The following set of messages were taken from a special message base on the subject of BBS Abuse, on the the PC-HOST BBS operated by The Plain Vanilla Computing Company, a Subsidiary of S/D Consultants, Inc. Data: (301) 986-9408 Message # 1 on 02-05-85 at 11:42 From :SYSOP To :ALL Subj :NEW CONFERENCE Welcome to the new PC-HOST Conference on Bulletin Board Abuse. The rules of usage are as follows: (1) All comments or remarks in the Conference are to be designated for "ALL". (2) Decorum must be maintained at all times; there will be no profanity, etc. in the Conference (as well as elsewhere on this system. (3) Subject matter in this Conference is RESTRICTED to BBS Abuse. Those visitors not honoring these requirements will have their access to this system severely limited. Unfortunately, in converting to PC-HOST, we were unable to restore the previous BBS Abuse Conference, so, again, let's see some participation. Thank you, The Plain Vanilla Computing Company. Press Enter,uit,kip or onstop n Message # 2 on 02-10-85 at 05:47 From :PHILIP BURNS To :ALL Subj :Tcimpidis Acquited! Tom Tcimpidis has been completely acquited of any wrong-doing. For those in the know, enough said. For those unfamiliar with the case, Tom is a California BBS operator whose system was used to post various phone company credit card numbers. The phone company had his equipment impounded, Tom was charged with theft of service (or whatever that's called in California), etc. After many months, he has been cleared of any wrongdoing. If anyone's interested, I can upload a more complete report to the files section. Message # 4 on 02-12-85 at 13:36 From :SYSOP To :ALL Subj :Files on BBS Abuse If you are having trouble thinking of contributions for this conference you might consider downloading files entitled SYSOP.TXT and REQUIEM.TXT from Download Directory #9. Though we do not agree entirely with the content of those files, most specifically the sections relating to uploads (we actually prefer not to receive them, except by prior arrangement or from certain of our visitors), we generally agree with the thought and philosophy. They are almost required reading. Thank you, The Plain Vanilla Computing Company Message # 5 on 03-03-85 at 12:59 From :SYSOP To :ALL Subj :Another Sysop Packs It In Abuse and misuse of Bulletin Board Systems has forced Howard Lambert to close down his 32 Megabyte HOWNAN system in Rockville, MD. Just thought I'd give you folks some food for thought -- this is happening all over the country . . . what are the solutions. Message # 6 on 03-13-85 at 01:22 From :MARTY MOLESKI To :ALL Subj :A Sad Story I don't know whether a story like this is appropriate here. I hope it doesn't give any sick callers ideas, but it does fit the topic. A friend who is SYSOP on an RBBS board was paged one day by a caller from Florida, who asked for SYSOP privileges in order to test the "Remote" capacities of the system. Before my friend could do anything to stop him, he trashed both disks on the system and signed off. I find it hard to believe that there are people like that out there, but Bill said it really happened. With inhumanity like that, it is amazing that there are *any* boards still running! Message # 7 on 03-13-85 at 04:19 From :PHIL GRIER To :ALL Subj :selectivity One major source of bulletin board problem callers is the callers using a system that is not the same as the hosts. My RBBS gets its abusers from users of other manufactures machines. The files & info available are directed to PC owners/users, so in an attempt to thwart the abusing community I "force" graphics displays on my menus & directories. Most all other machines than the PC will receive garbage characters instead of the graphics & "flighty" callers or potential abusers are in a sense shaken-off by having to sit thru this incoming garbage. Also most seem to use 300 baud and that makes for longer periods of time that a full screen of graphics takes to display. The PC users have no imposition put on their machines & also seem to be predominantly 1200 baud users. The graphics has noticably decreased the abusers by an estimated 75% +. Message # 8 on 03-16-85 at 18:41 From :CLEVE CORLETT To :ALL Subj :Howard Lambert Howard Lambert is back with a new board known as the Phoenix, which is welcome news for those of us who have valued his contributions. I'm one of those folks who use boards to exchange ideas and to download new public domain software. Usually, I find that the boards I most value -- and Howard's board is one of them -- usually have the software I want before I can upload it. What bothers me as a user is the stupidity of those who trash boards, which is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. I guess that registration requirements are the only answer, but it's one that I'll happily pay in order to take advantage of this incredibly valuable service that a few dedicated folks are willing to provide. Message # 9 on 03-19-85 at 02:16 From :ROSEMARIE SIDDIQUI To :ALL Subj :Same subject Hi. I thought I had input my thoughts here before but my message is not to be found anywhere... I agree with the "cutting off the nose to spite the face" feeling. I felt bad for Howard K. Lambert and was thrilled to find him back in the swing. I recently read of a "trasher" at T-System's board and captured it to upload here and other boards for the Sysops. Stuart Tomares had listed the callers' name and the names of the files -- we can help Sysops in that small way -- at least. I really cannot understand how people can afford to try to damage other people's boards. They are a real asset to the PC Community. (The boards, I mean.) I have learned so much about my PC from the boards alone. I think another good idea is if the Sysops will indeed prosecute a few of the abusers to set an example and put the "would-be" abusers on notice. Thank you for your time. RoseMarie Message# 10 is a private message. Message # 11 on 03-26-85 at 08:50 From :JOHN BECKMAN To :ALL Subj :RBBS ABUSE I READ THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE FROM ANOTHER RBBS AND PASS IT ON FOR YOUR INFORMATION. APPARENTLY SOMEONE IS ABUSING RBBS BOARDS BY UPLOADING A PROGRAM NAMED "ADD-DOS.EXE" THANT WILL DESTROY YOUR DISKETTE(S). THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM WAS "ADD DOS 2.1 TO ANY DISK WITHOUT MODIFYING BIOS". THE ORIGIONAL WARNING MESSAGE WAS TAKEN FROM THE BOLINGBROOK IL RBBS RUN BY DICK LAIN AND I GOT IT FROM GEORGE WARREN'S RBBS IN IL. I THINK THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS KIND OF ACTION IS BENEATH CONTEMPT AND REALLY CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT MOTIVATES SUCH A PERSON. I AGREE WITH OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS CONFERENCE THAT PROSECUTION SHOULD BE ATTEMPTED IF THE PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE CAN BE IDENTIFIED, HOWEVER, I DONT THINK THE SYSOP(S) CAN BE EXPECTED TO PAY FOR ALL THE POSSIBLE LEGAL COSTS WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF THEI USERS. I DONT KNOW HOW WE USERS COULD BE ORGAINIZED TO SUPPORT A PROSECUTIN SYOP BUT THERE SHOULD BE SOME METHOD/ORGANIZATION THAT WOULD SOLICIT USER SUPPORT AND COORDINATE SUCH ACTION. I AM NEW TO COMPUTERS AND RBBS BOARDS IN GENERAL, BUT I CAN CERTAINLY VALUE THEIR CONTRABUTION TO PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF AND MARVEL AT THE GENEROSITY OF INDIVIDUALS WHO CONTRIBUTE THEIR TIME AND MONEY TO HELP OTHERS. TO ALL SYSO I EXPRESS MY THANKS AND HOPE SOMETHING CAN BE DONE TO ELIMINATE ABUSE!! Message # 12 on 03-26-85 at 22:07 From :PAUL CILWA To :ALL Subj :Stopping Abuse I hope this doesn't seem frivolous but it just occurred to me that one way to cut down on BBS abuse is to have such a GREAT system that legitimate users have it tied up most of the time. I assume that most abusers are kids or in other ways immature and therefore lack the staying power to keep up the attempts at getting into the boards. Looking back at what I just said, I guess it is frivolous. But, for the record, I certainly don't mind registering to get into a board. In fact, I like it; it seems like I'm introducing myself and makes me feel like I and the other registered guests of the board in some way form a community. I sign onto a few boards regularly and (once I got over "download fever" long enough to look at the messages) have gotten to recognize a few of the names. I haven't encountered this PC-HOST system elsewhere, but RBBS-PC has the facilty of keeping a list of unlikely names to check against users trying to log on. Suggested enters might include "Doctor", "death" and so on -- the kinds of names that might be used as aliases. This apparently stops some of them. For those that log on with believable names, required registration before access seems reasonable to me. And, although it's unreasonable to expect a SYSOP to get to a registration in less than a week, I've never known it to take more than 2 days -- usually 24 hours. Like the rest of you in this conference, I would like to thank the SYSOPs of the country for the service they provide. My psychology studies tell me that no one does what he or she does without getting something out of it; but whether a SYSOP has a board for the warm feeling he or she gets from assiting fellow hackers, or whether it's for the sense of power gained from having constant callers is irrelevant. What's important is that SYSOPS provide a service -- one that, I think, will turn out to be immensely important from a future standpoint -- and if there is anything I can do to help, just ask. Message # 13 on 04-03-85 at 15:40 From :HOWARD LAMBERT To :ALL Subj :CUTTING DOWN ABUSES I appreciate the kind words found here for the defunct HOWNAN RBBS BOARD. There was such an outpouring of support from all the good guys and gals out there that I just had to bring it back... as The Phoenix. I agree with several of the comments above... most of the problems hat this board has had were caused by adolescent pinheads, many, of course, using C-64's, Atari's and the like. There