The Modem World: A Prehistory of Social Media
Date: 2022-06-15T18:12:13+00:00
Keywords: Computers; Internet; General; History; Modern; 20th Century; Social History; Social Science; Sociology; Media Studies
Description: The untold story about how the internet became social, and why this matters for its future "A great book for anyone who wants to understand the early days of online communications."--Preston Gralla, Arts Fuse Fifteen years before the commercialization of the internet, millions of amateurs across North America created more than 100,000 small-scale computer networks. The people who built and maintained these dial-up bulletin board systems (BBSs) in the 1980s laid the groundwork for millions of others who would bring their lives online in the 1990s and beyond. From ham radio operators to HIV/AIDS
Publisher: Yale University Press

the modem world

S

N
i

This page intentionally left blank

kevin driscoll

The Modem

World
a prehistory of social media

S

NEW HAVEN AND LONDON

N
iii

Published with assistance from the Louis Stern Memorial Fund.

Copyright © 2022 by Kevin Driscoll.

All rights reserved.

This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without written permission from the publishers.

Yale University Press books may be purchased in quantity for educational, business,
or promotional use. For information, please e-mail sales.press@yale.edu (U.S. office)

or sales@yaleup.co.uk (U.K. office).

An online version of the work is available under a Creative Commons Attribution-

NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) (https://creativecommons

.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).

Set in Scala & Scala Sans type by Newgen North America, Austin, Texas.

Printed in the United States of America.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2021943963
isbn 978-0-300-24814-2 (hardcover : alk. paper)

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992

(Permanence of Paper).

S

N

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
iv

For Eva Marigold

S

N
v

This page intentionally left blank
content s

1 Recalling the Modem World 1

2 Computerizing Hobby Radio 29

3 Building an Internet for Everyone 58

4 Sharing Files with Strangers 90

5 Cultivating Community 132

6 Becoming the Net 168

7 Imagining a Better Future for the Internet 192

Acknowledgments 201

Notes 205

Bibliography 267

Index 301

S

N
vii

This page intentionally left blank
the modem world

S

N
ix

This page intentionally left blank
chapter one

Recalling the Modem World
the internet became available to Richard Scott Mark in 1994.

After hours spent installing new communications software, configur-
ing his modem, and connecting to his new internet service provider, he
double-clicked on Mosaic and ventured out onto the World Wide Web.

As he wandered from page to page, an odd sense of loneliness and isola-
tion overtook him. The much-hyped information superhighway was full
of images but empty of people. Digital billboards flew by, but there was
nowhere to pull over: no exits, no rest stops, no roadside attractions. “I
was there,” he remembered thinking, “but where was everyone else?” 1

In 1994, the web was still brand new.2 But Richard Mark was no newbie. He had spent the previous decade building personal computers and exploring communication networks from his home in Gaines-
ville, Florida. Since 1987, he and two friends—Paul Martin and Dave

Tieman—had run Dragon Keep International, a dial-up online service
known as a “bulletin board system,” or BBS.3 They originally launched Dragon Keep with a secondhand computer, $25 worth of software, and a
commitment to creating a fun, respectful environment for their users.4

By 1994, their BBS had grown into a lively community serving more
than four thousand members from around the city.5 Every night, dozens of people dialed in from their home PCs to chat, trade files, play games,

S

N

1

1

2 rec alling the modem world
read the forums, and post messages of their own. In 1996, Mark de-
scribed it as a thriving “cyber-city.”6

The experience of running Dragon Keep shaped Mark’s early en-
counters with the internet and his expectations for the World Wide Web.

Logging into a popular BBS could feel like stepping into an electronic
nightclub. You were visiting a real place with real people, personality,
and vibe. The web of 1994, by contrast, felt less like a place than a thing.

Mark compared surfing the web to flipping the pages of an “endless
magazine.”7 The technology was impressive, the aesthetics were cool, and the information was engaging, but the overall experience felt static
and lifeless.8 After months of hype, Mark was underwhelmed. “In its
present form,” he concluded, “[the web] is simply noninteractive.”9

Mark was not alone in his disappointment. From the late 1970s until
the dot-com boom of the 1990s, dial-up BBSs were the prevailing form
of social computing for PC owners. Built by amateurs using off-the-shelf
parts and regular telephone lines, this “modem world” offered an open,
grassroots alternative to the closed, institutional networks sponsored by
state agencies, research universities, and multinational corporations. In

North America alone, more than a hundred thousand BBSs served mil-
lions of people on systems ranging from fewer than ten to more than
ten thousand active members.10 In the early 1990s, when privatization opened the internet to everyone with money to spare, these BBS enthusiasts were among the first to open their checkbooks. Big BBSs like Dragon

Keep International, ECHO, Exec-PC, and The WELL hitched themselves
and their dial-up communities to the global information infrastructure.

Former BBS users ran popular mailing lists, moderated newsgroups, and
commercialized the web. From private BitTorrent trackers to Facebook
groups, the fundamental social structures of the modern internet were
forged on a dial-up BBS.

how did the int erne t b ec ome s o c i a l ?

Today, the internet mediates all aspects of social life, from the most in-
timate to the most mundane. Digital communication networks are the
infrastructures through which we keep in touch with family, argue about
politics, find romantic connection, look up health information, and seek

S
emotional support. Social media services provide online counterparts to

N

2
rec alling the modem world 3
the café, shopping mall, library, cinema, confessional booth, barbershop,
and nail salon. Blending commerce and community, they are the gath-
ering places of the online world, spaces of social encounter where we
observe other people, express ourselves, and collectively make sense of
the world. From school to work, the bedroom to the public square, the
rhythms of everyday life resonate through networks of copper cabling,
optical fiber, and electromagnetic waves that seem to charge the very air
around us with the spark of communication.

And yet the social internet, in spite of its ubiquity, is short on social
history. The best-known histories of the internet focus on either the en-
gineers who developed the core technologies or the businesspeople who
profited from them. Neither offers a satisfying explanation for the rise of
computer networks as platforms for popular culture and public life. The
prehistory of social media unfolded not in the office parks of Silicon Val-
ley or the meeting rooms of military contractors or the labs of university
researchers. Instead, we must peer into the improvised workshops of
millions of hobbyists, volunteers, activists, and entrepreneurs who—for
fifteen years prior to the opening up of the internet—hosted small-scale
online systems in cities and towns throughout North America.

The modem world began in the late 1970s. Amateur technologists
appropriated the residential telephone network as an infrastructure for
data communications, trading electronic files and messages through cir-
cuits originally designed to carry the human voice. Within a few years,
dial-up BBSs had become the dominant form of networking among per-
sonal computer owners, especially those who were excluded from other
media systems. It was on these grassroots networks that computer en-
thusiasts started to use their machines for popular communication and
community building. Their experiences and experiments with anonym-
ity, identity, privacy, sexuality, and trust generated many of the technolo-
gies and practices that Silicon Valley later reproduced and sold as com-
mercial social media.

Lost in the transition from hobbyist telecommunication to commer-
cial social media was the intimacy of the modem world. Whereas today’s
social media systems are characterized by ambiguous terms of service
agreements, uncertain privacy guarantees, mass surveillance, and wide-
spread abuse and harassment, bulletin board systems operated under

S

N

3

4 rec alling the modem world
very different technical, cultural, and political-economic regimes. BBSs
were local affairs, serving small numbers of people living in relative
proximity. The administrators, known as “system operators” or “sysops,”

were responsible for maintaining the tech, paying the bills, setting the
rules, and resolving disputes. Regular users and sysops came to know
each other personally, often meeting up to tinker with computers, trade
software, party, or just hang out. Ownership accrued to the edges of BBS
networks, making sysops accountable to their users as members of a
shared community rather than representatives of a corporation or self-
interested investors.

This is a book about how the internet became social. The people who
built and maintained dial-up BBSs in the 1980s laid the groundwork for
millions of others who would bring their lives online in the 1990s and
beyond. Along with writing code and running up their phone bills, these
modem enthusiasts developed novel forms of community moderation,
governance, and commercialization. As some of the only people to enter
the dot-com boom with practical experience running online communi-
ties, many BBS sysops found employment in the internet economy of
the 1990s. Some transformed their BBSs into internet service providers

(ISPs). Others applied their expertise to the World Wide Web. Over time,
countless social media platforms have reproduced the social and techni-
cal innovations of the BBS community.

Recovering the history of dial-up BBSs also helps us to imagine a
world after social media. Endlessly modifiable, BBS technology afforded
sysops a remarkable degree of expressive flexibility. From the visual de-
sign of BBSs to their organizational structure, each BBS represented an
idiosyncratic dream of what cyberspace could be, a glimpse of the fu-
ture written in code and accessible from your local telephone jack. When
commercial internet access finally came to the public, tens of thousands
of BBS networks were already in operation, providing computer enthu-
siasts across the continent with networks of their own. This is not to ro-
manticize the past—many users happily abandoned BBSs for the web—
but to recover a sense of wonder about the internet of today. Immersing
ourselves in a period of experimentation and play makes the internet
seem strange again. By changing how we remember the internet’s past,

S
we can change our expectations for its future.

N

4
rec alling the modem world 5
what i s the int erne t ?

The purpose of this book is to change how we talk about the history of
the internet. But what is “the internet”? If you ask a network administra-
tor, they will tell you something about protocols, standards, gateways, or
peering agreements. In a technical sense, this is correct. Nearly every
mobile phone, laptop, tablet, and “smart” thing in the world runs a stan-
dard set of software programs known as the internet protocol suite, or

TCP/IP, and every ISP exchanges packets with peer networks through

IP gateways. 11 But a typical user doesn’t think about the internet in terms of datagrams shuttling between switches and routers. A strictly technical definition doesn’t capture what we mean when we talk about “the
internet.”12 Learning about the architecture of TCP/IP won’t help us to understand the diversity of user practices that have emerged since the

1970s. 13 Like the notion of “the movies,” the internet is an invention of our social imagination, as much an idea or a feeling as a technology.

The internet means something different depending on who, when, and
where you are.

Today’s vernacular use of “internet” reflects a transformation in
meaning from the technical to the social, from programs and protocols
to people and practices. For much of the 1970s and 1980s, “internet” was
just a shortened form of “internetwork,” an adjective used by network
engineers to classify technologies that spanned multiple communication
systems, for example, “an internetwork gateway.”14 As internetwork gateways became more common in the late 1970s, researchers needed a word
to describe the resulting networks-of-networks. Louis Pouzin, director of
the experimental CYCLADES network in France, proposed “catenet,” the
concatenation of dissimilar networks. Others used organizational adjec-
tives to distinguish particular internetworks such as “the Xerox internet”

or “the ARPA internet.” 15 The capitalized, singular “Internet” remained relatively rare, even in technical literature, until late in the 1980s, when a
flood of new data networks—national videotex systems like Minitel and

Telidon, international commercial services like CompuServe and Tym-
net, and worldwide cooperative networks like BITNET and USENET—
created a need for better documentation and a more precise definition.16

In 1990, John S. Quarterman, a former ARPANET engineer, published

The Matrix, a 750-page atlas of data networks. 17 According to The Matrix, S

N

5

New Mexico Technet

Colorado SuperNet

WSUnet

CERFnet

INRIA

BCnet

Onet

Confer

ZOOnet

WESTNET

PSCnet

UNINETT

NorthWestNet

NICNET

MSUnet

SURAnet

FAENET

DENet

OILCOMNET

Merit

NSFNET

JVNCNet

INDONET

UMnet

MIDnet

AHEN NORDUnet

Elisa

DSIRnet

NRAO

CRIM

PHYSNET

INFOPSI

HEPnet

NetNorth

NCSAnet

QZCOM

Sesquinet

CITNET

ACONET

GulfNet

NYSERNet

SUNET

SDSCnet

AGFNET

SPAN

INFNET

FUNET SPEARNET

SURFnet

CDNnet

ENSTINET

ARPANET

THEnet

SWITCH

PLATO

MRNet

HP Internet

EARN

ILAN

Starlink

BARRNet

CSNET

USAN

EUnet

DKnet

NSN

Dnet

ARIADNE

Comserve

UNA

NSI

BITNET

JANET

REUNIR

FNET

ITESM

HEANET

MFEnet

SDN

DREnet

Ean

Minitel

PRNET

EASYnet

DFN

SMARTIX

UUNET

AQ

AMPRNET

USENET

XEROX Internet ARISTOTE Afrimail COARA

VNET

JUNET

TCSnet

UKnetKeylink T

Big Sky Telegraph

RangKoM LASNET

ACSnet

Internet

Enet

UUCP

FidoNet

Web

TWICS

RED

CATIENET

UNInet

NCCN Portal

UNAM

AUSEAnet

GreenNet

HARNET

UPGCN

SCINET

OARnet

Dialcom WELL

SFMT

DDN

OMNET

PeaceNet

AT&T Mail

WINCS

IASnet

MILNET

Telemail

The Source BIX

DASnet

NWI

GeoNet

Delphi MCI Mail

UNISON

EIES

CARINET

OnTyme GEnie

Envoy 100

EasyLink

Alternet

Telebase CGNET

Telex

EcoNet

Dow Jones

THE META NETWORK

GOLDNET

Tandem

CompuServe

Telecom Gold

Telebox

Dialog

TWX

Quantum Link

PlayNET

The worldwide “metanetwork” of communication and information services, according
to data published by John S. Quarterman in 1990. This diagram depicts more than 227
systems operating in forty-one countries, from international commercial services and
cooperative email systems to national research networks and secure military infrastruc-
tures. The edges between nodes indicate a gateway. The size of each node corresponds
to its number of connections. Redundancies and gaps reflect the practical difficulties

S
of documenting this dynamic period. Around the world, new networks were coming

N
online, existing networks were merging, and old networks were being phased out.

6
rec alling the modem world 7

“the Internet” referred to a particular family of experimental networks
used by state agencies, universities, and corporations with roots in the

United States.18 Like Pouzin, Quarterman focused on the concatenation of heterogeneous networks. Accordingly, “the Internet” of 1990 was just
one component of a rapidly growing “metanetwork” of remote comput-
ing and conferencing systems.19

By 1994, the term “internet” had escaped from the specialized vocab-
ulary of computer experts, and a more expansive, metaphorical meaning
had taken hold in the language of politicians, advertisers, and the popu-
lar press. At the start of the year, there were fewer than one thousand
sites on the public web, but cyberspace was already becoming a topic of
popular curiosity. America Online (AOL) had mailed out a quarter mil-
lion starter diskettes by the time President Bill Clinton namechecked the

“information superhighway” in his second State of the Union Address.20

Self-Reported Populations of Commercial

Online Services, 1995

America Online

3,800,000

CompuServe

3,540,000

Prodigy

1,720,000

Microsoft Network

200,000

Delphi

125,000
eWorld

115,000

GEnie

75,000

Mnematics Videotex

65,000

ImagiNation Network

62,000

Reuters Money Net

33,000

AT&T Interchange

25,000

Interactive Visual

25,000

Digital Nation

15,000

The WELL

12,000

Computer Sports World

10,200

Multiplayer Games Network

10,000

S

Source: Adapted from Jack Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” Boardwatch,

December 1995, 65.

N

7

8 rec alling the modem world

In July, the cover of Time magazine—stocked in grocery-store checkout
lanes across the country—promised readers an introduction to “the
strange new world of the internet.” 21 The “metanetwork” described by Quarterman was expanding rapidly to include bulletin boards, commercial online services, and public data networks.22 In this period of convergence, the TCP/IP internet served as a convenient go-between,
conveying packets across otherwise-rigid political and organizational
boundaries. The Economist dubbed it “that Grand Central of cyberspace,”

a transit station for the online world.23

With the World Wide Web as the primary interface, the internet of

1994 lost its sense of being a metanetwork or network-of-networks. Mouse
in hand, the web made the internet feel like one massive system. Every
digital thing was a click away from every other thing. By obscuring the
complex routing of packets behind a simple point-and-click interface, the
web dissolved the boundaries between networks on the internet. In early

1995, just weeks before the NSFNET backbone was retired, the ARPANET
veteran David Crocker attempted to resolve the conflict between the two
meanings of the “internet.” 24 According to Crocker, a person sending internet mail from behind a corporate firewall or posting on USENET
from an AOL account should be considered “on” the internet, even if their
machine was not. The internet wasn’t just a network; it was the network.

Today, the internet is no longer the object of fascination that it was
in 1995. There is no sense of there being a world of networks outside
the internet. All networks are assumed to be internet networks. For the
majority of Americans living with ubiquitous broadband, the internet is
not a particular network or networking technique but a context for social
activity.25 Every bit of communication, from mundane telephone calls and credit card payments to television series and breaking news, flows
through an internet connection. Furthermore, Americans believe that
the internet has had a positive effect on their lives and say that it would
be difficult to give up.26 The internet is how they keep in touch with family, read the news, seek health information, look for jobs, listen to music,
play games, flirt, pray, celebrate birthdays, and mourn the dead.

wher e did the int erne t c ome f rom ?

S

Since 2016, I’ve asked dozens of students to write down, in a sentence or

N
two, where the internet came from. Year after year, they recount the same

8
rec alling the modem world 9
stories about the US government, Silicon Valley, the military, and the
threat of nuclear war. They remember learning about the early internet
in another course or hearing about the “dot-com boom” in a documen-
tary film. A few mention the ARPANET by name. Several get the chro-
nology wrong, placing the World Wide Web before the internet or ex-
pressing confusion about the invention of email. Others mention “tech
wizards” or “geniuses” from Silicon Valley firms and university labs. No
fewer than four students have simply written, “Bill Gates.”

Despite the internet’s staggering scale and global reach, its folk his-
tories are surprisingly narrow. This mismatch is the result of the un-
stable meaning of “the internet.” The fragments of internet history that
filter into popular television and film, political discourse, and tech PR tell
the story of an internet that hasn’t existed since 1994. When nonexperts
look for internet origin stories, they want to know how the internet as
they know it came to be. But the internet of today was created through
the convergence of hundreds of networks during the mid-1990s, only
one of which was previously referred to as “the internet.”

The internet swept into US popular culture as a technology out of
time, simultaneously new and old.27 The same magazine articles and TV
news reports that described the internet as the revolutionary, generation-
defining medium of the 1990s made sure to remark on its origins in
the Cold War research labs of the 1960s. This tension between novelty
and history prompted a burst of historiography during the 1990s.28 As Americans took their first steps into cyberspace, bookstores were over-run with how-to guides and reference materials. Scholars, journalists,
and longtime users undertook tremendous historiographic labor to meet
the demand for information about the origins of the internet. By con-
vention, nearly all mass-market how-to books included brief histories
in their introductory chapters.29 Longtime internet advocates such as Ed Krol, author of The Whole Internet: User’s Guide & Catalog, framed their
microhistories as a bulwark against the ahistorical rush of the dot-com
boom: “To most people, the Internet seems to have sprung fully formed
on the world some time after 1990. That is not the case.”30

The historiographic frenzy of the 1990s centered on the family of
packet-switching networks descended from the ARPANET project. Early
narratives were collected and shared on USENET newsgroups like alt.

S
folklore.computers and alt.culture.internet. A 1993 essay by the science

N

9

10 rec alling the modem world
fiction author Bruce Sterling offers a characteristic example. Transcribed
from The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, the piece opened with a
dramatization of the internet’s military origins: “Some thirty years ago,
the RAND Corporation, America’s foremost Cold War think-tank, faced
a strange strategic problem. How could the U.S. authorities successfully
communicate after a nuclear war?” 31 For more than a decade, the essay circulated across various BBS networks, USENET newsgroups, FTP
sites, and the web under the title “A Short History of the Internet.”32

The Cold War “survivability” narrative has been the best-known
story in internet history since the 1990s. Yet the focus on military strat-
egy rankled some of those who were involved in the early internet. In

1996, Where Wizards Stay Up Late, by the journalists Katie Hafner and

Matthew Lyon, gave voice to former ARPANET engineers who felt mis-
understood.33 Drawing on extensive interviews, Wizards directly challenged the Cold War mythology.34 In its place, Wizards offered a cast of brilliant oddballs far removed from the deadly considerations of their
funders. 35 From this perspective, any regard for the potential military use of the network was a bureaucratic formality, required for the continuation of ARPA funding but not a meaningful influence on the research.36

Despite these disagreements, the best-selling Wizards—subtitled The

Origins of the Internet—did little to dislodge ARPANET as the narrative
core of internet history. 37

In 1999, the historian Janet Abbate published Inventing the Internet,
tracing the continuous reinvention of packet-switching networks from
the experimental ARPANET to the internetworks of the 1980s and con-
sumer services of the 1990s.38 In an overt response to the historiographic explosion of the previous decade, Inventing the Internet focused on the organizational cultures and political-economic forces that shaped network-
ing projects like ARPANET.39 This approach revealed a complex period characterized by competing visions of the future, international competition over standards, and the simultaneous invention of fundamental
techniques. While ARPANET flourished, contemporary networks in

France and the United Kingdom floundered due to a lack of institutional
support.40 And, whereas earlier histories tended to dismiss the formal processes of standardization as dull and bureaucratic, Inventing the InterS
net suggested that useful research may have been swept aside in the rush

N
to establish TCP/IP as a de facto standard. Whether the computer sci-

10
rec alling the modem world 11
ence researchers working on ARPANET day to day could see it or not,
their internet was produced by and for a diverse range of stakeholders,
many of whom stood to benefit strategically and financially if the net-
work developed along certain paths.

From informal essays to mass-market paperbacks to scholarly mono-
graphs, the writers and historians of the 1990s produced a common set
of stories about the origins of the internet. After decades of repetition,
the sociologist Tom Streeter dubbed these narratives the “standard folk-
lore” of the internet.41 When I ask my students where the internet came from, many of them know the standard folklore. And yet these histories
were written at a moment when the internet itself was undergoing a
transformation, swallowing up commercial online services and univer-
sity networks, mutating into something bigger, more commercial, and
more accessible to the nonexpert. The internet of 1999 was a different
system—in culture, technology, economics, and policy—from the inter-
net of 1992. Why hasn’t the standard folklore kept up?

