1995-01-07 - Re: Files and mail

Header Data

From: I’m Wozz <wozzeck@phantom.com>
To: Mike Duvos <mpd@netcom.com>
Message Hash: 4adb96f1b87fe852b357e91481e900aa68951ac489ae712e4a64c0fe862e0c16
Message ID: <Pine.3.89.9501062250.B16409-0100000@mindvox>
Reply To: <199501070212.SAA19162@netcom3.netcom.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-01-07 03:20:46 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 19:20:46 PST

Raw message

From: I'm Wozz <wozzeck@phantom.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 19:20:46 PST
To: Mike Duvos <mpd@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Files and mail
In-Reply-To: <199501070212.SAA19162@netcom3.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9501062250.B16409-0100000@mindvox>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, Mike Duvos wrote:

> "I'm Wozz" <wozzeck@phantom.com> writes:
> [miscellaneous Netcom-honking elided]
>  > It just so happens the AUP of winternet allows for this
>  > situation.
> Right.  And a small service provider can make any "terms of
> service agreement" his or her little heart desires.  Just like
> the owner of a two line BBS.  With big service providers, such
> things tend to be done in a somewhat more business-like fashion.

hahah....netcom can make up anything they want to.

You do of course, read these agreements before you get on...don't you...

Here's a simple solution...don't get on a systems who's AUP you disagree 

You assertion that simply because a company is not netcom's size, that 
its unprofessional and incompetent is rediculous.

>  > its a bit far fetched to call HIS reaction a tantrum.... If
>  > anyone's screaming for mommy its whats-her-name....
> Well, if I posted a message to 10 newsgroups and some bozo posted
> a message to a.c-e.n-a falsely implying that it was the beginning
> of some sort of massive spam, I would certainly not be pleased.
> If Netcom, after receiving some small amount of flamage on the
> subject, summarily removed access to my account and made
> themselves unavailable for several days when I tried to contact
> them to discuss the matter, and then tossed me off with a
> flippant "so sue me" when I protested, I would be even less
> pleased.  Fortunately, I can't imagine Netcom even caring about a
> 10 newsgroup cross-post.

right....because Netcom is FILLED with assholes....those that crosspost 
to 10 groups are overlooked

>  > big is better i guess....
> In the case of Internet Service Providers, big is definitely
> better.  There are simply economies of scale which are not
> realized with smaller operations.  Netcom has had some problems,
> but almost all of them were growth related.  None of them were
> intrinsic to the systems and network itself.

so...AOL is better than netcom?

at least they have an irc server.

and ALL of netcom's problems are related to the systems and network....

they didn't plan their expansion correctly....and as a result...are 
feeling it now.

>  > Winternet is HARDLY a 'bbs'.  Its a regional internet
>  > service....much as netcom was before they flooded every
>  > city with dialups.
> Read again, this time for comprehension.  I did not say Winternet
> was a BBS.  Merely that smaller ISPs have many of the undesirable
> characteristics found in BBS systems.

and Netcom has many of the undesirable characteristics found in big 
systems like Prodigy and Compuserve...

if you honestly find this attractive.....well, enjoy

>  > Any professional knows better than to read private
>  > mail...and if this is so...then they aren't worthy of having
>  > a site to run
> For legal purposes, most BBS systems declare that for the
> purposes of the ECPA, there is no such thing as private mail on
> their system.  The Sysop is then free to read anything he wishes
> to.  This policy is clearly stated in the user agreements of
> almost all BBS systems offering access to the public.

well of course.....Netcom will read your mail too if you are accused of 
hacking.  The fact is....the chances of someone reading your mail on 
Netcom are about 100 times higher than on a smaller system....simply 
becuase the place is so overridden with root wielding hackers who have 
nothing better to do than torment others....

>  > as for PGP, this is an individual thing....I'm sure mike
>  > has no such objections...i know here at MindVox we
>  > don't...in fact, we installed it for the users
> Many BBS Sysops forbid PGP and kick users off their systems who
> use it.  They cite fears of encrypted illegal porn and credit
> card numbers passing through their systems, and potential legal
> liability.

well......once again.....shop before you buy.  You can't make such 
blanket assertations, because they simply aren't true. 

>  > Netcom is an abomination.....it is the only one of its kind
>  > (not counting delphi etc, since they were conceived under
>  > differnent systems)
> Netcom is the fastest growing and leading Internet Service
> Provider.  Their ability to attract new customers is limited only
> by the rate at which they are able to increase capacity.  Their
> respect for freedom of expression is absolute and they do not
> meddle in their customers' affairs.  Their prices are reasonable
> and their user agreement is fair.  Works for me. :)

Netcom is also the LEADING source of trouble for the rest of the network 
because of the way they handle their user population.  They can't keep up 
with all their problems.  This seems to translate to you as - "They 
respect me and don't bother me"  THe fact is....they don't even know who 
the hell you are.  And....being a matter of scale, as several pointed out...

netcom is about 100 times the size of winternet....(approximation)...

thus...lets multiply everything by 100, profits, users, problems, etc, etc

If one of their user's posted (10x100) 1000 MAKE.MONEY.FAST posts to 1000 
different groups.....you can bet that person wouldn't have their account 
the next day.

>  > They suck network services off others (irc as one example)
>  > and don't take responsibilty for the HUGE number of idiots
>  > on their service who maliciously hack anything they can
>  > reach....its totally without personality...AND....its slower
>  > than molasses...the management is out of touch with the
>  > users and they are so overloaded with trouble reports, they
>  > don't know what to do with them.
> Perhaps an exaggerated description of Netcom a few months ago,
> but certainly not the current state of affairs.  I always get a
> line when I dial in, response time is reasonable, disk is
> abundant, and almost all software is available.  Speed of network
> connections to other sites is quite acceptable.

this is THEIR network.....

there is ANOTHER network out there....its called...the Internet.

I've had MANY users at my site connecting from netcom, and insisting that 
our T1 is overloaded because of the chunky responses they are getting...

well, guess what.  As soon as they tried from somewhere else....their 
problems dissapeared.

They contribute very little to the Internet .... and that which they do 
is overshadowed by the harm many of their more immature users cause

>  > oh...btw...i don't have ANY connection to winternet, other
>  > than knowing MANY satisfied customers, and having heard
>  > alot about them, as a sysadmin for a site in much the same
>  > situation.
> The number of satisfied customers is not the measure of a site,
> any more than the number of people still alive is the measure of
> a disease.

its not?  then your opinion doesn't count...right?
i mean...you're just a satisfied user

> Netcom works with the reliability of the phone company.  It is
> always there, almost always up, and is redundant enough that when
> something breaks, it is still usable.  I pay my $19.50 a month
> and I get unlimited everything.  I'm happy.

If you call netcom usable...you've obviously NEVER tried another ISP...or 
had several VERY bad experiences with the few you've tried.  I urge you 
to give the whole situation another look.

  ,    +      .        /\_-\ ==================----------------------
    .      `    .     <((_))> ==============--------------------
`        x    .        \- \/ ===========------------------
       ,       /\_-\(:::::::::)/\_-\   matthew e. cable - systems administrator
   .       .  <((_))  MindVox  ((_))>  phantom access technologies inc
      .        \- \/(:::::::::)\- \/   wozzeck@phantom.com
  +      `             /\_-\ ===========------------------
   .   ,   *    '     <((_))> ==============--------------------
+             x        \- \/ ==================----------------------