were only about three adults that I could determine in the small group that created most of the problems. In setting up the new board, I have implemented the TRASHCAN file of RBBS-PC, and this works very well, especially with the comment that the call has been traced and recorded!! That one generally keeps the kids from coming back. Of course there are others who are simply locked out, too. I, too have forced graphics on my Board, and primarily to tear up those small machines. This has also helped a great deal, and while it may aggravate a lot of the callers who are running at 300 Baud, the vast majority of my callers (about 85%) are now running at 1200 Baud. As the price of modems keeps dropping, this will cause an increase in 1200 Baud activity with a substantial drop in 300 Baud except for the smaller "kiddie" machines (sorry about that, you PCJR users, but you'll just have to get with it and go a little faster). An exchange of ID'd miscreants would not be a bad idea at all, and I would certainly like to contribute to that environment. It could help to cut other problems. Oh, I almost forgot. I finally decided to limit all new callers to leaving Comments only... they cannot leave a Message at the new caller level. That way, there are no abusive or foul-mouthed messages posted on the boards to plague your callers. Quite important in my case, since I travel a lot in my work. Every little bit helps. Keep the faith. Howard K. Lambert, SYSOP THE PHOENIX Message # 14 on 04-04-85 at 13:37 From :KEN SMITH To :ALL Subj :Abuse I too wish to express my thanks to all other SYSOPS and valid users of BBS systems. I have learned 80% of what I understand about telecommunications from users and SYSOPS who take the time to help novice's up to speed. Regarding the sharing of names and passwords of individuals that have abused boards... I do not like the idea in principle. My concern is that we not get caught up in "SYSOP abuse." Can we not hope that malicious abusers can be won by being convinced that they are cutting off their own noses? I am a SYSOP for a limited access RBBS, used by my office to share infor- mation between employees and associates. New callers can read the bulle- tins, and leave a comment, but no more until checked out and approved for additional access. We have found this system to work very well. Back to sharing information about abusers... what I am saying is this: it might be a good idea to share the information, but what will we do with it? What if a malicious abuser decided to get the names of some valid users from your user log, then called your board under an alias, told you he was the sysop of the Vigilante RBBS in Tuscon, and that the following users had been identified as malicious "hackers?" See the danger? I don't want to be the victim of the very people we are trying to avoid by ending up locking out innocent users. That won't give us SYSOPs a very good name. I am all for the protection of our systems. I like the graphics idea, and would implement it except for the fact that some of our associates do not have PCs or compatibles. Here's another suggestion: when you are victimized by an abuser, put a message on your board to the effect that SO-AND-SO attempted to crash the system by doing thus-and-thus, and that their security has been reduced to minimum for the immediate future. As the abuser and other users see the message, they will get the picture; they will also know that other SYSOPS know, and may be they will straighten out. Thanks, Steve & Co., for the forum. Message # 15 on 04-11-85 at 18:29 From :PHIL NOGUCHI To :ALL Subj :New user As one who logs on to several boards with an Osborne at home and a PC at work, I too join in the praise for the SYSOPS of this country that are such a major resource and inspiration. In terms of graphics, as far as I can tell responsible CPM machines have no problem...my Osborne certainly doesn't, but it surely must mess up COMMODORES! I am appalled that trashing of boards has taken place...Unfortunately, I have no easy or ready thoughts to help with this problem. I agree that registration is useful and is certainly no proble with me. On several occasions, actually the sysops have called me at my home number to chat abbout several things. Subscriptions certainly must also hav a deterrant effect. Many thanks again to all those who have provided useful and productive software that easily beats the commercial stuff in terms of cost-benefit ratio.....Phil Noguchi Message # 16 on 04-19-85 at 19:19 From :BARRY FOX To :ALL Subj :Stopping Abuse I am the SYSOP of a BBS running on an Apple //e. I too have taken great pain to stop abusers. On my BBS, The Crystal City Connection, new users can only read messages, request passwords and leave me a comment or fill out a user survey. This stops most abusers, who as we all know are predominantly young and unfortunately for me run mostly Apple's. I agree that a BUSY BBS helps keep them off your system, and al proper policing of your message bases. ---------Barry