------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: The Digital Revolution Date: Wed Sep 13 17:19:07 CDT 1995 Message number: 1 Reply to message number: unavailable The Digital Revolution encompasses music, the media and even mundane things like burgular alarms that call the police for you. This base is a place to discuss what affect the digital revolution will have upon our culture. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CAPTAIN TEEBO To: Duckman Subject: Re: Addendum: Date: Tue Mar 12 09:27:31 CST 1996 Message number: 2 Reply to message number: 1 D> Are we ever going to hear this again? I was unfortunate enough to read abou D> it about 2 days too late after you mentioned when it would be on the air. H D> did it go? Did you record the show at all? Did the FCC ever catch wind of D> it? He never calls anymore... He said that he would get me a tape of this about 5 months ago, .. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DUCKMAN To: Captain Teebo Subject: Re: Addendum: Date: Tue Mar 12 16:21:05 CST 1996 Message number: 3 Reply to message number: 2 CT> He never calls anymore... He said that he would get me a tape of this abou CT> months ago, .. God, I'm always on after he gets off!! Can you send me a copy as soon as you get one? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CAPTAIN TEEBO To: Duckman Subject: Re: Addendum: Date: Sun Mar 17 09:53:48 CST 1996 Message number: 4 Reply to message number: 2 D> God, I'm always on after he gets off!! Can you send me a copy as soon as you D> get one? Consider it done.. However, somehow I doubt that he'll ever send it to me.. Just a minor complication. :) *teeob ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Quake Date: Tue Mar 26 14:48:54 CST 1996 Message number: 5 Reply to message number: unavailable I see that several of you have downloaded the beta version of Quake I put online. I haven't gotten a chance to look at it yet, but ... what do you all think of it, assuming you got it to work? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ZWEITER HOYF To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Quake Date: Wed Mar 27 18:34:35 CST 1996 Message number: 6 Reply to message number: 5 ^1-=> Quoting Daedalus Rising to All <=- DR> I see that several of you have downloaded the beta version of Quake I put DR> online. I haven't gotten a chance to look at it yet, but ... what do you al DR> think of it, assuming you got it to work? I only have 4mb (which I thought was a lot when I bought this computer) so I had to delete the game. Shit. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Zweiter Hoyf Subject: Re: Quake Date: Thu Mar 28 02:46:35 CST 1996 Message number: 7 Reply to message number: 6 DR> I see that several of you have downloaded the beta version of Quake I put DR> online. I haven't gotten a chance to look at it yet, but ... what do you al DR> think of it, assuming you got it to work? ZH> I only have 4mb (which I thought was a lot when I bought this computer) so ZH> had to delete the game. Why, what do you need ... 8 megs? 12? No game can be that good :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: ALL Subject: interesting www sites Date: Fri Mar 29 03:20:20 CST 1996 Message number: 8 Reply to message number: unavailable Sorry if this isn't the appropriate base, (feel free to move this Daedalus), but here are a few nice web sites I've come accross in the last few days: http://www.switchboard.com - So many phone #'s it's scary. http://www.igc.apc.org/peacenet/ - the Peacenet home page. http://www.goodnet.com/~sslayer - the FoS homepage, local art group http://www.umich.edu/~webspin/games - Digital Nostalgia, 80's games. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: interesting www sites Date: Fri Mar 29 07:29:12 CST 1996 Message number: 9 Reply to message number: 8 TI> http://www.goodnet.com/~sslayer - the FoS homepage, local art gr Ah, but have you found the Lameness home page? TI> http://www.igc.apc.org/peacenet/ - the Peacenet home page. For related material, look for the Z Magazine and Mother Jones pages ... both are pretty decent, the former includes links to some Noam Chomsky materials. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ZWEITER HOYF To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Quake Date: Fri Apr 05 18:24:21 CST 1996 Message number: 10 Reply to message number: 5 DR> Why, what do you need ... 8 megs? 12? DR> DR> No game can be that good :) Need 8. Don't think the game itself is worth the $179 to add 4 mb to this system. Even if it is a chance to get in on beta. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BADLANDS To: Zweiter Hoyf Subject: stuff Date: Sat Apr 06 18:17:59 CST 1996 Message number: 11 Reply to message number: 10 DR> No game can be that good :) Crusader: No Remorse. Now THAT'S good.... :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: DAEDALUS RISING Subject: interesting www sites Date: Sun Apr 07 05:53:16 CDT 1996 Message number: 12 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Daedalus Rising to The Invisible Man <=- DR> Ah, but have you found the Lameness home page? No I haven't, please post it if you know. DR> For related material, look for the Z Magazine and Mother Jones pages DR> ... both are pretty decent, the former includes links to some Noam DR> Chomsky materials. yup, which can be found at http://www.zbbs.com ... I think it's a .co domain, but if that doesn't work try .org, etc. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: We want our CDA Date: Mon Apr 22 10:58:45 CDT 1996 Message number: 13 Reply to message number: unavailable Christian Group Targets CompuServe By Stephen Pizzo April 17, WASHINGTON -- A pro-family group here has asked Attorney General Janet Reno to investigate CompuServe for violating the Communications Decency Act. It is the first known request for prosecution under the new law which is currently facing a court challenge. Patrick Trueman, director of governmental affairs for the Washington-based American =46amily Association wrote Reno earlier this month requesting that the DOJ open an investigation of CompuServe "for potential violations of the Communications Decency Act" because, the letter said, CompuServe "is offering pornography and other sexually oriented material on its on-line service to its users, including children." Trueman headed the DOJ's office of Child Exploitation and Obscenity under the Reagan and Bush administrations. Last year the AFA sparked a DOJ investigation into Calvin Klein over television ads that depicted what appeared to be underaged adolescents partially undressed and in sexually suggestive poses. The DOJ inquiry was dropped after it was determined that the models were all over 18 years of age. The AFA identifies itself on its Web site as "a Christian ministry, based in Tupelo, Mississippi." The focus of Trueman's ire this time is a site CompuServe unveiled on March 29 called the MacGlamour Forum. The site provides adult-oriented graphics, videos, and discussion groups. "This is exactly the kind of case the Justice Department should want to prosecute," said Trueman. "CompuServe will say that they offer their parental controls but they put this site up before parents knew it was going up and thousands of kids logged on that day." Since the CDA emerged from Congress as "a very weak bill," Trueman said, the DOJ needs to take on clear-cut cases like the CompuServe's MacGlamour site in order to "scare other online providers" into restricting indecent material online that could be accessed by children. CompuServe denies the MacGlamour site violates the CDA. "First of all we have not violated the law," said Daphney Kent, a CompuServe spokesperson. "In its letter to Ms. Reno, the AFA kept using the term 'pornography' and we do not provide pornographic content on CompuServe. We do provide adult content on our service and we provide state-of-the-art tools for parents to block such content." Kent also noted that the fact that parents were not warned the MacGlamour site was going up is not a valid criticism. "We added the site to our parental blocking list before we put it up," said Kent. "Any account that had already selected parental blocking would not have had access to that site even on the first day." But Trueman is unswayed. He said CompuServe's parental controls are not enough. "We have no control over adults who want to access indecent materials," said Trueman, "but they should have to phone CompuServe and prove that they are an adult at which time they could be given a password to access the adult site." CompuServe's chief spokesman, William Giles, said there are no plans to change the service's current policy. "We continue to believe that the best person to decide what children should or should not have access to are their parents," said Giles. "We don't want to be put in the position of deciding what your kids can and can't see on our service. That's the parent's responsibility." Giles said that if CompuServe's parental controls are not strong enough protection for some parents they can choose the company's new "Wow!" service that defaults to a child's menu of services unless an adult password is entered. Trueman responded that, even if a one household employs CompuServe's parental controls their neighbor may not be as careful and kids could get their porn next door instead. So far CompuServe has not heard from the DOJ. "We have not been contacted by the Justice Department and don't expect to be," said Kent. The DOJ has a policy of not commenting on requests like the AFA's but for now it may be a moot matter. The DOJ said it would not prosecute any CDA-related cases until the courts decide if the law is constitutional. But Trueman warned that the DOJ's self-imposed moratorium on CDA prosecutions is not the same thing as a grace period. "The law is enforceable now," said Trueman. "Just because DOJ has agreed not to investigate or prosecute CDA violations today does not mean they cannot go back after the law is upheld and investigate cases like this one." Trueman said his group was also worried about verbal pornography on the Net. But a visit to Trueman's AFA site contains a link to a page that graphically lists "homosexual sexual practices." Trueman said the AFA list is not the same as an online pornographic discussion. "We are explaining, not advocating that people actually perform these sexual practices and acts," said Trueman. Copyright =A9 Songline Studios, Inc., 1996. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED **************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt@coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-20 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd.,#176, Columbus, OH 43229 **************************************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Mailer Daemon Subject: Re: We want our CDA Date: Mon Apr 22 13:31:19 CDT 1996 Message number: 14 Reply to message number: 13 MD> Since the CDA emerged from Congress as "a very MD> weak bill," Trueman said, the DOJ needs to take MD> on clear-cut cases like the CompuServe's MD> MacGlamour site in order to "scare other online MD> providers" into restricting indecent material MD> online that could be accessed by children. I'd hate to see what "a very strong bill" would look like to this gent, then. He's on the right track, though. All they need to do is scare people with enough show trials, and the rest of the industry will follow suit. MD> Trueman responded that, even if a one household MD> employs CompuServe's parental controls their MD> neighbor may not be as careful and kids could MD> get their porn next door instead. I can't believe this piss-poor logic. Is this guy for real? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Mailer Daemon Subject: Re: We want our CDA Date: Mon Apr 22 14:53:05 CDT 1996 Message number: 15 Reply to message number: 13 MD> Patrick Trueman, director of governmental MD> affairs for the Washington-based American MD> =46amily Association wrote Reno earlier this MD> month requesting that the DOJ open an MD> investigation of CompuServe "for potential MD> violations of the Communications Decency Act" Do you suppose that if we turn on the lights, this guy will scurry under the baseboard like the rest of the roaches? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: We want our CDA Date: Mon Apr 22 14:57:38 CDT 1996 Message number: 16 Reply to message number: 14 MD> Trueman responded that, even if a one household MD> employs CompuServe's parental controls their MD> neighbor may not be as careful and kids could MD> get their porn next door instead. DR> DR> I can't believe this piss-poor logic. Is this guy for real? Remember that this guy wpuld probably like to stifle publishinh of adult books for the same reason . If you, a single adult man, are allowed to possess it, your kid nephews and nieces might sneak a peek at it. Even worse, you may show it to them. Yeah. That is probably what would happen because everyone knows what a prevert you are. :) Even better, let's just throw all single adult males who read this stuff in jail. Never can be too sure. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: Cyberangels Date: Mon May 06 13:29:03 CDT 1996 Message number: 17 Reply to message number: unavailable THE INTERNET IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD - LET'S LOOK AFTER IT! CYBERANGELS - WHO ARE WE? We are an all-volunteer Internet safety patrol and monitoring project started in June 1995 by senior members of the world famous crime prevention organization The International Alliance of Guardian Angels. CyberAngels membership currently numbers more than 1000 users worldwide in15 countries, who share a common mission - to be a Cyberspace Neighborhood Watch and to fight Internet crime. Our numbers are growing daily. We are working to make the Internet a safer and more enjoyable place to work and play, by being role models for self-regulation and responsibility. We are dedicated: TO FIGHT CRIME ON THE INTERNET in particular criminal activity where there are clear personal victims and/or at-risk users. TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN FROM ONLINE CRIMINAL ABUSE by fighting against the trade in child pornography and by working to deter sexual predators online. TO GIVE SUPPORT, ADVICE AND ASSISTANCE TO INTERNET VICTIMS OF HATE MAIL, HARASSMENT AND SEXUAL ABUSE ONLINE by referring them to professional assistance and by helping to guide them through the compaints and reporting processes. TO PROMOTE, PRESERVE AND PROTECT NETIQUETTE that is, the rules of polite conduct that govern our use of the Internet. We believe in courtesy and respect for others. We support Internet Service Providers who have clearly defined Terms of Service for the User, and who are prepared to enforce it. TO HELP TO PRESERVE INTERNET FREEDOM OF SPEECH by showing Governments that the Internet Community is prepared to take both responsibililty and actions to preserve the personal safety of all its members, and particularly its children. HOW DO WE FIGHT CRIME ON THE INTERNET? Crime on the Internet is a tiny percentage of everything that is there. But it is real and it is claiming victims with increasing regularity. We believe that we the Net Community should take the responsibility for the problem - after all it is our fellow users who are the criminals - and also that we should assume the responsibility for crime prevention measures. CyberAngels don't just talk about it. WE ACT. EDUCATION / ADVICE / CYBERSTREETSMARTS The Internet to us is like a vast city: public and private areas, kids and adult areas, safe areas and crime areas. To travel it safely you need some CyberStreetsmarts. One of our main methods of crime prevention on the Net is by educating users about the possible problems they may encounter, and how to avoid them Education means educating parents realistically about the Internet so that they areaware of the dangers, but are not overreacting. It's important that parents and kids cooperate in this area. The Internet is such a wonderful learning environment that we wish to encourage kids to use it - but adults must take responsibility for making sure our kids do not wander into areas that are not appropriate. We act as an advisory service for any user with problems of personal safety and / or personal security on the Net. This advice ranges from how to deal with mailbombs, forged email, mailing list spams, virii, impersonation and other