It is worth noting that referring to the historiography of the 1990s
as “folklore” or “mythology” is not meant to discredit the people, insti-
tutions, or technologies involved. The veracity of these histories is not
in question. Rather, mythologies provide us with an explanation of how
the online world came to be the way it is. The trouble is that histories of

ARPANET or Silicon Valley on their own cannot account for the mass
adoption of internet access, the commercialization of the web, or the
emergence of social media. The standard folklore can tell us why our
smartphones run TCP/IP, but it can’t tell us why we carry them. The
histories we know aren’t wrong. They are incomplete.

what wa s the “ mod em wor l d ” ?

Personal computers, or PCs, are virtually absent from the standard
folklore of the internet. ARPANET predated consumer PCs by nearly a
decade. The internet protocols were not designed for single-user PCs.

Microsoft did not release an official version of TCP/IP until 1994.42 Yet most people have experienced the internet through a personal computing device such as a laptop or smartphone. To understand how the inter-
net became a medium for everyday life, we need a history that accounts
for the creation of personal computer networks and their convergence

S
with the internet.

N

11

12 rec alling the modem world

At the core of such a history will be a rather strange peripheral: the
dial-up modem. In the 1980s, “modem” referred to a device for convert-
ing a stream of digital pulses from a computer into an audible signal for
transmission over a standard telephone line.43 Personal computers did not include a modem by default until the mid-1990s. As a result, the modem became a technology of distinction among computer enthusiasts of
the 1980s. Modem owners knew themselves as a separate class of com-
puter users, capable of traversing the emerging byways of cyberspace.

The networks that they frequented came to be known, collectively, as the

“modem world.”44

The modem world relied on the diffusion of the personal computer
as a cultural form and economic category. For most of the twentieth cen-
tury, computers were not seen as personal devices for individual people
to use. In popular culture, computers were depicted as massive “elec-
tronic brains” responsible for the automation of society.45 In films ranging from Desk Set in 1957 to 2001: A Space Odyssey in 1968, computers
represented the domination and de-skilling of human beings. These rep-
resentations reflected the prevalence of “mainframe” computers sold by
firms like IBM to large corporations and state agencies. Although main-
frames were hidden in the basements of large buildings and accessible
only to specialized staff, everyone felt their presence in the rising quan-
tification of daily life. Interest rates, income taxes, credit ratings, and
draft cards were all linked to the “computerization” of society.46 Yet, in the 1980s, small-scale PCs offered a new model of computing. Instead of
an electronic brain to power a whole organization, firms like Apple and

Microsoft marketed the PC as a single-user device. No longer displacing
human beings, the personal computer was sold as a tool to empower
individuals, foster creativity, and increase productivity.

Historians of technology trace the transition from mainframes to
personal computers through two overlapping technical cultures of the

1960s and 1970s, time-sharing and hobby computing. Time-sharing be-
gan in the early 1960s as a modification of the mainframe paradigm
by university researchers.47 The name referred to a clever programming technique that distributed a single computer’s processing power among
a network of attached terminals, giving multiple users the illusion of

S
exclusive access to the computer’s resources.48 Early advocates of timeN

12
rec alling the modem world 13
sharing promoted a vision of computing as a public utility comparable
to residential electricity.49 In the future, they reasoned, a single computer might offer enough computing “power” for a whole community.

Time-sharing proved especially successful in educational settings.

In hundreds of university computer labs and K–12 classrooms, time-
sharing enabled the flourishing of creative, cooperative cultures of com-
puting. At Dartmouth University, the BASIC programming language
offered an accessible point of entry for beginners, and at the University
of Illinois, the PLATO system provided interactive games, educational
software, forums, and chat rooms.50 The experience of time-sharing combined an invigorating feeling of individual control with a sense of
collective obligation to one’s fellow users. The historian Joy Lisi Rankin
describes the participants in these time-sharing communities as “com-
puting citizens.”51 By the start of the 1980s, hundreds of thousands of students had become citizens of a time-sharing community.

As time-sharing systems flourished in the 1970s, electronics hobby-
ists began to experiment with building computers of their own. Steeped
in the technical culture of amateur radio, hobbyists valued hands-on
learning, practical expertise, and fellowship among amateurs.52 Mail-order “microcomputer” kits like the MITS Altair 8800 in 1975 presented
hobbyists with a new challenge to their do-it-yourself (DIY) skills.53 Soon groups of microcomputer enthusiasts formed clubs, published newsletters, shared programs by mail, and added computers to their ham ra-
dio stations.54 Equipped with a BASIC interpreter, microcomputer owners benefited from the deep catalog of fun, accessible software created
for time-sharing systems.

By the end of the 1980s, hobby computing no longer required pro-
ficiency with a soldering iron. Kit computers like the Altair gave way to
prebuilt “home computer” products like the Radio Shack TRS-80 and

Commodore PET. The burgeoning personal computer industry drew on
its hobbyist roots for talent and countercultural bona fides. Yet, despite
brisk sales, “micros” were not seen as competitors to mainframes or
minicomputers until spreadsheet programs like VisiCalc began to drive
interest among business users. In 1981, IBM introduced its own PC,
lending further credibility among corporate decision-makers. Within a
few years, “IBM-compatible” had become a de facto industry standard,

S

N

13

14 rec alling the modem world
drawing many hobbyists away from earlier platforms.55 By the end of the decade, the popular image of the computer was no longer an imposing
mainframe but an approachable desktop PC.

The modem world developed at the crossroads of these two cultures.

Hosted on home-built micros and off-the-shelf PCs, the first bulletin
board systems combined the cooperative sensibility of time-sharing with
the accessible infrastructure of microcomputing. Whereas time-sharing
computers were typically owned by an institution, most BBSs were run
out of the homes of amateurs who maintained their systems through
tinkering and experimentation. Crucially, bulletin boards served a differ-
ent population from contemporary time-sharing systems. The earliest

BBSs were populated by microcomputer enthusiasts, trading technical
information and chatting about their hobby. Later, however, BBSs linked
a more diverse group of PC owners, covering a wider range of interests
and identities beyond the tech hobbyist. Time-sharing demonstrated the
potential for community to form around a computer network. Dial-up

BBSs made it accessible to the peripheries of computer culture.

BBSs emerged during the famously snowy winter of 1978, when

Ward Christensen and Randy Suess created the Computerized Bulletin

Board System, or CBBS, using a home-built S-100 microcomputer and
a brand-new Hayes modem. Christensen and Suess were members of a
local microcomputer club, known as the Chicago Area Computer Hob-
byist’s Exchange, or CACHE. The club’s newsletter was a vital source of
information; but club members had to be cajoled to submit new articles,
and there was no easy way to provide access to earlier issues. Inspired by
a cork bulletin board used for public notices at CACHE meetings, Chris-
tensen and Suess set about building an online database of newsletter
articles. 56 They installed the system at Suess’s place and had it running by early February. Almost immediately, hobbyists from outside Chicago
began to call in to check out the system and swap messages with one
another, transforming the “computerized” bulletin board into a public
forum. Within a few months, CBBS was fielding dozens of calls from
around the country, and new bulletin boards had sprouted up in Atlanta
and San Francisco.57

CBBS was the archetypal dial-up BBS. It was a clever technical sys-

S
tem with an accessible interface and friendly personality. The CBBS

N

“host” computer was hooked up to a single telephone line and could

14
rec alling the modem world 15
handle just one user at a time. To get online, potential users needed a
telephone modem and some kind of data terminal. Early on, most people
called in from paper-based teleprinters, but these were soon replaced
by video displays and “terminal emulation” software. Upon successfully
connecting to CBBS, one’s terminal would spring to life, hammering
out, “welcome to cbbs/chicago . . . ward and randy’s computerized
bulletin board system.”58 The welcome message also included instruc-
tions on navigating the system and encouraged new users to call Chris-
tensen or Suess at home to report any problems with the hardware or
software. They were told to jump right in: “Feel free to leave a message
on any hobbyist computer related subject.”59

The functional simplicity of CBBS belied its power as an organizing
tool for the hobbyist community. In November 1978, Byte magazine ran a
special issue on communications featuring an article by Christensen and

Suess that explained the technical architecture of CBBS and invited read-
ers to take the system for a spin.60 Thousands of readers took up their invitation, and soon new bulletin boards were being announced around

North America and Europe. Each new BBS tweaked the core concept of
the computerized bulletin board, adding features for trading files or play-
ing games, implementing rules regarding user behavior, and expressing
the local culture and personality of its owners. Most were free to use,
save for the cost of placing a long-distance call. BBS enthusiasts ran their
phone bills into the hundreds of dollars just to experience these novel
outposts on the electronic frontier.

Hobbyists weren’t the only ones building online systems. In 1979,
two new commercial online services launched with the hope of attract-
ing PC owners.61 By the end of the year, The Source, based in Northern Virginia, boasted three thousand customers dialing from 260 US cities.

Subscribers paid an hourly rate of $15 during the day and $2.75 at night
for access to international news, stock market data, real estate listings,
and restaurant reviews. Meanwhile, the time-sharing firm CompuServe

Inc. created MicroNET, an online service aimed at personal computer
enthusiasts. Whereas The Source emphasized access to information,

MicroNET promised access to computing power. From 6 p.m. to 5 a.m.,

MicroNET subscribers paid $5 per hour to write and run programs on
mainframe computers attached to the CompuServe network.62 Yet it S
was neither information nor access to computers that kept subscribers

N

15

16 rec alling the modem world
paying the hourly fees. CompuServe and The Source became important
community spaces for early modem owners. The discussion forums,
software archives, and “CB simulator” chat channels on these systems
served as a kind of informal backbone to the emerging network of
local BBSs.

The summer of 1983 brought about the rise of a new stereotype:

the tech-savvy teen. In movie theaters, the Cold War thriller WarGames
showed its two young protagonists using a modem and microcom-
puter to change their grades, download games, and (almost) start World

War III. It was the first time that Hollywood had depicted computers
and computer networks as tools of exploration, play, personal identity,
and teen mischief.63 Over the next year, BBSs and commercial services alike saw a surge in new users as teens attached modems to their home
computers. But what did the middle-aged hobbyists and teen newcomers
have to say to each other? And what teenager could afford to pay for the
commercial services? Soon, modem-equipped teens were hosting bul-
letin boards of their own, adapting the technology to meet their interests
and needs.

Unlike the nationwide commercial services, bulletin board systems
tended to serve a local population of users since few hobbyists could
afford to routinely call long-distance.64 System operators were keenly aware of the local nature of BBS culture. In a sense, sysops were inviting
strangers into their homes. With the host computer sitting on a nearby
desk or in a closet, they could hear the whirr of the hard drive and see the
flickering lights of the modem as callers dipped in and out. Most boards
encouraged the use of pseudonyms or “handles,” but relationships be-
tween users and sysops frequently crossed the boundary between on- and
offline. Many sysops hosted parties at their homes or a favorite watering
hole where users of their BBS could hang out. These opportunities for
face-to-face interaction shaped the social norms of the BBS. Trolling and
flame wars took on a different character when the person on the other
side could be your neighbor, classmate, coworker, or friend.

Through the 1980s, the distribution of BBSs roughly followed the
distribution of people. Modem owners living in densely settled cities had
a broader choice of local BBSs to call than people living in smaller towns

S
did. In metropolitan areas, the concentration of boards encouraged

N
sysops to specialize, resulting in BBSs that served particular groups of

16

Approximate number of BBSs per ten thousand people in regions served by the North American Numbering Plan (median = 3.16). Estimates based on 106,288 telephone
numbers associated with a BBS between 1978 and 2010, including at least one BBS in

S
each of the 158 area codes in service prior to 1996.

N

17

18 rec alling the modem world
people and communities of interest within the city. People who wanted
to talk about amateur astronomy found their way to one board; people
who wanted to trade pirated software found another. Those who were
interested in both topics could create separate profiles on each board,
thereby selecting, revealing, and disclosing different aspects of their on-
line identities. No such luck for rural users: if you were the only amateur
astronomer in your area, there might not be anyone on the local boards
for you to chat with.

To bring users from different regions together, bulletin board sys-
tem operators needed a way for users of one board to communicate with
users of another without placing a long-distance call. In the early twenti-
eth century, amateur radio operators solved this problem by organizing
a network of cooperating stations to voluntarily “relay” messages around
the country.65 The ARPANET email system relied on a similar “store-and-forward” technique to transmit data between machines in the net-
work, albeit without the need for human operators in the middle.66 Other
institutional networks used the Unix-to-Unix Copy (UUCP) protocol to
transmit messages between time-sharing systems.67 But as with CBBS,
it was a fellow amateur who finally started writing code and organizing
intercity links to transmit messages and files between BBSs.68

The first inter-BBS connections radiated out of the Bay Area home of

Tom Jennings in early 1984. Previously, Jennings, a microcomputer ex-
pert, dog lover, and self-described “weirdo fag punk,” had released a BBS
host program known as “Fido” for the IBM PC platform.69 By the sum-
mer, a dozen or so BBSs were running Fido, and Jennings kept in touch
with their sysops via telephone. With the help of John Madill, a sysop
in Baltimore, Jennings added an experimental feature that allowed two

BBSs running Fido software to call each other and trade data automati-
cally. After a year in operation, more than a hundred BBSs were active
on the network, and “FidoNet” became an open standard for exchanging
files and messages between BBSs. By the end of 1985, “netmail” mes-
sages were bouncing from Maryland to St. Louis, Texas to Hawaii, En-
gland to Indonesia. With its open standards and clever design, FidoNet
became a platform for experimentation. A group of sysops in St. Louis
created a hierarchy to more efficiently route messages across long dis-

S
tances, and internetwork gateways ferried mail between BBSs and the

N
burgeoning internet. By the start of the 1990s, the international FidoNet

18
rec alling the modem world 19
was unmatched among computer networks for its low barriers to entry
and global reach.

The social and technical environment of the dial-up BBS gave rise
to new forms of computational art and literature. The primacy of text
rewarded users who took pleasure in written communication. Many sys-
ops provided space for collections of plain-text documents, or “textfiles.”

While some were simply transcriptions of hard-to-find print material,
the textfiles phenomenon developed into a distinct genre of electronic
publishing akin to DIY fanzines and underground comics. As early as

1983, groups of textfile authors banded together into writing collectives,
producing hundreds of collaborative files and “e-zines.”70

Digital text also shaped the visual culture of BBSing.71 To ensure compatibility with teleprinter terminals, early BBS interfaces were constructed from the limited set of symbols available on the typical type-
writer. By the mid-1980s, however, the widespread adoption of IBM-
compatible “clone” PCs provided a common medium for “textmode”

artists—80 columns, 16 colors, and 256 characters. Soon, BBS interfaces
and textfiles were adorned with wildly colorful “ANSI art” graphics. ANSI
art collectives such as ACiD and iCE began to circulate “artpacks” along-
side existing textfile groups.72 These high-resolution text-mode graphics also enabled the production of BBS “door” games. Installed as extensions by the BBS sysop, door games ranged from simple casino simula-
tors to complex strategy games and multiplayer virtual worlds.73

As the 1980s wore on, personal computers became more acces-
sible, modem prices fell, and BBSs spread beyond techies to groups
of people with a practical need for alternative communication media.

Bulletin boards for queer communities, fan cultures, and political ac-
tivism were especially vibrant spaces for socializing, organizing, and
sharing resources. In 1984, Arthur Kohn opened the Backroom, which
led to the formation of GayCom, a network of BBSs for gay and lesbian
people.74 Political organizers in the United States and United Kingdom formed EcoNet, GreenNet, and PeaceNet for the peace and environmen-talist movements.75 And in 1985, The WELL—perhaps the best-known

BBS—provided virtual space for members of the Bay Area counter-
culture, including hundreds of Grateful Dead fanatics.76 Of course, the political potential of BBS technology was not lost on white power

S
groups, militias, anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists, and other far-right

N

19

20 rec alling the modem world

Legend of the Red Dragon, or LoRD, was a multiplayer fantasy role-playing game written in Turbo Pascal by Seth Able Robinson in 1989. Robinson hoped that LoRD would attract more callers to his BBS, and the mechanics of the game rewarded players who
frequently dialed in. Each day, players were allowed a limited number of actions—
exploring, trading, dueling, hunting, and hanging out in the tavern—and each night,
this allotment was reset. As LoRD grew in popularity, Robinson encouraged enthusiasts to enhance and modify the game, enabling sysops to adapt LoRD’s mechanics and
aesthetics to the local culture of their boards.

extremists.77 Some of the earliest coverage of BBSs on US TV news focused on the adoption of BBSs by neo-Nazi groups in the United States
and Canada.

We will never know exactly how many BBSs there were or precisely
how many people used them. The data that exist are messy and hard
to interpret. But even a rough estimate reveals that the scale of these
amateur networks outstripped many better-known commercial services.

In cities and towns across North America, more than one hundred thou-
sand bulletin boards served at least two and a half million callers.78 And the geography of BBSing extended far beyond tech hubs like Silicon Valley or Northern Virginia. From Alaska to Bermuda, Puerto Rico to Sas-

S
katchewan, every telephone area code in the North American Number-

N
ing Plan played host to at least one dial-up BBS.79 The roots of today’s 20
rec alling the modem world 21
social media are in in the interconnection of these local communities
and small-scale networks.

The demographics of BBS users appears to have tracked with the
broader adoption of personal computers in the United States, skewing
in favor of white men. Between 1989 and 1993, the US Census Bureau
asked American computer owners about their use of bulletin boards and
electronic mail. Although the survey did not distinguish commercial ser-
vices from BBSs or university networks, it remains one of the few com-
prehensive accounts of the early online population. In 1989, the bureau
reported that approximately 5–7 percent of all computer owners used
bulletin boards and electronic mail. While there was little variation by
age and income, single, white men were nearly twice as likely as other
groups to report using bulletin boards. In the early 1990s, a jump in
computer ownership brought more Americans into the modem world.

In 1993, the bureau found that Black and white computer owners used
bulletin boards in roughly equal measure, nearly 9 percent, and that
email usage had jumped to approximately 32 percent. Black users were
somewhat more likely to use email than other groups were. Yet women
were still underrepresented online. Nearly twice as many men reported
using bulletin boards as women, a disparity reflected in women’s first-
hand experiences of the period.80

In 1991, when future vice president Al Gore described the “infor-
mation superhighway,” many longtime computer users imagined a

S

Trend in North American BBS activity, 1978–2002. Annual estimates based on archived

BBS lists and retrospective self-reporting.

N

21

2 2 rec alling the modem world
souped-up network of BBSs. At the time, only about a fifth of Ameri-
cans had access to a computer at home, and even fewer knew how to
get online.81 As people struggled to make sense of cyberspace, many BBS enthusiasts saw an opportunity to convert their technical hobby
into a source of income. How-to books and trade shows promised to
teach sysops how to turn their BBSs into businesses. In the summer of

1994, a BBS convention in Atlanta, Georgia, drew four thousand attend-
ees—double the previous year—prompting the InfoWorld columnist Bob

Metcalfe to declare an imminent “explosion” of BBSs on the internet.82

Around the country, BBSs promoted themselves as a local, friendly alter-
native to nationwide systems like CompuServe, Prodigy, or AOL. They
would be the on-ramps, rest stops, and service stations on the informa-
tion superhighway.

But the process of privatization was messy. Lacking any central au-
thority or advocacy organization, the BBS community had no voice in
the roiling debates about the future of the internet.83 As commercial service providers tussled with the administrators of university networks, the
interests of BBS users and sysops were hardly considered at all. Com-
pounding the lack of representation, longtime internet advocates were
generally unfamiliar with the technology and culture of dial-up networks.

Packet-switching systems like NSFNET ran on a fundamentally different
infrastructure from consumer-oriented BBS networks, and relatively few
people were expert users of both.84 By and large, BBSs were not ignored by institutions of power so much as they were overlooked. Finally, when
a moral panic over “cyberporn” threatened to burst the dot-com bubble
in 1995, BBSs provided a convenient scapegoat.85 BBSs were old and dirty; the internet and the web were new, clean, and safe for commerce.

Facing this stigma, many enterprising BBS operators quietly rebranded.

Seemingly overnight, thousands of dial-up BBSs vanished, replaced by
brand-new “internet service providers.” In the United States, the term

“BBS” fell out of use. In 1997, the Bureau of the Census dropped the
term “bulletin board” from its questionnaire, replacing it with “internet.”

The BBS movement was short-lived, but its influence persisted. From
running local ISPs to establishing new communities on the web, former

BBS users and sysops played key roles in shaping the public internet. So

S
who were they? On average, the demographics of the modem world fit

N
the stereotype of the 1980s computer geek: young, white, middle-class

22
rec alling the modem world 23

Comparative growth of selected online services, 1979 to 2015. Estimates based on
self-reported data published by the trade press or disclosed in annual reports sub-
mitted to the US Securities and Exchange Commission. All estimates are assumed to
be international in scope except for Minitel, which was exclusive to residents of France.

Minitel remained in service until 2012, but usage statistics were only published through 1993. America Online acquired CompuServe in 1998. Facebook population estimates
are inferred from the “monthly active users” metric.

men and boys. At the peak of the BBS era, many BBSs were used exclu-
sively by men. Even overtly queer BBSs tended to serve primarily gay
men.86 Yet the decentralized structure of the modem world facilitated considerable variation from system to system. The organizers of individual BBSs and BBS networks freely adapted BBS technology to serve
different communities of computer owners. In New York City, ECHO
sysop Stacy Horn cultivated a community with a majority of women;
other BBSs such as The Oak Tree in Colorado and 10% Connection in

Chicago sought to create women-only spaces; and the member boards of

TGnet were dedicated to transgender identity, health, and culture.87 Likewise, AfroNet connected more than two dozen BBSs for wide-ranging
discussions of Black interest.88 On balance, Black American households were less likely than whites to own a computer in the early 1990s, but

Black computer owners reported similar rates of BBS use.

Making sense of this prehistory requires us to confront contradic-
tions in scale, moving between individual users’ firsthand experiences
and the aggregate characteristics of a widespread grassroots movement.

Dial-up BBSs both were overwhelmingly populated by middle-class white
boys and, at the same time, provided vital counterpublic spaces for com-

S
puter owners excluded from other media systems. Reckoning with the

N

23

2 4 rec alling the modem world
conflict between these two aspects of the modem world is fundamental
to understanding the failures of social media in the platform era and es-
sential to imagining the worlds that will come after.

how d o we k n ow what we k n ow ?

