XPost: alt.tv.smallville, news.groups, rec.arts.comics.dc.universe   
   XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv   
   From: kalelfan@yanospamhoo.com   
      
   [note crossposts but followups set to news.groups only on this one, so   
   consider it a pointer; feel free to restore as you wish but news.groups   
   is unmoderated]   
      
   We may be on the way to a New Usenet resurgence, thanks to a concept   
   whereby all of the existing Usenet would be retained but some new   
   concepts in new hierarachies would provide options for those who   
   are interested.  One such concept and new hierarachy would be:   
      
   users.*   
      
   Whereby each of you reading could start your own group and hierarchy   
   structure, within reasonable limits for example maybe no more than 31   
   sub-groups in a four-level hierarchy.  So for example I've been on all of   
   the crossposted groups for as many as 15 years, but only 10 in the case   
   of Smallville because that's how long it's existed.  There's a poster on   
   the Smallvile group who uses the handle "BC".  I doubt users.bc will be   
   available or allowed, because some rules over naming would probably   
   preclude that.  But BC may have been one of the posters who first   
   joked that Smallville's writers were like monkees at typewriters.  So   
   maybe BC starts up:   
      
   users.monkees-at-typewriters   
      
   So that's BC's group, and the meaning of "ownership" in this case is   
   a whole other post so I won't get into it.  But he starts it and it's his.   
   When the concept is fully operational, he can moderate it if he likes   
   and whitelist who he wants to authorize to post there, or he can   
   just leave it open to anyone.   
      
   Why not users.smallville-monkees-at-typewriters?  Well, he could,   
   but why not leave room for growth?  For example as his groups   
   gain in popularity and he's selling t-shirts or whatnot, and   
   branches out to other TV shows maybe his hierarchy looks like   
   this:   
      
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.announcements   
      
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.forum   
      
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.movies   
      
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.swag   
      
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.tv.smallville   
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.tv.suggestions   
      
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.writers.hall-of-fame   
   users.monkees-at-typewriters.writers.join   
      
   Some groups could be read only announcements, FAQs,   
   swag with links to your PayPal account -- it's your group.   
   It's limited only by your creativity.  You can still post to   
   alt.tv.smallville or wherever you hang out of course,   
   but you also have your own hierarchy where you can   
   invite people over for further discussions.   
      
   Now contrarian, cyncical, Usenet being what it is today,   
   there are inevitably some who will object.  That's fine.   
   They can just FRACK OFF!  :-)  No one's asking their   
   permission and "their" Usenet will still be here.  They   
   don't have to start their own group or visit any other   
   hierarchy they don't want to.  For every one of them I   
   already know a dozen who'll go for this.  Who wouldn't?   
   Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, Blogs, the concept has been   
   everywhere and massively successful.  This would be the   
   anti-web version of it, a place without all the graphics   
   and noise and popups and Flash video, and the vapid   
   whatever number of character limits.  You could still   
   link to all that, though, and the web site with your swag.   
      
   So that being the concept explained to those on the   
   alt.tv.smallville group, I'm including a post below that   
   got rejected by one of the anonymous moderators of   
   the Bambi Fortress news.groups.proposals.  Also for   
   the benefit of alt.tv.smallville, the Bambi's are a totally   
   powerless group of 10 who play an RPG game that's   
   gone on for five years now.  The game is to occupy the   
   dying lands of Usenet, and try to persuade other units   
   of genuine fiefdom called "news servers" to obey their   
   "checkgroups" lists and remove certain groups not on it.   
      
   Yes, it's been compared to that cult favorite RPG of old   
   "Throw that Damn Deck Chair Off This Titanic or We'll...   
   We'll..."  But you know, whatever floats their boat, or   
   not.  They like the game and have been playing it for   
   five years.  They're passionate about it.  They'll often   
   bemoan the fact that many news server fiefdoms have   
   been ignoring them for years.  Wouldn't you?  But it   
   still seems to surprise and annoy a few of them that   
   their edicts are not respected.  One of them still talks   
   about "rules" all the time.  In addition to the 10, they   
   have about 6 season ticket holders and a couple of   
   them talk about "votes".   
      
   Anyway, why am I teasing them so mercilessly?  Because   
   it's fun to tease a group of ten control freaks who don't   
   have any control?  No.  Well, okay I admit there would   
   be that.  But I actually think they're probably all quite   
   well meaning, and it's rumored they have considerable   
   technical skills of the control freak persuasion.  Running   
   moderation software and helping block spam and even   
   knowing a bit about an ancient and near-dead computer   
   language called nntp.  :-/  I'm from the COBOL and FORTRAN   
   days, and BASIC, which has evolved and is still used.  I   
   used to know nntp's dad unix.  Unix had another son   
   linux and... well these are all Biblical Tech texts, again   
   from way back.   
      
   So there aren't many scholars in the field and if the   
   Bambis are among them they should think "Screw this   
   RPG game, let's get out there and ride this Resurgence   
   of Usenet wave!"  But you know how it is getting kids   
   away from their video or RPG games.  They're just too   
   immersed in it I guess.  It's a shame.   
      
   Brad Templeton, an early builder/user of Usenet and   
   former chairman of eff.org (Electronic Frontier Foundation)   
   for ten years, and BSG fans will recognize him as a longtime   
   poster to alt.battlestar-galactica, and I believe he's related   
   to creator Ty Templeton who the comics group readers may   
   know, had the idea of users owning their own groups.  He   
   may have had it several years ago, but in any case he posted   
   it in a recent piece with the theme "If we were designing a   
   new usenet today, how would we do it?" or something along   
   those lines.  So again, credit (or blame!) goes to him for that   
   outside-the-box, creative thinking that must run in the family.   
      
   I'm not sure if Brad ever suggested a separate hierarchy for   
   those to keep it away from other managed and open/shared   
   hierarchies.  But that's what I've suggested with users.*  The   
   concept could obviously work as alt.users.* or rec.users.* for   
   example, if a user wanted to be located in those hierarachies   
   instead.  But existing hierararchies may all have different   
   technical (e.g., who sends the control messages) and other   
   considerations so a new hierarchy is better IMO.   
      
   Brad started the "Alternate forms of Usenet" thread on NGP (the   
   Bambi Fortress, moderated news.groups.proposals).  Dave Sill   
   made a supportive post and the following was my response to   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)