electronic sabotage and harassment methods, to information about how to deal with hate mail, sexual harassment, kids' safety online and unsolicited email. Many users do not know how to report abuse nor to whom they should report it. CyberAngels can usually help. SAFETY PATROLS CyberAngels volunteers run regular Safety Patrols on the Net. Safety Patrols on the Internet means cruising the electronic highways, keeping your eyes open for problems. The main areas we patrol are the Usenet (Newsgroups) and the live channels (IRC / Chat rooms etc). We read Newsgroups, especially the binaries groups on the Usenet, and if we find images of child pornography posted up there we refer those files to federal law enforcement authorities, eg US Customs Service. We also check out fraud schemes on the Usenet, and if necessary report them to the National Fraud Centre. We also keep track of Spam developments - who is mass mailing unsolicited mail and what they are offering. We travel the live channels of IRC / MUDS or the chat rooms in the big Providers, looking out for sexual predators searching for children, or pedophiles trading child pornography in the live talk areas. This is a major source of child pornography on the Net. If we find it we report it to Sysadmins and Federal authorities. We cruise the World Wide Web, checking sites to make sure child pornography is not being used to attract visitors, and checking that a site that says it is Kidsafe really is suitable for children. We visit and read websites and FTP sites of Racist and other Hate Organizations, keeping a check on their activities. There is a very close relationship between Racist material and Racist activities (eg Hate mail and harassment, violent threats and intimidation). We don't believe in the philosophy that "anything goes" on the Net. The Internet is a society and in societies where "anything goes" then crime and violence dominate, and the stronger consume the weaker. The Internet is a newly developing global nation - and we need Cyberspace law and law enforcement if users rights are to be protected. We believe in FREEDOM AND JUSTICE UNDER LAW. And although we recognize the problems of how National Laws can be applied to an International society, we believe that the first step is that Netizens CARE about Cybercrime and the victims of Cybercrime. YOU CAN HELP US! WE NEED VOLUNTEERS! The Internet Community is huge - a worldwide network of around 40 million people, 11 million Websites, 3500 Service Providers - and it's growing every day. The more volunteers we have, the more effective we can be. And by giving a little of your time to looking after the welfare of the Net, you can make a real difference! Anyone can be a CyberAngel. The only requirement is that you commit a minimum of 2 hours per week to the project. No previous experience or special skills are necessary, .although a computer and an Internet account would be useful! :) Being a CyberAngel involves no risk or danger. You are volunteering only to be eyes watching the Net, looking out for the welfare of others. CAN YOU HELP US? You may be able to help us in other ways - we are a Division of Guardian Angels and we are a 501 (C)(3) Non-profit organization. Our membership is voluntary and we are in desperate need of more resources. All of your donations are tax-deductible. You can help us by donating money, computers, Internet access accounts, design skills, or websites. Alternatively you may like to consider sponsoring our work on the Internet. Contact us for details. * Cyberangels support SAFESURF in their campaign for child safe areas on the Net * Cyberangels support WEBSAFE and their work with kids, teens and parents. * Cyberangels support the BLUE RIBBON Freedom of Speech campaign * Cyberangels support PICS, other rating systems and screening software *Cyberangels support CYBERSPACE LAW AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. CYBERSPACE NEEDS CYBERANGELS! ********************************************************* Colin Gabriel Hatcher - CyberAngels Director angels@wavenet.com "Freedom and justice, under law" ********************************************************* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THE INVISIBLE MAN To: MAILER DAEMON Subject: Cyberangels Date: Fri May 10 17:21:09 CDT 1996 Message number: 18 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Mailer Daemon to All <=- MD> CYBERANGELS - WHO ARE WE? MD> We are an all-volunteer Internet safety patrol and monitoring project MD> started in June 1995 by senior members of the world famous crime MD> prevention organization The International Alliance of Guardian Angels. What do y'all think of this? If you ask me, they sound like good reall good people with really good intentions, however it also sounds like these guys may take things a bit too far without even realizing what their doing. Hopefully they do more help than harm, it really sounds like these guys mean well. Does anyone know more about them? I'd like to see some information on what they've done on the net so far.. MD> We don't believe in the philosophy that "anything goes" on the Net. MD> The Internet is a society and in societies where "anything goes" then MD> crime and violence dominate, and the stronger consume the weaker. The MD> Internet is a newly developing global nation - and we need Cyberspace MD> law and law enforcement if users rights are to be protected. We Yuck.. I hope they're not too serious about this part. If they 'net becomes as heavily regulated as the rest of the world, it's entire purpose will go to waste. The internet obviously needs some regulation, but that "some regulation" is a very minute amount. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: HAND To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: Cyberangels Date: Sun May 12 01:03:26 CDT 1996 Message number: 19 Reply to message number: 18 TI> Yuck.. I hope they're not too serious about this part. If they 'net TI> becomes as heavily regulated as the rest of the world, it's entire purpose TI> will go to waste. The internet obviously needs some regulation, but that TI> "some regulation" is a very minute amount. IMHO this is a nice idea, but the one fear I have is that we are bringing the real world too far into the online community. When we get down to it the internet is a global community with users in just about every country on the planet with ideas and oppinions to match. We CAN NOT treat it like it is just an extention of America. We need to establish our own government and laws to deal with crimes purpitrated in the online world. It may sound a little extream, but the "Global Village" is quickly expanding into its own continant. It might not be time to take such drastinc measures yet, but the is coming... soon. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: The Invisible Man Subject: Re: Cyberangels Date: Sun May 12 11:00:51 CDT 1996 Message number: 20 Reply to message number: 18 TI> Yuck.. I hope they're not too serious about this part. If they 'net TI> becomes as heavily regulated as the rest of the world, it's entire purpose TI> will go to waste. The internet obviously needs some regulation, but that TI> "some regulation" is a very minute amount. The Cyberangels, and others like them, are equating a physical, tangible society with a society build on words and pictures. It's just not the same thing; speech needs no special regulation. I think we can all agree that unwelcomed messages that slander or threaten someone else is wrong - but current laws cover that. If they don't work, fix them up a bit until they do. Similarly, there are laws against fraud; people are being arrested for conducting unethical and illegal business in cyberspace. The laws are fine, it's just that law enforcement hasn't caught up to the technology yet. TI> What do y'all think of this? If you ask me, they sound like good r TI> good people with really good intentions, however it also sounds like these Thet sound like people who percieve a genuine problem, but then allow their desire to `control' take the lead. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: Cyberangels Date: Sun May 12 14:56:33 CDT 1996 Message number: 21 Reply to message number: 20 DR> I think we can all agree that unwelcomed messages that slander or threaten DR> someone else is wrong - but current laws cover that. If they don't work, fi DR> them up a bit until they do. Similarly, there are laws against fraud; peopl DR> are being arrested for conducting unethical and illegal business in DR> cyberspace. The laws are fine, it's just that law enforcement hasn't caught DR> up to the technology yet. DR> There may have to be some international agreements to make it more standard worldwide. TI> What do y'all think of this? If you ask me, they sound like good r TI> good people with really good intentions, however it also sounds like these DR> DR> Thet sound like people who percieve a genuine problem, but then allow thei DR> desire to `control' take the lead. They are called "vigilantes." and sure have caused a lot of grief in other areas. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: Usenet as Utopia Date: Sun May 26 06:30:39 CDT 1996 Message number: 22 Reply to message number: unavailable Ä Area: altgothic ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ Msg#: 6555 Date: 05-22-96 23:23 From: Jaffo Read: Yes Replied: No To: All Mark: Subj: What I Want From Usenet ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ From: jaffo@onramp.net (Jaffo) Subject: What I Want From Usenet Having been gone from Usenet for so long, I forgot just how shallow, insipid, and rude this place can be. When I'm not careful, it even brings out the worst in me. I get frustrated because I want more from Usenet than it really can give. I remember when I first got on the net. I read alt.religion.kibology because it seemed friendly and it seemed to attract the kinds of people I admire. And every now and then, someone would just open up and talk about their day. Somebody in Boston or Canada or North Carolina would list what they bought at the grocery store or talk about the weather. This just seemed magical to me. Ark represented all the thousands of totally unique people in the world that don't wear boots or cowboy hats and would not consider a pickup truck a family vehicle. At a time when all my old friendships were dropping away, these snippits of personal information reminded me of the good ol' days in high school. I find something incredibly romantic about driving through big city streets in the middle of the night, surrounded by new friends. Talking about philosophy and coffee, watching the bright lights on the big buildings, thinking that somewhere, something _important_ was happening. I wanted to meet people from strange places. I wanted to hear stories about Canadian Taco Bells and Ivy League campuses. I wanted to read posts about big cities and mundane friendship rituals. I think my favorite posts are "slice of life" things where people talk about what happened at Lab today, or just put up their grocery lists for all the world to read. These kinds of things make me feel close to people. They make the world seem small and warm and friendly. When I read things like this, it makes me realize that the world is made up of people just like me. They make me feel like I could move to any city in the world and find friends. They make me feel like a big community of writers and artists and students, just grinding through their degree programs, trying to make ends meet. And most of all, they remind me that in the midst of all these hicks, goofballs, drunkards and weirdos, there are still people out there that care about writing. There are still people out there who can spend a whole evening talking about the future of the human race, or funny things they saw in clouds, or what aliens would say if they could look down on us. I want to spend time with people who argue about the existence of God. What he looks like, what he feels, where he lives. I want to talk about Angels and Devils and Time and Reality. I want to dream about the future and all the wonderful things my kids will have. I want to have conversations with people that smack their foreheads and say, "Hey, Jaffo, that's really cool! I never would have thought of that." I want to rise out of this narrow little dustbucket town and spend some time with people that understand me. I want to feel lost in a big world, then narrow down the focus and feel at home again. I want to hear stories from people I don't understand. I want to participate in conversations I can't predict. I want to be surrounded by people who surprise me and make me laugh. I want to be in a room where I feel totally comfortable and at ease, knowing that whatever I say, someone will understand. I want to sit in the Mall drinking coffee, making fun of the people that walk by. I want to kick back in somebody's living room with the tv off, making up stories that may never be written. I want to laugh at bad in-jokes and listen to amateur music. I want to spend a Saturday night with people who don't have to get drunk to be human. I just want to know that somewhere out there someone understands what I think. I get frustrated with usenet because it really could be that way. These little newsgroups could be islands of humor and compassion, filled with tidbits of mundane truth. I want a little community where people support each other and encourage each other. A place where they think twice about being rude or crude or unkind. I guess that makes me a Kook. I guess I'm pining for my own little Neutopia. I think that's what Andy wants. I think that's what he's been trying to build for so long. He tries to tie it together with little in-jokes and web pages, but that's all just window dressing. What he really wants is a little cyber community where people all over the world talk to each other like close friends. Usenet could be that way, if we let it. Just let our hair down, lower the defenses. Put aside the personas and insecurities and just talk about what it means to be people. Don't hide our weaknesses from each other. Reveal them. Support them. Lend strength. I don't think it can really happen. Too many people are having too much fun being assholes. I mean, let's face it. Nobody responds to positive, revealing posts. Nobody is willing to let their hair down and be vulnerable in such a public place. Not when the Net is filled with so many people who look for easy targets just to make themselves feel better. There's no real way to seperate the adults from the children, is there? Shit. I guess I'm gonna have to pay 30 bucks a month to The Well. Jaffo On Larry King Live, Marlan Brando made the shocking statement that Hollywood is "run by Jews." In response, outraged Jewish groups made it snow in New York in April. - http://rampages.onramp.net/~jaffo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: MAILER DAEMON To: All Subject: `PICS' Standards Date: Mon May 27 15:03:51 CDT 1996 Message number: 23 Reply to message number: unavailable Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit [For those not following this issue, PICS relates to schemes now underway to 'rate' websites (all that most people know of the Internet is the Web, so they think "The Internet" = "The World Wide Web on my Graphical YuppieBrowser." Anyway, the idea is to have each website rate itself XXX for adults, etc., and "no-rated" sites would be "frozen-out" or censored, along with other XXX or offending sites, for users who have censoring-software installed. And, presumably, in the future, each YuppieBrowser will include one brand or another of Censor-Ware, or maybe you'll be able to click a button to choose one of five Censor-Wares, depending on your prejudices or perceived vulnerabilities. A few variations on these scenarios, and their problems, follow... -- NY Transfer] Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 11:31:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Andy Oram Subject was: "No Subject Given" You'll understand the subject line in a couple minutes. We've been hearing so much about third-party rating systems like PICS that it's high time we looked at what life would be like with such a system. We hear that PICS is technically solid (flexible, foolproof, and so forth) but no one has fleshed out the social side of the technology--the things people and organizations would have to do to make PICS work. When I rev up my imagination and