The stereotype of digital media is that they are sterile and precise. It costs
nothing to make a copy of this book and email it to a friend. This faith
in the immateriality of digital media is evident in the metaphor of “the
cloud.”89 Each time we store a vital bit of personal data in the cloud, we indulge in the fantasy that there is no cost—human or environmental—
to building and maintaining a global network of data centers. In the

1980s and 1990s, however, computer networks were tangible things,
made of copper wires and whirring disk drives. Their materiality was
impossible to ignore.

At the outset of the modem world, computer-mediated communica-
tion functioned more like broadcast media than software.90 Ephemerality was embedded in its architecture. Just as many TV studios routinely
erased their old tapes to make space for new recordings, many BBS
programs erased old posts to make space for new messages. BBS users
understood that there was no guaranteed future for their online activi-
ties. Bulletin board systems were never crawled by Google or captured
by the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine. There were no search en-
gines, portals, or digital directories to consult. When a BBS went offline,
it vanished from cyberspace, taking all of the files and messages created
by users along with it. Data storage was expensive. Most sysops either
could not afford or did not think it was necessary to create backup copies
of their systems. Often, the best way to record the visual culture of a BBS
involved pointing a camera at the computer and making a literal “screen
shot.” Home videos occasionally turn up on YouTube.

Further complicating the material history of the modem world is
that it was decentralized in its administration as well as its technical de-
sign. Each BBS functioned independently, and individual user accounts
were not linked from one BBS to the next. Even relatively large BBS as-
sociations such as FidoNet, which kept records out of technical necessity,
represented a small subset of the overall BBS world. Enthusiasts pub-

S
lished hundreds of reference guides and BBS lists, organized by region

N
and theme, but there was no single, central authority keeping track of

24
rec alling the modem world 25
the overall network.91 While state-sponsored contemporaries like Minitel and NSFNET kept central records for the purposes of accounting,

BBS operators were not bound by any record-keeping mandate: there
were no annual reports to be filed, no grants to be renewed, no stock-
holder notices or conference proceedings. Privately held commercial
services like CompuServe and The Source surely kept records of their
subscribers, but these data are not available to the general public. With
the exception of the US Census, a handful of academic papers, and a few
market-research reports, there were no representative surveys of the on-
line population published during the 1980s and 1990s.92 In the place of formal documentation, there are notes meant for contemporary readers,
such as FAQs and README files. The stories of people and their com-
munities lie in the margins of these gray literatures.

Today, the material record of the modem world remains scattered
and messy, but it is stubbornly growing. Traces persist in shoeboxes of
floppy disks, stacks of waterlogged magazines, deaccessioned library
books, unmarked VHS tapes, and pirated software. Although they have
not been systematically collected by libraries, museums, or other archi-
val institutions, they survive at ham radio swap meets, in eBay auctions,
and in the closets of former users. Over the past twenty years, a loose
network of self-archiving “retrocomputing” hobbyists have made their
personal collections accessible on the public web. Any effort to write
histories of the BBS era depends on the expertise, labor, and material
resources of this enthusiast community.93 In the absence of institutional support, hobbyists pay hosting fees out of pocket, scan and upload images from magazines and catalogs, and learn specialized forensic tech-
niques to recover data from aging floppy disks.

The single most important resource for modem world research
is textfiles.com, a digital archive that has been maintained by the self-described “rogue archivist” Jason Scott since 1998.94 Textfiles.com began with Scott’s personal collection and grew to include a range of newsletters, technical documents, computer programs, and other ephemera of

1980s BBS culture.95 Today, the site hosts over fifty thousand files, including more than eleven thousand homespun periodicals or e-zines.96

In addition to textfiles.com, Scott also directed BBS: The Documentary, an eight-episode documentary series about BBS technology and culture.

S

From 2001 to 2005, Scott documented the production process on a blog

N

25

26 rec alling the modem world
and in periodic posts on forums like Slashdot. This unusually transparent
approach served as an explicit invitation for former BBS enthusiasts to
reach out and share their memories. Rather than present a personal
memoir, Scott aimed to represent the plurality of the BBSing move-
ment, from for-profit commercial platforms to small-scale hobby BBSs.97

Consistent with the spirit of the original project, Scott has since posted
over two hundred hours of unedited interview footage to the Internet Ar-
chive.98 These interviews are the principal source of oral histories related to the modem world.

Beyond “born digital” sources such as the textfiles.com collection, print media have also been crucial vessels for the preservation of BBS
history. Between 1983 and 1998, the tech press produced a handful of
how-to books and technical manuals about BBSs and PC communica-
tions. Although these books tended to focus on technical implementa-
tion, the authors often included firsthand observations about the experi-
ence of using a BBS. From the late 1970s, computer hobbyist magazines
such as Byte, trade periodicals like InfoWorld, and special-interest TV
programs like Computer Chronicles regularly covered PC networks. The
late 1980s saw the emergence of several magazines specifically for BBS
users, including Boardwatch, BBS Callers Digest, and Sysop News . . . and CyberWorld Report. For readers without access to a local user group, computer magazines served as vital gateways into the growing community
of computer enthusiasts. Through reader letters and classified ads, these
magazines featured the voices of newbies and nonexperts alongside in-
dustry professionals and longtime hackers.99

In addition to these archival and methodological challenges, anyone
handling the material history of BBS culture will eventually confront dif-
ficult ethical questions.100 BBS communities thrived in relative obscurity.

With good reason, users behaved as though they were hanging out in a
private club. The feelings of security and anonymity offered by BBS net-
works facilitated their adoption by marginalized groups of people. As the
inheritors of this culture, we have a moral obligation to understand and
preserve these historical circumstances whenever possible. Throughout
this book, I have sought to balance a desire to identify and celebrate the
contributions of individual BBS participants with a respect for the origi-

S
nal contexts in which they lived.

N

26
rec alling the modem world 27

The informal archives of BBS history combine memoir and materi-
ality in equal measure. The scanned pages of a magazine contain hand-
written notes and a shipping address. A BBS advertisement is stowed
away in a ripped CD-ROM of 1990s shareware. Telephone numbers ap-
pear on the title screen of a pirated PC game. These bits of digital margi-
nalia remind us that these are histories of technology-in-use. These sur-
viving data were not made to last. They were smuggled into the future.

wh y n o t an o ther int erne t ?

Before social media, the dot-com boom, and “10 free hours” on America

Online, dial-up bulletin board systems provided an accessible platform
for computer owners to meet one another, share resources, and make
community. The history of this modem world offers a new explanation
for how the internet became social, a complement to histories focused
on the US military, academic research, or Silicon Valley. Building on a
long tradition of amateur media, the hobbyist groups that built dial-up

BBSs in the 1970s transformed the idea of the computer network from a
tool of work into a space for communication, culture, and play. Through
the creative appropriation of the North American telephone network,

BBSs of the 1980s provided a low-cost alternative to commercial packet-
switching systems and closed research networks. Rather than reliability
or profit, the design of BBS networks reflected the social needs of human
communities. By the end of the decade, thousands of people and organi-
zations that had been excluded from other media systems were running

BBSs in cities and towns throughout North America. From music fan-
dom and fantasy gaming to queer activism and political advocacy, these
communities developed norms and practices that continue to shape the
social media systems we rely on today.

Bulletin board systems were cheap, interoperable, and explicitly so-
cial—everything that their institutional contemporaries were not. They
proliferated in cities and towns far from conventional centers of tech
power, such as Silicon Valley or the Route 128 corridor. They were hosted
on PCs that sat on kitchen tables, on workbenches, and in the spare
closets of homes and offices of dedicated volunteers. And BBSs were
accessed by a more diverse population of people living under a wider va-
riety of socioeconomic conditions than the comparatively homogeneous

S

N

27

28 rec alling the modem world
research networks were. As the characteristic problems of online com-
munity—sustainability, privacy, governance, and free speech—inevita-
bly arose, the plurality of the BBS ecology afforded more opportunities
for experimentation and democratic participation than would have been
possible in a less diverse environment.

For early modem users, cyberspace was first and foremost a local

BBS. Embracing this grassroots origin story should change how we en-
gage with social media systems today. The concentration of power in
a handful of platforms and providers is a departure from the longer
tradition of decentralized networking, local ownership, translocal coop-
eration, and mutual accountability. To imagine a better future for the
internet, a future that comes after social media, we need a more robust
account of internet history, one that includes the abandoned prototypes
and paths not taken of a more experimental era. What cultural, techni-
cal, and regulatory conditions enabled the flourishing of BBSs? How did
potential users learn about the modem world? Who was welcomed to
participate and who was excluded? How did longtime BBS users respond
to the dot-com boom of the 1990s? What social practices and technical
innovations carried over to the participatory web? Why do so many his-
tories overlook the BBS phenomenon? How might the memory of yes-
terday’s BBS embolden us to demand justice for tomorrow’s internet?

S

N

28
chapter two

Computerizing Hobby Radio
on january 12, 1978, snow began to fall across the midwestern

United States, and within a few days, more than a foot blanketed the
region. Power lines were downed, freight trains derailed, and hundreds
of cars stranded alongside treacherous roadways.1 The brutal storm clobbered cities and towns from Michigan to Massachusetts for more
than five days, leaving thousands of people stuck inside with unplowed
streets and unreliable power.2 On the morning of Monday, January 16, Ward Christensen and Randy Suess were among those Chicagoans facing another day out of work. Feeling restless, Christensen phoned his
friend and suggested that the two begin building a “computerized bul-
letin board system” for their computer club, the Chicago Area Computer

Hobbyist’s Exchange (CACHE). Christensen had been toying with the
idea for a while, and now, with little but shoveling to distract them, the
two men set to work.3 By the end of the day, they had settled on a rough design, and after a few weeks of assembling, soldering, programming,
and testing the system in their spare time, the two were ready to pre-
sent “CBBS” to the rest of the club’s members. By February 16, 1978, the
first homegrown dial-up bulletin board system was up and running in

Suess’s basement, waiting to accept a call from anyone with a computer
terminal and a modem.

S

N

29

29

30 compu terizing hob by r adio

True to its name, the Computerized Bulletin Board System worked
like a cross between a telephone answering machine and cork-and-pins
community bulletin board. Accessing the system required a terminal,
modem, and phone line—a tall order for all but the hardcore hobbyist
in 1978. Lacking computers of their own, the earliest users relied on
teleprinters such as the Teletype Model ASR-33.4 To establish a connection using such a terminal, a user held the telephone handset to their
ear, manually dialed 312-528-7141, and waited for the machine in Randy

Suess’s basement to answer. Upon hearing CBBS respond with a tone,
the user placed the handset on a special cradle and pressed the termi-
nal’s “carriage return” key a few times. If this arcane rite was performed
successfully, it brought their printer to life, and the clacking machine
would begin to bang out a message:

*** welcome to cbbs/chicago ***

*** ward and randy’s computerized bulletin board system ***

As you might imagine, this system was hardly foolproof. A noisy line,
quirky modem, or bug in the software could break the connection. Chris-
tensen and Suess routinely updated the system on the basis of feedback
from their users, but the nascent modem world was as unpredictable as
it was exciting.5 With a virtual shrug, Christensen and Suess made no guarantees, advising would-be users, “Feel free to hang up and try sev-
eral times if you have problems.”6

The design of CBBS reflected the state of the art for DIY micro-
computer technology.7 Christensen mocked up the system software in

BASIC and rewrote it in 8080 assembler language, and Suess custom-
built the hardware using an S-100 motherboard that he bought at “some
flea market.”8 The machine connected to the phone line using a brand-new modem from D. C. Hayes Associates, the first computer modem
built by and for hobbyists.9 Unlike most modems available at the time, the Hayes modem was programmable. Taking advantage of these hack-able features, Christensen and Suess rigged up a clever mechanism to
detect incoming calls and “cold boot” the system directly into the CBBS
software, which would wake up the modem and answer the call. When
the caller disconnected, the system shut itself down completely—a crude

S
but effective way to recover if a user dropped the line without logging off.

N

30

Ad for the 80-103A modem, the first product from D. C. Hayes Associates, Inc. Aimed
at the burgeoning hobbyist market, the Hayes modem enabled microcomputers to
exchange data over the telephone network using the Bell 103 protocol from AT&T. In
addition to the modem’s ability to access time-sharing systems, its manual suggested
a range of applications including telecommuting, multiplayer gaming, electronic mail,
home and office automation, and running an online database. The circuit board was
designed to fit into the S-100 expansion bus used by popular microcomputers such as
the Altair 8800 and IMSAI 8080. ( Byte, November 1978)

S

N

31

32 compu terizing hob by r adio

In addition to Christensen and Suess sharing news of their creation
with the members of CACHE and the makers of the Hayes modem,

Christensen mailed announcements to Dr. Dobb’s Journal of Computer

Calisthenics & Orthodontia and Byte, magazines reaching over one hundred thousand hobbyists throughout North America and Europe.10 The
editors of Dr. Dobb’s simply printed the original text of Christensen’s let-
ter, complete with a note that anyone having trouble with the system
should give him a call at home.11 The editors of Byte, meanwhile, published a short commentary about CBBS under the title “What Might Be

Called CACHE’s On Line Graffitti [ sic].” In addition to a brief description
of the system’s architecture, they provided step-by-step instructions for
dialing in and joked that readers should be prepared for a busy signal
because of “all the other people reading this notice” who would be trying
to log in at the same time. At the end of the piece, they included a partial
log of their session on CBBS dated March 19, 1978. The editors encour-
aged readers to try out the system for themselves, promising “a long and
fascinating interactive communications session.”12

The response to CBBS was immediate and overwhelming. While the
system had already been receiving calls from outside Chicago through
word of mouth, the announcements in Byte and Dr. Dobb’s brought im-
mediate attention to the computerized bulletin board, and Suess’s phone
line started to register calls from all over the United States and beyond.13

The founding editor of Byte, Carl Helmers, was so inspired by CBBS that
he published an eight-page editorial speculating about the future impact
of the modem on hobby computing.14 “Computer-to-computer commu-
nications via the dialup phone network are a very real possibility for the
personal user,” he enthused. Helmers urged readers to think beyond the
typical time-sharing paradigm and toward smaller-scale group commu-
nication. To the hobbyist, computer-mediated communication offered a
new space for collaboration. Helmers imagined that systems like CBBS
would flourish whenever “a few people share a common goal and live far
enough away from one another.”15 Instead of long drives and occasional meetings, he suggested, a bulletin board offered a means for regular
communication among communities of interest.

After several months of testing, modification, and repair, Christen-

S
sen and Suess submitted an article to Byte magazine detailing the ar-N
chitecture of the new system.16 Published in November 1978 under the 32

compu terizing hob by r adio 33

Log of a typical session on CBBS during its first year in operation. Many early users
accessed the system from a teleprinter terminal, so these interface elements would
have been hammered out onto a reel of paper rather than scrolling up the glass of a
video screen. ( Byte, November 1978)

title “Computerized Bulletin Board System,” the article explained how to
assemble the hardware and code the software required for running an
autonomous bulletin board system of one’s own. Beyond the technical
instructions, their article also tacitly established several norms—social
as well as financial—for the protean BBS culture. Playing around with

CBBS was fun and interesting, but it wasn’t free. Hardware cost money
to buy and software took time to write, so they had to consider the finan-
cial as well as technical challenges of running an online community out
of your home.

From the outset, CBBS provided an open gathering place for hobby-
ists curious about computers and communication. A file called “WEL-

COME” contained text to be sent out each time a new caller connected
to the system. The CBBS WELCOME file conveyed a sense of friendly
informality. Beneath a short set of instructions for operating the system,
a bulletin—“problems with the system??”—invited users to call Chris-

S
tensen and Suess at home to discuss hardware and software issues.

N

33

3 4 compu terizing hob by r adio

The convivial tone of the WELCOME message made CBBS feel less
like a high-tech experiment and more like an easygoing computer-club
meeting.

Christensen and Suess also hoped that CBBS would provide a model
for other computer clubs to build virtual meeting places. The Byte article equipped readers with all of the information they would need
to assemble a computerized bulletin board system of their own. In a
letter to Dr. Dobb’s, Christensen noted that he had already shared the CBBS software with Dennis Hayes, maker of the Hayes modem, and

Dave Caulkins, head of the People’s Computer Company networking
committee (PCNET).17 Documentation for the software emphasized the fun of “getting on the air” with CBBS and joked that while users were “on their own,” they were welcome to call up the authors for
the “occasional chat.”18

On top of all this free sharing, Christensen and Suess were also
concerned with the legal complications and commercial potential of

CBBS. Christensen noted that the software was protected by copyright
to limit commercial uses, but “something should be able to be worked
out” in the case of noncommercial use.19 Shortly after, they began to sell copies of CBBS.20 Christensen joked that selling the software should prevent people from “bugging him” for a free copy. On Caulkins’s recommendation, Christensen set the price at $50 and gave all of the pro-
ceeds to Suess.21 “After all,” reasoned Christensen, “[Randy] put up all the money—all I’d put up was time.”22 Buyers received two eight-inch floppy disks containing the 8080 assembly code and related documentation formatted for the CP/M operating system.23 According to memory, they sold approximately two hundred copies of the software.24 By the end of 1981, three years after the publication of the Byte article, more than
two dozen other systems were running CBBS in cities and towns from

Vancouver, British Columbia, to Tallahassee, Florida. Countless others
were using software inspired by CBBS, such as ABBS for the Apple II
and FORUM-80 for the Radio Shack TRS-80.25

So what drove Christensen and Suess to build CBBS? Could they
imagine inspiring thousands of others? Did they dream of changing
the world or maybe getting rich? Or was it all just a goof? When asked

S
directly about their motivations, Christensen and Suess demurred. In

N

34
compu terizing hob by r adio 35

Christensen’s initial announcement to Byte, he reported that he kept the
system up twenty-four hours a day “just to see what happens.”26 Later, he joked that CBBS was just something fun to do during a snowstorm:

“all the pieces are there, it is snowing like @#$%, let’s hack.”27 While these statements reflect Christensen’s self-deprecating sense of humor,
they are also consistent with an ethic common among postwar technical
culture: innovation for its own sake.28

Of course, there was also a practical dimension to the computerized
bulletin board. As the system itself informed callers, it was designed for

“message communication between computer hobbyists.”29 By 1978, the
club to which Christensen and Suess belonged, CACHE, had already
begun to appropriate media technologies for sharing information about
the club’s hobby. It published a monthly newsletter, titled The CACHE

Register,30 and maintained an information “hotline” using an answering machine stored in Christensen’s basement.31 Rather than replace these systems, CBBS offered a new opportunity to extend the lively dialogue
that was already taking place in meetings, newsletters, and phone calls.32

And, unlike more ephemeral interactions, the questions, answers, an-
nouncements, and articles posted to CBBS remained available for future
retrieval.

The founding of CBBS marked the beginning of the “modem
world,” a period of time from roughly 1978 to 1998, during which the
use of computers for communication remained a niche, peripheral activ-
ity in the broader culture of personal computing. Although this period
overlaps chronologically with the interconnection of many computer sci-
ence research facilities in the United States, notably those with financial
support from the Department of Defense’s Advanced Research Projects

Agency (ARPA) or the National Science Foundation (NSF), such insti-
tutional computer networks remained almost wholly inaccessible to
the typical personal computer owner. Indeed, from the perspective of a
microcomputer enthusiast in 1978, the ARPA- and NSF-funded networks
simply did not exist.

But CBBS did not fall from the heavens with the Chicagoland snow,
fully formed and without precedent. Instead, it was created amid a gener-
ative historical conjuncture in which policy, infrastructure, and popular
culture converged to reimagine the PC as a medium for communication

S

N

35

Cover of a special issue of Byte magazine dedicated to data communication. A painting by the artist and software engineer Ken Lodding depicts a satellite and two microcomputer terminals orbiting a bright blue-green Earth. Red lines connect the terminals
and satellite to the planet’s surface. Keen readers may have recognized the satellite’s
three-point star shape as a prototype spacecraft under development by the Radio

Amateur Satellite Corporation (AMSAT). Feature articles detailed the opportunities for
combining amateur radio, microcomputing, and satellite communications. Tucked in
the middle, a piece by Ward Christensen and Randy Suess described a “computerized

S
bulletin board” built atop the existing telephone network. ( Byte, November 1978) N

36
compu terizing hob by r adio 37
rather than a tool for computation. Further, a long tradition of amateur
telecommunications created a context for grassroots innovation and a
community eager to experiment with novel forms of data networking.

Technical hobbyists were already in the habit of exchanging informa-
tion by radio, by mail, at swap meets, and in club meetings. Indeed, the
very same issue of Byte that carried the CBBS article featured a cover
story about adapting amateur radio repeaters to build a global system for

“intercomputer communication.”33 With photos of shiny satellites and diagrams of ionospheric propagation, this article presented a breathtak-ing vision of computer hobbyists around the world exchanging messages
with one another through the ether. In contrast, the system outlined by

Christensen and Suess must have seemed downright simple. Yet CBBS
struck the right balance of accessibility and difficulty to inspire readers
to break out their soldering irons. Creating a bulletin board was not easy,
but it was possible; and unlike more outlandish proposals, a BBS of-
fered immediately practical benefits—especially for members of hobby-
ist clubs and organizations.

The CBBS origin story is a treasured bit of BBS lore.34 Christensen
and Suess are humble, relatable heroes, and the blizzards of 1978 pro-
vide a perfect backdrop for the start of their adventures. At first blush,
this tale of two friends sparking an accidental revolution seems to follow
a familiar Silicon Valley innovation narrative—but CBBS was not a busi-
ness enterprise like Apple or Microsoft.35 Rather, Christensen and Suess aimed to provide a platform for communication and collective intelligence among their fellow computer enthusiasts. As Christensen later
recalled, the inspiration for CBBS came from his club’s newsletter and
a cork bulletin board posted up during club meetings.36 Further development of the system was driven by the pleasure of technical mastery
and pride of craftsmanship common to so many men’s hobbies of the

US postwar period. In this sense, the CBBS story provides a convenient
point of origin for an alternative mythology of the internet. The social,
technical, financial, and legal constraints that shaped the early years of

CBBS foreshadowed areas of conflict and creativity that would animate
the next two decades of personal computer networking. Likewise, CBBS
drew on nearly a century of amateur tinkering with radio technology and
the telephone network. CBBS may have been a literal computerization

S

N

37

38 compu terizing hob by r adio
of the community bulletin board, but it marked an even more significant
transformation: the computerization of telecommunications by the
grassroots.

At the end of the 1970s, a confluence of social, technical, and regu-
latory activity in the United States created a favorable environment for
grassroots networks like CBBS. First, the nationwide telephone network
known as the “Bell System” provided a reliable, accessible, and relatively
open infrastructure for hobbyists to experiment with data communi-
cations.37 For nearly half a century, AT&T had enjoyed a de facto monopoly over telecommunications in the United States, but in the 1960s
and 1970s, this arrangement was under increasing scrutiny.38 By the end of the latter decade, regulators were moving to break up “Ma Bell” and
open telephony to private competition. In this period of transition, the
gradual opening of the Bell monopoly enabled the formation of inde-
pendent dial-up networks. Without the ten-digit telephone number and
standardized RJ-11 wall socket, there could be no BBS networks or PC
modems.

To imagine the Bell System as an infrastructure ready for appropria-
tion depended on a broader cultural context. The technical culture of
dial-up BBSs drew directly from a tradition of amateur experimentation
that had been developing for decades around radio communications.

During the 1970s, hobby radio was experiencing a revival in the United

States thanks to newly affordable two-way FM equipment and a bloom
of interest in Citizens Band (CB) radio. Previously, amateur (or “ham”)

radio activities were limited by the complexity, cost, and availability of
equipment using vacuum tubes. But in the 1960s, advances in micro-
electronics resulted in simpler radios and radio kits based on integrated
circuits and other solid-state components. These same innovations drove
the production of new portable and handheld VHF radios in the 1970s,
reducing the technical and financial barriers to participation in both ham
and CB radio.39 Ham radio clubs around the United States built “repeaters” that served as virtual gathering places for casual communication.40

By the end of the decade, the practice of chatting over the air with nearby
strangers had become familiar. Numerous Hollywood films and televi-

S
sion shows depicted characters operating radio equipment, and CB slang

N
leaked into casual talk.

38
compu terizing hob by r adio 39

Meanwhile, the popularization of two-way radio communication in
the mid-1970s coincided with the emergence of a new arena of amateur
experimentation: microcomputing. Although small groups of enthusi-
asts had been experimenting with amateur computing since the mid-

1960s, the introduction of do-it-yourself kits in the mid-1970s opened
microcomputing up to a broader population of technology enthusiasts.41

Kit computers such as the Altair 8800 were featured in magazines of
general technical interest, such as Popular Electronics, as well as publications aimed at amateur radio operators, such as QST and 73. Kit computers were notoriously difficult to build and operate, but computer
hobbyists frequently carried over expertise from their prior experiences
with amateur radio, model rocketry, and hi-fi stereo equipment. With the
availability of prebuilt microcomputers after 1977, a secondary market
emerged around hardware peripherals, including devices for telecom-
munications. As a result, the basic technical requirements for building a

BBS—a phone line, modem, and PC—were available to most Americans
by the start of the 1980s and no longer required a soldering iron or back-
ground in electrical engineering.

The modem world appeared at a moment of social, political, and
technological change. Christensen and Suess brought CBBS online amid
the conjuncture of several systems in flux: a telephone network prepar-
ing for liberalization, a recent fad for CB, a revolution in amateur radio
practices, and an emerging marketplace for microcomputer products.

Briefly, these changing systems provided a context in which amateurs
could begin to build a new data infrastructure from the bottom up. On
the afternoon that Christensen and Suess decided that a computerized
bulletin board would be a fun project for a day off work, elsewhere in
the United States, songs about CB radio were climbing the pop charts,
economists were arguing for the end of the AT&T monopoly, ham ra-
dio operators were erecting antenna towers, and computer enthusiasts
were turning their hobby into an industry. To understand this unusually
generative moment, we should step back to a moment before electrified
communications had become commonplace.

mak ing c ontac t w i th r a dio ho b b y i s t s

For someone in 1975 to imagine that the Bell System could serve a func-

S
tion other than voice telephone calls required a playful relationship with

N

39

40 compu terizing hob by r adio
the media environment. But to actually build an alternative communica-
tion system on top of Ma Bell also required a certain hubris about your
right to modify the architectures of everyday life. In 1978, Randy Suess
and Ward Christensen exhibited both of these qualities in their work on

CBBS. By remaking the telephone network as a medium for grassroots
data communications, they were acting in a tradition of amateur tele-
communications stretching back more than a century. From adolescent
amateur press associations and “wildcat” rural telephone operators to
community television systems and radical “videophile” networks, enthu-
siasts have consistently pushed telecommunications in new directions
by finding unexpected uses for existing media technologies.42

Beginning with the earliest experiments in wireless communication
at the end of the nineteenth century, amateurs have adopted, modified,
and repurposed industrial information and communication technolo-
gies for the purposes of community building, resource sharing, collec-
tive intelligence, and public safety. Alongside the forces of regulation,
commercialization, and militarization, these amateur activities played
a critical role in shaping social computing practices and platforms of
the 1980s and 1990s. Unlike their peers in academia, industry, or the
military, the typical middle-class American amateurs worked out of their
homes using the “free” time and money left over from their commit-
ments to work and family. While the work of professional researchers
was rationalized, bureaucratized, and archived by virtue of their institu-
tional affiliation, the work of amateurs was either self-archived or, more
often, lost to time. As a result, the contributions of amateurs have been
obscured, overlooked, and ignored by popular histories of media and
communication. Yet, to make sense of the creation of CBBS in the late

1970s and the subsequent rise of the modem world, it is necessary to un-
derstand the norms, values, and visions motivating technical hobbyists
across North America.

The microcomputer hobbyists building and exploring networks like

CBBS were closely tied to the technical cultures of amateur (ham) and

Citizens Band radio.43 Ham and CB are legally and culturally distinct forms of radio communication, but they each experienced a boom in
participation during the 1970s. By the end of the decade, participants in

S
both types were in the habit of appropriating new media technologies

N
to extend their hobbies. Military surplus and cast-off consumer prod-

40
compu terizing hob by r adio 41
ucts provided a steady stream of raw materials for hands-on learning and
experimentation. In addition to on-air interactions, CB and ham radio
enthusiasts throughout North America belonged to local and regional
clubs that met regularly in person, published newsletters, and managed
shared technical infrastructures. By the late 1970s, the technical reper-
toire of radio amateurs provided a ready-to-hand set of metaphors and
communication frameworks for computer hobbyists building online
communications. Indeed, many of the practices that we now associate
with computer-mediated communication have a prehistory in the annals
of hobby radio.

Unlike AM/FM broadcasting, CB and ham radio are peer-to-peer,
noncommercial forms of wireless communication. There is no audi-
ence, no news or entertainment programming, no advertising. Rather,
hobbyist radio practices like these consist of home-built or store-bought
stations transmitting on particular frequency “bands” of the electromag-
netic spectrum. For example, since the late 1920s, amateurs have used
the ten-meter “high frequency” band to send and receive Morse code
messages around the world. During the 1970s, ham radio and CB radio
were two of the most common technical hobbies in the United States.

Historically, ham radio and CB radio have been quite distinct tech-
nical cultures. They operate on different frequencies, using different
equipment, according to different regulations. However, participants in
the two forms of radio share in a larger sociotechnical imaginary that
values hands-on knowledge and democratic access to communication
technology. Ham and CB operators each take pleasure in the rather un-
usual practice of reaching out across the airwaves to communicate with
unseen strangers. One joy of hobby radio is to make contact for its own
sake, to establish a communication bond without any expectation of
transmitting useful information.44 Despite the meaningful differences between amateur radio and CB radio, both played a key part in shaping
the emerging technical culture of the modem world.

v i r t ua l c omm uni t y on the l o c a l r e pe at er

In the United States, “amateur” denotes a special class of radio operators
licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to oper-
ate certain types of equipment on a set of clearly defined frequencies.45

S

Federal legislation guarantees amateur access to valuable regions of the

N

41

4 2 compu terizing hob by r adio
electromagnetic spectrum to encourage bottom-up experimentation
and innovation. For more than a hundred years, amateur radio opera-
tors have built and maintained countless networks ranging from public-
service systems to experimental satellite communications. Their trials
and achievements provided the cultural context for the appropriation of
other communication and information technologies during the 1970s.

In a very material sense, dial-up BBSs grew out of preexisting amateur
radio networks.

The ham radio origin story is about the stubborn creativity of am-
ateur technologists. In the (metaphorical) wake of the sinking Titanic,

Congress passed the Radio Act of 1912. The act both introduced an of-
ficial “amateur” radio license and also severely restricted the activities of
amateur operators.46 Newly licensed amateur stations were restricted to transmitting on wavelengths of two hundred meters or less, a region of
the electromagnetic spectrum considered useless at the time. The days
of unrestricted experimentation were over. Yet hobbyists embraced the
term “amateur” as a collective identity and sought out new opportunities
to communicate with each other, on and off the air. Among the newly
classified amateurs was a forty-three-year-old automobile engineer and
radio hobbyist named Hiram Percy Maxim.47 In 1914, believing that a lack of political representation was to blame for the severe restrictions of
the Radio Act, Maxim proposed the creation of a “league” of local clubs
to represent the amateur radio hobby community. In addition to its po-
litical purpose, the Amateur Radio Relay League (ARRL) aimed to create
a nationwide communication network of cooperating wireless stations.

Using a store-and-forward networking technique, participating ama-
teurs could exchange messages over far-greater distances than would
have been possible under the technical restrictions of the Radio Act. By

1917, the ARRL had grown to more than three thousand members across
the United States and Canada. On March 8, a message made the round
trip from Los Angeles to New York and back in less than two hours, a
technical and organizational feat unmatched by either commercial or
military wireless systems of the period.48

Over the next half century, as radio and television technology dif-
fused into homes and automobiles throughout the United States, hams

S
continued to push the boundaries of wireless telecommunications. In

N

42
compu terizing hob by r adio 43
the 1960s, ham radio clubs around the United States began to build a
new type of cooperative network known as a “repeater.” Repeaters are au-
tonomous stations installed at high elevation that automatically retrans-
mit the signals of nearby hams in order to extend their geographic range.

Unlike the relay networks, which required substantial human organiza-
tion and sought to cover large territories, repeaters are local resources. In
the 1970s, ham radio clubs built and maintained repeaters in cities and
towns throughout the United States. Today the ARRL produces repeater
databases listing locations, frequencies, ownership, and other details to
help visitors “key up” the repeater. The repeater provides an informal
gathering place on the air for hams living nearby or passing through
the area.

The explosion of repeater activity was stimulated by changes in
the technology and regulation of amateur radio. In the late 1960s, the
consumer electronics industry went micro, using small self-contained
components known as integrated circuits or “chips” to replace full-sized
transistors, resistors, and capacitors.49 Integrated circuits enabled the production of smaller, simpler equipment that could be assembled and
sold at a dramatic discount. Meanwhile, the FCC changed the allocation
of wireless spectrum above 30 MHz, known as the “very high frequen-
cies” (VHF), rendering a significant amount of commercial FM radio
equipment (of the sort found in police cruisers and taxicabs) obsolete.50

Hams eagerly bought up this discarded gear and modified it for use on
the new amateur radio frequencies. By the early 1970s, amateur activ-
ity on VHF had become so popular that electronics manufacturers such
as Motorola began to produce new VHF transceiver equipment specifi-
cally aimed at the amateur market.51 With short VHF antennas and tiny integrated circuits, many of these new radios were small enough to be
handheld, enabling a new mobility for ham radio operators.52

While VHF radios offered greater mobility and improved audio qual-
ity, their range was considerably shorter than other operating modes—
approximately five to fifteen miles.53 Building repeaters allowed ham radio enthusiasts to overcome this limitation. Approximately the size of
an office filing cabinet when fully assembled, a repeater is composed of
an antenna, a transceiver, a microcomputer for operating the radio au-
tonomously, and a “duplexer” that allows the system to simultaneously

S

N

43

4 4 compu terizing hob by r adio
transmit and receive information on a single antenna. Antennas placed
at higher altitudes reach a much larger area, so hams sought out hilltops,
ridges, and space on existing radio towers for their repeater installations.

In practice, operating a repeater feels like joining a chat room or a
party line. Only one participant can speak at a time, and the repeater typi-
cally enforces a short pause between each transmission. With the advent
of repeater culture in the 1970s, ham radio operators began to keep a
radio tuned to the local repeater all day, waiting for friends to show up
for a short chat. Numerous clubs used (and still use) repeaters to hold
weekly on-air discussions, or “nets,” as a way to keep in touch during
the gaps between their in-person meetings. An active repeater provides a
gathering point in the ether, a rest stop on the electromagnetic spectrum.

A repeater is a collective good of significant value to its users. In

Elkhart, Indiana, for instance, the Elkhart County Radio Association

(ECRA) has continuously operated a VHF/FM repeater for nearly fifty
years. In the early 1970s, Elkhart was home to Crown International, an
electronics firm owned by a Christian minister and radio amateur named

Clarence Moore (W9LZX). Moore provided his employees with an ama-
teur radio station to support their interest in radio communications and
experimentation. However, members of the local club remember that
the company’s low-band station was little used until Moore’s fellow ama-
teurs “kindled a burning desire” in him to add a VHF repeater.54

Initially, the ECRA repeater’s antenna was installed on a “modest”

eighty-foot tower outside Moore’s home. From this location, the repeater
became an important infrastructure in the ongoing social life of the

Elkhart club and came to symbolize the members’ technological ambi-
tion and collective commitment to experimentation. Following Moore’s
death in 1978, the repeater’s antenna was moved to a new five-hundred-
foot antenna erected in his memory and ceremonially activated on Janu-
ary 1, 1980. The new antenna was said to fulfill the late founder’s dream
of reaching “50 miles in all directions” and led to considerable growth
of the club, as the repeater invited participation from an even greater
geographic range.55

Amateur radio repeaters of the 1970s such as the Elkhart system
represented a different type of telecommunications network from the

S

ARRL’s store-and-forward messaging system from half a century earlier.

N

Whereas the decentralized ARRL network moved messages efficiently

44
compu terizing hob by r adio 45
across the continent, the centralized repeaters represented hubs of local
communication.56 The work of building and maintaining a local repeater strengthened the relationships between hams in the local community.

Furthermore, by publicizing the repeater’s location and frequency, local
clubs made themselves audible to traveling hams, extending a kind of
fraternal hospitality into the ether.

Structurally, ham radio repeaters provided a ready-to-hand concep-
tual model for the architects of grassroots computer networks such as

CBBS. Both systems acted as hubs for local networks of hobbyists. The
autonomy of repeaters and BBSs depended on the availability of pro-
grammable microprocessors to control communication interfaces and
convey messages between users of the system. Functionally, repeaters
and BBSs provided virtual gathering spaces for users of a larger tele-
communications infrastructure. Repeaters were located at particular
frequencies on the VHF band; BBSs, at particular numbers on the tele-
phone system. Potential users learned about these spaces through word-
of-mouth recommendations or publications aimed at communities of
shared interest. Once up and running, however, the themes and inter-
ests discussed on BBSs ranged much more broadly than the technically
minded chat on ham radio repeaters. Indeed, the open-ended discus-
sions on dial-up BBSs more closely matched the playful, provocative dis-
course of CB channels.

g e t t ing w i l d on the c i t i zens b and

Whereas ham radio was steeped in history and tradition, CB radio
flashed into US popular culture of the 1970s as a fun, accessible form
of grassroots communication. The radio historian Kristen Haring char-
acterizes the difference in terms of social norms and barriers to par-
ticipation: “the culture of CB radio was as free as amateur radio’s was
restrictive.”57 Although the spectrum was allocated in 1948, the Citizens Band, as we know it, came into being with the creation of twenty-three
distinct “channels” in 1958. During the 1960s, the falling price of two-
way radio gear spurred adoption among enthusiasts and commercial us-
ers alike. The cover of the 1965 Radio Shack Catalog depicted two men
at the beach chatting over handheld radios: “No license. No kit building!

Ready to talk.”58 Officially, CB radio required a license, but CB regula-S
tions were scarcely enforced. Hardly any CB owners bothered to register

N

45

46 compu terizing hob by r adio
with the FCC.59 In the mid-1970s, a prebuilt CB radio from a nearby Radio Shack—or garage sale—was the only requirement for getting on
the air. At the height of the craze, CB radio participation outstripped ham
radio by an order of magnitude. More than four million CB radios were
sold in 1975 alone.60

Due to the low barriers to entry, the discourse on CB was more free-
wheeling than on the ham radio bands. Whereas hams tended to follow
orderly on-air procedures, CB radio could be rollicking and chaotic with
frequent interruptions, trash talking, and endlessly mutating slang. If
amateur radio could feel like a friendly classroom or workshop, tuning
into CB radio could be like wandering into a late-night saloon. As a re-
sult, the popular image of CB radio took a dramatically different shape
from earlier forms of amateur telecommunications. Ham radio opera-
tors were civic-minded nerds. CBers, in contrast, were telecom outlaws
in muscle cars and tractor-trailers. On film and TV, CB operators fla-
grantly violated FCC regulations, broke the new interstate speed limits,
and revved their engines at the global shortage of crude oil. According to
the FCC, CB operators were supposed to identify themselves on the air
by their call signs and avoid transmitting foul language, music, adver-
tising, or malicious interference—but, like the licensing requirement,
these regulations were difficult to enforce and largely went ignored by
the everyday CB operator.

During the mid-1970s craze, country and western recording artists
brought the sounds and slang of the Citizens Band over to the AM/FM
airwaves. A slew of “trucker” songs included the crackling sound of CB
to convey the sonic experience of the open highway. In 1972, Dolly Par-
ton and Porter Wagoner recorded an early CB-themed song, titled “10-4

Over and Out.” In “10-4,” Parton and Wagoner play out a series of es-
calating arguments between a wife and her chronically late husband as
though they were sung over the air. In the second verse, Parton demands
to know why her husband isn’t home, and Wagoner warbles his reply,
claiming that he can’t hear her due to interference. The song’s romantic
twist is that the couple only fights on the air. When they’re home, they
shut off the radio and love each other, telling the rest of the world “over
and out.” As the population of CBers grew, so did this frisson between

S
voyeurism and performance.

N

46
compu terizing hob by r adio 47

Although the duet between Parton and Wagoner suggested equal par-
ticipation in CB among men and women, other popular media portrayed

CB communication as a predominantly male practice. In blockbuster
films such as Smokey and the Bandit (1977) and Convoy (1978), long-haul
truckers adopt the CB as part of a rugged, macho counterculture. Convoy
was adapted from an earlier country-western song, the 1975 hit “Convoy”

by C. W. McCall. The film and the song describe a fictional on-the-road
protest in which long-haul truck drivers evade highway patrol officers
and the National Guard through their tactical use of CB. McCall’s story
was enhanced by snippets of CB chatter, peppered with nearly impen-
etrable lingo. As the record crossed over from country-western radio to
mainstream pop, it boosted the hype for CB across the country. Whereas

Parton and Wagoner’s bickering portrayed CB as a space of daily chat-
ter, “Convoy” portrayed it as a form of mass resistance. Microphone in
hand, these truckers “just ain’t a-gonna pay no toll.” In a departure from
the geeky masculinity of ham radio, “Convoy” positioned the CB radio
alongside the eighteen-wheeler, the .38 Special revolver, and the Ameri-
can muscle car as icons of roadhouse masculinity.

The popular perception of CB radio as an ungovernable space was
also reflected in the use of CB for gender play and sexual exploration.

Beyond the cute drama of “10-4” and outlaw masculinity of “Convoy,” the

Citizens Band offered an opportunity for anonymous flirtation among
nearby strangers. As Ernest Dickinson reported in the New York Times
in 1976, some CB communities informally set aside one channel for this
type of communication, in his words, “a singles bar of the airwaves.”61

The uncertain audience for radio transmissions offered an additional ex-
hibitionist thrill for those who were engaging in the sexier side of the Cit-
izens Band, and popular coverage of the CB craze frequently remarked
on the use of CB radios among sex workers.

Occasionally, representations of sexuality on the Citizens Band took
on a distinctly queer character, as in Rod Hart’s novelty song “CB Sav-
age,” a minor hit in 1975. The vocal performances on “CB Savage” sit
in polysemy between the homophobic and homoerotic. In spoken nar-
ration, Hart recounts the story of a pair of bored truckers interrupted
by flirty come-ons from a lisping male voice over their CB radio. The
mysterious stranger flips the typical radio slang, exploiting the double

S

N

47

4 8 compu terizing hob by r adio
entendre in common CB terms like “hammer” and “handle.” The two
truckers are flustered by the suggestive transmissions, and their reac-
tions invite a queer misreading. The narrator describes his copilot blush-
ing and smiling like “a big old bird-fed cat.” Liner notes on the record
sleeve took pains to describe Hart as a “good ole, straight ole country
boy,” but Plantation Records seemed to acknowledge more ambiguous
reading of “CB Savage,” issuing the seven-inch single with a pink label
in place of its conventional green.62

While the popular representation of CB tended toward the sensa-
tional, quotidian CB use was surely tamer. In 1975, at the apogee of the

CB radio “boom,” Harvey A. Daniels from the Education Department at

Rosary College in River Forest, Illinois, encouraged K–12 English teach-
ers to bring CB radios into their classrooms. The unusual vocabulary and
dynamic lexical choices of CB slang, Daniels argued, offered a unique op-
portunity for students to think critically about the relationships among
language, culture, and communication. In suburban Chicago, Daniels
noted, “the most common phonological judgment made by first-time

CB listeners is that ‘they all sound like southerners.’”63 Although the predominance of southernness “defied demographic reality,” Daniels
observed a surprising harmony among speakers exhibiting different
phonological characteristics: “There does not seem to be any conflict or
discrimination between speakers whose phonological patterns do reveal
different social or regional backgrounds. Blacks and whites, northerners
and southerners, and all other possible combinations of speakers, con-
verse more peacefully and more often on the radio than they ever would
in person. I have never heard any linguistic discrimination or put-downs
of anyone’s language as long as both sides were employing the basic CB
dialect—and this is a medium where wisecracks are more the rule than
the exception.”64 Daniels was careful to note, however, that this tolerance had its limits and that languages other than English were often poorly
received. In one interaction, an operator transmitting briefly in Spanish
was criticized harshly by another, who stated, “Somebody forgot they’re
in America.” Clearly, the egalitarian possibilities of the Citizens Band
were not equally accessible to all users.

