Well, I'm glad you added it then - but it was also in other documents
at the time. (Also, I haven't yet gotten to see a copy of Boulder
Annoucement despite some efforts to get a copy from a few different
sources - so if anyone has one that they can get to me, i would
appreciate it.)
> (by me I'm afraid) for the Delaware announcement.
> Poor man's X may have been fashionable then, but today
But it doesn't seem to me that it is is a question of it being "fashionable"
somehow it seems to me the spirit of Usenet - that it was available
to all unix users at the lowest possible cost -
I found in Human-Nets a discussion of the problems of compuserve -
it seems that compuserve was OPEN - but it's cost limited what
people could afford to contribute to it.
Whereas Arpanet was a "playground" for those who had access
because they weren't paying for any time on it - and could
explore its possibilities and help to develop them.
It seemed that somehow this was some of the achievement of
Usenet - that poor unix users had a way to have access.
> it is not even politically correct.
It may not be so called "politically correct" but it does me no
good to have high prices for netnews even if it is open to women.
So somehow the
> "Open Arpanet", that has a nice ring to it :-)
But you didn't say "Open" Arpanet back then - and it's a bit
disappointing to hear so little support for the Poor Man's Arpanet
tradition that Usenet does represent :(
I was surprised to find that the term hasn't gotten more of
a supportative response on this list.
Doesn't anyone have any sense of what led to the term being
used at the time - of the spirit that it represented.
>
> As for CSnet, it didn't exist when Usenet started
> (I don't know which was thought up first however).
> Also, CSnet was not bulletin-board oriented.
> I am not sure if CSnet had mailing lists anything like ARPAnet.
>
> The big deal with Usenet/Arpanet was that Arpanet mailing lists
> were poured into Usenet. At first it was a one way.
> It had a big effect on Usenet volume, if nothing else!
> (My history of this is weak, perhaps Bruce Jones archives have good stuff.)
>
But the term Poor Man's Arpanet was used before the mailing lists
were poured into Usenet.
I wondered what folks who were involved with usenet in the early days
knew about the ARPANET. Was it common knowledge what it was doing
and what was available on it?
> Technically, Usenet probably has more in common with FidoNet.
>
But the Delaware invite wasn't an invitation to a poor man's fidonet :(
This page last updated on: Jul 1 09:16