try to do this, I come up with a system that inevitably goes back to the old broadcast model--a few organizations offering a very limited number of hand-chosen sites. Of course, all this affects just the people who choose to install filters. Certainly such a system is less onerous than government censorship or software that searches for naughty words. I can still put political analyses on my Web site, and it doesn't bother me too much if some 17-year-old is denied access. I just don't believe we should be pretending to offer children Internet access when actually we're just offering them a fancy new low-bandwidth medium for seeing a few popular sites. Part I--the parent's point of view To see what I mean, suppose you are squeamish about the ideas your kid is exposed to and are living in a world with a lively third-party rating system. Your church offers a rating service, but they believe in screening out everything to do with homosexuality, which you think is going too far. Some friends like another site that features children's material, but it acts blase about passing through stories that put women in a subordinate position, and you don't like that. I forgot to say that your spouse comes from another country and has very different ideas about what is proper for young minds. What's going to happen is that hundreds, perhaps thousands of rating services will spring up to appeal to different tastes. There may be more rating sites than Web sites. Every religious denomination will have one. Large library and school systems will have them. And then we can watch the battles erupt! People will fight over which rating system to use for the local school and library, just as they fight over books now. Mark my words: some clerical fundamentalist is going to sue their public school to pay the cost of private school, because, "I'm not going to let my child see the filth they allow on their Web sites." And on the other side, some teenager with a sexually transmitted disease will sue because, "I would not have contracted the disease had they not shut out information on how to protect myself." These are the consequences of spreading the notion that you can control children's behavior by controlling the ideas you expose them to. Few people will do their own rating for personal use, because who can go through thousands of sites and pick out the ones appropriate for kids? Those who do are essentially sitting beside the child choosing what he or she should see--which is not a filtering system, it's parental guidance. Part II--the information provider's point of view Let's switch gears now. How will you get your own material rated by all these thousands of independent entities? If you're Disney Studios or the Smithsonian Institution, they'll check you out spontaneously and give you their blessing. But if you're some small publisher with a few games or stories you think children will like, they'll never find you--you've got to go to them. And perhaps even pay them for the privilege of being listed. The sites will probably charge parents for using the links too--why not skim a bit off of both ends? This could turn into quite a racket; I think I'll go out and buy my server right now. Meanwhile we'll have more appeals and battles, as authors and health services and others all try to persuade popular rating services that they're kosher. But it's not enough to be rated once. What if a questionable story goes up on your site a month after you're rated? You've either got to sign some promise to the rating service that you'll obey their rules (but this isn't censorship, no!) or have them rate you at regular intervals. More overhead, more cost. And as I said in my subject line, there's the risk that sites will turn you down because of one possibly offensive link. (They can theoretically rate on a link-by-link basis, but I bet they won't take the trouble.) Given all this overhead, I think each service will rate just a limited set of sites that they consider a nice, balanced offering. The way the big services like American On Line offer kid areas now. More popular services (who get a higher income) can afford to offer a larger variety of sites, but in either case we're getting closer and closer to the broadcast model. Surf away, Jimmy! References: The World Wide Web Consortium offers their own scenarios for using PICS at: http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/PICS/Scenarios.htm Rating services in general are discussed at: http://www.vtw.org/pubs/ipcfaq http://www.cais.net/cannon/memos/parents.htm (Feel free to respond to this list, but please also post to the main list where the discussion is occurring right now: cyber-rights@cpsr.org) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Andy Oram O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. andyo@ora.com 90 Sherman Street http://jasper.ora.com/andyo/ Cambridge, MA 02140-3244 phone: (617) 641-1261 USA fax:(617) 661-1116 Not owned by a media conglomerate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Permenance Date: Mon Jun 17 04:55:12 CDT 1996 Message number: 24 Reply to message number: unavailable PRIVACY Forum Digest Saturday, 15 June 1996 Volume 05 : Issue 12 Date: Sat, 08 Jun 96 16:17:21 PDT From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator) Subject: Re: Publishing on the net and old usenet postings This is an extremly significant topic, and one I discuss frequently. Having been writing publicly via ARPANET/Internet since the early 70's, there is a vast quantity of my writings and public messages now online, going back to my college days at UCLA. I don't feel uncomfortable with any of it being out there, since in general I always figured I was writing to a public audience and that public meant *public*--forever. Is availability of the archived public materials really a problem in and of itself? I personally I don't so. It seems likely that persons who don't feel comfortable with their public writings being permanently archived and available will need to decide if they want to write publicly on the Internet (or similar venues) in the first place. It's much the same as politicians, judges, and others who find their early speeches and writings scrutinized when they come up for new offices or appointments. Such processes have been going on for a very long time, though without a doubt the vast increases in online storage capacity, advanced search engines, and similar technological developments have brought the cost to perform amazingly detailed seaches regarding anyone's public writings on the Internet (or many other places) down close to zero. One problem is that many persons new to these systems simply don't realize that their public writings (and most private email) on the net are routinely archived (the former for later public access, the latter typically only for system backup purposes, not for public availability!). Many new users are still thinking in terms of personal telephone calls, which normally don't have a prolonged existence. Education of users as to the possible ramifications of public statements on the network is key to helping resolve these concerns. Issues of misinformation, propaganda, libel, etc. (and the ability of any misinformation or other lies to stay around "forever" on the net) are a different matter and a terribly serious one, but no non-draconian solutions are obvious. The essential character of the Internet, allowing individuals to potentially reach masses of persons (very cheaply--or free) without intervening truthfulness, sanity, reality, editorial, or other checks, is something the world has never seen before. I am not convinced that truth will necessarily overcome lies in this regard. Persons whose goal is to spread misinformation are usually much more willing to saturate the net with their materials in an abusive manner than would be the target of such actions with a rebuttal. The result--the original misinformation is much more widespread, probably more memorable for being inflammatory in the first place, and may well show up in later searches without any rebuttal attached. But are there solutions that wouldn't entail egregious free speech limitations? I hope so. Probably the worst scenarios involve "anonymous" attacks, where existing libel laws--one of the few legal remedies available, can be rendered impotent. Many of us who were on the net starting in the earliest ARPANET days recognized the potential power of the medium even then, even with the relatively tiny and highly skewed (toward high-level technical individuals at a very limited number of locations) user community of the time. But it *was* a very small community by today's standards, and we knew that with very few exceptions nobody in the community would be abusive. I don't think that any of us really anticipated the explosive growth and infrastructural changes that would very suddenly place these tools, grown by orders of magnitude in their reach, speed, and influence, but still much the same as our original designs in many fundamental aspects, in the hands of essentially the entire world's population. But the genie is most certainly out of the bottle, and our goal now must be to do our utmost to try steer the almost unimaginable forces unleashed towards good, however challenging the task, and however many setbacks we might endure. There are no guarantees of success by any means. But it should be interesting. --Lauren-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: The Evolving Web Date: Sun Jul 14 14:17:21 CDT 1996 Message number: 25 Reply to message number: unavailable CYBERSPACE HYPE FEEDS BIG ILLUSIONS By Norman Solomon / Creators Syndicate Midway through 1996, no media image is more appealing -- or more misleading -- than the wondrous realm known as cyberspace. By now, most print and broadcast outlets are deeply involved in cyberhype. News reports keep track of cybercompetition. Feature stories extol the savvy moves of cyberinvestors. Commentators hail our cyberfuture. And, as you may have already noticed, writers strain to invent new "cyber" words. It's pleasant to believe that the Internet will provide a free flow of information and opinion. The rhetoric makes plenty of egalitarian claims -- but the emerging reality is something else. "The Internet is in full transition from a participatory interactive communications network to a broadcast medium dominated by electronic commerce," observes Frank Beacham, a journalist who monitors technology. Viewed from corporate boardrooms, the ideal Internet users will be passive consumers. Smart money is betting that the most heavily visited sites on the World Wide Web will be the ones with deep pockets behind them. Lots of publicity and multimedia leverage will be crucial to steer a mass audience to particular spots on the vast Internet. Perhaps no company is better positioned to do such steering than Microsoft. At the end of last year, Microsoft announced plans to redirect its on-line strategies to the Internet, where the powerful firm is now implementing a financial battle plan based on advertising. As Wired magazine notes, Microsoft will "act like a broadcaster" in cyberspace. The resemblance to network television is even more striking in terms of content. Microsoft owner Bill Gates has chosen to team up his company with a news organization (NBC) led by Tom Brokaw, and a huge cable conglomerate (TCI) run by a Rush Limbaugh fan named John Malone. The thread that connects them all is the bottom line. Such alliances promise to be enormously profitable for Microsoft. Gates may be at the cutting edge of cyberspace technology and ultramodern marketing. But his guiding principle is as old as the hills: insatiable greed. The way things are going, Beacham warns, the Internet will undergo a profound shift -- "from being a participatory medium that serves the interest of the public to being a broadcast medium, where corporations deliver consumer-oriented information. Interactivity would be reduced to little more than sales transactions and e-mail." With gee-whiz enthusiasm permeating so much media discussion of cyberspace, we tend to think of the Internet as a dramatic departure from the past. But this is hardly the first time that high-tech advances have been confused with grassroots democratic empowerment. Fifteen years ago, as cable television arrived with great fanfare, the futurist Alvin Toffler discerned "a truly new era -- the age of the de-massified media." Just around the corner was cable-wired democracy. "Instead of masses of people all receiving the same messages, smaller de-massified groups receive and send large amounts of their own imagery to one another." Consider Toffler's paean to cable technology the next time you're stuck in a motel room flipping through the cable channels. It's easy to be mesmerized by a techno-fix that seems to offer a way of cutting through knotty social problems. To substitute for figuring out how to create systems of communication that are genuinely democratic, believers in the techno-fix assume that a brilliant new technology can dissolve the bottlenecks. It never works. From radio to television to modem, each new gizmo has arrived with inspiring potential -- undermined by extreme disparities in people's access to economic resources and political clout. Now, billionaire Bill Gates and his collaborators are smiling as they pour big investments into the Internet and tie those projects to other mass-media endeavors. The middle of July is scheduled to bring the launch of MSNBC, a 24-hour news channel on cable television that's a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC (owned by General Electric). Many of the channel's programs will promote "interactive companion activities on the Internet." Rather than getting away from the centralized power of a network like NBC, such cyberspace "synergies" will only amplify it. "Microsoft's extensive reach into the interactive media business could well make it the world's first 21st-century media company," industry analyst Denise Caruso writes in Wired. Not a comforting thought. ------------------------------------------------------------ Help get "Media Beat" in your newspaper!!! Send e-mail to for more information. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: BIG TEEBO Subject: Re: The net, democracy? Date: Fri Aug 02 02:55:39 CDT 1996 Message number: 26 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Big Teebo : BT> the reasons why the "commercialization" of the net isn't as potentially BT> destructive as it is with other mediums is that the advertisers are BT> going nuts trying to figure out how to turn this into a one way system BT> like they have with all the other medias and there finding that they BT> can't - now everybody has a voice - suckers. In some ways I agree, but ... (I know this is going to sound pretentious) ... read your history. They said the same thing about radio, television, and even cable TV. I can remember a time when people thought that cable TV would be democracy in action - with 500 channels, everyone would have a voice. Now they're saying it about the internet. "Everyone can have a voice", they say. I say, beware the creeping trends. I'm not arrogant enough to assume I can predict the future, but the past seems to imply that (small case) democracy only thrives where the dollars bloom. ... Privatize the profits. Socialize the costs. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: The net, democracy? Date: Fri Aug 02 04:01:10 CDT 1996 Message number: 27 Reply to message number: 26 DR> and even cable TV. I can remember a time when people thought that cable TV DR> would be democracy in action - with 500 channels, everyone would have a DR> voice. Then there is me, and others like me, who can SMELL a skunk. (You know what I mean, and if you dont.. too bad) And I smell a big Roadkill. ALSO: There has never been anything that has stoped me from doing something, and if these people make INTERNET a one way communication (Busness --->Consumer, instead of CONSUMER---->BUSNESS ____>Consumer), just for the fun of it, will do everything possible to FiX that. I dont like companys. I dont like crowds either .. go figure. Later. I am gone (FOr the weekend) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: STARFOX Subject: Re: The net, democracy? Date: Fri Aug 02 14:26:04 CDT 1996 Message number: 28 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Starfox : St> something, and if these people make INTERNET a one way communication St> (Busness --->Consumer, instead of CONSUMER---->BUSNESS St> ____>Consumer), just for the fun of it, will do everything St> possible to FiX that. That's the scary part, maybe it *will* end up being `Business -- Consumer -- Business'. I'd much prefer to see a hodge-podge of commercial, non-profit, ideological, theological, anarchical, anti-consumer, pro-consumer, chaotic, elegant, melodic and even a pinch of the mundane ... which is what the web used to be, and is increasingly becoming less and less of. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: LEMON To: Daedalus Rising Subject: The internet sucks. Date: Sun Aug 18 08:16:17 CDT 1996 Message number: 29 Reply to message number: 28 Yeah, no kidding. The internet is now just one huge buisness venue. The good sites put up by people in their spare time and programming are being replced with www.motorolla.com, www.embassy-suites, and www.byerly's.com. The problem can easily be traced to sytems like AOL, allowing any idiot access for very high prices on a REALLY SHITTY server. This is not how the system was meant to be used. But then, I'm pretty anti internet, as I have to be. I'm a SysOp. -lemon@iacc.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: Lemon Subject: Re: The internet sucks. Date: Sun Aug 18 12:24:27 CDT 1996 Message number: 30 Reply to message number: 29 L> meant to be used. But then, I'm pretty anti internet, as I have to be. I'm a L> SysOp. WAHOO!!!!!! JOIN THE CLUB!!!! SysOps against Internet ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: LEMON To: Not Starfox He He Subject: Tonight We Murder, Ooh yeah, murder... Date: Sun Aug 18 22:56:41 CDT 1996 Message number: 31 Reply to message number: 30 S> WAHOO!!!!!! JOIN THE CLUB!!!! SysOps against Internet SVSI? Heh, doubt it hasn't already been started. Every SysOp has seen the serious effect the information superparkinglot has had on a BBS. The only ones growing are those with i-net access or at least mail. And that's not cheap, added to phone bills, which means manditory "donations". Free BBSes die. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Lemon Subject: Re: Tonight We Murder, Ooh yeah, murder. Date: Mon Aug 19 03:24:14 CDT 1996 Message number: 32 Reply to message number: 31 L> SVSI? Heh, doubt it hasn't already been started. Every SysOp has seen the L> serious effect the information superparkinglot has had on a BBS. The only on L> growing are those with i-net access or at least mail. And that's not cheap, Can always have your bbs on the internet... *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: Lemon Subject: Re: Tonight We Murder, Ooh yeah, murder. Date: Mon Aug 19 09:39:24 CDT 1996 Message number: 33 Reply to message number: 31 L> SVSI? Heh, doubt it hasn't already been started. Every SysOp has seen the L> serious effect the information superparkinglot has had on a BBS. The only on L> growing are those with i-net access or at least mail. And that's not cheap, L> added to phone bills, which means manditory "donations". Free BBSes die. My board is free, and it will not die.. cuz I am gettin a job to support it myself. And I guess, think of it this way.. If "Internet" went down (God forbid:) then all the lamers from there would come throught the BBS flood gates, and piss us all off. Its bad enough to have those lame AOL people in your news groups. Imagine if they invaded your poor little BBS (Or My poor little bbs, or any poor little BBS). People ask me "Do you have Online" (Which is a stupid question, and not specific. When they say that they uasally dont know what the hell they are talkin about anyways.) I say What online? there are millions. Then they say America Online, DUHH. I say NO, I wouldn't ever give those money eating bastards any money, if I was a millionair. THey say, you must be living in the stone age! You dont know anything about computers. Then I say one more thing: I write programs, and get money in the mail, I get applications for Tech collages, and the like. Now tell me again, that I am living in the stone age. They just shut up. Suckers. KILL INTERNET. or at least educate people on it, and not let them continuisouly lame away. -=>StarŸox<=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Starfox Subject: Re: Tonight We Murder, Ooh yeah, murder. Date: Mon Aug 19 11:32:10 CDT 1996 Message number: 34 Reply to message number: 33 S> it myself. And I guess, think of it this way.. If "Internet" went down (Go S> forbid:) then all the lamers from there would come throught the BBS flood S> gates, and piss us all off. Its bad enough to have those lame AOL people in That's why you don't let those people on. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: Big Teebo Subject: Re: Tonight We Murder, Ooh yeah, murder. Date: Mon Aug 19 19:03:01 CDT 1996 Message number: 35 Reply to message number: 34 BT> That's why you don't let those people on. Ya dont know till ya watch them for a while. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: LEMON To: Starfox Subject: the taste of match heads Date: Tue Aug 20 00:51:50 CDT 1996 Message number: 36 Reply to message number: 35 It's kind of easy to tell most rugs just by their validation feedback. If you get a validation letter that says "GOT ANY GIFS? '/HELP' WHAT THE FUCK!!!!!???????" Then you don't validate those people. It is really annoying though, just because all the hype gets your starters on te internet, and not BBSes, so instead of learning coherant posting and ettiqute, they're learning which "girls" will talk dirty in a private chat room. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: STARFOX To: LEMON Subject: the taste of match heads Date: Tue Aug 20 15:57:45 CDT 1996 Message number: 37 Reply to message number: unavailable L> Then you don't validate those people. It is really annoying though, just >because all the hype gets your starters on te internet, and not BBSes, so >instead of learning coherant posting and ettiqute, they're learning which >"girls" will talk dirty in a private chat room. Hmm I know what you are saying. The people at my school give me crap about find Girlfriends on the "INTERNET" when they are the ones with G/F's in california or something. What board do you run? --- ž QMPro 1.53 ž 2400 baud makes you want to get out and push. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: LEMON To: Starfox Subject: orange juice looks purple to me Date: Wed Aug 21 03:37:41 CDT 1996 Message number: 38 Reply to message number: 37 S> G/F's in california or something. What board do you run? The Suicide Gorge, 484-1437 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: LEMON Subject: Re: The internet sucks. Date: Fri Aug 23 12:34:39 CDT 1996 Message number: 39 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Lemon : Le> But then, I'm pretty anti internet, as I have to be. I'm a SysOp. Le> -lemon@iacc.com Anyone care to point out the humorous inconsistency here? ... Leonard Nimoy for President in 1996! The Only Logical Candidate! ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: The internet sucks. Date: Fri Aug 23 19:21:46 CDT 1996 Message number: 40 Reply to message number: 39 DR> Le> But then, I'm pretty anti internet, as I have to be. I'm a SysOp. DR> DR> Le> -lemon@iacc.com DR> DR> Anyone care to point out the humorous inconsistency here? DR> Yeh. Why does someone who is "anti-internet" have an internet address? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: LEMON To: Myself Subject: dksjkldj Date: Sun Sep 01 19:18:12 CDT 1996 Message number: 41 Reply to message number: unavailable That was kind of the point of my statement. I hate the internet, and it's clogging so many lives that even SysOps like myself have subdued (somewhat) and got an address. That's it though (geez, do you think I put "lemon@iacc.com" at the bottom of that post by random incident?) -lEmOn ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: Lemon Subject: Re: orange juice looks purple to me Date: Wed Sep 04 11:33:07 CDT 1996 Message number: 42 Reply to message number: 38 S> G/F's in california or something. What board do you run? L> L> The Suicide Gorge, 484-1437 yay, its back up. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: LEMON To: Nolan Subject: lard Date: Sun Sep 08 08:52:00 CDT 1996 Message number: 43 Reply to message number: 42 Huh? I don't remember a Nolan. Hmmm....maybe it was a while ago. In any case, call now. -nomel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: Lemon Subject: Re: lard Date: Mon Sep 09 11:11:14 CDT 1996 Message number: 44 Reply to message number: 43 L> Huh? I don't remember a Nolan. Hmmm....maybe it was a while ago. L> L> In any case, call now. Like cool and stuff. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: Internet Infidals Date: Wed Nov 20 18:35:42 CST 1996 Message number: 45 Reply to message number: unavailable Internet Infidels Newsletter October 1996 * Internet Infidels Acquire New Domain Name and Server * New "Freethought Now!" Logo * Freethought Email Addresses Available * Editorial: "Can't We all Just Get Along" by Bill Schultz * In Memoriam: Gordon S. Stein * Press Release Announcing the Formation of the Campus Freethought Alliance * Free the Darwin Fish by Gary Betchan * What's New on the Secular Web --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet Infidels Acquire New Domain Name and Server Many of you have expressed interest in the progress being made on moving to a n ew server. I'm pleased to announce that much progress has been made: we have registered a domain name, se lected an internet service provider, and moved to a new server. Thanks to Bill Schultz (the newest co-mana ger of the Internet Infidels, by the way), infidels.org is now registered to Internet Infidels. The old addre ss will still work until the end of the year, but we ask that everyone who has linked to the Secular Web ple ase update their links immediately to http://www.infidels.org. During the transition period, both the old and the new address will work, but we'd like to get as many people as possible to use the new address now. Perhaps one of the most exciting new features of our new server is the long-awaited search engine. There is now a link to "Search the Secular Web" at the bottom of every page; we hope that you enjoy this new feature as much as we do. Please note that one thing that has not yet moved to the new server is our list server. Assume that all Internet Infidel email lists will continue to run off freethought.tamu.edu unti l further notice. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- New "Freethought Now!" Logo Jeffery Jay Lowder We frequently receive feedback at the Secular Web from people asking if they ma y link to the Secular Web, if they may link using the Internet Infidels logo, and so on. We have created a ne w logo specifically for this very purpose. Designed by the Internet Infidels' very own graphic designer, And reas Heldal-Lund, the "Freethought Now!" logo is now available at http://www.infidels.org/images/ft-n ow.gif. To use this graphic to link to the Secular Web, you may use the following HTML code: Freethought Now! We ask that this logo be used in place of the Internet Infidels' logo when link ing to the Secular Web. [Andreas Heldal-Lund is also the designer of the Secular Web logo, the Internet Infidels logo, and the Campus Freethought Alliance logo. He may be rea ched at heldal@telepost.no.] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Freethought Email Addresses Available Jeffery Jay Lowder The Internet Infidels are now offering -- at a price of $20 US per year -- vani ty email addresses on the following domains: atheism.org freethinker.org freethinkers.org freethought.org infidel.org infidels.org secular.org skeptic.org skeptics.org Because all of these domains are hosted on the same computer, having an address on one domain automatically gives you an address on all of the others! (In other words, having dude@infide ls.org automatically gives you dude@atheism.org, dude@freethought.org, etc.) There are three advantages to purchasing a freethought email address: 1. You are supporting a worthy freethought cause (e.g., Internet Infidels) 2. You are promoting freethought through your email address 3. You will have a permanent email address. By having all mail forwarded from your freethought address to your real address , you will have an email address that will always be valid, no matter how often your real address change s. You can then list your freethought address in your .sig and on your home page, business card, and resu me! To have your freethought email address created, please send a check or money or der (payable on a U.S. bank) for $20 US to Internet Infidels, PO Box 1051, Colorado Springs, CO 80901-1051, USA. Please indicate on the check 1) your current email address, 2) the email address you would like to hav e, and 3) an alternate address in case your first choice is already taken. [Questions about freethought email addresses may be sent to infidel@infidels.or g] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (S)lap nearest innocent bystander. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: iinewsletter--2 Date: Wed Nov 20 18:35:43 CST 1996 Message number: 46 Reply to message number: unavailable --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Editorial: Can't We All Just Get Along? Bill Schultz Atheists and other freethinkers are a notoriously diverse and independent group . It takes a fairly strong mind to be able to adopt and accept a freethought point of view, and that degree of commitment to your individual view of what is a "proper" belief system will, unfortunately, usually bring fre ethinkers into conflict with one another on what would otherwise be relatively minor matters. As a minority of one in this group of mostly atheists, I am probably more sensi tive to the need to at least "get along" with the rest of you in order to achieve our common goals. And we d o have common goals which are worthwhile for all of us to achieve. Jeff Lowder and I both believe that the In ternet Infidels ought to be an *INCLUSIVE* group of those who believe in spreading a freethought point of view , not an *EXCLUSIVE* group for a particular brand of atheist (or other freethinker) to promote one particular point of view. The former ideal leads us towards the sort of strength in numbers which has traditionally led to social change. The latter policy would be one of ruin for the group, as one or two people would eventuall y drive the rest of us away to follow our own paths. It is not a new concept that a group of relatively diverse individuals should band together to achieve an important common goal. During the American revolution, there was that famous quote: "Gentlemen, we must all hang together, or surely, we will all hang separately." As the fundamentalists strive for power in this country, the possibility arises, once again, of people being put to death for their adherence to disfavored religious views. Surely each of us must recognize that freethinkers are the group most likely to be suppressed by any sort of dictatorial governmen t, and the fundamentalists are the "leading edge" of a movement towards a dictatorial government in this count ry. (You don't believe this? Try reading: "The Twilight of Democracy" by Patrick E. Kennon. A former CIA analyst, he claims democracy is obsolete, and s hould be discarded.) The title of this piece comes from the famous plea of Rodney King during the Lo s Angeles riots. The target then was the racial and economic divisions which had torn the minority communit y apart, but the message is just as applicable in the context of a religious "holy war." As the clearest re ligious minority in this country, the atheist/freethought movement simply cannot afford to destroy itsel f with internal bickering. I'm not advocating that we cease exchanging our points of view. I'm advocating a return to respect and civility in any of our discussions, both wit hin our community and with outsiders. There are groups which advocate the creation of the image of "your f riendly neighborhood atheist." That image will self-destruct if the atheist(s) in question can't "get along." In my opinion, there is a clear way to distinguish our enemies from those with whom we should strive to "get along." The method involves only an inquiry into a person's epistemology. If so mebody believes in facts derived from scientific inquiry, and the interpretation of those facts