Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 16:31:12 CST
From: [email protected]@ivgate.omahug.org
Subject: File 7--SUMMARY AND UPDATE: alt.* Removal at UNL

As of April 17, 1992, when I write this summary and update, the noise
on the nets has abated somewhat.  But those readers of the CuD who
have access to Usenet news have almost certainly seen and remember the
brouhaha over the deletion of the alt.* hierarchy at the University of
Nebraska.  The following is the story, as I understand it, pieced
together from several sources and personal inquiries.  It is only as
accurate as the information I was able to obtain, and if anyone has
corrections or additions, please submit them to the CuD.

The furor started on March 2nd, 1992, when the alt.* hierarchy was
eliminated by the UNL Computing Resource Center (CRC).  The
termination was so abrupt that some downstream sites did not know in
advance, and had to immediately scramble for alternate feeds.  The
decision was supposedly resource-based, and supported by a February
27th recommendation by the UNL Academic Senate Computational Services
and Facilities Committee.  Almost immediately, however, it became
obvious that content-control had played a major part.  Leo Chouinard,
the "Academic Senate representative on the Computational Committee"
[sic], reportedly said the committee discussed several considerations
before making a decision about the alt groups, including possible
violations of state pornography laws and concerns about computer
resources being used for non-educational purposes.

The memorandum announcing the termination read as follows:

    CRC Policy on Providing Information Resources
        2/27/92

    The Computing Resource Center provides information resources to
    the UNL community in support of the University's mission of
    research, instruction, and service. These resources commonly take
    the form of databases, archives, and bulletin boards. The
    Computing Resource Center makes available those information
    resources that are requested by faculty at UNL and approved by
    the Computing Resource Center in consultation the Academic Senate
    Computational Committee as useful in supporting the University's
    mission.

    If a user desires information resources not provided by the
    Computing Resource Center, they are free to acquire that
    information elsewhere, subject only to the requirements of the
    information provider, relevant federal and state laws, and
    applicable University policies.

Adopted UNL Academic Senate, 2/27/92

The UNL Academic Senate Computational Services and Facilities
Committee is chaired by Professor (of English) Les Whipp.  He told me
that, in hindsight, he felt his committee did not have all the facts
before them when they concurred in the CRC recommendation that the
following Usenet newsfeeds (and only these newsgroups) be made
available: bionet, bit, biz, ci, comp, general, gnu, misc, news, rec,
sci, soc, talk, unix-pc, unl, and vmsnet.  In particular, he was not
aware of the connotations of censorship that could (and did) become
attached to the wholesale removal of the alt.* hierarchy, and as of
the date I talked with him, felt that someone at the CRC had a hidden
agenda to remove certain "objectionable" groups.  Professor Whipp did
not claim to be expert on the management of hardware resources, and
sounded disturbed that a decision officially based on "limited
resources" was so open to question on its basis.  (The debate about
the percentage, cost, etc., of carrying the alt.* groups went on at
length in comp.org.eff.talk and other newsgroups.  It is not my
purpose to reiterate that discussion).

Mr. Kent Landfield ([email protected]), a UNL alumnus, systems
manager at a major software contractor, and moderator of
comp.sources.misc, posted a thoughtful "Open Letter to UNL CRC"
regarding the alt.* group removal.  As a result of my own feelings,
and encouraged by Mr. Landfield's letter, I contacted several
individuals at UNL.  Acting at approximately the same time, a number
of UNL students formed the "Nebraska Students for Electronic Freedom
(NUSEF)."  The thrust of our comments was if resources were at issue,
tell us what was needed and we would lobby to get them.  If content
was actually at issue, admit it openly, apply generally accepted
educational/library standards, and bring back at least those alt.*
groups with recognized value.

As a result of the lobbying efforts, including telephone call from
Mike Godwin at the Cambridge office of the Electronic Frontier
Foundation, the involvement of librarians both knowledgeable
regarding computer services and resource allocation and selection
criteria, and the general education several of the faculty
participants received during the discussions, the UNL Academic
Senate Executive Committee, meeting on April 6th, voted to request
restoration of the majority of the alt.* groups.  Their minutes
reflect:

    7.0  ALT Network Disconnect
Wise and McShane indicated they had been contacted
         regarding CRC discontinuing the ALT network because of
         the potential for transmitting erotic pictures via the
         network.  Users have indicated these pictures can be
         blocked under copyright law restrictions and the general
         network be continued.
The committee requested the ALT network be added back
         with the designated restrictions.

When I discussed the committee recommendation with one of its members,
I came away with the feeling that the digitized pictures would be
removed due to copyright concerns, and that the rest of the group
would be evaluated using American Library Association criteria (as
often advocated and explained by Carl Kadie, [email protected]).

I also came away with the feeling that similar decisions will, in the
future, be conducted substantially more in the open.  To use a trite
saying, "time will tell."

In Nebraska we are still waiting and watching for the return of the
alt.* groups, will work to obtain legislative support if additional
resources are in fact needed, and will continue to support resource
allocation decisions based on academic criteria, as opposed to
censorship.

Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253