Fox, Sysop, Crystal City Connection, 703-553-0821 Message # 17 on 05-05-85 at 20:28 From :RICH HOUGHTON To :ALL Subj :Safeguards As a converted hacker (as you get older, you get wiser), I thought that I would pass on this little bit of advice. When you upload a file, make sur that before you run it for the first time you remove all other disks from your drives and have a backup of your hard drive (if any). I've known quite a few kids who will upload a legitimate program with a disk-destroying seed program buried inside it. The seed program is usually broken up with severa GOTO and GOSUB statements so as not to be obvious, and can't be picked out b casual observation. If the Sysop hasn't examined the program before putting it on his board, it can really screw up the disk its on and any other disks you have inserted in the system. Always save new programs to a scratch disk look over anything with a .com or .exe (or even a long .bas file!) for what seem to be frivolous lin, and when running for the first time clear out all your other drives. I haven't seen alot of this activity on this coast; it seems more p prevelent out west where every twerp under 15 has got an Atari and loves to go around causing problems. Having been there myself (never trashed a board but I used to LOVE breaking into systems for the hell of it), the best deterents are forced graphics as early on the board as you can get them, a file which screens out typical alias names (Atilla, Dr., any name from Star Trek, D&D, or Star Wars, etc.), or verification of phone numbers. Just remember to stay alert. A friend of mine in LA is attemping to write a program that will watchdog his board. I have also heard of an ex- hacker out west trying to write a program that will detect incoming destruct ive programs, hanging up or disabling the sending system. I'll keep ya poste Rich Houghton Message # 18 on 05-22-85 at 22:39 From :MARTY MOLESKI To :ALL Subj :Have things improved recently? I haven't seen any new messages on this area for at least a month. Does this mean that going to 1200 baud and having a stiff "entrance policy" has solved the basic problems? I enjoyed reading the answers from Plain Vanilla to some folks who didn't want to abide by the house rules. Thanks for sharing them, SYSOP! Message# 19 has been Killed. Message # 20 on 05-30-85 at 12:25 From :DAVID THOMPSON To :HOWARD LAMBERT AND ALL Subj :PCjr's Howard, I highly resent your comment about the PCjr being a "kiddie" machine. I run the Software Exchange, a 2400 baud board in Omaha,Ne. Most of my users are PCjr and PC users, and I have found that the PCjr users are genreally the best people to deal with. Dave Thompson Sysop: The Software Exchange 1-402-391-5419 Message # 21 on 06-02-85 at 23:24 From :CHRIS ROWLEY To :ALL Subj :A little lax While I am all for the prevention of so-called Trojan Horse programs and the prevention of meddlers who attempt to crash belletin boards that are there for their use, there is a line to draw about scum/non-scum. Some sysops out there see their bbs as a place for serious adult conversation and the transfer of public files. But when this happens, the younger users see it as an offense, not realizing that it is not their right to have your system at their beg and call. I have and always will have a different view of the bbs world. My board has no validation (which I see as a hassle to keep up with, especially since I operate two boards, one at work and a more liberal one at home), and no baud-restrictions/funny characters. My board is for communications--it is a bulletin board, those first two letters of the abbreviation bbs if you didn't know. And while some C-64 and Atari and Apple users may be out there to fill your message base with 4-letter words, there is an equal number interested in public-forums and discussions. They don't bother with files, they realize its an IBM board. Age always makes a difference, but I like a variety of opinions, and since I am not a "file board" at home, and only files at work because that's one of our promised services, I don't worry about it. -- Chris Rowley, Sysop LINDA, Fido #359, and WITHK Systems Message # 22 on 06-07-85 at 13:05 From :JIM TYSON To :CHRIS ROWLEY & ALL Subj :BBS (AB)USE It seems some sysops see their boards in the same light as a suicide hot-line or rape crisis counseling line - that is, a number to be used only by those with a serious need, and the response of these same sysops to (young) non-serious non-business callers is about the same as you would expect a suicide hot-line counselor to respond to a prank call. I agree absolutely with Chris Rowley (who maintains two of the most truly rewarding boards in the area). A bbs system is a Bulletin Board system, should be free for public access without exceptions. Boards like this one or Howard Lambert's Phoenix (nee Hownan's) should perhaps be called (no offence) fts's for File Transfer Systems, as there are never any messages of consequence for sharing. Besides, well written BBS software should be