The ah....Whole Story (background and a few questions)

[uwvax!astroatc!gtaylor (Mr. Sharkey....white courtesy phone, please)]

Mr. Hsu has asked what's going on here. As far as I know, Tim
Wicinski has been booted off the net. As of right now (9 AM on
Friday), I think that the current train of events started with a
posting to soc.women a couple of days ago. Besides reading it and
saving it for my wife, I remembered it because I recognized Sue's 
name in the usual batch of articles. Here's that article:

Simply put, the context of the article is rather neatly summarized
by Jeff Winslow. The discussion started a long time ago with a set
of articles about Susan Butcher winning the Iditarod dog race. The
articles were cross-posted to a sports newsgroup, and a lengthy but
heated discussion arose as to whether or not cheering about Ms. 
Butcher's performance constituted an intrusion into rec.sports by
a contingent of "radical feminists" rather than a simple recognition
that some areas of sport can be considered gender-neutral (and it 
does appear from some of the articles that some men who read rec.sports
feelthat any sport in which a woman *could* compete with parity must
somehow be a trivial exception to male superiority rather than a "real"
victory). So we enter the argument here:

)>> 
>> Also, you'd have a pretty hard time showing that women were being
>> ridiculed in other groups *because they were women* 
>> 
>> 						Jeff Winslow
>
>Oh yeah? Check this out, from rec.music.gaffa. I am the only woman
>who posts regularly to that group, and I am the only one who is
>continually subject to harassment like this --
>
>> then again, your still blowing bouncers and record company execs so
>> you can get all the wavo hip college music when it comes out so you
>> can be soo much more [expletive deleted] hipper than the next person
>> that it almost makes me puke. it would make me puke, but your not
>> worth the time it takes to puke.
>
>This person also suggested that a gag should be put in my mouth and
>then I should be set on fire. All this for writing such "inflammatory"
>articles as my experiences in college radio and reviews of Suzanne
>Vega and R.E.M. albums. Believe me, the people in an innocent music-
>related newsgroup almost make Jay Skeer look like Alan Alda! Sigh.

I have to imagine the next part (and I may be wrong). It's quite likely
that a large number of the women and men reading soc.women fired off a
few uncomplimentary notes to Tim's sysop and/or boss and the result is
that he's off the net. What puzzles me about this is James' report of
*also* being called on the carpet. This implies that (presumably) Ms.
T. also fired off a letter or two to James' boss as well. It does appear
that Jim wasn't directly confronted in the matter, however.

That's what started the whole thing. Of course, there are a few things
that are unanswered. Is Suzanne's assertion that she's on the receiving
end of the above quoted abuse solely because of her gender correct?
If my guess about the flood of mail following a cross-posting is at
all correct, the question of soc.women readers inferring such matters.
(those of us who arrived here via Bubette McLeods net-flamers mailing
list might disagree that the conventions of discourse are distinctly
gender-related) Is she the sole recipient of this kind of abuse (apart
from her gender), and if so, why wasn't this particular bent on 
personal ad feminim caught and dealt with by the moderator? Since a
popular form of malediction here (as was the case with flamers) *is*
occasionally racist and sexist and homophobic, has anyone reading them
felt compelled to talk to the people involved in the action individually?
(Everyone must answer that for themselves-not just Suzanne and Doug and
Tim. We're all participants here)? Has there been any attempt to discuss
the issue with the moderator? With the group as a whole?

It should be clearly noted that I am making no attempt to defend or
condemn Tim's behaviour (I have tried to deal with it on the personal
level first), or Suzanne's way of responding to it-in this group,
any other groups in which she's quoted Tim, or in private. Likewise,
there's no approval or disapproval of Doug's moderation. Ditto for
personal responses (or their apparent lack) on the part of each of
us. I'm merely sending along the quoted text that (again, I imagine)
that might have started 
the present train of events and asking some questions (no, I cannot
escape whatever biases I have-so my questions may reflect that. I am
trying to avoid the problem as best I can.  There is time to speak 
about this (and-yes-it is, in my opinion, a lot more important or 
interesting than what's on the B side of BKtMM), and I'm sure that 
everyone will have their chance to speak (except for Tim, I suppose).

My apologies to anyone I've misquoted or slighted. The purpose of this
is information. It is a flaw of my nature to salt things with
questions-occasionally ones which aren't germane.