In addition to the “southern” characteristics of the CB dialect, Dan-

S
iels also observed linguistic habits that suggested comparisons with

N

“Black English.” Not coincidentally, CB radio was already widely adopted

48
compu terizing hob by r adio 49
among middle-class Black Americans by the time that the 1976 “boom”

brought CB radio into the homes and cars of millions of white Ameri-
cans. Whereas hams were often drawn to radio out of technical curiosity,

Black American CBers were additionally compelled by the sonic qualities
of radio communication. In a landmark 2011 article on the origin and
growth of Black CB radio culture for American Quarterly, Art M. Blake
describes Black CB culture emerging out of a preexisting Black “aural-
oral sphere” at the conjuncture of Black-interest radio, jive talk, and jazz
and blues lyricism.65 Even as the mobility of Black bodies remained socially and politically constrained, the active, omnidirectional antennae
of the Black CBers emanated Black voices and Black cultural concerns
without restraint.

The motivations for Black CB radio adoption were explicitly con-
nected to the civil rights struggles of the 1960s, and the future politi-
cal implications of CB radio use were no less explicit.66 In 1976, Ebony published a statement from Berkeley G. Burrell, the president of the National Negro Business League and adviser to President Nixon, celebrat-
ing the potential applications of Black CB radio for political organizing
and economic development. “With the strength of thousands of Black

CBers,” enthused Burrell, “they could be organized to do almost any-
thing.”67 Two years later, Burrell repeated this appeal to an audience of over ten thousand Black CB radio enthusiasts at the fifth annual convention of the African American radio club the Rooster Channel Jumpers.68

Within a few months, this political potential was demonstrated in the
city of Boston as the public crisis over desegregation and busing erupted
into street violence. Residents, white and Black, in the neighborhoods of

Roxbury and South Boston employed CB radios to coordinate political
and public-safety activities with their neighbors.69

In spite of CB’s rapid adoption and pop visibility, the CB craze did
not last long. Kristen Haring speculates that a combination of uncertain
technical standards and unfavorable atmospheric conditions may have
contributed to a decline in the reliability of CB communication.70 What fun is CB if you can’t hear anyone? Furthermore, the FCC specifically
prohibited the operation of repeaters on the Citizens Band, so even tight-
knit CB communities were unable to (legally) engineer solutions to the
rising interference and limited range.71 Without the freedom to experiS
ment guaranteed to licensed amateurs, CBers were at the mercy of forces

N

49

50 compu terizing hob by r adio
out of their control. And with declining functionality, many CB radio
owners may have simply abandoned the habit.

Ham and CB radio complemented each other during the 1970s, re-
sulting in a bloom of hobby radio activity across the United States. Each
offered multiple forms of legitimate participation, from demonstrating
expert on-air operating to repairing secondhand equipment. This variety
reflected a broader rise in participatory cultures concerned with tech-
nology and innovation, such as amateur film and photography, hot rod
and lowrider car clubs, and science fiction and fantasy fandoms.72 CB
also attracted different groups of people to the airwaves. Amateur radio
had traditionally been a homosocial activity promoting intergenerational
mentorship among middle-class white men.73 Organized club activities such as erecting new antennas or running “field day” events provided
opportunities for hams to form intimate fraternal bonds without break-
ing the restrictive norms of postwar masculinity.74 The Citizens Band, meanwhile, welcomed a population of hobbyists who were more diverse in race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic class than their ham radio
contemporaries.

After more than half a century of ham radio activity, the accessibil-
ity and popular pleasures of the Citizens Band finally opened amateur
telecommunications to participation on a mass scale. Furthermore, the
lower barriers to entry made CB a more appropriate tool for political
organizing among communities of people with variable technical exper-
tise. As a result of these features, CB radio culture included participants
from a greater range of racial groups and socioeconomic classes than
were welcomed into the rather homogeneous society of amateur radio.

This diversity was audible in the unrestrained slang, regional colloquial-
isms, and racially specific discourses that listeners encountered across
the Citizens Band. CB radio facilitated a much more playful, spontane-
ous, and, at times, subversive, on-air culture than its older cousin did. A
visit to a crowded CB channel offered humorous commentary and en-
tertaining personalities. These performative aspects of the hobby were
valued just as highly as the engineering of a crisp signal was.

Finally, the CB craze overlapped chronologically with the emergence
of affordable, accessible computing. How many microcomputer enthu-

S
siasts heard the galloping rhythm of McCall’s “Convoy” on their drive

N

50
compu terizing hob by r adio 51
down Interstate 40 to Albuquerque, New Mexico, for the first World

Altair Computer Convention in March 1976?

the c omp u t er i z at ion of ho b b y r a dio

While the 1970s airwaves buzzed with two-way radio activity, a new tech-
nical culture was forming around a different microelectronic medium:

the computer. Although data processing was already part of corporate

America’s information infrastructure and the time-sharing industry was
beginning to boom, hands-on access to computers remained rare, espe-
cially outside of university research labs.75 Participatory time-sharing systems such as the Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium dem-
onstrated the potential of amateurs and nonexperts to shape the future
of computing, but these remained shining exceptions during the 1970s.76

Rather, scarcity stimulated the curiosity of tech enthusiasts, giving rise to
a popular computing culture that revered computers as mysterious and
exciting. For teen ham radio operators such as the future microcomputer
designer Steve “Woz” Wozniak, computers became objects of unmet
boyhood desire—Woz hung computer posters on his bedroom walls and

“dreamed” of owning his own minicomputer.77 Such fan practices were
encouraged by hobbyist magazines and science fiction stories that of-
fered speculative glimpses of a more participatory future for computing.

As a result, unrestricted access to computer technology became a driving
concern and fundamental value of the new technical culture.78 Radio was accessible. Computing was aspirational.

Amateur access to computers happened in fits and starts. As early as
the mid-1960s, some amateurs enjoyed informal access to a computer
thanks to the beneficence of a local institution. But widespread access
was hard to imagine before the introduction of affordable “microproces-
sor” chips in 1971.79 A microprocessor is an integrated circuit designed to perform a set of basic arithmetical operations. Its utility depends on the
architecture into which it is deployed. In the 1960s, Intel imagined that
its microprocessors would be built into household appliances like coffee-
makers and washing machines to automate simple, predetermined
tasks. But as had been done many times before, experimenters and en-
trepreneurs found an unexpected application for these new materials:

to build cheap computers. By 1975, microprocessors formed the basis

S

N

51

5 2 compu terizing hob by r adio
of several do-it-yourself “microcomputer” kits available from mail-order
catalogs and enthusiast magazines.

Ham radio operators and CB enthusiasts were among the earli-
est adopters of microcomputers. Kit computers, occasionally referred
to as “hobby computers,” were sold through the same mail-order cata-
logs and retail stores as amateur and CB radio equipment. Magazines
of interest to amateur radio operators—for example, Popular Electron-
ics, Radio-Electronics, QST, and 73— featured articles on computing and advertisements from microcomputer makers. Promotional photos of
microcomputers frequently depicted them among the larger technical
apparatus of a ham radio “shack.” For many hobbyists, amateur radio
and microcomputing required similar skills and offered similar techni-
cal pleasures. These were hands-on hobbies for people who enjoyed the
smell of burning solder.

Microcomputing was especially attractive to radio hobbyists frus-
trated by the limited tinkering potential of radios built around integrated
circuits rather than discrete electronic components.80 Ham radio magazines promoted computer kits as an extension of amateurs’ existing tech-
nical practice, while also presenting digital logic and software develop-
ment as wholly new challenges. Between 1974 and 1976, 73 magazine
ran a series of articles on the fundamentals of computer science: number
systems, binary arithmetic, discrete logic, serial communications, and
memory addressing.81 Behind the scenes, Wayne Green, editor of 73, was hard at work on a new magazine dedicated to the computer hobby: Byte.

Beyond the inherent pleasures of learning a new technical field,
hobby computing promised to expand the scope of hams’ existing radio
practices. In an article titled “Computers Are Here—Are You Ready?,”

Green positioned microcomputing as a complement to the latest ama-
teur radio techniques: “More and more amateurs are tackling the new
inexpensive computer kits and coming up with very usable results. Some
are using the units to aim their antennas for moonbounce, some to pre-
dict or even aim antennas at Oscar, some to operate a virtually automatic

RTTY station, some to run a repeater or even a system of repeaters.”82 If microelectronics threatened ham radio’s tradition of hands-on technical
expertise, hobby computing promised a renewal.

S

By 1976, thousands of amateurs were working on building a com-

N
puter of their own. That year, Green published an anthology of micro-

52
compu terizing hob by r adio 53
computing articles aimed at amateur radio operators. At first glance,
the book’s cover looked like a typical ham radio operator’s workbench.

Instead of transceivers or amplifiers, however, the photograph depicted
a typical hobby computing setup: a home-built keyboard, cassette tape
recorder, small television and video interface, and MITS Altair 8800
computer. Based on the Intel 8080 microprocessor, the Altair was not
the only or the latest kit computer on the market in 1976, but its bright-
blue case and blinking red LEDs had come to symbolize the technical
culture of microcomputing. Indeed, MITS, the firm responsible for the

Altair, had previously sold model rocketry components and electronic
calculators.83 Truly, the Altair was a computer by and for the technical enthusiast.

Designed to resemble more expensive minicomputers like the DEC

PDP-11, the Altair 8800 promised both practical business and scientific
applications and fun challenges for the technical hobbyist.84 A cover story in the January 1975 issue of Popular Electronics declared the Altair
a “minicomputer kit to rival commercial models.”85 This claim was accurate insofar as a fully functional Altair could replace a minicomputer
in many industrial and commercial settings, but it did not at all reflect
the usability of the kit alone. While time-sharing systems offered real-
time interaction and terminals with QWERTY keyboards, the Altair user
interface was limited to one row of red LED lights and a bank of on/off
switches. Without the additional purchase of a teletype terminal and tape
reader, programming the machine was a slow, difficult task. And without
a floppy-disk or cassette-tape interface, the machine’s memory would be
lost each time it was shut down.

As painstaking as building and programming an Altair may have
been, the experience brought computer hobbyists into close contact with
the digital logic of the microprocessor. Whereas microelectronics had in-
troduced a layer of opacity between radio operators and their equipment,
kit computers brought the hobbyist back down “close to the metal.”

Early microcomputer programmers needed to express their ideas using
the limited set of instructions etched into the Intel 8080.86 Eight of the switches on the face of the Altair corresponded to the eight digits that
could be read at a time by the eight-bit microprocessor. The “on” position
indicated a “1” and the “off” position a “0.” Though considerably less

S
efficient than the programming and debugging tools available on more

N

53

5 4 compu terizing hob by r adio
sophisticated systems, this interface forced the hobbyists to “speak” the
same language as the microprocessor.

The enthusiastic adoption of the Altair by hobbyists in 1975 and

1976 presaged a boom in the microcomputer market stretching into
the 1980s.87 Just as the CB craze expanded access to two-way radio communication beyond the limited domain of the technical hobbyist, pre-
built “home” and “personal” computers brought microcomputing to a
broader population. Between 1977 and 1983, multiple manufacturers
brought computers to market for a wide range of prices, users, and ap-
plications.88 Radio Shack featured the low-cost TRS-80 Color Computer in its annual catalog, while Apple Computer maintained a premium rate
for the Apple II. Atari and Commodore sold computers with rich graph-
ics and sound as entertainment machines, while IBM packaged its PC
in silver and beige for the serious business user. Meanwhile, the BASIC
programming language became the lingua franca of personal comput-
ing, and a torrent of BASIC workbooks and programming magazines
encouraged users to write their own software.89 By the end of the 1980s, microcomputing no longer required facility with a soldering iron, but
the values and interests of radio amateurs continued to shape the grow-
ing technical culture.

Radio hobbyists saw the microcomputer as a device for communica-
tion, rather than information processing or automation. By incorporating
microcomputer technology into their hobby, radio amateurs anticipated
the diffusion of computers across the field of telecommunications. In
the hands of ham radio operators, microcomputers came to serve three
key functions. First, microcomputers extended the technical affordances
of amateur radio stations by, for example, automating the control of a
directional antenna or interpreting incoming Morse code messages. Sec-
ond, hams used office applications such as database management sys-
tems and word processing software to organize hobby activities outside
of radio communication, for example, printing a club newsletter or orga-
nizing one’s contact history. And, third, microcomputers offered wholly
new telecommunication modalities that were not previously possible.

Amateur radio enthusiasts were uniquely suited to the technical
challenges of computer-mediated communication. Although they would

S
not have described their activities as “digital,” hams of the 1970s reg-

N
ularly communicated in code. Until 2003, all licensed amateurs were

54
compu terizing hob by r adio 55
required to demonstrate minimal proficiency with copying and trans-
mitting messages in Morse code. Furthermore, a popular activity within
amateur radio since the 1940s included adapting cast-off teletype equip-
ment for “radio teletype,” or RTTY, operations.90 Radio teletype stations could even be configured to receive messages semiautonomously, providing RTTY operators with a kind of proto–bulletin board function. It
was easy to imagine adding a microcomputer to such a system. Indeed,
one popular application of microcomputers to amateur radio was to
translate messages from the Morse code sent by human operators to the

ASCII and Baudot codes used by RTTY stations.91

Local and regional amateur radio club meetings were also important
venues for microcomputing enthusiasts to meet one another. By the late

1970s, many amateur radio clubs were also actively engaged in hobby
computer activities. In 1983, the “Club Corner” section of QST magazine
specifically addressed this area of contact between the two hobbies in a
column by Sally O’Dell (KB1O) titled “Clubs and Computers: A Simple

Interface.” O’Dell compared the early days of ham radio with the na-
scent personal computing movement and encouraged club members to
make computing a more central feature of their activities. As a place to
start, she suggested finding access to desktop publishing tools, noting
that at least 25 percent of ARRL-affiliated clubs were already producing
a computer-generated newsletter. O’Dell further portrayed hobby clubs
as crucial spaces for learning and sharing technical information about
new technologies such as home computing. O’Dell also urged club orga-
nizers to reach out to local computer users’ groups: “it may well be that
computer enthusiasts are as interested in Amateur Radio as you are in
computers.”92 Finally, O’Dell announced that two microcomputer videos were added to the ARRL film library and were available for rent by any
affiliated ham radio club.

Along with magazines and club meetings, amateur radio also pro-
vided a few additional venues for the nascent microcomputing com-
munity: on-air “nets” and regional swap meets. Amateur radio “nets”

are on-air meetings in which hams gather on a prearranged frequency
or repeater to share information and socialize. In 1980, QST magazine
published a short note from David P. Allen (W1UKZ) of Scituate, Mas-
sachusetts, inviting readers to join several computer hobbyist nets.93 A S

Boston-area net met on Wednesday nights, an East Coast net for Apple

N

55

56 compu terizing hob by r adio
owners met on Saturday nights, and an international Atari net was held
on Tuesday evenings. In Southern California, the W6TRW Amateur

Radio Club began hosting a monthly swap meet in the parking lot of
an aerospace company where many club members were employed.94 Al-
though a valid amateur radio license was required to rent a table, the
swap meet’s organizers specifically allowed participants to sell computer
parts along with amateur radio gear. Amateur radio nets and swap meets
provided valuable spaces for informal socializing among hams inter-
ested in learning about hobby computing.

During the 1970s, the established technical culture of amateur radio
provided a nurturing context for the formation of hobby computing. Not
all of amateur computing originated in ham radio, of course, but the two
hobbies served as valuable complements to each other. In particular, the
existing values, practices, and structures of amateur radio provided use-
ful models for the organization of amateur computing’s technical cul-
ture. For those computer enthusiasts who were hams, however, amateur
radio also significantly shaped their expectations of the microcomputer.

Beyond the advertised uses of microcomputers as tools for business and
entertainment, the amateur radio operator encountered the home com-
puter first and foremost as a technology for communication and com-
munity organization.

f rom the a i rwav e s t o the t e l e phone l ine

The creation of CBBS in 1978 marked the beginning of the modem world.

By publishing the details of the system in Byte, Christensen and Suess
laid the groundwork for thousands of similar “computerized bulletin
boards” to pop up across North America.95 By 1983, more than 275 boards were up and running across forty-three states.96 Byte continued to play a central role in the emerging modem world, routinely covering new developments in BBS technology and publishing dozens of reader letters
about modems and telecommunications.97

Despite CBBS’s origins in the eerie quiet of a snowy city shutdown,
it was not formed in a vacuum. Rather, Christensen and Suess worked at
a particularly generative conjuncture of technological, cultural, and reg-
ulatory change in telecommunications. The Bell System infrastructure

S
had recently been opened to experimentation, microcomputer kits based

N
on the Altair architecture were becoming increasingly reliable, and the

56
compu terizing hob by r adio 57
technical culture of hobby radio encouraged a playful, participatory en-
gagement with telecommunications. CBBS represented a convergence
of these three parallel phenomena, a culmination of more than fifty years
of amateur and professional telecommunications in the United States.

The technical culture of the modem world exhibited many of the
norms and values of earlier forms of amateur telecommunications, not
all of which were positive. While early bulletin boards exuded the same
spirit of technical exploration and collaboration that had motivated ra-
dio amateurs before them, the social and material barriers to entry were
high. Unlike the open and accessible culture of CB radio, the early mo-
dem world more closely resembled postwar amateur radio. For more
than a decade, participation was largely limited to white middle-class
men, many of whom seemed happy to escape from the complex social
reality of the 1970s into an alternative world of protocols, software, and
transistor-transistor logic. Eventually, the political, economic, and cul-
tural circumstances of the 1980s opened the modem world to more di-
verse publics. But in the very early days, the population of most bulletin
boards was relatively homogeneous—especially in contrast to CB radio
and other racially diverse technical hobbies.

Amateur and CB radio nevertheless provided the firmament for
grassroots computer networks like CBBS to grow and flourish. Their
appropriation of the Bell System for data communications was consis-
tent with the creative pragmatism of radio hobbyists who built their sta-
tions out of secondhand military equipment and discarded commercial
hardware. Likewise, early online systems reproduced many networking
concepts and cultural norms from hobby radio. Dial-up BBSs came to
serve a similar function for local computer hobbyists as the amateur ra-
dio repeater did for local hams. Even the slang overlapped. Terms like

“channel” and “handle” were borrowed directly from CB radio. In 1980,
the nationwide online service CompuServe made the connection explicit
by naming its chat system the “CB Simulator.” In a very direct sense, the
computerization of hobby radio in the 1970s produced the modem world
of the 1980s and 1990s.

S

N

57
chapter three

Building an Internet for Everyone
in 1983, john madill worked at the Pikesville ComputerLand
store in Baltimore, Maryland.1 At the time, ComputerLand was promot-
ing the DEC Rainbow, a competitor of the IBM PC, and Madill bought
one for himself. As he learned to use the new computer, he started look-
ing around for communications software with the goal of running his
own BBS. Although DEC designed the Rainbow for compatibility with

MS-DOS, it didn’t provide the same “interrupts” that most DOS software
used to interface with the modem, so many widely available BBS pro-
grams wouldn’t run. A friend recommended that he reach out to Tom

Jennings, the sysop of “Fido’s BBS” in San Francisco. Jennings special-
ized in writing low-level code to make DOS run on non-IBM hardware.

While working for Phoenix Technologies in Boston, he had written the
compatibility layer for numerous PC “clones” including the Rainbow.

His own machine—nicknamed “Fido”—was “a real mongrel,” running

MS-DOS on a Motorola 68000 microprocessor.2

One night, Madill gave Fido’s BBS a call—long-distance from Balti-
more to San Francisco. He left a message for Jennings, and the two be-
gan chatting about computers and communications. Jennings provided

Madill with Rainbow-compatible versions of two utilities he had written

S
for terminal emulation and file transfer.3 Over the next few weeks, they N
spent a lot of time chatting about how to port Fido’s underlying BBS soft-

58

58
building an interne t for e veryone 59
ware to the Rainbow. Out in San Francisco, Jennings had no access to the

Rainbow, so they often wound up on the phone, late at night, with Jen-
nings dictating code for Madill to key into the machine. Jennings later
described it as “the most painful code I have ever written.”4 After several

“gigantic telephone bills,” Madill had a working copy of Fido’s BBS run-
ning on his DEC Rainbow.5

Despite Jennings and Madill’s success, the collaboration had not been
easy. Living in different time zones and area codes, they were keenly
aware of the costs involved. As they continued to tinker with Fido and call
each other’s boards, they began to discuss a new feature that would allow
one Fido to automatically place a call to another Fido, quickly exchange
new messages or files, and hang up. This would minimize the duration
of each long-distance call and enable them to schedule the calls for late
at night, “off peak” hours when the long-distance rates were cheapest. At
the time, there were only two Fidos, so they designed a simple “point to
point” networking scheme in which each system was assigned a num-
ber—Jennings was #1, Madill was #2, and so on—and each system kept a
file listing the telephone numbers associated with each node number. If
you wanted to send a message to the sysop of another Fido, you needed
only to know their node number. Your Fido would wake up in the middle
of the night and deliver the message while you slept. With off-peak calls
running about $13 per hour, they estimated that a “coast to coast” transfer
would cost about $0.01324 per message.6 Early in the summer of 1984, Jennings sent a software update to Madill’s Fido. Soon after, the first

“FidoNet” connection was made between San Francisco, California, and

Baltimore, Maryland.7 “[It was] a big giant hack,” recalled Jennings; “the
hack value was very high.”8

The big giant hack was about to get much bigger. Jennings had also
been communicating with Ben Baker, a computer hobbyist based in

St. Louis.9 Baker was planning to start a BBS for the employee computer club at the aerospace firm McDonnell Douglas. The club had a Rainbow

100 on loan from DEC to host the system, which led Baker to discover
the port of Fido BBS being written by Madill and Jennings. In March,

Baker set up a new Fido BBS on the Rainbow, and in April, the new sys-
tem became Fido #10.10 Over the next few weeks, Fido BBSs continued to pop up around the country. By June, there were five in St. Louis’s 314 area

S
code alone—including four running on DEC Rainbows.11 As Jennings

N

59

60 building an interne t for e veryone
continued to work on the Fido software, he kept in touch with all of the
sysops running a Fido BBS, regularly leaving messages on their boards,
uploading files, and chatting with them on the phone. In June, Jennings
passed around an updated version of Fido along with two new compo-
nents: “FIDONET” and “NODELIST.BBS.” Overnight, every board run-
ning Fido had been transformed into an addressable node in an autono-
mous, grassroots messaging network.

the p ro b l em of l ong - di s tanc e di a l ing

To understand the financial and technical constraints that inspired

Jennings and Madill’s collaboration, it is helpful to explore several key
aspects of the nationwide telephone network on which dial-up BBSs
depended.

