Re: A New Usenet...

[Clark Reynard <clark@metal.psu.edu>]

a possible idea is simply a modification of what ringuette suggested;
while i am all for anonymous posting, i believe that they should be
marked as such (or at least marked with some sort of alias so that
one knows which anonymous poster is which--for example, my actual name
is Robert Clark, but my user name on this system is Clark Reynard--
not because I am here illegally, but because the sysadmin of this
site (a personal friend) is unable to give me an account here for
political reasons).

irt the idea of a new usenet, i doubt that a 'new' USEnet is possible;
it is so firmly entrenched, by 'tradition' et cetera, that it is very
likely that what will exist is merely an improvement and expansion of
the existing usenet; however, i believe that alternative means of reading
usenet should exist; i have found, since rejoining usenet after
a three-year absence, that the signal-to-noise ratio has increased
greatly (and who hasn't noticed that?).  what is necessary, given the
constant increase in broadcast, is a correspondingly great increase
in 'broadcatch,' that is, the ability to find the information that you
actually wish to have (one man's signal is another man's--or person's--
noise).  thus, rather than have kill files, having scanning programs
capable of filtering out particular TYPES of data, rather than the poster
him- or her-self, will be of far more use than excluding a usenet poster
who may very well post a greatly useful file amidst a welter of
useless files.  thus, some sort of syntax/subject/type of data file
scanner (which requires asi--my acronym for artificial semi-intelligence)
is necessary to make the usenet actually new, and not merely IMPROVED--
usenet improves constantly.  if anyone wishes to comment regarding this,
rather than clutter the list with more articles like this, send them
to me, either here, or to rclark@nyx.cs.du.edu, and i will summarize
and post.

fc