Subject: Re: Self-Destructing Newsgroups
From: mccarty@aaet.csc.ti.com (Rick McCarty)
Date: 1990-11-21, 14:36
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <62543@unix.cis.pitt.edu> tjw@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Terry J. Wood) writes:
> >
> >The important thing is to remember that USENET is here to serve us.

We must TAKE CARE to ensure that it retains its ability to do so.

> >
> >All of this has come up because someone was worried about what will
> >happen if the television show were to be canceled.  I agreed to remove
> >the group when the time was right as a compromise (and a net-public-service).
> >

Ok.  Just HOW do you propose to make an rmgroup really happen?  Are you
going to get a user ID on THOUSANDS of systems and do it yourself?  Be real.

> >Now we hear that USENET can not deal with a "temporary" subject.  It
> >must be permanent to be a part of USENET.  I really don't see why this
> >must be true -- it simply hasn't been addressed before.  It's a new idea,
> >that's all.  And let's be realistic, just how long does anyone think
> >USENET will exist?  Forever?  Hardly.  USENET will exist until something
> >makes it obsolete.  The more adaptable USENET is, the longer USENET will
> >last.

I'll tell you why it's true.  Because each system in Usenet is autonomous.
There's no board of directors.  And there's no Usenet "superuser".  To
successfully remove a group from the net requires LOTS of folks to act in
concert.  Until an architectural or other change happens in Usenet, the
situation will remain that way.

So I'd suggest we look at making Usenet "adaptable" FIRST before we go and
implement something it can't handle well.  Let's not put the cart before the
horse.

===========================================================================
Rick McCarty                    "arg"
mccarty@aaet.csc.ti.com                            :-)~*|>
===========================================================================