Re: Young people peering

On 04/19/2024 01:03 PM, Ted Heise wrote:

On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 15:35:54 +0000,
   Retro Guy <retroguy@novabbs.com> wrote:

  Grant Taylor wrote:

On 4/19/24 09:56, The Bjornsdottirs - Lightning wrote:

I'm 24 and I've rattled the idea around my head a couple
times. Each time, I am demotivated by the kind of person I
come across,

>

ProTip:  Aspire to more.  You will fail.  But failure part of
the learning process.

>

Even if you fail when aspiring to mire, you will quite likely
be in a better position than you were before you tried.

>

I think I'm qualified to say Pro because I've been paid for
the last 20 years for 10:aspiring, 20:failing, 30:goto 10.

>
  I agree. Fear of failure will just keep a person from
  accomplishing much of anything.
>
  It's good to realize that people who end up producing something
  awesome didn't just get it done on the first try, they tried,
  and tried again with persistence.

>
You responders are of course correct about the benefits of not
letting fear stop action, but I read the OP more as a matter of
asking why make the effort when it just increases contact with
unwanted folks (and behaviors).  Maybe I misread.
>

These days standing up Internet services involves basically
putting up a fire-wall and putting up a spam-wall.
Usenet at least is just a protocol and doesn't share all
your habits necessarily with all the gruesome "shadows"
and "ad mods" or whatever else the "moderators" are doing
these days with very brown, very blue noses.
Of course it's an Internet protocol and whatever goes over
the Ethernet packetry more or less goes through an Internet
Service Provider, more or less, or more, or less.
If you leave out alt.binaries, Usenet can be a pretty great
place. There really is a sort of anti-spam approach in effect.
It really does sort of adhere to the spirit of the charters,
of the Usenet groups. The netiquette is encouraged.
So, how to put up a spam-wall, basically I've been thinking
about this as a "NOOBNB" approach. What this is is that
there are three kinds of posters, New, Old, and Off, and
three kinds of non-posters, Bots, Non, and Bad. The idea
is that any kind of determination of this fundamentally
has to be entirely open and same for all, i.e., not in
the hands of shady, duplicitous individuals lurking on
their little click-farm feeds.
So, the NOOBNB approach, basically makes for editions
of the feed, sort of Cur, Raw, and Pur, where, Cur
is Curated and only New/Old/Off, i.e. it's curated ham
not spam and it's the feed, then Pur, is purgatory,
where New posters are born as Non posters, then about
how to make it so that Non posters result New posters.
Then Bad posters don't get into Cur, and how to make
it so that if a poster turns Bad (and not just Off)
is similar as to how Non becomes New. Then Bot,
is just sort of the other category that's in Raw
but not in Cur. The idea is that any posts whatsoever,
that get past a sort of spam-wall black-hole,
arrive in Raw, and if they're new, which is determined
by them not existing in the list of existing posters
to anywhere in Usenet, then they arrive also in Pur
as Non. The idea is to actually sort of prevent
nym-shifting and email-faking then how to figure out
how to make it so that posters arrive from Non to
New. It's sort of figured that the Usenet peer,
or here that the idea is that NOOBNB makes for
Usenet "compeers", basically makes some hoops like
2FA and "reading the charter" and "agreeing to the
charter", to promote from Non to New. Then New,
after they post a few times, graduate to Old, then
Off, is basically for off-topic posters, about
whether Old and Off vacillate, and just to make
it so that they're all in the Cur curated feed,
yet, there's basically an attribute to filter
off all the Off.
So, that's sort of the idea, to setup an Internet
service that is behind a firewall sort of courtesy
that the host on the Ethernet is behind a firewall
and otherwise subject its exposure on the Internet,
then that the spam-wall basically figures that
the same sort of posts as arrive as spam would
arrive as spam emails, then that the proof-of-effort
and voucher-of-conduct sort of thing prevents most
of the Usenet compeers employing a NOOBNB approach,
from flooding their compeers with spam.
I.e., the idea is to use the existing protocol,
and a sort of modern approach in front of it,
to make it much simplified and uncomplicated,
to stand up Internet services and here Usenet compeers,
then as with regards to compeering and groups,
then as with regards to making whatever format
of the Internet messages go in the groups,
like MIME and HTML email, and whatever front-end
makes for interacting with what's behind the
protocol, like IMAP for MIME and HTML email,
or a web frontend in HTTP and HTML.
I've been tapping away on this for a while on
a thread on sci.math called "Meta: a usenet
server just for sci.math", which describes
sort of the technical part of implementing
an Internet service with NNTP or other text-based
Internet protocols, then the considerations with
regards to "NOOBNB: a compeering system",
then here also recently about "AAAATU: archive
any and all text usenet".