[Coco] Re: A return to bit.listserv.coco?

[jdaggett at gate.net]

Is this a joke or what ???????

james

On 23 Mar 2005 at 23:09, Stephen H. Fischer wrote:

From:           	"Stephen H. Fischer" 
<SFischer1 at MindSpring.com>
To:             	"CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts" 
<coco at maltedmedia.com>
Subject:        	Re: [Coco] Re: A return to bit.listserv.coco?
Date sent:      	Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:09:02 -0800
Organization:   	A. Nani Mouse Inx.
Send reply to:  	"Stephen H. Fischer" 
<sfischer1 at mindspring.com>,
	CoCoList for Color Computer Enthusiasts 
<coco at maltedmedia.com>
	<mailto:coco-
request at maltedmedia.com?subject=unsubscribe>
	<mailto:coco-
request at maltedmedia.com?subject=subscribe>

> Hi,
> 
> I am sorry if I offend you, but I have seen no signs of life anywhere
> in the Bit hierarchy.
> 
> Not even from anyone that thinks they are in charge.
> 
> Thus I consider the following rules, information and the rest to be
> meaningless!
> 
> No one, Person, Organization or whatever are interested in B.L.CoCo
> now.
> 
> I tracked down the Organization that took over the "BIT " hierarchy
> and went to their office which is 5 miles north of my location. It was
> strictly a *sales office*.
> 
> They acquired the supposed control of the Bit hierarchy solely for use
> in *selling* their companies products.
> 
> There may be some interest in the strictly academic segment  but the
> "BIT" controlling organization has disappeared.
> 
> The rules and other files related to B.L.CoCo still are on a server
> but it is not possible to get anyone to even reply.
> 
> And it does not matter as no one would accept their correctly
> formatted "Orders" because the people that did so in the past have
> moved on to a real life.
> 
> To say that Princeton is in control is silly. All that they control is
> their own servers and as they pay for them, there would be no interest
> in restarting a list that was operating on the good will of low order
> persons that were not keeping the decision makers correctly informed
> thus putting their *own* jobs in jeopardy. Thus the very bad policy of
> B.L.CoCo to not rock the boat.
> 
> The organization "BIT" is dead. Deal with that fact and move on.
> 
> -- 
> Stephen H. Fischer
> 
> 
> 
> John E. Malmberg wrote:
> > Lets clear up some items of confusion.
> >
> > Currently the newsgroup bit.listserv.coco is under the control of
> > Princeton.edu even if they are not actively doing anything with it.
> >
> > The official charter of the bit.listserv.coco newsgroup is to be a
> > newsgroup mirror of the coco mailing list that is currently hosted
> > by Princeton.edu.
> >
> > The bit.listserv.* newsgroups are specifically designated to be
> > gateways or mirrors to mailing lists hosted by bitnet members. 
> > Princeton.edu is one such member.  http://www.google.com can easily
> > find others.
> >
> > That mailing list is in a suspended state because Princeton.edu's
> > security rules require that it have a sponsor that is a member of
> > their faculty or staff.
> >
> > The coco mailing list was with out a sponsor for several years
> > before the spam infected it, and if princeton.edu information
> > security policies had been followed, the mailing list would have
> > been shutdown at that time.
> >
> > It was only until after a large number of users started leaving the
> > coco mailing list and newsgroup due to the spam that first Dennis
> > started this list, and then Princeton suspended the mailing list.
> >
> > I do not know why Princeton suddenly took such action, but my guess
> > was that since the mailing list robot was sending a confirmation to
> > each e-mail address that it received spam or viruses from, someone
> > who's address was forged filed an abuse complaint, and when
> > Princeton.edu could not locate a sponsor, they suspended the list
> > per their long published policy.
> >
> > Princeton is willing to restart the list if a member of their staff
> > or a student is found that will sponsor the list.  A year ago or so,
> > a search of google for such lists shows me only one other
> > bit.listserv.* list that was still being run by princeton.edu.
> >
> > If Princeton.edu decides to, as they have the designated ownership
> > of the bit.listserv.coco newsgroup, they could easily get it
> > removed.  My guess is that since the newsgroup is not using any
> > physical resources controlled by Princeton.edu that Princeton will
> > not make any request to have the group removed.
> >
> > The way that the bit.listserv.* newsgroups are chartered is that
> > they are specifically to be gated to active mailing lists.
> >
> > There is a web form on the newsguy.com news server to request such
> > associations to be set up.
> >
> > The preference is for such newsgroups to be gated to mailing lists
> > on bitnet members, however there is precedence for them to be gated
> > to mailing lists on other servers.
> >
> > So while there is a possibility that the bit.listserv.coco can
> > disappear with out notice, it probably will not happen.
> >
> > There was also for some reason some belief that people could lobby
> > their local news providers not to delete the bit.listserv.coco
> > newsgroup if newsguy.com deleted it.  Even if they decided to keep
> > the newsgroup, postings would probably not be propagated to other
> > news servers that still carried the newsgroup.  Too many holes would
> > appear in the peering between news servers.  So that idea never was
> > practical.
> >
> > A filtered gateway can be installed between the bit.listserv.coco
> > newsgroup and this forum with only a little effort.  Message
> > threading would likely be lost as more postings would appear in
> > different order than they were originally posted.  We see a little
> > of that now, but with another newsgroup gateway it would get worse.
> >
> > I could have a one-way auto-moderated system that copies the
> > bit.listserv.coco postings to here running with in a week.  That
> > template of that system has been running since just before Dennis
> > started his list up.  I stopped work on it when Dennis announce this
> > list.  At the time people were also cross posting to the mailing
> > list and the bit.listserv.coco, which would have made the gateway
> > more complex.
> >
> > It is highly likely that a polite letter to both newsguy.com and
> > princeton.edu would turn over the bit.listserv.coco to be a mirror
> > of Dennis's mailing list under Dennis or someone else's
> > guardianship, where newsguy.com would take over being the gateway.
> >
> > I would recommend if this were done, that the bit.listserv.coco be
> > converted to a moderated newsgroup with a robot program that handles
> > almost all the moderation as I have seen done on other newsgroups.
> >
> > If it is not done by someone here, it could be done by someone else,
> > but I do not see what value that would be to them.
> >
> > Also the amount of spam visible on the bit.listserv.coco will vary
> > greatly with the news server that you read it on. 
> > http://www.google.com tries to remove spam from it's archive, so
> > that can not be relied on.
> >
> > Of the several news servers that I can use to access the
> > bit.listserv.coco, most of the direct newsgroup spam only shows up
> > on one of them.  So it looks like the other news servers have
> > depeered with the news servers that are allowing spam to be posted. 
> > This is very common with news server providers.
> >
> > This is also basically a rehash of what I have previously posted on
> > this topic.
> >
> > -John
> > wb8tyw at qsl.net
> > Personal Opinion Only
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco