa Crucis unix BBS, Auckland, NZ

clear@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz (Charlie Lear) in article:
<1992Oct03.115230.15589@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz> hangs, draws, and quarters
Pope Richard Vowles with:
>In article <boo!> richard@nacjack.gen.nz (Richard Vowles) projectile vomits:
>>Because, you irreverant twat, we wanted to pass it onto Wellington, and
>>...etc..
>
>Didn't make yourself clear???  Shit, Richard, at no stage did you ever
>imply that it was to be anything other then a local group being bounced
>between a few machines in Auckland.  This stinks of an after-the-event
>and rather weak attempt to cover your butt.

Well that seems a common enough exercise for this net. There is always a
good measure of after-the-event-butt-covering going on, although I must
say I sometimes suspect who is covering whos butt and with what.

>God knows I'm not one of the net.fascists, in fact I campaigned vigorously
>for the "backwoods net" to be set up down here using the wgtn hierarchy.
>But even so, namespace is not something to be buggered around with.  The
>nz hierarchy is an established part of NewZnet and while I may or may not
>agree with the 25-vote rule, it is the rule (or decree, or assumption by
>net.fascist.bastards) that applies at this time to the nz hierarchy.

But although I support the concept of many backwoods nets and it works
when the extent of the backwood is clearly marked it is not a viable 
alternative nor should it be used to justify the current rules of the
NewZnet hierarchy. Stupid or non-sensical or non-working rules should be
reviewed and changed and the 25 vote rule has proven itself to be more than
useless. Perhaps if we had a more reasonable and workable set of NewZnet
rules or conventions when creating new nz newsgroups we would not need to
have lots of little parochial "backwoods nets".
Anyway I though this net was all about communications, I still cannot see
_any_ good reason why new nz newsgroups should not be created on an almost
ah-hoc basis. (Oooohh, I can hear the howls of Messrs Misfit and Dogbowl
already)
Somehow none of the previous objections really mean too much when the
alternative is that we could attract a *lot* more people into contributing
to nz newsgroups.

>I suggest you get hold of "Managing UUCP and Usenet", one of the Nutshell
>books.  Get it mailorder from a US bookshop.  Lend it to Jon when you've
>finished it.  David could benefit from a read too, except he knows it all
>already... ;-)

Correct, he does know it all already and if you believe everything that
everyone writes on managing UUCP and Usenet then I suggest you should become
a computer magazine editor (errr... sorry you been there done that already
eh?)

>Anarchic rule does not automatically imply that you have to be a spraycan-
>wielding antivivisectionist skinhead Doc Martened fido weenie.

True, but he is generally an entertaining one of those :-)

>An anarchic network survives by people doing their own thing without kicking
>shit out of the established edifices, crumbling though they may be.

But we do not have a _reasonable_ established network in NZ. We either do
what we are told (by a few of those net.fascist.bastards you referred to
previously) or we go do something totally different.
Maybe the net costs series of articles in cave.kcbbs will start to show how
we are already paying for _all_ of the nz network :-)
Time must come soon when someone else gets that NZ-USA newsfeed connection
up and going.
                                                               *
dgd@kcbbs.gen.nz (David Dix), Fidonet 3:772/90.
ZL1UZC (bbs on 144.75 Pac Comm 1200)                     k *      *
Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, NEW ZEALAND.                   .
Pth.9817-3725/3714 v32/v42bis/MNP5
   9817-3094/8424 v32bis/v42bis/MNP5                          *
   9817-3324/3393 v22bis/MNP5  NZMC lines
Newsgroups: nz.general