From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Apr 17 20:26:49 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA28650 for isp-outgoing; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:26:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mixcom.mixcom.com (mixcom.mixcom.com [198.137.186.100]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA28645 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 20:26:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mixcom.mixcom.com (8.6.12/2.2) id WAA08023; Thu, 17 Apr 1997 22:23:53 -0500 Received: from p75.mixcom.com(198.137.186.25) by mixcom.mixcom.com via smap (V1.3) id sma007997; Fri Apr 18 03:23:42 1997 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970417221535.00ba8d44@mixcom.com> X-Sender: sysop@mixcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 17 Apr 1997 22:15:35 -0500 To: danlaw@rust.net From: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" Subject: Re: Binaries in Usenet (was: News...) Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 03:11 PM 4/17/97 -0400, Sysadmin wrote: --snip-- >Has _anyone_ in this thread read about the Prodigy decision? > >As I understand it, the ruling was that *only if you censor some >messages* >do you become liable for others that sneak into other newsgroups, >otherwise you are simply acting as a distributor and do not have the >duty to scan each and every message in all newsgroups you allow. > >Of course if you delete on the basia of size or UUEncoded content this >might not be true. If done universally. > >Dumb law, IMHO, but - law. >[snip] > >> >> And you know what the REALLY sad part is? Reader stats show that the >> porn-of-questionably-aged-people is the most popular. There are sick >> people out there. And most of them are on the net for that sole >> reason. > >Data? Those stats? I could believe that in MB downloaded the >alt.binaries.erotica groups would be the most popular. 'Fraid to say going by connections for the groups they still are #1. Binaries (and we only had the cross-posted ones) were as a hierarchy, ahead of rec by about double with a spattering of others. >The problems with deleting the groups people are interested in are >obvious of course! Another problem I see is systems that allow control messages to create groups, which is why snicker when I see "Over 26,000 news groups!" How about the number of legitmate groups. Worthwhile to have around would be a drastically lower number. Ok, so the news groups go away, then mail/ftp/web traffic goes up. There will always be a way. My biggest beef is the mass mail that goes around and we have taken steps here to reduce that and I'm happy to say that is is working well, but mail is so easy to exploit. News to me is a wasteland full of ads. ------------------------------------------- Jeff Mountin - System/Network Administrator jeff@mixcom.net MIX Communications Serving the Internet since 1990