The modem world is a telephonic history of the internet.12 Without the availability of reliable telephone service throughout the United

States, neither the institutional nor the hobbyist computer networks of
the 1970s and 1980s would have been possible. State-supported networks
like ARPANET ran over special long-distance “leased lines” that created
a dedicated connection between points in the network, freeing ARPA-

NET engineers to focus on higher-level concerns.13 Hobbyists enjoyed no such luxury. Modem users remained keenly aware of the conditions
and constraints of their residential telephone service. Line noise, busy
signals, and the competing interests of other members of the household
were common sources of frustration for BBS users and sysops.

The computerized bulletin board emerged at a particularly oppor-
tune conjuncture in the history of the telephone. For nearly half a de-
cade, AT&T had enjoyed a de facto monopoly over telecommunications
in the United States, but by the early 1980s, regulators had broken up

“Ma Bell” and opened telephony to private competition. While the grad-
ual opening of the Bell monopoly enabled the formation of independent
dial-up networks, the system that AT&T had created was a technological
and organizational marvel. In 1978, nearly every home in the United

States was accessible from every other home through a convenient, easy-
to-use telephone terminal.

However, some telephone calls were far pricier than others. During

S
the twentieth century, US telephone services depended on a division of

N
space into “local” and “long-distance” regions, with long-distance “trunk”

60
building an interne t for e veryone 61
lines connecting local network exchanges. Since the 1920s, long-distance
calling rates have been set relatively higher than local rates in the United

States. The rationale for this arrangement is that local network infra-
structure is required for callers to access long-distance services—a long-
distance call literally depends on a larger component of the network.

So by 1978, nearly everyone could receive a telephone call, confident
in the knowledge that it cost nothing to answer. Dialing out, however,
required a mental calculation of distance, time, and cost. The telephonic
spatial imaginary sorted the geography of one’s social life according to
rates set by telecom regulators. It might be free to call your son’s school
downtown but cost five cents a minute to call your friend across the state
and twenty cents a minute to call Uncle Larry in Walla Walla. Acciden-
tally ringing up a massive bill was, unfortunately, a common experience
for many new modem owners. The combination of long-distance dial-
ing, hourly fees, and premium services could be confusing, and users
might not realize their mistake until the end of the month, when the
telephone and credit card bills arrived by mail. While professional adults
could afford to joke about the cost of getting online, similar usage by a
teenager could result in significant intrafamily conflict.

The ten-digit telephone number was the result of a thirty-year effort
on the part of AT&T to create a fully automatic network spanning the
continent of North America. Central to this project was the organization
of the network into the North American Numbering Plan, or NANP, in

1945.14 By enforcing a universal numbering scheme across the network, telephone users from around the country could imagine themselves
as members of a single integrated system. The first three digits of any

North American telephone number contain the “area code.” Since the in-
troduction of area codes in the 1960s, they have been markers of collec-
tive identity, recognizable around the country and brandished with pride
by longtime residents of cities like Los Angeles, Manhattan, and Miami.

Although area codes do not always align neatly with the system of lo-
cal and long-distance calling rates, lists of BBSs were nevertheless typi-
cally sorted by area code, reflecting users’ desire to avoid long-distance
charges.

Whether or not BBS users were willing and able to pay, long-
distance calling fees substantially structured the network imaginary of

S
the modem world. The prevalence of regional BBS lists reflected the

N

61

62 building an interne t for e veryone
extent to which BBSing remained an exclusively local activity. Callers
seeking special-interest boards may have been more inclined to pay a
long-distance fee than were those looking for general-interest chat, but
toll calls could easily overwhelm the careless modemer. BBSs with adult
content, particularly original images and video clips, typically charged a
monthly access fee, but the authors of Erotic Connections, a how-to book
aimed at readers curious about “love and lust” on BBSs, cautioned their
readers to be mindful of their telephone bills: “Even a free board . . . can
get expensive to use if it’s an out-of-state call.”15

The steep cost of long-distance dialing meant that the aggregate
growth of BBSs did not necessarily translate into equal access for all
computer owners. Faced with the ten opaque digits of a telephone num-
ber, there was no way—short of dialing—to know what was waiting at
the other end.16 For some people, this ambiguity lent BBSing an attractive air of mystery, a sense of participating in an underground society.

For others, it was costly and frustrating, enough of a barrier to keep them
out altogether.

b ec om ing f id one t

Early on, FidoNet employed a simple point-to-point networking scheme
and a fixed schedule for transmitting messages between nodes. The

NODELIST.BBS file was a human-editable list of BBSs in the Fido net-
work. Each night, at 4 a.m. Eastern Time, the FIDONET program took
over the host PC. If there were outgoing messages to be sent, it looked
up the destination BBS in the NODELIST and placed a call. If it got a
busy signal, it moved on to the next message in the queue. Meanwhile,
it paused between calls in case a remote board was trying to call in. The
telephone company billed long-distance in one-minute increments,
and a typical message was just a few hundred bytes in length. Even at

300 bits per second, most Fido-to-Fido connections were over in less
than one minute. Yet, as more Fidos came online and more sysops be-
gan to experiment with the inter-BBS messaging feature, the network
started to fall out of sync. Busy signals were coming up more often, and
messages weren’t getting through. The net needed a more sophisticated
system for routing and scheduling mail.

S

In addition to network traffic jams, the management of the nodel-

N
ist itself was becoming a problem. At first, everyone in FidoNet knew

62
building an interne t for e veryone 63
each other, and the entire nodelist fit on a single piece of notebook
paper. Node numbers were assigned on an ad hoc basis. Anyone who
registered their copy of Fido BBS received a printed manual with a
unique node number handwritten on the cover.17 But as the network grew beyond thirty nodes, there were strangers involved, and the nodelist required daily care and attention. By July 1984, recalled Jennings,
the nodelist was falling apart, and the network was “starting to deterio-
rate.”18 Each week, the list grew longer, creating more opportunities for error. In the absence of any formal process for joining the network, new
sysops simply reached out to Jennings and asked to be included. Bogged
down developing the software itself, Jennings couldn’t keep up with the
interest. Errors weren’t just frustrating to the hobbyists involved with
the network. A wrong number in the nodelist meant that dozens of

BBSs would be dialing out to that number every night. In one case, a
typo resulted in a “poor old lady” being woken up every night at 4 a.m.

to her telephone ringing off the hook for an hour. Realizing the error,

Jennings called up to apologize, only to find himself in the unpleasant
situation of trying to explain FidoNet to “an extremely tired, extremely
annoyed person.”19

With six active nodes in the local calling area, St. Louis became the
unofficial testing ground for the future of FidoNet. In August, St. Louis
sysops Ken Kaplan, Mike Mellinger, and Jon Wichman took over main-
tenance of the nodelist. By that point, the list was “in shambles.”20 After several weeks of verifying the accuracy of each record, they released a
thoroughly revised nodelist on September 21, 1984. They also declared
that all future requests must be submitted through FidoNet itself, a
mechanism that ensured that all new nodes had correctly installed and
configured their BBS software.21 Simultaneously, several other sysops including Madill, Tony Clark, Danny Feinsmith, Jim Ryan, Ben Baker,
and Vern Crawford continued to work with Jennings to develop and test
the design and implementation of FidoNet. They added binary file trans-
fers, cost accounting, and system security features. They also began to
work out a scheme for routing mail among local nodes in the network.22

Instead of point-to-point networking, a single board would act as a gate-
way into the area code and redistribute mail locally. In this “store-and-
forward” arrangement, a message would take multiple short “hops” to

S
reach its destination, cutting down on the number of long-distance calls

N

63

64 building an interne t for e veryone

The FidoNet nodelist from June to July 1984, including handwritten updates by Tom

Jennings. (Original materials courtesy of Tom Jennings)

throughout the system.23 Jennings and others dreamed of one day rout-
ing messages coast to coast using only flat-rate local calls.24

Under the new system, the network continued to grow. In the final

S
four weeks of 1984, the nodelist climbed from 108 to 134 nodes. Less than

N
a year after the release of version 1, Fido BBSs were operating in forty-one

64
building an interne t for e veryone 65
area codes of the NANP. St. Louis was no longer the only area code with
a network of local boards. New clusters were forming in wealthy suburbs
like Route 128 in Massachusetts, Orange County in California, North-
ern Virginia, and the Houston Beltway in Texas. Beyond these high-tech
hubs, the network was taking hold in regions that were especially disad-
vantaged by long-distance dialing. Four nodes were trading mail from
the islands of Hawaii, three served BBSs in Ontario, and one BBS in the
small town of Petersborough, New Hampshire, brought FidoNet into
the offices of Byte magazine.25 Outside of Canada and the United States, international links were established with BBSs in England, Indonesia,
and Sweden. Calls from North America to Europe cost approximately
one to three dollars per minute, so exchanging messages computer to
computer was cheaper than talking by telephone and faster than mailing
a conventional letter.26

With increasing reliability and geographic reach, FidoNet was be-
coming as much a social organization as a technological project. On De-
cember 1, 1984, Jennings launched FidoNews, a weekly electronic news-
letter distributed to every node in the network.27 In a short introduction, Jennings laid out a vision for the newsletter. Each issue would include

“human-readable” copies of the nodelist and routing map along with
classified ads and articles written by other Fido sysops. “anything is
fit for the newsletter,” he assured readers, “a description of your board,
problems found, questions, jokes, fixes, horror stories about wrong

FidoNet numbers, things for sale, etc etc etc.”28 Over the next year, the newsletter served as a forum for the Fido community, on topics ranging
from highly technical discussions of network protocols to an alarming
piece about the emergence of neo-Nazi BBSs.29 As the only authorita-tive source of technical information about the rapidly changing network,

FidoNews was essential reading for all Fido sysops.30 “FidoNews is the only thing that unites all FidoNet sysops consistently,” wrote Jennings.

“Please keep up to date on it, and stock it for your users if you have the
disk space.”31

FidoNet is closely associated with Tom Jennings. As the sysop of

Fido #1 and author of Fido BBS, he was accepted as the creator of FidoNet,
and many other sysops deferred to his judgment about its future. Online
and off, Jennings was gregarious, opinionated, charismatic, and out-

S
spoken. He could easily have positioned himself as the final authority

N

65

66 building an interne t for e veryone

Masthead from the first issue of FidoNews featuring the ASCII art dog logo created by John Madill. (Original materials courtesy of Tom Jennings)

on FidoNet. But time and again, he disclaimed any control over the net-
work. Instead, he invited others to collaborate, focused attention on their
contributions, and gave up positions of power. In the electronic pages of

FidoNews and in later interviews, he characterized his refusal to exercise
central control as an expression of his politics—radical, anarchist, queer,
punk. Jennings regarded the decentralization of the preexisting modem
world as a virtue: “Every bulletin board was completely different, run by
some cantankerous person . . . the way that they saw fit, period.”32 The original design of FidoNet sought to maintain the autonomy of individual boards. A sysop could cut themselves off from others by editing their
copy of the nodelist, but they couldn’t force anyone else to accept their
changes. Conversely, the Fido software did not require the use of the

St. Louis nodelist. With a copy of Fido, any two sysops could start a new
network in parallel to, in competition with, or in defiance of the original.

Early documentation for the system made this point clear: “You get to
control absolutely everything that FidoNet does.”33

S

In the spring of 1985, after a year in operation, FidoNet was becoming

N
many things: a set of protocols, a collection of programs implementing

66

building an interne t for e veryone 67

FidoNet bumper sticker with a gap for Fido sysops to write in their node numbers.

Sold at cost through FidoNews at the start of 1985. (Original materials courtesy of Tom Jennings)

those protocols for different platforms, a network of interconnected

BBSs, and a community of sysops and users. This multiplicity of mean-
ings foreshadowed the transformation of the internet a decade later.

Sure, anyone could use the Fido software to create a new network, but
there was only one “FidoNet.”34 Overwhelmed by hundreds of requests
for help, Jennings handed off editorial control of the weekly newsletter to

Thom Henderson, an early Fido sysop.35 In his first editorial, Henderson encouraged readers to take ownership of FidoNews. “Don’t think of this
as ‘my’ paper, or even as Fido’s,” he wrote. “Think of it as your paper.”36

FidoNet was a collective, participatory project, and Fido sysops were al-
ready beginning to identify with the network. Jennings printed up five
hundred bumper stickers featuring a dog and a blank space for sysops to
write in their node numbers.37
r e or g ani z ing f id one t

As the growth of the nodelist continued to accelerate, FidoNet was again
racing toward disaster. Despite the success of the new routing system,
the latest version of Fido could only index 250 nodes, and the nodelist
was projected to hit the limit sometime in mid-April 1985.38 The nodelist was also becoming an unreasonable burden on its volunteer administrator, Ken Kaplan. Ben Baker argued that an amateur network should
be driven by pleasure: “[For Kaplan,] FidoNet is rapidly becoming work,

S
not fun.”39 Ultimately, Kaplan represented a single point of failure in a N

67

68 building an interne t for e veryone
system with dozens of participants. “FidoNet is too large to be managed
from a central point,” wrote Jennings in an article for FidoNews.40

A fundamental revision of the FidoNet addressing scheme was
urgently needed. In 1985, there were no models for organizing a cost-
conscious computer network at an international scale. FidoNet was an
anomaly. “Fido wasn’t designed,” Jennings had remarked to Byte the pre-
vious October. “It was just built.”41 But the stakes seemed higher than they had even a few months before. Every night, hundreds of people sent
mail through the network, and each week, a dozen boards joined the
system. Could they rebuild the network while it was running? Or would
it all fall apart?

The opportunity to redesign FidoNet came in April 1985. The Mc-

Donnell Douglas computer club invited Jennings, Henderson, and Byte
magazine’s West Coast editor, Ezra Shapiro, out to St. Louis for a special
joint meeting with the local chapter of the Digital Equipment Computer

Users’ Society.42 Henderson wasn’t available, but Jennings and Shapiro took the five-hour flight from San Francisco to the nerve center of

FidoNet in the US Midwest. The club meeting was held on Thursday
night, but Shapiro and Jennings stuck around. That weekend, they con-
vened with several St. Louis sysops at the home of Ken and Sally Kaplan
to discuss the future of FidoNet.43 Jennings turned up with a skateboard and knapsack full of maps of North America. They spread the maps out
on the floor, passed around a felt-tip pen, and carved the continent into
ten “regions.”44 For eleven hours, no one left the Kaplans’ living room.

They talked about software problems and administrative difficulties,
drew potential maps and routing diagrams, and discussed how the net-
work should function differently. Jennings later called it “the most pro-
ductive meeting” he’d ever attended.45 Late that night, they said good-bye and headed out with a plan.

On April 22, Thom Henderson sent out a special issue of FidoNews
dedicated to the outcome of the meeting in the Kaplans’ living room.

Anticipating the pushback from sysops happy with the status quo, Hen-
derson opened the newsletter with an excited editorial. “FidoNet has just
grown too big too fast,” he wrote. “Something that started out as a way
for a small circle of friends to swap files back and forth has grown into

S
a nationwide (even worldwide) electronic mail network, with hundreds

N
of subscribers.”46 In a pair of articles, Jennings and Baker laid out their 68
building an interne t for e veryone 69
vision for the remaking of FidoNet. “Don’t panic yet,” assured Jennings;

“it will be easier and better for everyone.”47

The principal outcome of the St. Louis meeting was a reorganization
of the network from an “amorphous” topology to a two-tiered “multinet.”

In the multinet, each individual BBS was still a node, but now every
node also belonged to a region or a net.48 Regions were defined strictly by geography, while nets also included an agreement to route mail locally.

Ideally, all nodes would eventually belong to a net, but nodes in remote
areas often started out as a member of a region. For example, while Re-
gion 17 covered a geographic area bounded by Alaska, Saskatchewan, Or-
egon, and Wyoming, most nodes in Region 17 belonged to one of seven
nets organized around the cities of Portland, Vancouver, Alberta, Seattle,

Regina, Saskatoon, and Eugene. For continuity, existing nodes kept their
numbers, which left traces of the earlier topology in the new nodelist.

Tom Jennings’s original Fido BBS, located in the Bay Area’s Net 125, be-
came 125/1. John Madill’s board, Fido #2, joined Metro DC’s Net 109 and
became 109/2. Under the net/node system, fewer messages would be
sent directly over long-distance calls. Instead, Node 0 would act as a gate-
way. Any messages sent to Node 0 would be routed to the appropriate
local node.

The regional schema represented a novel reconfiguration of space.

For FidoNet purposes, the net/node number actually superseded the
telephone number as a BBS’s primary address. To convey the purpose of
net numbers to the community, Baker and Jennings compared them to
telephone area codes. In fact, an early prototype of the Fido map adopted
area codes directly from the NANP.49 At first blush, it might have looked to some sysops like they were reinventing the telephone numbering
plan. But unlinking the network’s addressing schema from the NANP al-
lowed FidoNet to grow independently of the underlying telephone infra-
structure. Just as the cluster in St. Louis had formed organically around
the McDonnell Douglas computer club, future nets would be created
according to the social and economic needs of a local community.

Breaking FidoNet into regions did more than fix a technical problem.

The two-tiered system effectively decentralized administrative control of
the network. Jennings characterized the new architecture as “anarchy
through computers,” a noncoercive approach to internetwork commu-

S
nication.50 Instead of relying on a single person to manage the nodelist, N

69

70 building an interne t for e veryone
each net and region nominated a voluntary “coordinator,” known as the

“NC” and “RC.”51 The coordinators were responsible for assigning new node numbers, distributing issues of FidoNews, resolving technical problems, and maintaining a regional nodelist. Each week, if there were any
changes within the region or net, the coordinator would send an updated
list to the sysop at Node 1/0. This position, initially held by Ken Kaplan,
involved simply compiling the regional lists into a global nodelist and
sending it back to the NCs. Jennings characterized the new top-level
position as “grunt-work . . . no creativity involved.”52 Crucially, the net coordinator positions were designed with hobbyists in mind. Each NC
was responsible for just a handful of nodes.53 The network no longer depended on the beneficence of a single coordinator. Errors and failures
would be contained within nets and regions.

Splitting up the nodelist enforced an interdependence among sys-
ops in each calling area. The architects of the net/node plan did not pre-
scribe how the net coordinators were to be chosen. This hands-off ap-
proach gave political control to the regional nets, enabling a flourishing
of regional cultures. The practical need to find a volunteer NC implicitly
encouraged local sysops to identify with their regional nets as much (or
more) than with FidoNet as a whole. In July 1985, Henderson invited
everyone in Net 107 (NYC_Metro) to spend a day on his boat for “sun,
suds, surf and sysoping.”54 The next issue of FidoNews featured a humorous account of the party: “Picture a bus load of Fido Sysops with a
printed text file as a guide scooting north on the Garden State Parkway.” 55

Joining a net meant joining a community of peers.

The transition to “multinet” Fido was not immediate, and its cre-
ators anticipated that it might be rocky. Soon after the meeting in April,

Kaplan announced that the nodelist was frozen.56 New applicants would have to wait for the transition and apply to their new net coordinators.

In late May, after more than a month of testing, Jennings released the
first version of Fido with support for regional nets. 57 Now, when a user entered the FidoNet messaging area to create a new message, they were
prompted to first select a net and then a node within that net.58 Sysops were instructed to get the new version of Fido installed before June 12,

1985.59 On that date, a new nodelist would go into effect. To make the S
transition, each sysop needed to download the new nodelist and set their

N
system’s net and node numbers. “I was expecting total chaos,” recalled

70
building an interne t for e veryone 7 1

17

11

16

14

13

10

15

18

19

12

Geographic structure of FidoNet after the “multinet” transition in June 1985. These
original ten regions were “dreamed up” by several key FidoNet sysops during a mara-
thon meeting in St. Louis and included every active area code in the North American

Numbering Plan. Using felt-tip markers on large paper maps, the sysops constructed
each region intuitively, aiming for segments of approximately equal population. The
results provide a sense of the prevailing spatial imaginary among BBS sysops of the
period, as well as a snapshot of the geographic reach of the telephone network. Not
pictured: Region 18 also included area code 809, which was used by Puerto Rico, the

US Virgin Islands, Bermuda, the Dominican Republic, and the fifteen island nations of
the Commonwealth Caribbean.

Baker. “I was not at all prepared for just how smooth the transition hap-
pened!”60 After weeks of anticipation, FidoNet carried on with barely a blip. Bemused, Baker later joked, “The mail kept flowing as if nothing
had happened!”61

The successful upgrade marked an evolution in the collective iden-
tity of FidoNet’s sysops. In the same sense that amateur radio opera-
tors discussed the coast-to-coast relay project of the 1910s, the transition
to multinet Fido became a source of pride for the FidoNet community.