immune from 'board crashers' anyway. I wonder how many sysops have restricted access to their boards only because they care not to take the time to correct weaknesses in the software that allow them to be crashed. I am in the process of setting up a public access bulletin board system for which there will never be access restrictions on anyone. The Tom Tcimpidis case set a precedent, so I need not worry if someone uploads a credit-card number or copy of Lotus 123 - I will simply delete them if I find them. Message # 23 on 06-07-85 at 13:50 From :SYSOP To :ALL Subj :RESPONSE I think it's time for the old Sysop to jump in here, following Mr. Tyson's message. "A bbs system is a Bulletin Board system, should be free for public access without exceptions," according to Mr. Tyson. The question here is "Why?". This company leaves equipment with a retail value of over $7,000 online 24 hours a day, seven days a week, experiences roughly 90 minutes of maintenance on the system daily and expends approximately $100.00 weekly to provide serious software for serious users. Because we are among the most restrictive systems in the country, our visitors rarely experience access problems. Notwithstanding that restrictiveness, we have over 500 registered visitors and have had more than 9,000 logons since last October. Obviously, we are doing something correctly. The notion that "BBS" systems are a "free-for-all" we find rather distasteful. Of all the industries and people I covered during my newspaper days with the Wall Street Journal, I never encountered a group such as PC-Users. They seem bent on "getting something for nothing" and rarely offer anything quid pro quo. Our system would not exist if it did not pay its own way . . . and if it ever stops paying its own way, we will simply put it to another use. We take humbrage at the statement that this system never has "any messages of consequence for sharing." There are forums here on Turbo Pascal, Technical Issues, Copy Protection and, of course BBS Abuse. Some are, in fact, quite lively. If Mr. Tyson believes the messages are of no great moment, he may place the blame squarely on our visitors who logon, race immediately to the file transfer section and download for 43 minutes or so. As President of S/D Consultants, I can say without qualification this will never be a public message base, nor will it ever drop its restrictions. This, for many reasons, not the least of which are legal. If Mr. Tyson truly believes he can operate a totally open system, based on the Tcimpidis "precedent," he is both naive and sorely mistaken. As that case was lost by the prosecution more on technicalities than case law . . . one upload to one's system can do it all: Registration is necessary. Operating a host communications system is, in many ways, in the public interest and certainly can be profitably, interesting and rewarding. However, I firmly believe that the utilization of a host system by a remote user is a privilege, not a right. Visitors are just that: "Visitors" and required to maintain the same decorum on a host system that they would maintain when walking into one's office or home. Message # 24 on 06-07-85 at 16:38 From :DAN PLUNKETT To :ALL Subj :Scott Keating Today, someone claiming to be "Scott Keating" from CentreVille, VA got access to my users log and subquentially got passwords (including mine). He called me back (BBS line) and proceeded to type in my name and my password. Of course, he got on without a hitch. I believe the others passwords too. PEOPLE CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS! To all BBS operators: If someone calls your system and claims to be me and leaves nasty messages, please, erase them. I DID NOT LEAVE THEM! I will try to get around a soon as possible to change my password. I will leave a comment saying so. Dan P. Plunkett Sysop of Fido #450 Message # 25 on 06-10-85 at 14:04 From :CHRIS ROWLEY To :ALL Subj :Difference of opinion Well, Steve and others have their right to their own opinion as to the use and freedom of their system. They just appear on the opposite end of the spectrum--the spectrum in this area is of course, Capitalistic Personal Computer User's Group, or CPCUG. These people provide a great service to the community and quite a number of boards. I personally do not like this group because of censorship, lack of access and "snootiness". I used to hold this opinion of "snootiness" to almost all IBM PC sysops, but from calling across the country I have seen this not the case. They have their share of restricted system, but not on the scale CPCUG brings to this area. Washington, D.C. has probabaly the largest number of bulletin boards in this country, yet the novice is bound to come across CPCUG either as a tip from the dealer or a friend. "Yeah, they got lots of files," is an apt description. But this is a bad precedant for the bulletin board society. Users need a share of both public and restricted access, file and discussion boards. I only wish the CPCUG could reevaluate