NetNews Offline 2/NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso/news/comp/sys/amiga/audio/616

Internet Message Format | 1996-08-05 | 8.9 KB

Path: tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!demon!spence-n.demon.co.uk
From: [e-mail] (Neil)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.audio
Subject: Open response to Richard E Depew
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 21:26:42 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spence-n.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: spence-n.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82

The following has been sent by e-mail and posted to
comp.sys.amiga.audio and news.admin.net-abuse.misc.

On Feb 8th [e-mail] wrote in comps.sys.amiga.audio ....

>I have issued 4 cancels for large binary files (average size 297,665
>characters - total size 1,190,661 characters) posted to....

You have cancelled 137 postings in the last 14 days. On what basis and
authority do you 'police' the Internet. Are these individual actions
or as the agent of your employer ?

The Internet, a superficial  network of computers, is a network of
people and ideas. Technocratic decisions and policies are only valid
when they are supported by the people and do not impinge of the rights
of individuals to free expression. NEWS administrators do not own the
news articles they administer servers on the users behalf. The news
groups are owned  by the individuals who post and read articles.
Administrators are the agents of the users and not vice versa.
Therefore on what authority either mandated or moral do you cancel
posts without reference or request from the owners of the group or
articles.

>Binary posts do not belong in unmoderated discussion groups.

These group are unmoderated so why are you moderating them.

These files were very particular in that they were posted into USENET
because of its distributed nature. This act was totally legal. It has
been suggested that certain individuals wanted to restrict the
circulation of these binaries for competitive reasons. This would make
distribution via FTP or WWW difficult due to the power of the
particular individuals who wished to suppress these files. This would
directly harm the rights of the individuals using this newsgroup and
their ability to use and support their chosen hardware platform, which
has already been harmed by other vested interests.

A feeder article asking for responses to the posting of these
particular binary files directly into comp.sys.amiga.audio group
produced the following response 23 in favour, 2 against. Hence the
binaries were posted by democratic decision.

[Note: Since you censored these files there have been numerous e-mail
requests for a re-post]

>There has been a long-standing consensus among news administrators
>that binaries belong in binaries newsgroups, and not elsewhere.
>There also seems to be a consensus supporting the cancellation of
>large binaries in discussion groups as long as appropriate protocols
>are followed.

Please explain both the democratic and geographic basis of these
consensus.

Exactly, which news servers do you administer ?

>I am testing that consensus and developing a protocol.

So your not even sure there is a consensus. Does this mean you are
just taking action and if no one objects then it must be OK.?  This is
neither a logical nor intelligent way to test a belief. If you believe
there is a commonly held belief, it is logical to seek opinion before
taking action. I can find no evidence in the USENET archives of you
having sought a democratic  opinion from the USENET owners.

I have however found a considerable number of articles in the USENET
archives disagreeing with your actions and only a few supporting you.

>The cancels in the alt.binaries groups are an unavoidable consequence
>of the way cancels work.  A cross-posted article is only one article.
>When it is cancelled from an inappropriate group it is cancelled from
>all groups.

So your protocol happens to remove postings in groups that even you
think you shouldn't be removing them from. Is this just a technical
problem or does it represent a conscious decision to support the
utopian concept of the needs of the many outweigh the need of the few.
This is of course the concept used to justify the odd 'accidental'
state murder when countries with capital punishment, such as your own,
occasionally kill the wrong person.

>The criteria used to search for this batch of large binaries were:
>   SIZE: > 120,000 characters (soon to be 100,000)
>   NEWSGROUPS: Unmoderated akr, biz, comp, misc, news, rec, or sci
>   BINARY: (.zip, .jpg, .avi, .exe, .sit, .bmp, .bin, .wav, .gif,
>   .dwg, .fon, uuencoded and base64 encoded files, etc.)

Such automated removal is arbitrary and pointless. From my research I
see that you have deleted maps, tables, spreadsheet files, midi files,
charts, drawings etc.

Given the composite nature of many documents produced by the latest
generation document  processors it is becoming increasingly common to
need to post articles in non text formats. Your criteria is removing
these files. These formats are fully supported by the latest
generation of newsgroup readers (these software writers must not
therefore support your consensus)  which can decode and launch
relevant viewing programs on the host system. You are romoving
pictures, sound files midi files etc. In fact anything other than the
written word in ASCII. Why have you decided that the written word in
ASCII is the only acceptable form of communication in newsgroups ? I
object to your removal of my freedom of expression.

Your criteria would also appear naive. If for instance, as result of a
discussion in a newsgroup, I posted a IFF document that was
a criticism of the recent firing squad execution in the USA this
would be removed. How would you prove that this was not an act of
political censorship ?

>In my opinion, the best way to distribute binary files is via ftp or
>the web.  With the ready availability of ftp mail servers, even uucp
>sites can retrieve binaries from ftp sites.

Your opinion does not count in this instance, nor that of
administrators, who must remain administrators not owners of the
USENET system. Only  the news group users opinions count. By all means
remove and censor files from your own servers but do not issue
world-wide cancels.

In addition the distributed nature of USENET is ideal for world wide
access.  FTP and WWW is unsuitable due to speeds over long distances
and especially developing countries with slow or unreliable links.
Many developing nations have links which support mail and USENET
services but cannot provide reliable services for WWW and FTP etc. Do
you wish to discriminate against these nations ?

>However, if you really must post a binary to Usenet, please post it
>to an appropriate binaries newsgroup such as alt.binaries.misc.
>Then, if you like, post something in the appropriate discussion group
>telling people where to find the binary in the binaries group (a
>pointer to the binary).  This will permit news administrators and
>users to decide for themselves whether to receive the binary files.

Modern news packages and server software can already be configured not
to receive postings longer than a set size. Individuals therefore
already have the ability to decide not to receive the files. You are
removing this decision on a world wide basis.

>If there is an unmoderated binaries group in the hierarchies that I
>scan, I don't know about it yet.  Feel free to enlighten me.

Does this really mean that if you are accidentally deleting files you
shouldn't, please let you  know ? Well coupled with ...
>It's over, and can't be helped, and that's one consolation, as they
>  always say in Turkey, when they cut the wrong man's head off'' --
>  Charles Dickens
... appears rather arrogant.

In addition if individual post articles in a newsgroup via the anon
service you should not openly post any additional details about these
individuals, such as host name, and respect the rights of the
individual. Although you and I may be able to easily find such details
many people cannot, that is the decision of the poster when using the
anon service.

You have not, by your actions, respected my rights or those of all
other USENET users.

Please note: I use this particular account  for my personal use, as I
do not believe in using my employers facilities for my own use. I am
however head of IT for one of the largest organisations in Europe.
Your cancel messages will be blocked from all of our servers shortly
after my arrival in the office tomorrow. I will ensure my colleagues
in other organisations are appraised of your actions. If you do not
believe this, mail me or respond in one of the newsgroups and I will
send you proof .

It has been suggested in USENET articles that Richard E Depew is not
your real name. I do not wish to insult you,  but if this is the case
please respond with your real identity and mail address. If this is
not the case plesae accept my apologies for any offence this request
may cause.

Yours

Neil Spencer-Jones
[e-mail]

"Censorship is more depraving and corrupting than anything
pornography can produce."
Tony Smythe. Chair National Counicil for Civil liberties
The Observer, UK Newspaper, 1972