Re: Proposing alt.security.engineering

Nuno Silva  <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 2026-01-02, William Stickers wrote:
>
>> Keith wrote:
>>> 
>>> Keith <[email protected]> posted:
>>> 
>>> > 
>>> > William Stickers <[email protected]> posted:
>>> > 
>>> > > Keith wrote:
>>> > > > 
>>> > > > first of all i am an amateur (that doesn't mean i'm
>>> > > > incompetent quiz me if you
>>> > > > want), but i feel like security engineering as a field should
>>> > > > have a sub-hierarchy
>>> > > > 
>>> > > > again i have no control group perms, so would be really cool if
>someone could
>>> > > > create this :D
>>> > > 
>>> > > <https://www.reddit.com/r/securityengineering/>
>>> > 
>>> > why can't we have both spaces?
>>> 
>>> i'm just going to set this shit up myself thats the best thing about
>this platform
>>> no one can censor you because you can just run everything
>independently, no wonder
>>> it has been consistently active for like 50+ years
>>
>> I don't think you quite get it. The reason there are not half a dozen 
>> usenetters on here explaining the pros and cons of creating this group is 
>> because they have moved on. Mostly everyone has, even the spammers have given 
>> up. You've missed the party.
>> Good luck with sending the newgroup cmsg. I don't know of any NSPs that allow 
>> them anymore.
>
>Has this changed significantly in the past couple years or so?
>
>Just a few years ago at least three alt.* groups were created after
>Giganews and Mozilla pulled the plug on news.mozilla.org.

How is that comparable? A small fraction of the users were highly
motivated to continue communicating, choosing to start three Usenet
groups. The move to these groups did not retain much of the old
audience. Please don't bring up irrelevancies.

Our Dear Proponent, who proposed two newsgroups despite never having
posted to Usenet, effectively wants vanity froups. He has threatened to
set up his own News server if he cannot get what he wants, because he
believes he's being censored. He refuses to understand that if the
Usenet community is ignorant and apathetic about his froups, which are
admittedly the greatest thing since sliced bread, that he has been
censored. He's a would-be dictator who thinks he can force others to
talk about his topics despite no one having any idea who he is, nor do
they give a fuck.

Let's say by some miracle he figures out how to properly configure a
News server and it doesn't become a major originating source of spam. He
still won't have an audience for either of the two froups. He'll claim he's
been censored and will stalk off.

This is the true nature of Usenet. Audiences must be built. It's real
work. There are no shortcuts. Just because one doesn't care to put in
the work to build an audience doesn't make one the victim of censorship.
It's because one is an uncaring lazy and worthless proponent.