their policies. I've run 4 boards over a year and a half, with no access restrictions (as I left one board, CPCUG member Rich Schinnell brought security to the board after complaining to teh ComputerLand management, but on later evaluation and dedicated users voicing objections the management realized that a foolish act to have taken) and have had no problems. Maybe I'm just immoral in your eyes, but I for one cherish freedom in this country and will do my best to allow others to enjoy it as well. I make no money dedicating my $8000 machine to public use. It's just fun. Chris Message # 26 on 06-10-85 at 16:30 From :SYSOP To :ALL Subj :Response My, my Mr. Rowley, that is quite a response. In one breath you use the word "Capitalistic" in the perjorative and the next breath speak about cherishing freedom. I have no idea what your references to the CPUG mean. As a non-profit organization, the group certainly cannot be "capitalistic." The argument of "snootiness" is quite simply rebutted by the hundreds, perhaps even thousands of computer neophytes the group has assisted. With regard to "lack of access," I find that difficult to believe, as the primary CPUG host systems are those operated by Rich Schinnell and Wes Merchant. The former requires password and telephone number at logon, the latter has no requirement and both are open systems. Censorship on both of those systems, as well as this one certainly is nothing but a base canard issued by you, as the only editorial restrictions relate to the normal bounds of decorum and propriety. Considering those two parameters, one might well remember the old Computerland RBBS, which was filled with more foul language than I care to remember. In fact, the system was quite worthless as even a marketing tool and certainly reflected poorly on Computerland. In fact, I am not sure what purpose the system now service Computerland, as it represents only a message base and file transfer system utilized primarily by children. As to Computerland management recognizing, according to your missive, that they had embarked on a "foolish act," perhaps that is reflective of Computerland's thinking in general . . . one need only to look as the softening in business from Corporate to determine the wisdom of their business decisions. With regard to computer retailers operating host systems, we have had a number acquire PC-HOST and establish the system for two purposes: (1) the marketing of products; and (2) customer support. They have found that both sales and good will have increased significantly. With regard to the operation of an $8,000.00 system dedicated to fun and games, well, Chris, you are fortunate that it is so affordable . . . or, are you using it as a tax deduction. Message # 27 on 06-11-85 at 00:35 From :JOHN MCMAHON To :ALL Subj :CBM Machines and BBS Abuse I was Assistant Sysop for several months at the Computer Emporium BBS in Southern New York State. (914) 343-1031 N/8/1 300/1200 if you are interested. When I was there I had to deal with many of the problems you folks have described, mostly foul language and lewd comments. As for board crashers and people who upload 'bombs' we were luck enough to be spared this. Most of this occured because we were an open system, and although I hate to see more and more boards go private, I feel it's nessesary to protect the Sysop and also to protect the user. Since the CEBBS went private, many of those problems have disappeared, and CEBBS has flourished even with the entry restriction. I have 1 suggestion to add to improving a BBS, and a few comments on what people have said before me. 1. Uploads- Many boards have an 'Uploads Directory', this is a file of recent uploads that haven't been catagorized or tested by the Sysop. This ought to be removed so that users can't get their hands on 'untested' material. A Sysop, in most cases, will be able to safely test for bombs as opposed to the general user who may not know what to look for. So to prevent the user from getting their hands on a potential disaster program, remove the UPLOADS directory from users access. 2. 300 Baud- Why get rid of it ?? Many people cannot afford a Hayes 1200B (or eqivalent) I certainly can't! (Before you ask, I am not calling from my own computer) Good Policeing of a system will prevent abuse, not closing out users who can't afford better equipment. Also not all hackers and kids have 300 Baud machines. continued... Message # 28 on 06-11-85 at 00:51 From :JOHN MCMAHON To :ALL Subj :Last Message continued... My apologies for making this 2 Messages, but I get a little long winded. 