through the processes of logic and reason, then that person is NOT our enemy, and we should make every effort to " get along" with that person. On the other hand, if somebody believes in the supremacy of "revealed truth," and in particular, that "revealed truth" takes precedence over facts and conclusions derived from scientific trut h, logic, and reason, then that person is our declared enemy. Our only weapons in the coming war of ideas are s cientific facts, logic, and reason, and those who will not even accept the premises derived from that base cannot be remonstrated into an acceptable point of view. You only need to look at other civil rights organizations to know that a policy of inclusiveness is the proper way to achieve change. The groups which advocate exclusiveness are seen as raci st and bigoted, whether they are the KKK or the Nation of Islam. The groups which strive for inclusiveness a re seen as the leaders for a new tomorrow. So, from now on, whether we are debating among ourselves, or even more importantly, when we seek to engage others outside of our community, let us adh ere to the old rule: you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Advocate your point(s) of view, and you can even advocate them forcefully. All you have to do is to maintain a respectful and tolerant tone ab out your advocacy so that the listener need not feel that they are being personally attacked. Do not engage i n "name calling" because you will never help somebody to see "the truth" in that way. Instead, challenge the m with ideas. Challenge them to grasp the truth of our universe and the insignificance of mankind to the overal l scheme of things. Challenge them to expand their minds with facts, logic, and reason. Name calling will onl y advance the date of the eventual "holy war" between the fundamentalists and those who would oppose them . If we follow this path, we should gradually become an acceptable alternative "religious group" in the minds of the community-at-large. If we do not, we will continue to marginalize ourselves by dividing ourselves into ever-smaller groups which can be attacked and destroyed at will, some time in the future. We should not allow ourselves to destroy ourselv es in this fashion. Instead, we should recognize any who adhere to the supremacy of scientific fact, logic, and reason as our "spiritual brothers" to one degree or another, and we must strive to "get along" with all of them. [Bill Schultz is a co-manager of Internet Infidels. He is also founder and webm aster of the Agnostic Church (http://www.agnostic.org/). He can be reached at pope@agnostic.org] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (S)lap nearest innocent bystander. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: iin--3 Date: Wed Nov 20 18:35:44 CST 1996 Message number: 47 Reply to message number: unavailable --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Memoriam: Gordon S. Stein [Originally printed in "The Buffalo News," August 30, 1996.] Gordon S. Stein, 55, an author and editor on secular humanist and paranormal subjects who was internationally known among freethinkers, died of c ancer Tuesday (Aug. 27, 1996) in Buffalo General Hospital. Stein, a member of the Center for Inquiry in Amherst for the last four years, was the senior editor of Free Inquiry, a bimonthly magazine with a circu lation of 20,000. He also was the director of the two libraries at the Center of Inquiry, one tha t deals with secular humanism and the other with paranormal experiences. He was the editor of the "Encyclopedia of Hoaxes" and the "Encyclopedia of the Paranormal." He was the author of "The Sorcerer of Kings," a book about D.D. Home, a 19th ce ntury spiritualist medium who duped wealthy people; a book about Robert G. Ingersoll, the 19th century Americ an agnostic; and the "Anthology of Atheism and Rationalism." Joseph Nickel, a Center of Inquiry colleague, described Stein as a bibliophile with his own collection of rare books on spiritualism, which he deb unked, and secular humanism. "He lectured widely, enjoyed debate and did not suffer fools," Nickel said. Stein held degrees in library science and management from the University of Roc hester, Adelphi College and the University of California at Los Angeles, and a doctorate in physiology from Ohi o State University. For a time, he taught at the University of Rhode Island. Stein had been a consultant to the Committee of Scientific Investigation of Cla ims of the Paranormal. Surviving are his first wife, Barbara, and daughter, Karen, both of Atlanta; a second wife Eve Triffo of Los Angeles; and a sister, Irna S. Jay of Baltimore. A humanist ceremony will be held at 2 p.m. today in the Center for Inquiry, 131 0 Sweet Home Road, Amherst. [Gordon Stein was also a supporter of Internet Infidels. --editor] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (S)lap nearest innocent bystander. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: iin--4 Date: Wed Nov 20 18:35:50 CST 1996 Message number: 48 Reply to message number: unavailable --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Press Release Announcing the Formation of the Campus Freethought Alliance With great joy, we issue this press release announcing the formation of the Cam pus Freethought Alliance! Derek Araujo, CFA PRESIDENT, Ali Aliabadi, VICE PRESIDENT, Keith Augustine, SECRETARY, Brie Waters, TREASURER, Chad Docterman, PUBLICITY COORDINATOR, Paul Kurtz, Chairman of the Center for Inquiry, Amherst, New York -Council for Secular Humanism -Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP ) Jeff Lowder, Internet Infidels, -------------------------------------------------- The Campus Freethought Alliance (CFA) was founded August 9, 1996, at the Center for Inquiry in Amherst, New York. The founding was a collaborative effort of representatives from the Counc il for Secular Humanism, CSICOP, and seven student representatives from five universities. The Campus Freethought Alliance was created to encourage and support the founda tion of campus freethought groups across the nation, and to eliminate the discontinuity and isolation whic h have plagued groups of the past. CFA will offer practical guidance, literature, speakers, publicity, finan cial assistance, and a greater sense of community to campus freethought groups. Delegates from affiliated CFA organizations will be invited to the annual CFA convention in Amherst to join student freethinkers from acros s the nation. WHAT YOU CAN DO TO HELP 1) Distribute this message to others. 2) Link to the CFA homepage at any of the following mirrors: , or . 3) Subscribe to the CFA email newsletter. Send a message to and type "CFA list" in the subject portion of the message. 4) If your campus freethought group would like to join the Campus Freethought Alliance, send a message to Vice President Ali Aliabadi at . A representative from your campus group may also add his or her signature to the Declaration of Necessity below. Thank you for your support! Chad Docterman, CFA Publicity Coordinator ----------------------------------------------- ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (S)lap nearest innocent bystander. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: iin---5 Date: Wed Nov 20 18:35:51 CST 1996 Message number: 49 Reply to message number: unavailable ----------------------------------------------- A DECLARATION OF NECESSITY We as representatives of various student skeptical, secular humanist, atheist, agnostic, and freethought campus organizations have assembled out of c oncern. As members of a small but significant minority, we often have been forced to reside in a social envir onment caustic to our needs, interests, and convictions. Instead of diminishing, opposition to free thought is now increasing with ominous rapidity. * We have witnessed a resurgence of religious fundamentalism, hand-in-hand with growing belief in mysticism, the paranormal, and the occult. * We have witnessed a growing disdain for science and a flight from reason and the principles of the Enlightenment, both in popular media and in the halls of academe. * We have witnessed a deplorable onslaught by religious factions upon personal liberties. * We have witnessed their concomitant effort to undermine secularist ideals in government, law, and education -- striving to replace science with pseudo-science, knowledge with ignorance, tolerance and pluralism with prejudice and oppression. The very core of our rational, secular, free, and democratic society has been b rought under attack in our communities, on our campuses, even in our classrooms. We cannot afford to endur e this development with indifference. A resolute defense of the principles of reason is necessary as ne ver before. Organized student opposition is necessary as never before. Though the tide of unreason is rising, we have taken it upon ourselves to stand in union against it. We have resolved to confront our diffic ulties directly, whenever and wherever they might arise. Our task is to actively defend and fight for the rat ional principles and ideals we hold so dear and to demonstrate, by argument and practice, that it is possible to lead a good and meaningful life without religion. Ethics and morality can be based on rational and humanis tic ideals and values. Thus, it is with great pride and enthusiasm that we convene to establish the Ca mpus Freethought Alliance, dedicated to the promotion and enhancement of freethought, skepticism, seculari sm, non-theism and humanism, and to the national consolidation of campus resources for that end. It is our h ope that by pressing to create campus environments more friendly toward the rational viewpoint, we might aid i n ameliorating the negative condition of society at large. Given the fact that student religious organizations exist on virtually all coll ege and university campuses (Campus Crusade, Newman Centers, Hillel, Muslim organizations and the like) -- and that corresponding freethought, secular humanist, and unbeliever groups generally do not -- we thi nk it vitally important that freethought organizations be formed on every campus. Too many secular humanists , atheists, and skeptics face the demands of college life alone. A campus freethought organization can provid e much-needed support, and when necessary, help to defend unbelievers' rights. We call upon our fellow students to establish skeptical, secular and freethinking organizations on college and university campuses across this land. We invite our fellow students to loft high the banner of rationality and to joi n us in this most necessary endeavor. Signed this day, 9 August 1996 Amherst, New York Derek Carl Araujo of Harvard University Chad Stephen Docterman of Marshall University Etienne Rios of State University of New York at Buffalo Alireza Aliabadi of University of Maryland at College Park Keith Justin Augustine of University of Maryland at College Park Brianna Kathleen Waters of University of Maryland at College Park John Muhrer of Webster University Selena Brewington of University of Oregon Jason Erickson of University of Minnesota Nicholas J. Rezmerski of University of Minnesota John Simons of Western Washington University Adam Butler of University of Alabama at Birmingham Chris McDougal of University of Alabama at Birmingham Jason Roylee Tippitt of University of Tennessee at Martin Vincent Bruzzese of StonyBrook University Michael S. Valle of University of Illinois at Chicago Diana Carter of University of Guelph Jason Pittman of Kalamazoo College John F. Kennedy of New Mexico State University Institutions are shown for identification purposes only. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (S)lap nearest innocent bystander. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: iin---6 Date: Wed Nov 20 18:35:52 CST 1996 Message number: 50 Reply to message number: unavailable --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Free the Darwin Fish Gary Betchan Have you seen the neat little Darwin Fish? The one that really gets the Christi ans' goat? Of course you have. The image has been the rage of the freethought community for several years now. You might even have one on your car. Or you might have a T-shirt with the Darwin Fish on it. But do you know where it come from..? Do you know who invented it? Do you know that a corporation is trying to own it..?? Two long-term members of the Freethought community claim to have first put the word Darwin in a fish in 1983. (Al Seckle and John Edwards, Atheist United). They say it was their intent that the image be in the public domain, so they didn't file a copyright on it. Today, a small corporation in Texas is using law suits and legal threats to sol idify their claim to ownership of the Darwin fish image. They recently got the better of Seckle and Edwards th rough a legal technicality. Today, they are on the verge of knocking two other Darwin fish sellers out of b usiness. If this corporation, which has no known contact with the freethought community, locks up their ownership of this image, they will have the right to sell, or refuse to sell it, to whomever they want. They could even sell all rights to the Darwin Fish to some group like the Christian Coalition, or your local christian millionaire preacher.. . On the other side, many freethinkers are trying to keep the Darwin fish free. To prove that it is in the public domain. Would you help us? What we need are examples of Darwin fish produced before 1990. We know that man y were made as buttons, bumperstickers, t-shirts, etc. They appeared in newspapers , newsletters, books , etc.. We need to find those images. Preferably on dated items (like newspapers). And we need the names and contact information of any company or group that made or sold them in the 1980s. If you have such an item or information, or know where one is, please send an e mail to Gbetchan@usa.net Please forward this message to all freethinkers, atheists, humanists, or anyone who might help us... NOTE: This message is not intended to create a negative opinion or image of any entity. Nor is it intended to support or denigrate the validity of any entity's claim to creative or legal ri ghts. The sole purpose is to solicit information. [Gary Betchan is the President and Founder of the Freethinkers of Colorado Spri ngs. He may be reached at Gbetchan@usa.net.] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (S)lap nearest innocent bystander. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SANDMAN To: ALL Subject: iin---7 Date: Wed Nov 20 18:35:53 CST 1996 Message number: 51 Reply to message number: unavailable --------------------------------------------------------------------------- What's New on the Secular Web The following is a partial summary of items added to the Secular Web since our last newsletter: * "Positive Atheism and The Meaninglessness of Theism" by Michael Martin * Faith And History by Mark Hutchins * Author Page for Joseph Lewis * Author Page for Mark Twain * August 1996 AHA Bulletin * "The Argument from the Bible" by Theodore Drange * Theodore Drange * Colorado '96 Meet 'n' Greet Homepage * Best-Selling Errancy * Mark Ball * "Friendly Atheism?" by Michael Martin * "Atheism and Humanistic Value Theory" by Michael Martin * Robert J. Riggins * Welcome to Hell * Cale Corbett * Abington Township School District v. Schempp: The Day God Was Kicked Out of School * July 1996 Feedback * Added Ted Drange to the list of Internet Infidels Supporters * Centre for Critical Studies * Ibn al-Rawandi * "Review of 'Why I Am Not a Muslim'" by Ibn al-Rawandi * Finally updated the woefully out of date Electronic Resources for Atheists FAQ and Secular Mail Lists * Doug Craigen * H.J. Blackham * "What Is Agnosticism?" (1981) by H.J. Blackham * "Are There Really No Atheists?" by Michael Martin * Temy Beal * "Is Atheism Just Another Belief?" by Temy Beal * "Reply to Butler, Ventrella, and Fields" by Michael Martin * The Atheist's Grace * Author Page for Alfred Russell Wallace * Author Page for Friedrich Nietzsche To access these and other resources, go to http://www.infidels.org/new.html in your World Wide Browser. ========================================================================== The "Internet Infidels Newsletter" is published on an irregular basis and is co pyright by Jeffery Jay Lowder and Internet Infidels. Submissions should be sent directly to jlowder@infidels. org. Articles may be reproduced freely as long as 1) the "Internet Infidels Newsletter" is acknowledged as the source, and 2) they are reproduced in their entirety. To unsubscribe, send a message to listproc@atheist.tamu.edu with a message body of "unsubscribe ii-news". ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (S)lap nearest innocent bystander. ___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 [NR] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Gates the antichrist Date: Mon Jan 13 12:23:34 CST 1997 Message number: 52 Reply to message number: unavailable This is part of the www.stale.com web site, a parody of the Microsoft-funded Slate magazine ... Introduction by Herb Stern "What does this mean, 'mailer daemon'? Satan, are you messing with the e-mail system already?" --Herb Stern Wednesday "Where do I want to go today? Poland, Czechoslovakia, France. Can Microsoft Office do that for me?" --Adolf Hitler Thursday "Get thee behind me, Bill Gates." --Satan Friday "Remember how I used to purchase everything with gold checks? Well, you know what I never purchased? DaVinci's notebooks. Imagine that." --Evel Knievel Saturday "I object to this discussion of whether Bill Gates has "balls." Why must we equate large or even multiple testicles with Will To Power. That is a fallacy. I prefer the word 'chutzpah.'" --Adolf Hitler Sunday "What do you mean you want to take the day off to rest? Bunch of pussies!" --Satan Wednesday Steve Belial 8:45 p.m.  Wednesday  7/31/96 Microsoft isn't evil, we're successful. What's the problem? Consumers buy our products because they are the best available. We invented Windows, and revolutionized the computer industry, and quite frankly we're growing tired of losers' complaints. And let me make one thing perfectly clear: we'll continue to put out the fastest, best, most efficient, crash-free, sublimely-coded programs. We're proud of our product, and we're proud that so many consumers freely choose to buy them. How can you call us evil for that? Satan 9:45 p.m.  Wednesday  7/31/96 Save it for the press release, Steve. Bottom line: Bill Gates and I have a deal, and if Microsoft isn't evil he's got some explaining to do. Adolf Hitler 11:10 p.m.  Wednesday  7/31/96 While Bill Gates is something of a puny man, I have much respect for his will to power, his understanding of the need for order and his quest for total domination. As Steve proved in his opening remarks, Microsoft understands the importance of the Bi g Lie. The organization is full of great strength, and is positioned well to dominate the whole--how do you say?--"kit unt caboodle". What I worry about only for Commander Gates is the possibility that, between Netscape on the Internet and Mac on the OS, he may be involving himself in a war on two fronts. Charles Manson 11:36 p.m.  Wednesday  7/31/96 When you look at things in a positive manner, everything can work out perfect--you know, like as fast as man can go, he is destroying everything he can destroy. That's the thing with Gates, with Microsoft--the pace that he's picked up in sawing the t rees down, killing the animals, shooting everything--that's it, man. That's the thing with Gates and how he's working. You know, I lived out in the desert and I saw a lot of madness. I saw big fat people coming around with guns, shooting lizards, spiders, birds, anything they could get their hands on. Just killing and killing. They're programmed to kill. The Company, it's pure evil. It's programmed that way. Next Day ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: apologies Date: Tue Jan 14 15:47:35 CST 1997 Message number: 53 Reply to message number: unavailable A while ago in another message area, I retorted to one of your posts by claiming that I hadn't noticed any dead-air on your BBS. I now have to admit that I was wrong. Sorry. I guess I hadn't taken into account that most of the frequent posters turned out to be high school kids on winter break. (There isn't anything wrong with high school kids; I was one myself and was interested in BBSes myself back then. In fact, the high school kids I've talked to on this board have been intelligent, mature, and willing to think through a strange man's modes of thought; most people my own age wouldn't even bother.) In retrospect, I should have expected the post rate to drop after the new year. It also appears that the regulars on this board don't stop in every day. I can understand that as well. As somebody put it in another area, "I used to have a life, now I have a modem." I wonder if calling here every day isn't proof positive that I don't have a life. A friend asked me if I thought the Internet had drawn off all the immature "flamers" that used to inhabit BBSing when we were in high school. I told him I thought that was true; "flamers" get more value out of appearing on unmoderated forums where their behavior cannot be effectively policed, and where they are anonymous presences. If the Internet has reduced the quanitity of BBSing (and I see now that it has), then it has also certainly improved the overall quality. Great BBSers were always out there, but now they're much easier to find. (Starfire, Cosima, take a bow. This means you. The rest of you know who you are.) So, again, sorry to be so persnickety. I guess this is one area where you might have been happier to be wrong... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: apologies Date: Wed Jan 15 06:20:00 CST 1997 Message number: 54 Reply to message number: 53 DT> A friend asked me if I thought the Internet had drawn off all the immature DT> "flamers" that used to inhabit BBSing when we were in high school. I told DT> I thought that was true; "flamers" get more value out of appearing on DT> unmoderated forums where their behavior cannot be effectively policed, and DT> where they are anonymous presences. If the Internet has reduced the quanit DT> of BBSing (and I see now that it has), then it has also certainly improved DT> overall quality. Great BBSers were always out there, but now they're much DT> easier to find. (Starfire, Cosima, take a bow. This means you. The rest o DT> you know who you are.) DT> * well, it's an interesting thing to go through the cycles of a cyber-life, and it's interesting to me that i find myself back here on dissent after quite a hiatus. i got seriously into interactive chat, there, for awhile, had a couple pretty amazing long-distance flings- got my heart broken big time- and now am making myself quite happy with 2 classical music list-servs (wading through about 300 posts a day can be pretty daunting), hanging out with the warped minds over at _epistolary_ and stopping by here on occasion. i've missed the interaction here- very seldom does one find a group of people all the way from junior high aged people to senior citizens, all of whom can conduct themselves in a literate and generally kind manner. all righty then! :) best, -=c=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: apologies Date: Wed Jan 15 17:51:40 CST 1997 Message number: 55 Reply to message number: 53 DT> A while ago in another message area, I retorted to one of your posts by DT> claiming that I hadn't noticed any dead-air on your BBS. I now have to adm DT> that I was wrong. Actually, it's Teebo's board. But, point taken :-) Things go in wabes, people come and go. Sometimes it's livelier than others, everything is relative in the end. But as for dead air, the biggest problem I've encountered in running a BBS for 2 years, and now seeing Teebo running the board, is trying to get peopleto help out in starting topics (like you've just done, incidentally). In my opinion, people are more likely to call back if there's something to "look forward to" everytime they call. DT> It also appears that the regulars on this board don't stop in every day. I DT> can understand that as well. As somebody put it in another area, "I used t DT> have a life, now I have a modem." I wonder if calling here every day isn't DT> proof positive that I don't have a life. Depending on how busy the board is, calling in every day doesn't really take up a lot of time :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Cosima Subject: Re: apologies Date: Thu Jan 16 15:40:12 CST 1997 Message number: 56 Reply to message number: 54 C> i got seriously into interactive chat, there, for awhile, had a couple C> pretty amazing long-distance flings- got my heart broken big time- The first time I tried chat, I stumbled into a conversation between three Canadians who were discussing the impending (at that time) Quebec secession referendum. It was an absolutely amazing experience. I never found anything close to that again, so I stopped chatting. I also had two friends who were big chat-romantics. One of them used chat-romance as sort of a vengence weapon against the gender that spurned him in real life; floating from relationship to relationship, leaving a trail of broken hearts in his wake (at least to hear him tell it). The other was far more serious about it, since he was fundamentally a nice guy who was just too darn shy to impress a woman in person. He met a woman in Georgia, fell head over heels, went to visit her over X-mas break, and got engaged at the end of the school year. _I didn't understand either of them._ (though I was happy for the friend who got engaged) I far preferred e-mail to chat, but I never had the brass _cojones_ to try an e-mail romance. Ah, well, c'est la vie... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BIG TEEBO To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: apologies Date: Sat Jan 18 05:03:06 CST 1997 Message number: 57 Reply to message number: 55 DR> Actually, it's Teebo's board. But, point taken :-) Ah, who's keeping track these days.. DR> peopleto help out in starting topics (like you've just done, incidentally). DR> In my opinion, people are more likely to call back if there's something to Yep, it seems like people generally don't have a problem replying to things that interest them, but they have trouble thinking up entirly new topics to answer questions that they have... Maybe people on here think that they're smart enough they don't have to ask questions, they can answer all of them though. *teebo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: BIG TEEBO Subject: Re: apologies Date: Sun Jan 19 12:45:14 CST 1997 Message number: 58 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Big Teebo : DR> Actually, it's Teebo's board. But, point taken :-) BT> Ah, who's keeping track these days.. All I know is, I don't pay the phone bills anymore. That's the important part. ... The best defense against logic is stupidity. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: apologies Date: Sun Jan 19 17:08:39 CST 1997 Message number: 59 Reply to message number: 56 DT> I also had two friends who were big chat-romantics. One of them used DT> chat-romance as sort of a vengence weapon against the gender that spurned h DT> in real life; floating from relationship to relationship, leaving a trail o DT> broken hearts in his wake (at least to hear him tell it). The other was fa DT> more serious about it, since he was fundamentally a nice guy who was just t DT> darn shy to impress a woman in person. He met a woman in Georgia, fell hea DT> over heels, went to visit her over X-mas break, and got engaged at the end DT> the school year. DT> DT> _I didn't understand either of them._ (though I was happy for the friend wh DT> got engaged) DT> DT> I far preferred e-mail to chat, but I never had the brass _cojones_ to try DT> e-mail romance. DT> DT> Ah, well, c'est la vie... * well.. i don't know if it takes brass balls or not. my take on it is this: as far as online romance, the people who do it are (and of course, like in any generalization, there are going to be exceptions) 1) 'physically challenged' 2) married 3) absolutely starved to change something in their current lives. most of the men i met online were married- didn't have the balls to have affairs in their own home town but would want to cyber, phone and even occasionally meet women who lived halfway across the continent. many people were physically disadvantaged in some way- and could communicate more easily than in their regular lives. some people- i fell into this last category-- were absolutely fascinated with the prospect of having the entire WORLD at my fingertips-- and getting to know someone through the Word rather than through the bullshit of parties or bars and whatever. it was an interesting experience all the way around. i met a few good friends. i had a few amazing romances and got my heart broken. and i'm a different person than i was 3 years ago...or maybe i should say i'm the person i always was...but now i can bring it out in real life rather tha hiding behind the puter. -=c=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: COSIMA Subject: Re: apologies Date: Mon Jan 20 09:38:56 CST 1997 Message number: 60 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Cosima : Co> i don't know if it takes brass balls or not. my take on it is this: as Co> far as online romance, the people who do it are (and of course, like Co> in any generalization, there are going to be exceptions) 1) Co> 'physically challenged' 2) married 3) absolutely starved to change Co> something in their current lives. You mean there are people out there who would abuse the anonymity of the Internet and cheat on their spouses? Action alert! It's time to pass a law, people. H.R. 162 Be it enacted that the state of marriage as defined in subsection X34 of the Minnesota statutes be amended to read: The state of marriage shall bar one from participating in modem-to-modem or networked conversations, except in such cases where they are monitored by said person's spouse or mother-in-law. ... Why didn't they stop at "Congress shall make no law"? ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Cosima Subject: Re: apologies Date: Sun Jan 26 17:26:08 CST 1997 Message number: 61 Reply to message number: 59 C> i don't know if it takes brass balls or not. my take on it is this: as far a C> online romance, the people who do it are (and of course, like in any C> generalization, there are going to be exceptions) 1) 'physically challenged' As in overweight? Or are you being more general? I wouldn't be offended: I usually fluctuate between 250-270 pounds. Since I'm only 6'0", this counts as serious poundage over my "ideal weight". I often think that my weight is a great barrier to romance, and that I should welcome chat- or e-mail-romance as a way around that problem. Unfortunately, that seems to me more like hiding from the problem than dealing with it. C> most of the men i met online were married- didn't have the balls to have C> affairs in their own home town but would want to cyber, phone and even C> occasionally meet women who lived halfway across the continent. The anonymity of cybersex is a real advantage for men like that. It lulls them into a false sense of security by making them think they won't get caught. It's amazing how stuff like that gets around, though; have you ever seen "Six Degrees of Separation"? C> some people- i fell into this last category-- C> were absolutely fascinated with the prospect of having the entire WORLD at m C> fingertips-- and getting to know someone through the Word rather than throug C> the bullshit of parties or bars and whatever. There are still social preconceptions, masks, and roles on the 'net as well as in bars. Still, the 'net versions at least have the illusion of sincerity (and some are actually sincere). In a bar, a sincere person just seems either too naive or too dull to be worthwhile. Of course, you know this, so I guess I'm just preaching to the choir. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: apologies Date: Mon Jan 27 03:32:12 CST 1997 Message number: 62 Reply to message number: 61 C> i don't know if it takes brass balls or not. my take on it is this: as far a C> online romance, the people who do it are (and of course, like in any C> generalization, there are going to be exceptions) 1) 'physically challenged' DT> DT> As in overweight? Or are you being more general? DT> DT> I wouldn't be offended: I usually fluctuate between 250-270 pounds. Since DT> only 6'0", this counts as serious poundage over my "ideal weight". I often DT> think that my weight is a great barrier to romance, and that I should welco DT> chat- or e-mail-romance as a way around that problem. Unfortunately, that DT> seems to me more like hiding from the problem than dealing with it. * well, actually, i was thinking of people for whom the computer can, by erasing sound or appearance factors at the beginning, allow others to see them absolutely objectively. a good example would be a friend of mine who has MS- she is absolutely brilliant but has a severe speech impediment because of the disease that's affecting her body. but in a way, this could apply to everyone-- the minute we meet someone, we do all of these summary judgments that might have nothing whatsoever to do with the person we're seeing. those first impressions can be conquered, but they're *there* and need to be dealt with. on-line, everyone can be evaluated honestly- or they can create a totally different human from the one someone might meet if they run into them at Target. * as far as hiding from a problem, it only happens if you're dishonest. if someone says, what do you look like, and you say you're 6'3, 180 pounds and have a swimmer's bod, then you'll be in trouble later if someone asks for a picture or a meeting. DT> There are still social preconceptions, masks, and roles on the 'net as well DT> in bars. Still, the 'net versions at least have the illusion of sincerity DT> (and some are actually sincere). In a bar, a sincere person just seems eit DT> too naive or too dull to be worthwhile. Of course, you know this, so I gue DT> I'm just preaching to the choir. * well, don't get me wrong, there are astoundingly dull people on-line, too. my family just got AOL back, and i cruised around there for hours without hearing anything but "hey, do you have a GIF of yourself you can send me?" and the implication was that it should be a naked or obscene one. i was fortunate to know and meet a few exceptional people. they also, almost across the board, ended up being assholes, or else just dying away, as the long distance costs were just astounding. but it sure got me out there, though, when it came to being required to express the things i thought and felt through the Word, tho. -=c=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Cosima Subject: Re: apologies Date: Wed Jan 29 15:15:32 CST 1997 Message number: 63 Reply to message number: 62 C> in a way, this could apply to C> everyone-- the minute we meet someone, we do all of these summary judgments C> that might have nothing whatsoever to do with the person we're seeing. those C> first impressions can be conquered, but they're *there* and need to be dealt C> with. on-line, everyone can be evaluated honestly- or they can create a C> totally different human from the one someone might meet if they run into the C> at Target. Dead on, Cosima. If I saw Stephen Hawking in Target without knowing who he was, I probably wouldn't have any indication to find out. And you're right about the on-line mentality: there are too many people out there who just can't get past the "non-picture" part of the conversation. C> implication was that it should be a naked or obscene one. i was C> fortunate to know and meet a few exceptional people. they also, almost acros C> the board, ended up being assholes, or else just dying away, as the long C> distance costs were just astounding. but it sure got me out there, though, C> when it came to being required to express the things i thought and felt C> through the Word, tho. Some of us are probably assholes, too, but we just can't realize it because we're too busy congratulating ourselves on how clever we are. It may sound weird, but I find few things more attractive than a woman who can, correctly, tell me when I'm full of s**t. Stick with us, Cosima. We may not be easy, but we're cheap... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: apologies Date: Wed Jan 29 17:16:26 CST 1997 Message number: 64 Reply to message number: 63 DT> Some of us are probably assholes, too, but we just can't realize it because DT> we're too busy congratulating ourselves on how clever we are. It may sound DT> weird, but I find few things more attractive than a woman who can, correctl DT> tell me when I'm full of s**t. DT> DT> Stick with us, Cosima. We may not be easy, but we're cheap... * LOL! yowsah. actually, you sound (perish the thought) secure! i get tired of people telling me i'm intimidating- i don't think i am, but frankly if a person *can* be scared off by a feisty female, then get outta my way. i'm with you-- i *love* it when people call me on an opinion i have and i can't talk my way out of it-- if i can't justify my own convictions, then i need to rethink them. -=c=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: Cosima Subject: Re: apologies Date: Thu Jan 30 02:02:39 CST 1997 Message number: 65 Reply to message number: 64 C> be scared off by a feisty female, then get outta my way. i'm with you-- i C> *love* it when people call me on an opinion i have and i can't talk my way o C> of it-- if i can't justify my own convictions, then i need to rethink them. Well, there's your problem right there. You're trying to assert yourself, pretending that it's important what you say or think. You uppity women are the reason this country is going to hell ... it was a heck of a lot better when men ran everything, and women were officially property. In short, what the heck are you doing with convictions in the first place? WARNING: EXTREME, OVER-THE-TOP USE OF SARCASM. FORWARD YOUR FLAMES TO PRESIDENT@WHITEHOUSE.GOV ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: apologies Date: Fri Jan 31 05:41:39 CST 1997 Message number: 66 Reply to message number: 65 DR> Well, there's your problem right there. You're trying to assert yourself, DR> pretending that it's important what you say or think. You uppity women are DR> reason this country is going to hell ... it was a heck of a lot better when DR> men ran everything, and women were officially property. DR> DR> In short, what the heck are you doing with convictions in the first place? DR> DR> DR> WARNING: EXTREME, OVER-THE-TOP USE OF SARCASM. FORWARD YOUR FLAMES TO DR> PRESIDENT@WHITEHOUSE.GOV * OHHHH! i just didn't GET it til now... OK. i can do the barefoot thing...but the *pregnant* part, i dunno, that's gonna have to wait for awhile, i got places to go.... thanks for clearing this up, -=c=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Cosima Subject: Re: apologies Date: Fri Jan 31 10:56:18 CST 1997 Message number: 67 Reply to message number: 64 C> yowsah. actually, you sound (perish the thought) secure! i get tired of peop C> telling me i'm intimidating- i don't think i am, but frankly if a person *ca C> be scared off by a feisty female, then get outta my way. Thanks for the compliment, but I can't take credit for being secure. It helps to have a decent education, which the more I think about it, the more I am convinced that I had very little to do with it. As far as the eternal "battle of the sexes" goes, check out the _outstanding_ article in this past weeks Twin Cities Reader. It's the cover story, so you can't miss it. C> i'm with you-- i C> *love* it when people call me on an opinion i have and i can't talk my way o C> of it-- if i can't justify my own convictions, then i need to rethink them. I agree. I've been caught "with my pants down" (so to speak) at least once on this board already. It's good to have access to a community that's willing to challenge each other. I sometimes wonder if the decline in "community values" is at all related to the tendency for people to be content with the middle-of-the-road values they share until they despise each other for being so ignorant. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Daedalus Rising Subject: Re: apologies Date: Fri Jan 31 10:58:12 CST 1997 Message number: 68 Reply to message number: 65 DR> WARNING: EXTREME, OVER-THE-TOP USE OF SARCASM. FORWARD YOUR FLAMES TO DR> PRESIDENT@WHITEHOUSE.GOV Oh, come on, Daedalus; the President doesn't deserve that. He _loves_ a good woman. (or something like that...) You should post Newt's e-mail address: at least then he'd have a reason to be pissed-off at everybody... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: apologies Date: Fri Jan 31 12:16:28 CST 1997 Message number: 69 Reply to message number: 68 DT> You should post Newt's e-mail address: at least then he'd have a reason to DT> pissed-off at everybody... I posted it once. I think it is House.Georgia.US.gov Or something like that. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: FROGGY Subject: Re: apologies Date: Sun Feb 02 14:43:21 CST 1997 Message number: 70 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Froggy : DT> You should post Newt's e-mail address: at least then he'd have a reason DT> pissed-off at everybody... Fr> I posted it once. I think it is House.Georgia.US.gov Or Fr> something like that. Look for MN-ACT*.ZIP in the file library, they're all in there ... ... Jesus saves, Allah protects, Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: BADLANDS To: All Subject: ... Date: Mon Feb 03 19:25:16 CST 1997 Message number: 71 Reply to message number: unavailable It's been 5 years now (officially!) since I started BBSing... i have to admit, after a while, one is just DYING for human contact.... the annonyminity (sp) becomes much like a phone call.... becomes... tooo.... much..... but it sure beats being without it... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Badlands Subject: Re: ... Date: Tue Feb 04 06:11:29 CST 1997 Message number: 72 Reply to message number: 71 B> It's been 5 years now (officially!) since I started BBSing... i have to admi B> after a while, one is just DYING for human contact.... the annonyminity (sp) B> becomes much like a phone call.... becomes... tooo.... much..... B> B> B> but it sure beats being without it... * awwww don't let it bother you. people are sometimes OK...but they don't come with a 'delete' key, and most of them can only carry on one meager conversation at a time... -=c=- ;) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: FROGGY To: Cosima Subject: Re: ... Date: Tue Feb 04 13:40:12 CST 1997 Message number: 73 Reply to message number: 72 C> awwww don't let it bother you. people are sometimes OK...but they don't come C> with a 'delete' key, and most of them can only carry on one meager C> conversation at a time... I don't know about that. I was talking to a small businessman today who told me about a man who told him that he was going to take all of his business elsewhere. The businessman said, "Do you want me to open the f***ing door for you?" He hasn't seen the man since. Sounds like a delete to me. :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Froggy Subject: Re: ... Date: Wed Feb 05 03:21:14 CST 1997 Message number: 74 Reply to message number: 73 C> awwww don't let it bother you. people are sometimes OK...but they don't come C> with a 'delete' key, and most of them can only carry on one meager C> conversation at a time... F> F> I don't know about that. I was talking to a small businessman toda F> who told me about a man who told him that he was going to take all of his F> business elsewhere. The businessman said, "Do you want me to open the f***i F> door for you?" He hasn't seen the man since. Sounds like a delete to me. : * LOL! the only problem with that is that the person receiving the comment has to *get* the comment in person. with cyber, you can *pre-delete* comments from people you know are going to be jerks. and if all else fails, you can (gulp) turn off the computer. -=c=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: THROCKMORTON To: DAEDALUS RISING Subject: Re: apologies Date: Sat Feb 08 11:19:29 CST 1997 Message number: 75 Reply to message number: unavailable DR>C> be scared off by a feisty female, then get outta my way. i'm with you-- >C> *love* it when people call me on an opinion i have and i can't talk my w >o >C> of it-- if i can't justify my own convictions, then i need to rethink th DR> Well, there's your problem right there. You're trying to assert yourself, >pretending that it's important what you say or think. You uppity women are >reason this country is going to hell ... it was a heck of a lot better when >men ran everything, and women were officially property. DR> In short, what the heck are you doing with convictions in the first place? Trying to talk Arnie into pardoning them. --- ž OLX 1.53 ž COFFEE.COM not found: (A)bort, (R)eheat, (S)nooze ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAVE THE LUCKY To: Cosima Subject: Re: ... Date: Sat Feb 15 10:52:47 CST 1997 Message number: 76 Reply to message number: 72 B> It's been 5 years now (officially!) since I started BBSing... i have to admi B> after a while, one is just DYING for human contact.... the annonyminity (sp) B> becomes much like a phone call.... becomes... tooo.... much..... C> awwww don't let it bother you. people are sometimes OK...but they don't come C> with a 'delete' key, and most of them can only carry on one meager C> conversation at a time... Ha! Cosima, you've hit the nail squarely on the head. I can't tell you how much better I'd get along with people if I had a "mute" button for them. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: COSIMA To: Dave The Lucky Subject: Re: ... Date: Mon Feb 17 05:48:01 CST 1997 Message number: 77 Reply to message number: 76 DT> Ha! Cosima, you've hit the nail squarely on the head. I can't tell you ho DT> much better I'd get along with people if I had a "mute" button for them. * lol. the sad thing about it, tho, is that they can delete *you* also...it's funny tho. i write on a couple listservs- and people get so damn riled about things it's astounding. i keep saying, all righty now, *chill* f'r goddess' sake- you don't want to get upset, just *don't read it.* sheesh...people have been using this technique to avoid getting involved in current events for centuries! <'what do you mean, concentration camp? i'm sure it's just a factory....'> -=c=- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: NOLAN To: All Subject: jnsdf Date: Thu Feb 20 09:08:40 CST 1997 Message number: 78 Reply to message number: unavailable As anyone else heard this rumour that the fone co was going to start charging connections made by modem by the minute (I belive it only applies to internet/online service calls, not bbses)? Apparently they want to do this to keep people off AOL so much, so they'll quit complaining or something like that. Check out the MCI commercials on tv..on the bottom in fine print it usually says "internet acces billed seprately" or something to that effect. if they start billing by the minute, I might be the next person to drop off the internet!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: NOLAN Subject: Re: Rumors and telcos Date: Fri Feb 21 04:14:31 CST 1997 Message number: 79 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Nolan : No> As anyone else heard this rumour that the fone co was going to start No> charging connections made by modem by the minute (I belive it only No> applies to internet/online service calls, not bbses)? Apparently they No> want to do this to keep people off AOL so much, so they'll quit No> complaining or something like that. I've heard about it, but not from reliable sources (the same list where a host of hoax virus warnings have been posted in the past), so I tend to treat it suspiciosly. Compared to some, this one has the ring of truth though. ... Texas is the Reason ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: KRUSTY To: NOLAN Subject: jnsdf Date: Fri Feb 21 12:52:10 CST 1997 Message number: 80 Reply to message number: unavailable NO>As anyone else heard this rumour that the fone co was going to start chargi NO>connections made by modem by the minute (I belive it only applies to NO>internet/online service calls, not bbses)? Apparently they want to do this There's no real way to determine a call to an ISP and a BBS other than to look at the number dialed. And what about BBS's that provide internet service? This would never fly.. NO>keep people off AOL so much, so they'll quit complaining or something like NO>that. AOL being busy is AOL's problem, not the phone companies. If anything they are making $$$ off of AOL's problem with the sales of new lines. Why kill it's own business? NO>Check out the MCI commercials on tv..on the bottom in fine print it usually NO>says "internet acces billed seprately" or something to that effect. if the NO>start billing by the minute, I might be the next person to drop off the NO>internet!! This just sounds like that MCI One service, which I believe is cell phone and voice mail and stuff like that, along with internet service. I don't know about their service but it could be one of those 20 hours + $2/hr for addition hours type of deals. I remember when I first started calling BBSes about 8 years ago seeing those damned "FCC is going to enact modem surcharges" posts for years. I don't think anything like this will ever happen, ESPECIALLY now with the popularity of the internet and it's increasing commercial usage. --- ž OLX 2.1 TD ž Neat Neat Neat ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DEVIOUS To: Krusty Subject: Re: jnsdf Date: Sun Feb 23 06:05:21 CST 1997 Message number: 81 Reply to message number: 80 Nolan.. It is like, they are running their own internet service.. It is nothing with AOL, though, the phone company is ticked cause people can talk LD over the internet for the price of a local call.. So, that is about it.. POWWOW allows talkin and internet exploring at the same time.. devious ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: KRUSTY Subject: Re: internet power Date: Mon Feb 24 16:10:42 CST 1997 Message number: 82 Reply to message number: unavailable -=> Quoting Krusty : Kr> I remember when I first started calling BBSes about 8 years ago seeing Kr> those damned "FCC is going to enact modem surcharges" posts for years. Kr> I don't think anything like this will ever happen, ESPECIALLY now with Kr> the popularity of the internet and it's increasing commercial usage. And especially since internet users *vote*, in very high proportions. ... Be suspicious of all native-born Esperanto speakers. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Internet voters Date: Tue Feb 25 15:24:32 CST 1997 Message number: 83 Reply to message number: unavailable Related to that last message, take a look at this ... >How the Internet is Changing Politics > > > >By Jim Buie >Copyright 1997 > >Tens of thousands of Americans participated in the political process >new way in 1996--via the Internet. New statistical and >anecdotal data suggest the Internet influences users' involvement in >politics, their energy level and motivation, their opportunity for >discourse, and their access to information. Internet users are thinki >globally, but the structures are just beginning to be built for them >locally. > > > > >Surveys Show Political Influence of the Net is Growing, >and 90% of Internet Users Vote > >If you compare the Net's developmental history to television, 1996 is >probably equivalent to 1952. Citizens on the Internet do appear to be >deeply connected to politics than they were before and they are >participating in a more interactive democracy. It's just that between >percent and 20 percent of the American population are on the Net at t >point. > >Five recent surveys offer insight into the Net's political influence >1996. Of those who voted, 26 percent are regular Internet users, acco >to an exit poll of 16,338 voters by the Associated Press and the majo >television networks. Extrapolating the results, one learns that 90 pe >of those 18 and over who use the Internet regularly also vote. > >While only seven percent of voters said the Internet was a major sour >information about the elections, about one-third of voters said the >Internet was a source of information about the election, according to >survey by The Washington Post and others. > >One in every eleven citizens who cast their ballots in the 1996 elect >or 8.5 million people, were influenced by information they found on t >Internet, according to a survey released November 21 at the Politics >Conference in Washington. The telephone survey of 1,030 randomly sele >voters was conducted by Winston Strategic Information and Wirthlin >Worldwide, a leading market research firm. "Clearly,...the Internet h >established itself as a new communications tool to influence the >decision-making process of voters at every level," said David Winston >of the study's authors. "It has now become a viable means of politica >communication on par with radio and magazines." > >The Winston-Wirthlin study indicated that nine percent of voters were >influenced by information on the Internet. This compares to the 11 pe >of voters who said they were influenced by information they found in >magazines, and 19 percent who were influenced by information on the r >according to a study conducted by the Pew Research Center. Television >newspapers still dominate as information sources--more than 60 percen >voters cite them as primary sources of information about the election >their influence may be declining. > >Return to top of page > >Net Users More Involved in Politics > >If political participation is defined as publishing an opinion, more >Americans probably participated in politics in 1996 than ever before. >Thousands of citizens built web pages to express their political view >tens of thousands if not millions more surfed political sites on the >discussed politics in online forums and through e-mail messages. On A >Online alone, in the "Politics channel" at campaign's end, one could >hundreds of web pages from citizens telling why they endorse or oppos >candidates, more than 20 percent for third party candidates. > >Forty percent of World Wide Web users report that they are more invol >with politics since coming online, according to a survey by the Georg >Tech Research Corporation. Their most popular online activities are w >government officials (31 percent), discussing political issues (23 >percent), and signing petitions (22 percent). More than a quarter (27 >percent) of Web users reported that they have contributed to or solic >money for political campaigns. > >The Net currently attracts more affluent voters, and males, but the >demographics are changing rapidly. The medium is becoming more >representative of the population at large. By the year 2000, half of >voting population or more may be online. > >A True Marketplace of Ideas > >While the mainstream media focused incessantly on polls and the horse >on the Internet, citizens passionately debated issues like "character >"taxes", and the records of Clinton, Dole and the Republican Congress > >"It is no exaggeration to conclude that the Internet has achieved, an >continues to achieve, the most participatory marketplace of mass spee >that this country--and indeed the world--has yet seen," Federal Judge >Stewart Dalzell wrote in June, when he declared the Communications De >Act unconstitutional. > >Communication Energizes and Motivates Volunteers > >For many years, Dean Axelrod of Tucson, Arizona was "politically home >He believed in many of the tenets of the Democratic Party, he said, b >"felt disconnected from the decision-makers and the party itself." In >he discovered the White House World Wide Web site and other Democrati >sites. "Those activities led me to become more personally involved in >Party locally," he said. "I joined the Democratic Writer's Guild, I n >attend my state legislative district meetings, I talk to the candidat >and I volunteer." > >"I don't think that the Internet can or should ever replace people ge >together in the same room and talking face to face. But in my case, i >me the momentum to get up from my desk and get out into the world. >Ultimately, that's where politics has real meaning." > >Tom Angi of Ohio wrote that interacting by computer about politics is >lot of fun....Here in south Suburban Dayton, I'm the only Democrat fo >three blocks east, two blocks south, five blocks west and four blocks >north. It gets lonely at times." > >Alyssa Cotler was also inspired to get involved in politics partially >her activity on the Internet. "I wanted to give something back to the >community, and I was looking for a campaign to work on," she wrote in >e-mail. "I will admit that seeing an email address on the bottom of a >helped convince me to volunteer for the candidate I did select." > >The time people spend communicating with each other about politics on >Net "helps get them motivated and energized," she said. "And being ab >see how elected officials voted is a phenomenal thing." > >"Very few days go by that don't include some level of political discu >over the 'net," she wrote. "I'm sure my views have been shaped by all >this. Some of the best political conversations I've had have been on- > >Internet Elevates Level of Political Discourse > >"Sound bites have lobotomized classical political discourse," Alan Ar >of Rockville wrote in an e-mail. "The ideas of Socrates, Lincoln, >Churchill, and Roosevelt could not survive in such a sterile, toxic >wasteland." He suggests that the Internet is reviving intelligent pol >dialogue. On the Internet, for example, for the first time he read wh >called thoughtful remarks by President Clinton on the legacy of Frank >Roosevelt. "This is the first time I have appreciated the President's >superb grasp and phrasing," he wrote. "FDR actually had an advantage >because there was no TV with a zillion channels, and people had to gi >single radio speaker their close attention." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Internet voters 2 Date: Tue Feb 25 15:25:34 CST 1997 Message number: 84 Reply to message number: unavailable >Activists' Thirst for Information Quenched > >Individual activists have a variety of perspectives on connecting to >politics via computer. "I thirst for information," John Maylie, a stu >at Penn State University wrote in an e-mail. "I find the popular medi >sources do not provide me with enough information to form an educated >opinion on many issues. For instance, President Clinton extended disa >benefits to Vietnam Vets who were exposed to Agent Orange, some kind >herbicide....What I want to read is the actual scientific reports tha >the herbicide to illness....This is only one small issue. But it >illustrates the kind of detailed information I need to form opinions. > >Third Parties and "Non-Mainstream" Viewpoints More Accessible > >"The internet is making politics possible for me," writes John Lowry, >frustrated with America's two-party system. On the Internet, meaningf >political affiliation is now possible. He's involved in >populist-progressive causes, and can promote them, network with other >activists, and build the foundation for a viable third or fourth part >movement. Libertarians are also quite active on the Internet. Washing >Post columnist David Broder was so impressed with their political >organizing skills on the Internet in 1996 that he predicted they will >become a very serious political movement in the coming years. > >Interestingly, the Reform Party used e-mail in balloting for its nomi >in 1996. Since Ross Perot eclipsed former Colorado governor Richard L >it wasn't much of a contest. But the Reform Party did make contact wi >tens of thousands of voters via the World Wide Web in 1996. > >In my view, these third, fourth and fifth parties have new opportunit >build political foundations. On the Net, disenchantment with the Demo >and Republicans' "duopoly" seems high. Some even talk of a political >for Internet users. > >Cynicism, Paranoia, Rumor-Mongering, Hacking, and Obscenity > > > >Alyssa Cotler sees the Net having both positive and negative impact o >politics. "There's a free flow of information, a level of excitement >politics that hadn't been as easy to catch, a sense of immediacy and >accessibility on issues, and honest-to-goodness grassroots movements. > >On the negative side, she says "it's scary how quickly people fall in >cynicism (in ways they wouldn't with other rhetorical contexts), wild >incorrect information being propagated widely and quickly, and people >becoming more polarized. It's scary when 'we, the people' are more ne >and extreme than the political ads!" > >At the Politics Online conference, some online journalists also expre >concern about this. The Internet, complained Jodi Allen, an editor at >Slate, is "a hot-bed of rumor-mongering." She cited the story that CI >agents were selling crack cocaine in the black community, a story tha >originated on the Net. Grave doubts have been cast on the veracity of >charges, but some people still believe it, and it feeds the paranoia >conspiracy-theorists, Allen noted. > >John Heilemann, an editor at Wired magazine, said the Net's ability t >spotlight widely-believed rumors, requiring the mainstream media to >investigate and prove them true or false, "is a healthy thing." The >CIA-crack cocaine story had been widely believed in the black communi >and the thorough coverage by the San Jose Mercury News was a sign tha >black community's concerns were paid attention to. "The story has bee >largely discredited, but the investigation was good," he said. > >And officialdom has found the Internet to be sometimes annoying and >embarrassing. Even the CIA's Web Site was broken into by computer hac >So was the Department of Justice, and several other government agenci >(Hackers changed the content of the home page, or you might say they >virtual graffitti on some of the government's digital walls.) The Whi >House Web Site, at http://www.whitehouse.gov, has been spoofed by two >men in Northern Virginia, who put up a site with the address, >http://www.whitehouse.com. > >On the state level, an interactive guest book on the Maryland Electro >Capital web site was shut down after users repeatedly posted obscenit >slander and erroneous information. The site's webmaster, Nanette Stes >says she hopes a way can be found to automatically edit out the most >objectionable messages. > >Volunteers Not Fully Utilized Yet > >The presidential campaigns, along with senatorial and congressional r >reported signing up hundreds of volunteers on their web sites, so man >the campaigns didn't know what to do with them. Modern campaigns are >focused on television that they haven't figured out how to efficientl >mobilize volunteers or interact on the Net. > >"Probably less than one percent of those who would like to be involve >presidential campaign actually are," says Lowell Weiss, a former assi >to Democratic consultant James Carville who fielded calls and e-mail >hundreds of citizens eager to participate in politics, but who were >frustrated because the party didn't have a structure to respond effec >to their desires. > >But this is likely to change, political consultant Phil Noble told th >Politics Online conference. "If you've got 20,000 people in a Senate >saying 'give me something to do', it's going to have a profound impac > >Over the next few years, it's a good bet that political and advocacy >organizations will build inter- connected national, state and local >"cyber-communities" so that citizens can easily network with like- mi >citizens and focus on local political action. > >Whether this activity will actually lead to the transformation of pol >into participatory democracy on a mass scale that the computer vision >have predicted is anyone's guess. > >I'll soon report in more detail on what strategists for Bill Clinton >Bob Dole learned from the 1996 campaigns, on a "cutting edge" Senate >in Massachusetts, on other races where the Internet might have made a >difference in 1996, on various efforts to build electronic democracy >virtual communities on the local level, and what various specialists >believe is in store for cyber-politics in the next few years. And as >something of a "cyber-activist" myself in 1996, I'll report on the re >and frustrations of political activism on the Net. > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >I'm very interested in what YOU think. If you have comments, please e > >Until Next Time, >Jim Buie > > > >This service is made possible by the financial support of readers lik >You can support its continuation by: >^Õ purchasing subscriptions to our e-mail newsletter, Netpower. To do >online by visiting the Digitals shop, click here. Or send your check >money order directly to Jim Buie, INDC NEW MEDIA, P.O. BOX 75483, >Washington, DC 20013. Please include your e-mail address and which >publication you would like to receive by e-mail. >^Õ utilizing the services and products of the sponsors listed in the >left-hand column. >^Õ forwarding this column to friends and associates on the Net, and u >them to subscribe by writing indc@us.net. > >Thank you! > >Return to top of page ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: DAEDALUS RISING To: All Subject: Sorry ... Date: Tue Feb 25 15:26:54 CST 1997 Message number: 85 Reply to message number: unavailable Sorry, the software seems to have cut off some of the text from that last message :-(