XPost: news.groups, rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.sf.tv   
   XPost: rec.arts.tv   
   From: kalelfan@yanospamhoo.com   
      
   "Whiskers"  wrote in message   
   news:slrniijt10.a4e.catwheezel@ID-107770.user.individual.net...   
      
   > If you are dead set on creating a new hierarchy, the Big 8 is   
   > irrelevant to you...   
      
   I've mostly posted to rec and alt, with some to news and sci   
   and maybe one or a few to misc.  In terms of Big 8 groups,   
   probably 95% have been irrelevant to me.  :-)  The Big 8 and   
   alt.* and Usenet generally are becoming less and less relevant   
   every day, and it's been on that trend for at least 12 years.   
      
   My early posts on OM challenged the Big 8 Board and others   
   to see this and basically abandon ship in terms of all the futile,   
   silly attempts to get rmgroups and checklists respected and   
   so on.  It really is strictly RPG stuff.  The Big 8 will be around   
   for as long as it takes to die.  Just leave it be.  It's not "fixable".   
      
   Leave a forwarding address for news servers in the unlikely   
   event they ever have an issue.  But send out a final control   
   message and/or posting announcing the hierarchy has matured   
   and groups should be left as is on their servers.  You recommend   
   no newgroups or rmgroups be honored, but as always it's up to   
   them.   
      
   Then, if you're interested, help start a Fourth Cycle of Usenet.   
   I think I've coined that and if you think about it three cycles   
   to date is probably about right.  There was the First Cycle of   
   Formation, when Usenet started and it was academics and so   
   on, with very limited access of others beyond that.  Then the   
   Second Cycle of Growth, as access became more available and   
   then exploded with AOL, which was perhaps the peak of that   
   cycle.  It continued upward until about 1998 in terms of users,   
   and the chaotic number of discussion groups, but there were   
   also signs of trouble as Terms of Service were less enforced,   
   and the cesspool barrier began to build.   
      
   Somewhere around 1998 I would say, began the Third Cycle of   
   Decline.  The collapse of Terms of Service as a defense against   
   the onslaught of the growing cesspool barrier and signal to noise   
   problem.  That drove more and more users away to web boards   
   and eventually blogs and so on, which Facebook and Twitter are   
   in some ways conceptually akin to.   
      
   So more or less chronologically over the course of the three   
   cycles:   
      
   1 - Freedom of Expression, Broadcast Worldwide (Good)   
   2 - Influx of New Users (Unavoidable)   
   3 - An Increasingly Chaotic and Fragmented Group System   
   4 - The Collapse of Terms of Service   
   5 - A Growing Cesspool Barrier   
   6 - A Greater Signal to Noise Problem   
   7 - Competition Has Slayed Usenet, Utterly (Uncontrollable)   
   8 - Turn Out The Lights? (Your Choice)   
      
   #3 to #6 are the "Things The Fourth Cycle Needs to Address".   
   Collectively #3 to #6 can act as a filtering system in the sense   
   of building on "Good Enough" users who are still here, and   
   attracting lapsed Good users back as well as new users.   
      
   #3 is where it actually first went wrong, even though it may   
   have seemed right at the time and perhaps it was right back   
   then.  It's foolish to try to fix it by consolidating the existing   
   chaos and fragmentation into 16 or 30 groups.  You have no   
   authority to start with, over the existing groups and can't   
   get some to remove dead groups.  You won't even get to   
   the onslaught of outrage from users part.  They'll just laugh   
   while you achieve nothing.  If a news server is stupid enough   
   to listen to you, its users will just gravitate to the servers that   
   don't listen to you.   
      
   So again, just let Old Usenet be.  Consider what's there Heritage   
   or Legacy, and move on to some new frontier in a Fourth Cycle   
   of Usenet.  Maybe it'll work, maybe it won't, but at least you'll   
   have tried.  Again:   
      
   3 - An Increasingly Chaotic and Fragmented Group System   
   4 - The Collapse of Terms of Service   
   5 - A Growing Cesspool Barrier   
   6 - A Greater Signal to Noise Problem   
      
   Addressing #3 and #4 would not be against the tradition of   
   usenet, in fact the exact opposite!  It would get back to   
   basics to have a coherent topic list of 15-20 groups, and   
   a basic TOS check for access to the hierarchy.  OM can   
   provide this, and 5 and 6 as well, and has all kinds of   
   flexibility including the quick launch none of you have   
   really seen yet.   
      
   I think many of you realized the Big 8 was kaput when I   
   first posted the 16-group hierarchy.  It was kaput long   
   before I posted it, but on top of the Optional Moderation   
   and Decline of Usenet (cesspool barrier, signal to noise),   
   those 16 just decimate what's left.  95% of potential new   
   users would pick the 16 over the two dog's breakfasts   
   that are the Big 8 and alt.*   
      
   Does this mean *only* those 16 in an OM hierarchy, and   
   that's Usenet?  No, but I think that's the "shared Usenet"   
   part that would become the biggest.  The rest is, I think,   
   Brad's idea of owned groups.  If we have the optmod.*   
   hierarchy we might also have the owned.* hierarchy and   
   whatever criteria that has for an individual poster to get   
   set up with one.  Distributed Usenet and news readers   
   and substantive discussion threads are a plus you don't   
   get on Facebook or Twitter.  Groups of high-quality posters   
   might get together and become highly subscribed to   
   and widely read.  Usenet Performance Art might thrive   
   in some of those.  To start a "Yahoo!" or "Google" group   
   just isn't the same feeling as it being *your* group.  It's   
   right there in the title that it's the big corporate behemoth's   
   group.  So I think Brad is onto something there.  New Usenet   
   might be very well suited to owned groups.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)