3- Commodore, Atari and other game machines - This stereotype makes my blood boil, and this is the first time I have seen it. Just because users are using 'foreign' machines (i.e. using a Vic-20 to call a PC Board) and just accessing your message base doesn't mean that the are better or worse, just different. I resent the implication that owners of these socalled 'game' machines have nothing better to do than bother the Sysops and IBM-PC BBS systems. Why shut these people out ?? They just want to communicate with other people, just like you with your IBM-PC equipment. Also my comment about expense comes under this point also, many people cannot afford a IBM-PC! Let alone a PC with a modem. For what you would pay for an IBM-PC, you could get a decent Commodore-64 system and still have money left over! To go back to my board CEBBS, most of our users own Commodore 64's, in fact our up/down load section for C-64's is (at last count) 12 or 13 times larger than the IBM-PC directory. Why? Cause most of the people in our area own C-64's. How would you feel if you called the all the local BBS systems in your are a and discovered that you couldn't do anything because they were restricted to C-64 users ?? My message here is don't discriminate because of equipmen security is required obviously, but don't prevent a new user from entering the BBS world just because he has an Atari! By the way, I am quite happy with the communications abilities of my non-IBMPC... a 300-baud Commodore Vic-20. Thank you for allowing me to express my views (sorry about the spelling errors) Regards, John J. McMahon Message # 29 on 06-11-85 at 07:58 From :SYSOP To :ALL Subj :Response Jim, first, I believe you have misunderstood the parameters of this system: it exists and operates ONLY for IBM PCs and clones, not for other systems. This for any number of reasons, the primary of which include the fact that we are commercial and business oriented. With that in mind, the IBM and compatibles are the preeminent systems extant. As to other computers and host systems for them, well, there are many existing for Commodores, Ataris, Apple. About a year ago we opened the system up, to other systems, primarily Apples, with associated products for sale and file transfer. We had that system up for several months and it was pure horror . . . just filled with abuse. We had a number of responsible Apple users and a number of Apple customers, however, the headaches far outweighed the profits, so we removed all access for non-IBM users. With regard to the exclusion of 300 baud users, again this is a business oriented system and we believe that most business users are operating at 1200 baud. In fact, prior to excluding 300 bauders, our statistics showed that more than 95 percent of our visitors were at 1200. Moreover, your cost factor comes into play, along with efficiency: if one is utilizing an IBM PC and communications, then one should certainly be at least somewhat current with communications equipment: using 1200 baud. Finally, most of our problems on this system were related to visitors using 300 baud. All uploads on this system, by the way, ARE placed on a private directory for prior review. Message# 30 has been Killed. Message # 31 on 06-16-85 at 23:47 From :CHRIS ROWLEY To :ALL Subj :Response Since it appears my response was lost due to my work, I'll rekey it. The reference to the illustrious group as "Capitalistic" is merely a monicker I use in my manual NRBBS-PC, the first public-domain parody documentation to be available soon. Just came out as habit I guess. I know of your groups successes and contributions but would never be a member because of the CPCUG double-standard. I quote from the RBBS-PC documentation which is pubically acknowledged as part of the CPCUG (it is version CPC12.2A etc.): "to be a catalyst for the free exchange of information." Yet most if not all CPCUG boards require real names and a curb on language, subject matter (Tom Mack is the prime example: his board is for free exchange but he places the bounds of religion, literature and NRBBS, not quite a free turf to me). My "toy" was a graduation/birthday present. A tax write-off would be foolish since I haul the thing off to college each school year. It is used for programming, communications, study and writing. When not being used (during sleep and while at work) I run a truly free bbs, with no restrictions on monickers (bulletin board users did not invent the pseudonym--what about the many fine authors who used it to their advantage?) or subject matter. I feel obscene replies with no warrant should be purged, but on the sex story board, a very funny and well written area, the language is needed, but it is used in a very non-offensiv matter, as least as far as I'm concerned. Chris Message # 32 on 06-17-85 at 08:33 From :SYSOP To :ALL Subj :Response Ah, the anarchy of youth . . . what degree of freedom is required before freedom is no longer . . . these are issues and philosophies I've not the time to address. However, Chris, the analogy of pseudonyms and authors is thoroughly spurious and was well-addressed here about a year ago in a colloquy with Tom Hamlin. Again, I've not the inclination to debate the use of fraudulent names again, save to say that there is no reason to utilize them on this, or any other responsible system unless one is here to violate the regulations of this system or effect damage upon it.  or any other responsible system unless one is