Usenet and democracy
Jan. 2nd, 2010 08:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
plutherusI came across a couple of ancient usenet posts of mine.
Usenet, for those who don't know, was where people discussed things on the internet way back in Ye Olden Days when it wasn't actually an "internet" yet, but several separate networks. Some of which shared some commonality. But I'm not going to go there.
Suffice it to say, it is (for yes, it does still exist) a series of discussion groups, for various things. Anything that might be of interest to the kind of people who might be interested in having discussions with strangers via computer in the mid-to-late 80s. Which is to say, it was mostly technical forums and discussions about which of the two Star Trek captains was better.
And, of course, pornography. And D&D. For those are, after all, the first and second uses to which any new technology is ever put.
Anyway, it was a wonderful time of freedom and anarchy, but with strict societal standards. If you were an asshole and intent on trolling newsgroups, nobody would (or indeed, could) stop you, but you soon ended up in everybody's killfiles, and found yourself shouting into the wilderness.
OK, this is already longer than I meant it to be. I just wanted to point out two things:
Despite there being nothing to stop anyone from creating any new newsgroups, there was a defined method of voting on and creating new groups, which worked quite well.
I took part in several of these discussions, and the one I stumbled upon recently was a discussion on whether to split the group comp.sys.next into four parts, from 1991.
One of the things I find interesting now about the discussion was one of the points of contention: Some people believed that splitting it up might segregate the advanced users from the novices. Other people argued that if the split by category of discussion was handled properly, this would be unlikely to happen.
But nobody at all back then argued that this would be a good thing. One of the whole points of usenet is to share knowledge, and it was acknowledged that some people are more knowledgeable on some subjects than others and it's the duty of the "gurus" to pass their knowledge on to the "novices". And that the novices, in turn, will learn, become gurus, and help out the new novices. (Generally, on Usenet of Yore, this process started every September.)
Nobody was arguing that if you are significantly more knowledgeable in some field, that you should keep that information to yourself in order to better your position in comparison to everyone else, which is an attitude I see very commonly online today.
Usenet, for those who don't know, was where people discussed things on the internet way back in Ye Olden Days when it wasn't actually an "internet" yet, but several separate networks. Some of which shared some commonality. But I'm not going to go there.
Suffice it to say, it is (for yes, it does still exist) a series of discussion groups, for various things. Anything that might be of interest to the kind of people who might be interested in having discussions with strangers via computer in the mid-to-late 80s. Which is to say, it was mostly technical forums and discussions about which of the two Star Trek captains was better.
And, of course, pornography. And D&D. For those are, after all, the first and second uses to which any new technology is ever put.
Anyway, it was a wonderful time of freedom and anarchy, but with strict societal standards. If you were an asshole and intent on trolling newsgroups, nobody would (or indeed, could) stop you, but you soon ended up in everybody's killfiles, and found yourself shouting into the wilderness.
OK, this is already longer than I meant it to be. I just wanted to point out two things:
Despite there being nothing to stop anyone from creating any new newsgroups, there was a defined method of voting on and creating new groups, which worked quite well.
I took part in several of these discussions, and the one I stumbled upon recently was a discussion on whether to split the group comp.sys.next into four parts, from 1991.
One of the things I find interesting now about the discussion was one of the points of contention: Some people believed that splitting it up might segregate the advanced users from the novices. Other people argued that if the split by category of discussion was handled properly, this would be unlikely to happen.
But nobody at all back then argued that this would be a good thing. One of the whole points of usenet is to share knowledge, and it was acknowledged that some people are more knowledgeable on some subjects than others and it's the duty of the "gurus" to pass their knowledge on to the "novices". And that the novices, in turn, will learn, become gurus, and help out the new novices. (Generally, on Usenet of Yore, this process started every September.)
Nobody was arguing that if you are significantly more knowledgeable in some field, that you should keep that information to yourself in order to better your position in comparison to everyone else, which is an attitude I see very commonly online today.
