On Sat, 19 Jul 2014 18:18:44 GMT, mjello <non.compos@ment.is> wrote:
>The alt hierarchy isn't (has never been) subject to the pre-1987
>formal procedure for creating groups (Charter, FAQ, RFD, etc),
>so if the original purpose was ever spelled out, it was unlikely
>to have been archived as the non-alt birth certificates were (for
>a while). The alt groups could have been created using that formal
>procedure, and some were, but it wasn't obligatory.
Formally you are correct however the @Home network was particularly
nasty in enforcing non-compliant post abuse complaints as were a
number of other players. The original intent of Alt.Config as an
approval mechanism became moot fairly quickly as all it took to create
a newsgroup was merely having some tech at your ISP create it on their
Typhoon server and then it would propogate after a few days just as
long as a few people posted to it. Either way there used to be some
level of control until there was none whatsoever.
>So, unless somebody happened to make a note of what the original
>intent was at the time....
This group may have had a charter in one of its original names,
(Monkey Movies maybe), but it was ultimately a migration of sorts. I
am not sure that there was really much of a plan except to post
grindhouse films from the 60's to early 80's.
>It probably depends on whether you think sleaze is 60s-70s grindhouse
>sexploitation preserved in amber or whether you're willing to extend it
>to include the inexplicable fascination with what Kim Kardashian is
>wearing.
I think my concern with going for a complete generalization of the
definition of sleaze is that by defintion everything posted in
alt.binaries.erotica meets that criterion which goes back to the
alt.porn vs. alt.notporn debate. There are lots of sleazy independant
films being made all the time replete with nudity etc. but is that the
intent? Who knows.
|
|