Replied: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 18:31:38 EDT Replied: "an458@yfn.ysu.edu " From an458@yfn.ysu.edu Thu Aug 8 04:05:58 1996 Received: from MIT.EDU (PACIFIC-CARRIER-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.69.0.28]) by bloom-picayune.MIT.EDU (8.6.13/2.3JIK) with SMTP id EAA16791; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 04:05:56 -0400 Received: from YFN2.YSU.EDU by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA24098; Thu, 8 Aug 96 04:00:48 EDT Received: (from an458@localhost) by yfn2.ysu.edu id EAA08996 (8.6.13/IDA-1.6); Thu, 8 Aug 1996 04:03:24 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 04:03:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199608080803.EAA08996@yfn2.ysu.edu> From: an458@yfn.ysu.edu (Rosemarie Ventura) To: news-answers-request@MIT.EDU Subject: Re: FAQ: Introduction to Alt.adoption Reply-To: an458@yfn.ysu.edu I need to know whether the following was actually approved by the news-answers moderation team, and if so what the procedure would be to resolve the issue of competeing faqs. You may be unaware of this, but the reference to Christopher Walken in this 'faq' refers to a specific incident wherein some people took turns posting a list of links with information on this actor numbered and titled as an alt.adoption faq. I asked them not to do so, and cc'd the request to their postmasters since they have a 'history' on this newsgroup and I knew they would not stop simply on my request. This was after a series of other incidents wherein the same group of people filled the newsgroup with posts that had nothing to do with adoption, making it difficult for others to use the newsgroup. An even uglier incident preceded this wherein the group was flooded with binaries with forged addresses, though I don't know if this groups of people had any involvement in that. If you do a dejanews author profile on Steve White you will see he has made a 'hobby' of creating alternate charters and faqs for other newsgroups in the alt.adoption hierarchy as well. This is not alt.anarachy, and I object strongly to any 'faq' or 'charter' for any newsgroup which states that no limit is placed on topics. Why bother HAVING different newsgroups and hierarchies if not to make some order out of the discussion? >================ >FAQ begins below >================ >FAQ: Introduction to Alt.adoption > > >From: sheag@oz.net, swhite@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu >Newsgroups: alt.adoption,alt.answers,news.answers >Subject: [alt.adoption] Introduction to alt.adoption >Followup-To: alt.adoption >Summary: This posting is an introduction to the unmoderated newsgroup > alt.adoption. It should be read by anyone who wishes to post to >the alt >.adoption newsgroup. >Approved: news-answers-request@MIT.EDU > >Archive-name: genealogy/adoption/introduction >Posting-Frequency: monthly > > >13.1 WHAT CAN I POST HERE? > >Alt.adoption is as varied a group as the personalities in it. Common >material may include search questions or statements, discussion of current >legislation, support for members blowing off steam, discussions on the >social impact of adoption, comments on Christopher Walken, discussion of >Bastard Nation, and many other things. Alt.adoption is an open, >unmoderated forum, and has actively supported the unmoderated, unchartered >format on multiple occasions, thus any and all subject matter is hereby >deemed to be ontopic for alt.adoption. However, the members of >alt.adoption, and Usenet in general, discourage chain and commercial >letters as well as binaries, and it is recommended that you read >alt.adoption for at least two weeks before posting in order to familiarize >yourself with the culture of the group. > > >13.2 THEN WHY BOTHER WITH THIS FAQ? > >Good question. As stated above, alt.adoption has in the past actively >supported the freedom of individuals to post as they wish. This constitutes >a "no-charter" situation which can be confusing to some. With this FAQ, we >hope to dispel any concerns about what material "should" be seen on >alt.adoption and what should not. In fact, the reason that alt.adoption >agressively defends its chaotic nature is that the field of adoption is so >diverse. Personalities of every kind abound, and many people just have >different ideas about adoption, communication, and Usenet in general. >At the same time, emotions can run high. Therefore, alt.adoption remains >totally unrestrained in order to protect its subscribers from a de facto >exclusion of their points (and therefore open discourse) by defining too >rigidly what is or is not on-topic. > >13.3 IS THERE A MODERATED, MORE FOCUSED VENUE? > >Yes. For those desiring a forum that is less of a free-for-all, with >a more narrow focus and homogenous population, we recommend that you >investigate the moderated adoptees-only newsgroup, soc.adoption.adoptees. >There are also a number of mailing lists that may suit your needs. Consult >the other FAQs posted frequently by Rosemarie Ventura, and available at >http://www.webcom.com/~kmc/adoption/faqs.html for more Internet adoption >resources. > > > > >This FAQ was authored by multiple members of the newsgroup alt.adoption. It >may be copied and distributed freely, in whole or in part, as long as it is >not sold, and this notice is kept intact. > -- Rosemarie Ventura