“We’ve done an incredible thing here,” remarked Thom Henderson in

FidoNews a few months after the transition.62 In comparison to other major networks requiring reorganization around the same time, the remaking of FidoNet was remarkably uneventful. When ARPANET tran-
sitioned to TCP/IP, it had taken six months for all of the nodes to adopt

S
the new protocols. USENET’s “Great Renaming” involved months of

N

71

72 building an interne t for e veryone
acrimonious debate. For Fido sysops, the experience of working together
on a big technological problem seemed to deepen their commitment
to FidoNet. “[The transition] took a good deal of coordinated effort by a
great many people,” recalled Baker in 1987. “It proved we could function
as a body!”63

Over the next year, the net/node architecture remained stable, and

FidoNet grew to nearly one thousand nodes—including more than one
hundred outside of North America.64 In November 1985, the Hobbycom-
puterclub (HCC) of Holland flew Jennings to Utrecht for a large com-
puter show and a meeting of European Fido sysops.65 According to a report Jennings published in FidoNews, the HCC included approximately
twenty-five thousand members, and the room was packed for his pre-
sentation on FidoNet.66 Despite the enthusiasm for microcomputers and BBSs, however, Europe presented unique challenges to FidoNet’s
growth. Whereas Americans paid a flat rate for local calls, Europeans
paid per minute, regardless of distance. Additionally, variations in line
quality and the availability of consumer modems complicated the con-
struction of international connections. In the short term, countries out-
side North America were represented by national regions and nets, and
local coordinators determined the best way to route mail within each
country. By October 1986, there were nineteen regional networks oper-
ating outside North America, including nodes in Indonesia, Australia,

Singapore, and Hong Kong.

r eeng ineer ing f id one t

Although the transition of June 1985 distributed administrative control
of FidoNet to the regional subnets, one critical aspect remained highly
centralized: the Fido software itself. Tom Jennings originally created

Fido BBS as a lark—it was 1983, he’d just moved across the country, and
he had the time to write code for a few weeks. That owners of the DEC

Rainbow flocked to the system was unexpected. That it would become
an international messaging network was ridiculous. After two years and
dozens of updates, Jennings was burning out. “It’s crazy!” he told a DEC
computer magazine. “There are 250 or 300 nodes, and I’m the only per-
son maintaining them.”67 The pressure to release updates increased with S
the size of the network. In October 1985, just a few weeks after the re-

N
lease of version 11, a well-intentioned Fido sysop circulated a “wish list”

72
building an interne t for e veryone 7 3
of features he’d like to see in version 12. “Tom Jennings has much to be
proud of,” he wrote. “Maybe he’ll be able to teach Fido some of [these]

‘tricks.’”68 Tom didn’t finish version 12 until August 1987.

Fortunately, the structure of Fido BBS invited tinkering. Fido had
always been a software system rather than a single monolithic program.

Future innovations to FidoNet came from outside Fido itself. A typical

Fido was composed of a copy of the FIDO executable program, a set of di-
rectories on disk, and a collection of custom scripts. The initial configura-
tion was difficult, but a functional Fido BBS was relatively easy to under-
stand. Fido used the standard MS-DOS file system to define its message
and files areas, providing sysops an unusual degree of control over its
internal operations. Sysops frequently authored and swapped small utili-
ties to automate the maintenance of their BBSs and add features to the
system. Participants in FidoNet began experimenting around the edges
of the network, building new components to replace parts of the default

Fido system. In April 1986, the Houston-area sysop Richard Polunsky
tracked down 133 Fido utilities, many of which automated maintenance
tasks such as managing the nodelist and culling old email.69 By 1987, it was possible to run a fully functional FidoNet node without running any
of the original Fido software at all.

Tom Jennings, meanwhile, was living in a San Francisco warehouse
with a crew of queer punks, artists, activists, and skateboarders.70 In just under a year, the warehouse had become a hotbed for political organizing, underground publishing, and countercultural events. Jennings di-
rected any revenue generated by Fido shareware fees toward rent and
groceries for the collective, but his companions were only peripherally
aware of what he was doing with his computer. One former housemate
described him, lovingly, as a “mad scientist.”71 Jennings continued to support the Fido community from a workbench in the warehouse, but
his attention was increasingly occupied by the queer punk culture blos-
soming around him. Soon, he stopped running his own bulletin board.

As other sysops took on more responsibility, Jennings reduced his role,
allowing FidoNet to take on a life of its own.

Compiled versions of Fido BBS were freely available for a range
of platforms—FIDO_IBM.EXE, FIDO_DEC.EXE, and so on—but the
source code was not. Fido’s code included proprietary routines that Jen-

S
nings was not at liberty to distribute.72 In March 1985, Jennings had begun N

73

74 building an interne t for e veryone
raising the alarm: “This is a grassroots, low cost, hobbyist network, the
first and only one of its kind. It is truly the forefront of technology; you
can ride along for free and see it collapse by Fall, or you can start things
going, even better than it is.”73 A new Fido-compatible BBS program was needed to keep the network going in the event that he “dropped dead.”74

Plus, Fido was hardly perfect: “It is huge, cumbersome, and consumes
disk space like a congressional subcommittee consumes money.”75 In response, FidoNet began to move further away from Fido as the default.76

By the end of 1985, several dozen nodes were running bits and pieces of

Bob Hartman’s Fido-compatible ROVER project.77 But cloning Fido was
not the only way to remove Jennings as the single point of failure for

FidoNet. If other BBS software could generate the same message “pack-
ets” as Fido, the network would continue to grow on its own.78 At least two programs—SEAdog and Colossus (aka “Collie”)—were already offering limited support for FidoNet mail thanks to their authors’ painstaking
efforts to reverse-engineer the Fido data format. Forget the Fido code: the
future of FidoNet depended on its protocol.

Ideally, publishing a standard FidoNet protocol independent of the

Fido software would open the network to thousands of new participants.

In 1985, countless developers—from hobbyists to professionals—were
writing BBS programs that could potentially join FidoNet, if only they
had access to accurate information about the protocol.79 The challenge, of course, is that any technical standard is more than a mere document.

Standards are complex social objects, laden with cultural values and po-
litical commitments.80 In the case of telecommunications, the values embedded in a networking protocol shape the relationships between people,
places, and things.81 In the mid-1980s, such “protocological” forms of social control were top of mind for networking researchers in Europe
and the United States. A protracted battle over internetworking stan-
dards had split the community between advocates of TCP/IP and the

Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model.82 But whereas TCP/IP and

OSI both represented the interests of universities, corporations, govern-
ments, and other large institutions, the FidoNet protocol would serve an
open-ended, loosely affiliated network of amateurs. The financial stakes
may have been lower, but the debates were just as fierce. Notoriously

S
independent, BBS sysops were not used to being told what to do.

N

74
building an interne t for e veryone 75

Despite Fido BBS’s cutting-edge networking features, by the end of

1985, its user interface was starting to look positively ancient. Messages
and menus rendered in monochromatic text rolled up the screen like
the output of a teleprinter, just like the bulletin boards of the late 1970s.

Jennings defended the spartan interface on the grounds that it was eco-
nomical, interoperable, and easy to learn. “It was done ugly on purpose,”

he told InfoWorld magazine.83 Indeed, Fido worked with virtually any available computer platform—including screen readers for the visually
impaired—but the rest of the modem world was moving to colorful, ani-
mated interfaces similar to videotex systems like Minitel. The diverging
aesthetics presented a quandary for Fido sysops. Couldn’t they have the
network without the ugly?

Elsewhere in the modem world, a more beautiful Fido was already
under way. At the urging of friends, the Dallas-based programmer Wynn

Wagner III started working on a FidoNet-compatible BBS called Opus.84

Rather than replace the previous system, Wagner conceived of Opus as

“an evolutionary step” forward.85 Opus used the same support files, message areas, and networking tools as Fido, making it easy for sysops to
switch. But whereas Jennings had resolutely stuck to the minimal in-
terfaces of an earlier era, Wagner encouraged sysops to adopt “blazing
color” and “lavish widgets.”86 To create its animated graphics, Opus relied on the sixteen-color “ANSI art” technique characteristic of MS-DOS
and the IBM PC platform.87 For callers with compatible hardware, Opus could display dynamic, moving visual images. For everyone else, the system fell back on plain ASCII text.

Opus sent a shock through FidoNet’s increasingly bureaucratic cul-
ture. Irreverent quotations and references to cyberpunk science fiction
appeared throughout the user manual. FidoNet was “the matrix,” pro-
grammers wore “mirror shades,” and the whole project was “militantly”

anticommercial.88 Wagner, a gay man, insisted that anyone running Opus in a for-profit context send $50 to support AIDS-related research
and care services.89 In January 1987, after a year of testing, Opus version 0.1 was released, sparking a frenzy of calls into North Texas. “So many
people were using modems to get to the Opus sites in Dallas,” recalled

Wagner, “that the telephone network couldn’t handle the load.”90 Within S

N

75

Welcome screens for BBSs running Opus software. These colorful images were made
for the text mode of an IBM-compatible PC by arranging the built-in semigraphical char-
acters and ANSI escape codes. “The Antenna Farm” was created by Jim Lane (KD5WS)

(silent key) for the ham radio BBS run by the sysop Ben Thornton (NI5B; formerly

S

WD5WLS). “The Private Oak Lawn Exchange” was bundled with Opus to demonstrate
its graphical capabilities. The name of the BBS refers to the Oak Lawn neighborhood

N
of Dallas, Texas, a hub for the city’s gay community. (The Antenna Farm courtesy of

76

Bennett Thornton)

building an interne t for e veryone 7 7
months, a large majority of FidoNet nodes had switched over from Fido
to Opus. The Fido network was becoming a mongrel.

With the emergence of Fido alternatives like Opus, the need for a
common definition of FidoNet was becoming urgent. The first coordi-
nated effort at standardizing FidoNet began in the summer of 1986.91

Randy Bush, a Fido sysop and the author of several BBS utilities, an-
nounced the formation of the FidoNet Standards Committee.92 The ini-
tial purpose of the committee was to document the existing protocol and
create a standard for future “FidoClones.” The announcement listed sev-
eral familiar names—Ben Baker, Ken Kaplan, Tom Jennings, and Thom

Henderson were all involved, as well as programmers Gee Wong and

Bob Pritchett. The committee planned to share a first draft of the stan-
dard at an upcoming FidoNet convention planned for August in Colo-
rado Springs, Colorado. Henderson assured readers of FidoNews that the
committee was concerned only with the technical definition of FidoNet,
not its administration or organization: “just the stuff that goes over the
phone line.”93 At the convention, Bush presented the committee’s draft standard to a rapturous reception. The longtime Fido sysop Allen Miller
described the standardization project as “the most meaningful contribu-
tion to the world of telecommunications that I could have imagined.”94 A
few weeks later, Hartman invited the committee to visit him in southern

New Hampshire, where they outlined an “extended addressing” scheme
to better handle the growth of international traffic and internetwork
gateways connecting FidoNet to USENET and ARPANET.95 Existing net/
node addresses would be expanded to include optional zone and point
numbers. Zones represented large, continental-scale constructs, and
points referred to nodes with just one user. For example, Henderson’s

107/6 address would be extended to 1:107/6.1. Days after the meeting,

Henderson offered cautious optimism in his report to FidoNews: “Kludge
it may be, but it’s simple and straightforward.”96

The FidoNet Standards Committee, later known as the FidoNet Tech-
nical Standards Committee, or FTSC, adopted similar decision-making
practices as the emerging internet community. FidoNet standards were
published in plain ASCII text, circulated on the network for discussion,
and frequently updated by the committee.97 Like the internet’s “Request for Comments” documents, FidoNet standards blended policy consid-S
erations with technical specifications, an unavoidable characteristic of

N

77

78 building an interne t for e veryone

Evolution of the FidoNet Zone System, 1987–1995
zone
year
name

1

1987

N._America_Coord

1988

Intl_FidoNet_Co

1989

North_America

2

1987

Europe

1991

Europe/Soviet_Union

1992

Europe_etc

1995

Europe_&_more

3

1987

Oceania

1993

Australia_NZ_PNG

4

1989

America_Latina

5

1990

Africa

6

1991

Asia

Note: Zone names extracted from archived FidoNet nodelists through 1998.

any telecommunications protocol.98 As Randy Bush explained in an early draft of the standard, compliance with the standard protocol was a “social obligation” between cooperating participants in the network.99 The stakes reflected the amateur community’s reliance on the spatial and
economic structure of the telephone network. Failing to receive an in-
coming packet represented not only a breakdown in communication but
an unfair financial burden on the sysop placing the call. The FidoNet
standards were written by people who paid their own telephone bills.

In 1987, shortly after the meetings in Colorado and New Hampshire,
the FidoNet Standards Committee produced its first standard, “A Basic

FidoNet(tm) Technical Standard.” Labeled FSC001 and credited to Randy

Bush, the standard established the bare minimum requirements for a
node to fully participate in the network.100 In plain language, the purpose of FSC001 was to ensure a “reasonable chance” that any two nodes could
successfully exchange mail.101 Ideally, every node on the nodelist would meet the criteria laid out in the standard. Bush based his definition of

FidoNet on the messages and packets produced by Fido version 11w and

S

SEAdog version 3. To make the standard legible across the amateur and

N
institutional boundary, he adopted the same “layered” protocol model as

78
building an interne t for e veryone 79
the OSI.102 Among other technical details, FSC001 outlined the byte-for-byte structure of a message “packet” and modeled the exchange of pack-
ets between nodes as a finite state machine.103 Crucial components of the network, such as the format of the nodelist, were set aside to be defined
in a future standard. The goal of FSC001 was to provide all of the details
necessary to replicate the networking features of Fido BBS.

This standardization effort occurred in parallel with the creation of

“continuous mail” and “Echomail,” two extensions of FidoNet built by
members of the community. Continuous mail, also known as “crash”

mail, enabled boards to exchange messages at times other than the late-
night FidoNet Mail Hour. Nodes supporting continuous mail could send
and receive FidoNet packets throughout the day, dramatically speeding
up the spread of messages through the network and providing sysops
with more fine-grained control over their expenses. Continuous mail
first appeared early in 1984, when Thom Henderson introduced SEAdog,
an email program that implemented Fido’s network protocol but none
of the BBS features. SEAdog could either run alongside a standard

Fido installation or act as a stand-alone node for a single user.104 In the complementary configuration, SEAdog answered the phone instead of

Fido. If the incoming call was from another SEAdog node, then the two
programs would rapidly exchange packets and hang up. If not, SEAdog
would hand over the call to Fido.

“Front-end mailers” like SEAdog transformed the temporality of

FidoNet. The late-night Mail Hour remained sacrosanct, a technocul-
tural ritual holding the network together, but a growing number of
nodes traded mail throughout the day. From 1987 to 1992, the number of
nodes accepting continuous mail rose from approximately 54 percent to

85 percent.105 During this period, new mailer software such as Binkley-Term, Dutchie, and FrontDoor altered the structure of BBS communica-
tions by enabling individual PC owners to read and write mail in “offline
mode.”106 Sysops of popular BBSs encouraged frequent callers to adopt mailer programs to reduce the amount of time that each person spent on
the board, thereby freeing up the line for other callers.107 Mailers also provided sysops with tools to determine when and how to send data around
the network. For example, a sysop might set a high priority on a few
long-distance boards and send mail to them immediately, despite the

S
cost, while leaving the rest of the mail for late at night.

N

79

8 0 building an interne t for e veryone

Echomail, the second major extension of FidoNet, used the underly-
ing networking facility to create a public conferencing system similar
in purpose and structure to USENET newsgroups or CompuServe fo-
rums.108 The standard Fido BBS featured several separate “areas” organized around different topics. The manual suggested technical themes
such as “IBMPC,” but sysops were free to create their own ontologies—

Jennings’s board featured areas dedicated to graffiti and music.109 Yet the standard Fido software allowed only one of the message areas to carry

FidoNet mail. As a result, FidoNet mail was used primarily for person-to-
person messaging between sysops, rather than open-ended discussions
between the users of different BBSs.

Echomail emerged out of the same lively BBS community in Texas as

Opus. Sysops around Dallas and Ft. Worth were tight-knit and chummy,
meeting regularly for pizza parties and picnics. At one such gathering
in late 1985, several sysops had been talking shop, complaining about
long-distance bills and irksome users causing trouble on their boards.110

They began to wonder aloud about an online space for local sysops to
compare notes. Why not use FidoNet? Jeff Rush, one of the sysops, took a
few ideas from their bull session and came up with the basic structure of

Echomail. Instead of depositing all incoming FidoNet messages into the
same message area, Rush introduced two additional programs—a “scan-
ner” and a “tosser”—to manage the distribution of messages among
multiple networked areas. The Dallas-area sysops Chuck Lawson, Jon

Sabol, and Wynn Wagner agreed to test out the new system. Within a
week, they added a link to Harv Neghila’s BBS in San Francisco.111

The defining feature of Echomail is the topical conference, or “echo.”

Each echo was identified by a unique nickname that appeared in the list
of message areas on participating BBSs. The Dallas group started with

SYSOP and TECH. After a week, they added CHATTER and POLITICS,
foreshadowing a proliferation of topics far afield of tech and telecom.

Like FidoNet itself, Echomail was a decentralized communication sys-
tem, managed from the edges of the network. There was no official list
of echoes or approval process to create a new conference. Rather, the
growth of Echomail was informal and ad hoc. To create a new confer-
ence, two sysops would agree to “carry” the topic on their boards, vol-

S
untarily swapping messages back and forth. If another sysop wished to

N
join in, they would request a “feed” of new messages from one of the es-

80
building an interne t for e veryone 81
tablished participants.112 To generate interest in a new echo, participants circulated electronic memos to other sysops inviting them to carry the
feed. By August 1986, new echoes were popping up every week on topics
including genealogy, ham radio, record collecting, science fiction and
fantasy fandom, witchcraft and neopaganism, polyamory and other “al-
ternate lifestyles,” support for Vietnam veterans, disability, and countless
computer platforms, software systems, and programming languages.113

Compared with conventional FidoNet mail, Echomail was very easy
to use. Indeed, the interface was so transparent that a new user could
jump into a discussion without initially realizing that they were trading
messages with people on other BBSs.114 Upon close inspection, however, telling details were appended to every remote message. Like a postmark
on a traditional letter, the body of an Echomail message included two or
more lines of “control information” used to route the message through
the network. The “origin line” spanned a single line with a maximum of
seventy-nine characters—excessive control information was considered
wasteful—and indicated the name and address of the BBS from which
the message originated.115 Creative sysops seized on this technical requirement as an opportunity for promotion and self-expression, packing
the origin line with ASCII art, jokes, puns, and other silly messages.

Soon, individual users joined in, extending the automatically generated
text to include their own signature “taglines.” In practice, taglines and
control lines were easy to ignore, but they provided a regular reminder
that Echomail conferences did not exist in some abstract cyberspace—

FidoNet was a network of real computers, each one plugged into a wall
somewhere on Earth.

Echomail spread so quickly and so thoroughly throughout the net-
work that FidoNet almost collapsed under the sudden increase in activ-
ity.116 Within weeks of Echomail’s release, Thom Henderson joked, “[It]

will greatly expand the whole meaning of FidoNet, if it doesn’t break it
first.”117 By summertime, the Dallas clique had released a new version of Opus with built-in support for Echomail, lowering the bar for participation even further.118 In August 1986, Jeff Rush showed up at the annual FidoNet convention wearing a shirt emblazoned with a bull’s-eye and the words “echomail creator.” During the opening session, he
stood up from the audience for a round of applause as Ben Baker and

S

Thom Henderson pretended to shoot him with imaginary arrows from

N

81

Taglines, tear lines, and control lines appearing in Echomail conferences between 1987
and 2002. The “tear line,” beginning with three leading dashes, marked the division
between a user’s message and the required Echomail control information. The tear line
often included the name and version number of the “mailer” program used to send the

S
message. The “origin line” indicated the BBS from which the message was sent, typically

N
with the FidoNet address listed in parentheses. This list includes messages sent from

Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, South Africa, and the United States. Many Echomail

82
programs also allowed users to add an additional “tagline” just before the tear. Taglines included shout-outs, quotes, social commentary, and single-line ASCII art illustrations.

building an interne t for e veryone 83
the stage.119 An overwhelming majority of the sysops in attendance had adopted Echomail, mere months after its release. To handle the new traffic, participants informally agreed to shrink the size of their transfers
using compression software, to limit redundant Echomail packets, and
to prioritize person-to-person mail over conference messages. 120 FidoNet survived; Echomail thrived.

Due to the decentralized structure of the network, there are no au-
thoritative lists of Echomail conferences or comprehensive archives of

Echomail messages. However, as with the broader BBS movement, sev-
eral Echomail users stepped up to create their own information resources
regarding the new network. In May 1986, the Fido sysop Thomas Kenny
announced his plan to create a public database of Echomail conferences,
available from his BBS in Tom’s River, New Jersey.121 At the start of 1987, Kenny published a first draft of the list, including contact information
for 133 active echoes and twenty-three proposed topics.122

In January 1987, Echomail was just one year old. Yet Kenny’s list re-
veals an emerging awareness of FidoNet as a medium for cross-regional
communication. A few echoes focused on particular geographic re-
gions—an unmoderated conference for gossiping about Florida’s Sun-
coast BBS scene, a “cosmopolitan” conference for talking books with

Metro Boston modemers, a proto-foodie conference for DC-area restau-
rant reviews.123 But many more aimed to overcome the constraints of long-distance dialing. Two of the earliest echoes, GAYNET and BIBLE,
specifically sought users from different parts of the modem world to cre-
ate translocal communities of interest.124 Wynn Wagner created GAYNET
with his boyfriend, Rick, from their home in Oak Lawn, a historically gay
neighborhood of Dallas.125 Just as the gay residents of Oak Lawn might visit friends in Boystown, Chicago, or vacation in Provincetown, Massachusetts, Echomail enabled an alternative mapping of the modem world,
organized by shared interest and identity rather than area code or com-
puter platform. Whether connecting the residents of gay enclaves or the
adherents of a particular religion, Echomail provided a common meet-
ing place for geographically distributed communities of interest.

For longtime FidoNet sysops, Echomail was a revolution they had
been working toward for nearly two years. Ben Baker, after “banging
his head against the wall” and “pleading” with users to try FidoNet, was

S
thrilled by the sudden enthusiasm for Echomail.126 Tom Jennings believed N

83

Selected Echomail Conferences, 1987–1991
conference
description

ABLED
disABLED users information exchange

ASIAN-AMERICAN

Asian-American Community happenings

BIBLE

Christian conference

C_ECHO

C language programmers

DOGGIES

Fido clones & compatibles

FEMINISM

A discussion conference on feminism and gender
issues

FIRENET

Fire/Rescue/EMS news and information exchange

FOR-SALE

A nationwide flea market

GAYNEWS

Gay/Lesbian news echo

GENEALOGY

Family ties

HAM_TECH

Amateur (ham) radio technology conference

HEALTH

Health related issues (MDs participating)

IFNA

International FidoNet Association members

IPR

InterPersonal Relationships plus moral, ethical,
social issues

JOBSHOP

Nationwide help wanted

JUDAICA

General Jewish discussions

LIFESTYLE

Aging hippies, probably

MEADOW

Opus sysops

PARK

US National Park Service only

RECORDS

Record collecting and music in general

RECOVERY

Members of Alcoholics Anonymous

RELIGIOUS DEBATE

Born again vs secular humanists

S&M

Consensual power exchange

SF

Science fiction and fantasy literature

SYSOP

THE National Sysop conference. Sysops ONLY!

TECH

General computer talk

VIETNAM VETS

Vietnam veterans’ conference

WILDLIFE

Discussion of nature, outdoors, hunting, fishing,
conservation

Sources: Michael G. Fuchs, “Echomail Conference List Report,” FidoNet on the Internet, July 1,

1991, http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/e1991/elist107.txt; Thomas Kenny, “The First Echomail Conference List,” FidoNet on the Internet, January 13, 1987, http://www.textfiles

S

.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/e1987/elist701.txt; Kenny, “The First Echomail Conference List,”

FidoNews, March 9, 1987, http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/FIDONEWS/fido0410.nws;

N

Wynn Wagner, “OPUS Computer-Based Conversation System Version 1.0,” ed. John Miller,

84

June 14, 1987, archived at http://cd.textfiles.com/masterdisc/SS/CMM/0004/OPUSDOC.TXT.

building an interne t for e veryone 85
that Echomail alone drove the adoption of FidoNet during the late 1980s.

“It spread like wildfire,” he recalled. “The traffic was just enormous.”127

New sysops were joining FidoNet specifically to access Echomail.128 Several sysops volunteered to form a high-volume Echomail “backbone” net-
work to ensure the availability of the most popular echoes.129 Between 1986 and 1989, the nodelist more than quadrupled, and by one estimate,
the network carried nearly five hundred public Echomail conferences.130

To manage the rising cost of running a node, sysops experimented with
novel long-distance products from Sprint and MCI and tunneling over
commercial packet-switching networks like Telenet’s PC Pursuit. They
worked directly with modem makers including US Robotics, Telebit, and

Microcom on the design of faster, more flexible PC modems.131 And in 1992, they moved a large proportion of FidoNet traffic off the telephone
network altogether and onto the Planet Connect satellite network.132 Yet the growth of FidoNet and Echomail continued to outpace these innovations. In 1993, the sysop Roy Timberman reported paying $2,500 per
month to move data through his Kansas City gateway.133 That was a big number for an individual hobby, but it was a steal when it came to running a global data network.

the int ernat iona l f id one t l i v e s u p t o i t s name

By 1988, the FidoNet community had stubbornly built its own online
world, independent of the corporate or academic networks springing up
around North America. The grassroots BBS network provided a set of
services comparable to the nascent internet—email, file transfers, and
discussion forums—without any of the institutional support. The clever
hack that enabled Tom Jennings and John Madill to trade bits of code in

1984 had become a worldwide network of cooperating bulletin board sys-
tems, carrying everything from geeky jokes to vital medical information.

Gateways eroded the boundaries between FidoNet and the institutional
networks connecting large corporations and universities.134 As people outside the modem world learned about FidoNet, many came to see it
as a “training ground” rather than a legitimate information system of its
own.135 This dismissive view of FidoNet reflected a common prejudice against microcomputers and a failure to appreciate the unique social,
technical, and economic challenges that the international amateur net-

S
work had already overcome. Echomail wasn’t a substitute for USENET

N

85

86 building an interne t for e veryone
any more than FM was a substitute for AM radio. As Zone 1 coordinator

George Peace reminded an internet-hungry audience at a BBS conven-
tion in 1993, FidoNet was a different technology meeting different needs
for different people.136

Above all, FidoNet remained an independent, cooperative computer
network. Unlike commercial platforms or institutional networks, there
was no central authority governing the technological or social behavior
of FidoNet users and sysops. A resistance to hierarchy was baked into
the very core of the network’s original design, an explicit expression of

Tom Jennings’s anarchist values. Yet the lack of authority posed new dif-
ficulties. As FidoNet attracted tens of thousands of new users, its key
challenges were administrative, rather than technological. In late 1986,
several well-known early sysops—including the original St. Louis crew—
had attempted to form a nonprofit membership organization to oversee
the nodelist and represent the network. The organization, known as the

International FidoNet Association, or IFNA, faced an immediate back-
lash from dozens of self-described “grunt sysops” who objected to the
legalistic incorporation process and a perceived loss of individual auton-
omy.137 On January 1, 1988, a splinter group—including FidoNews editor Thom Henderson—announced the creation of Alternet, a parallel BBS
network using the same technology as FidoNet but governed by a differ-
ent set of policies and principles. Over the next year, Alternet provided
empirical proof of the durability of Fido’s decentralized architecture.138

Sysops were free to participate in FidoNet, Alternet, or both. By 1989,
several other groups of sysops had followed the Alternet example, creat-
ing additional “othernets” to run alongside the original FidoNet.139 This process of replication revealed FidoNet to be a functional network-of-networks, adaptable to dynamic political and infrastructural conditions.

Despite the political turmoil in North America’s Zone 1, the geo-
graphic expansion of FidoNet continued. From 1988 to 1993, the net-
work nearly doubled each year, with substantial growth coming from
beyond the affluent, English-speaking hobbyist communities of North

America.140 In eastern Europe and South America, the creation of newly democratic governments enabled some citizens to participate more
freely in international telecommunications. For sysops in these environ-

S
ments, building a networked BBS was more than an enjoyable techni-

N
cal challenge. The net/node system offered an alternative arrangement

86

Growth of FidoNet as measured in active nodes, from May 1984 to December 1998.

The international FidoNet peaked around thirty-four thousand nodes in 1996. However,
the rate of growth differed by region. The number of nodes in North America declined
faster and earlier than the rest of the network, falling from nearly seventeen thousand
in January 1995 to approximately ten thousand in January 1997. Over that same period,
the rest of FidoNet continued to grow, expanding from about fifteen thousand nodes in

January 1995 to almost nineteen thousand in January 1997 before beginning to decline.

This lag reflects differences in the culture, technology, regulation, and political economy of communication networks across the globe.

S

N

87

8 8 building an interne t for e veryone
of communication power. Each FidoNet node number represented an
addressable location in a global network of computer enthusiasts. For
computing fans cut off from Western infrastructures and institutions,

FidoNet offered a place in cyberspace.

In 1987, Poland became the first communist country with a FidoNet
region number. With the help of the Dutch Hobbycomputerclub and the
support of FidoNet sysops in the United States, Poland joined Europe’s

Zone 2.141 Whereas most FidoNet nodes were located in the homes of
individual hobbyists, the Polish BBSs on FidoNet were run out of private
computer firms and the offices of Komputer magazine.142 In 1989, the Polish sysop Jacek Szelozynski arranged for an Echomail feed from a

BBS in the Netherlands run by Arjen Lentz, providing access to a grow-
ing community of Polish PC “fanatics” in Gdansk, Krakow, and War-
saw.143 According to Szelozynski, the appearance of messages from beyond the Iron Curtain caused “quite a sensation” in techie conferences
like C_ECHO and ZMODEM.144 And as revolution spread across the Eastern Bloc, computer enthusiasts in other cities followed the Polish
model, adopting FidoNet technology to build translocal communication
networks in the absence of institutional infrastructure.145

Meanwhile, in 1987, a BBS in Johannesburg became the first FidoNet
node on the continent of Africa, exchanging mail through a gateway in

Europe. The decision to grant the node number was the subject of debate
among sysops in Europe and North America who objected to the racial
terror of the apartheid regime.146 Anticipating the cyberutopian rhetoric of the 1990s, the debate seems to have turned on a belief that the possibility of communication itself might contribute to the cause of libera-
tion. Don Daniels, president of IFNA, expressed a commitment to “the
free and open exchange of information” and a hope that participation
in FidoNet would “in some small way” benefit the antiapartheid move-
ment. 147 In retrospect, their optimism seems naïve, but by 1992, FidoNet had already become a critical communication infrastructure for NGOs
and universities in South Africa.148 Gateways created by Randy Bush and others enabled activists and academics in Africa to exchange email and
files with colleagues in the United States and Europe even if their home
institutions were not connected to the packet-switched internet.149

S

At the same time that FidoNet was extended into Johannesburg,

N
the Argentina-based sysop Pablo Kleinman was creating TangoNET

88
building an interne t for e veryone 89
around the city of Buenos Aires.150 TangoNET exchanged mail with the rest of FidoNet through a BBS in Southern California run by the
sysop Travis Good and became a gateway for other regions of Latin

America. Juan Davila, a sysop in San Juan, broke off from a regional
network in the southeastern United States to form an independent net
in Puerto Rico. Together, Davila, Good, and Kleinman began promoting
a Spanish-language conference on Echomail called LATINO, translating

FidoNet documentation, and publishing the first non-English articles
in FidoNews.151 Eventually, the sysops in Latin America and South Africa broke away from Europe and North America altogether and formed

Zone 4 and Zone 5, respectively. By 1991, Zone 6 reached into areas of

Southeast Asia and China.152

After 1995, the increasing availability of commercial internet access
eroded some of the appeal of FidoNet in North America. FidoNet did
not stop running—indeed, thousands of nodes continue to exchange
mail and files today—but the costs and constraints of a telephone-based
network eventually pushed a majority of the users and communities off

BBSs and onto internet mailing lists and web forums. Of course, there
was a social cost to this change in infrastructure, too. While the internet
discouraged people from thinking too much about geography, FidoNet
constantly reminded users that they were people living in place. The
unique net/node numbering schema engendered a translocal imaginary
of cyberspace as a network of local communities rather than a global
village or virtual reality. Internet advocates envisioned cyberspace as an
escape from the physical world. FidoNet provided a means to tunnel
through it.

S

N

89
chapter four

Sharing Files with Strangers
in the summer of 1982, Rich Schinnell’s phone rang and rang and
never stopped ringing. Day and night, calls came from PC owners around
the country trying to get through to Schinnell’s new bulletin board. By

November, he estimated that he’d received more than six thousand calls
at his home in Rockville, Maryland.1 At the time, Schinnell’s BBS, known variously as the Software Exchange or Software Library, was a novelty
in the modem world.2 Rather than sharing messages or technical tips, callers to the Software Exchange were on the hunt for real, working programs to download. Using host software written by fellow members of
the Capital PC User’s Group, Schinnell’s BBS acted like a robot store-
keeper, automatically accepting uploads and queuing downloads for the
system’s callers.3 Four floppy disk drives whirred and clicked endlessly, serving up games, utilities, and other applications for the new IBM PC
platform. At 300 baud, downloads were slow and unreliable—Schinnell
joked that early data-transfer routines merely “threw the bits out the
communications port”—but the files were rare and the users were stub-
born.4 A profile in InfoWorld magazine described Schinnell’s board as “a
simple revolution.”5

The allure of free files was irresistible to many early PC owners. A

S
year after Schinnell put up the Software Exchange, InfoWorld ran a cover

N

90

9 0
sharing file s with s tr anger s 91
story on the online file-trading phenomenon. A long-exposure photo of

California’s Interstate 280 depicted a new off-ramp between San Fran-
cisco and San Jose. Hanging over the freeway, a green sign read “free
software” in bright white letters.6 “It’s no scam,” exclaimed a blurb inside; “you can get software for free (or almost free) from user’s groups
and bulletin board systems all over the country.” Describing BBSs like
the Software Exchange as a “junkyard of software spare parts,” the fea-
ture story lauded the “creative,” “experimental,” and “rare” programs
available online.7 Byron McKay, the sysop of PicoNet BBS in Silicon Valley, reported receiving eight megabytes of new software each month:

“60% crap, 10% so-so, 10% you’d use once in a blue moon and 10%
absolute gems.”8 Like hot-rodders prowling the junkyard for auto parts, hunting for software gems offered its own intrinsic pleasures. “One of
my favorite sports has become bagging some of the megabytes of free
software that can be had for the price of a (sometimes extended) phone
call,” joked InfoWorld staffer John Markoff.9 (Of course, he confessed, all this modeming was easier when your employer picked up the bill at the
end of the month.)

Moving data from one machine to another was one of the funda-
mental challenges of early personal computing. Prior to the populariza-
tion of modems and BBSs, microcomputer owners were stuck with just
two methods of exchanging files. First, they could transfer their data to
a cassette tape or floppy disk and physically carry it over to another ma-
chine—the proverbial “sneakernet.” Or, second, they could write down
the source code longhand and manually type it back into the other com-
puter. Neither solution was ideal. Both were prone to error, floppy disks
weren’t cheap, and manual entry was tedious.

The modem offered a third way to exchange data between microcom-
puters. By connecting directly over a telephone line, two modem own-
ers could trade files in real time, streaming data over Ma Bell’s copper
wires. BBS host software removed the need for coordination between us-
ers. BBSs became central nodes in an emerging network of file-sharing
strangers. More than a convenience, BBSs served as rich data depots,
makeshift libraries for the file-hungry culture of 1980s computing.

In the shift from sneakernets to dial-up BBSs, the human beings
trading files with one another became increasingly estranged. Files took

S

N

91

92 sharing file s with s tr anger s
on lives of their own. Rather than handing a floppy disk to a friend or
fellow computer-club member, pseudonymous file traders uploaded and
downloaded without any expectation of forming a relationship. File-
oriented BBSs became gathering places for data as much as for people.

The files sitting in their download directories may have been copied
numerous times before, long predating the systems that played host to
them. Files jumped from BBS networks to USENET newsgroups, from
commercial online services to CD-ROMs. Users dialing long-distance
carried files across the invisible borders of telephone area codes, en-
abling data to spread semiautonomously through the decentralized net-
work of regional BBSs. Popular files traveled farther than their authors,
reaching distant BBSs that would have been prohibitively expensive to
dial directly. Even today, files originating on a local BBS from the 1980s
accumulate in the dusty corners of the web, reappearing in search re-
sults after years of neglect.

The enthusiasm with which BBS users set about copying files from
place to place raised difficult questions about the legal status of com-
puter software and the moral obligations of computer owners to share

(or not to share) the data in their possession. The notion that software
represented an immaterial form of “intellectual property” remained in
flux throughout the start of the microcomputer industry, and there were
few ethical norms governing the small-scale exchange of files. In the

1970s, representatives of the film and music industries could argue that
media-sharing practices like “home taping” were hurting the owners of
cinemas and record stores, but there was no similar retail infrastruc-
ture for consumer software. Indeed, the dominant computer firms of
the period, such as IBM, did not consider software a part of their prod-
uct lines at all. Rather, as the historian Paul Ceruzzi puts it, software
was “what the company did to get people to buy hardware.”10 The norms and values of hobby computing culture reflected this perception as well.

Many hobbyists—particularly those who belonged to clubs and user
groups—were accustomed to trading software freely with friends. In

1975, Bill Gates infamously challenged this social norm in an “open let-
ter to hobbyists” criticizing the unauthorized duplication of Microsoft’s
first product, Altair BASIC.11 Gates’s letter sparked a nationwide debate S
about the value of software and the future of the software industry, but it

N
did not fundamentally alter the norm of free exchange.12

92
sharing file s with s tr anger s 93

Debates over “software piracy” have distorted the history of file shar-
ing. The outsized attention paid to piracy has obscured other file-sharing
cultures and practices. While unauthorized copying stimulated internet
adoption and challenged traditional media industries, it was not the
only form of peer-to-peer file sharing on early networks. As file sharing
moved online in the mid-1980s, the practice of trading programs with
other computer owners gave rise to novel aesthetic forms and economic
practices. From the electronic publications known as “textfiles” to free-
to-try “shareware” applications, modem users glimpsed a fundamentally
different future for computer software than the media industries that
came before. Even within the history of software piracy, a competitive
culture of “cracking” gave rise to the worldwide “warez” subculture, with
its own customs, values, arts, language, and lore.13

The cultural history of file sharing is imbricated with the techno-
logical history of communication by modem. The file-sharing prac-
tices and types of files in circulation at particular times and places
reflected the speed and pricing of modems, the sophistication of serial-
communication and error-correction protocols, and the efficiency of
data-compression algorithms. For example, the same piece of software
that would have taken several hours to download with a modem from

1980 took only a few minutes in 1990. Between 1978 and 1998, the data-
transfer rates between consumer modems rose from 300 bits per second
to 56 kilobits per second, the theoretical maximum transfer rate for the
standard twisted pair of copper telephone lines. Each step in the typical
upgrade path for a BBSer in the 1980s—from 300 to 2,400 to 9,600 bits
per second—represented a massive increase in data throughput.

For computer owners of the 1980s and 1990s, buying a new modem
opened up entirely new areas of online activity that were previously inac-
cessible. Friends who had only communicated by email and chat could
suddenly exchange photos. Gamers satisfied with turn-based games and
text-mode interfaces could participate in real-time graphical worlds such
as Doom. Computational art practices such as demoscene programming
and sample-based “tracker” music flourished as fast modems carried
their work to new audiences.14 For internet users accustomed to broadband, the phenomenological experience of upgrading one’s modem dur-
ing this period of rapid innovation is difficult to comprehend. It would

S
be like buying a new set of tires that turned your car into an airplane.

N

93

9 4 sharing file s with s tr anger s

Approximate download times for different modem speeds (in hours and minutes).

Estimates based on ideal conditions. Real-world download times were longer due to
connection problems such as telephone-line noise.

Beyond the efficiency of individual file transfers, faster data rates
altered the collective temporality of the modem world. The owners of
faster modems downloaded files differently from the owners of slower
modems. Someone with a fast modem could sample new programs and
download files out of curiosity without worrying about tying up their
telephone line for hours on end. In turn, faster connection speeds en-
abled BBSs to accommodate more callers per telephone line, allowing
more users to download more files at lower cost and in less time. By the
late 1980s, hundreds of software authors were creating programs to cir-
culate on BBS networks, altogether bypassing the retail and mail-order
markets. Together, the producers and consumers of BBS files created a
data ecology that functioned on a different temporal scale and commer-
cial logic than its offline counterparts did.

Files and messages are the twin foundations of BBSing. Nearly every
bulletin board in history has offered a combination of both. Yet, as Rich

Schinnell’s Software Exchange BBS illustrates, newcomers were drawn
to the online world by the promise of free files. And indeed, they were
not disappointed. Files were abundant—from unique applications to pi-
rated games to risqué images. Yet those who came seeking files were
also exposed to the communication and community functions of BBS
networks. Many file seekers became active participants in the messaging
side of their local boards. For some, online forums offered opportunities
to discuss their file-collecting hobby and seek technical support. For oth-
ers, the mystery and joy of virtual community far exceeded the value of
free downloads. Files were an engine that drove many thousands of PC
owners to venture online for the first time. Meeting strangers and be-

S
coming part of a community were the experiences that kept them com-

N
ing back.

94
sharing file s with s tr anger s 95
at 3 0 0 b i t s per s ec ond

Early on, the heartbeat of the modem world pulsed at a steady 300 bits
per second. Streams of binary digits flowed through the telephone net-
work in 7- and 8-bit chunks, or “bytes,” and each byte corresponded to
a single character of text. 15 The typical home computer, hooked up to a fuzzy CRT monitor, could display only about a thousand characters at
once, organized into forty columns and twenty-four rows. At 300 bits per
second, or 300 “baud,” filling the entire screen took approximately thirty
seconds. The text appeared faster than if someone were typing in real
time, but it was hardly instantaneous.

In the late 1970s, the speed at which data moved through dial-up net-
works followed a specification published by Ma Bell nearly two decades
before. Created in the early 1960s, the AT&T Data-Phone system intro-
duced a reliable technique for two-way, machine-to-machine commu-
nication over consumer-grade telephone lines.16 Although Data-Phone was initially sold to large firms to facilitate communication between
various offices and a single data-processing center, it soon became a de
facto standard for commercial time-sharing services, online databases,
and amateur telecom projects.17 In 1976, Lee Felsenstein of the People’s Computer Company designed a DIY modem kit offering compatibility
with the AT&T system for under $100. 18 And as newer tech firms like Hayes Microcomputer Products in Atlanta and US Robotics in Chicago
began to sell modems for the home computer market, they assured con-
sumers of their compatibility with the “Bell 103” standard. Rather than
compete on speed, these companies sold hobbyist consumers on “smart”

features like auto-answer, auto-dial, and programmable “remote control”

modes. 19 A 1980 ad for the US Robotics Phone Link Acoustic Modem
emphasized its warranty, diagnostic features, and high-end aesthetics:

“Sleek . . . Quiet . . . Reliable.”20

To survive, early PC modem makers had to sell more than modems.

They had to sell the value of getting online at all. Today, networking is
central to the experience of personal computing—can you imagine a lap-
top without Wi-Fi?—but in the late 1970s, computer owners did not yet
see their machines as communication devices. Against this conventional
view, upstart modem makers pitched their products as gateways to a fun-
damentally different form of computing. Like the home computer itself,

S
modems were sold as transformative technologies, consumer electronics

N

95

9 6 sharing file s with s tr anger s
with the potential to change your life. Novation, the first mover in this
rhetorical game, promised that its iconic black modem, the Cat, would

“tie you into the world.”21 Hayes soon adopted similar language, describing the Micromodem II as a boundary-breaking technology that would

“open your Apple II to the outside world.”22 Never mind that these

“worlds” did not yet exist in 1979. Modem marketing conjured a desir-
able vision of the near future, specially crafted for computer enthusiasts.

Instead of driving to an office park or riding the train, modem owners
would be the first truly autonomous information workers: telecommut-
ing to meetings, dialing into remote databases, and swapping files with
other “computer people” around the globe. According to Novation, the
potential uses for a modem like the Cat were “endless.” 23

In practice, 300 bits per second did not seem slow. In fact, the range
of online services available to microcomputer owners in 1980 was rather
astonishing, given their tiny numbers. A Bell-compatible modem like
the Pennywhistle or Novation Cat offered access to searchable databases
such as Dialog and Dow Jones, as well as communication services like

CompuServe and The Source. Despite the hype, microcomputers alone
could sometimes seem underwhelming to a public primed by visions of
all-powerful, superhuman “world brains.” 24 Yet, as one Byte contributor recounted, the experience of using an online “information retrieval” service felt like consulting an electronic oracle. The oracle accepted queries
on virtually any topic—“from aardvarks to zymurgy”—and the answers
seemed instantaneous. 25 “What’s your time worth?” asked another Byte writer, comparing the breadth and speed of an online database to a “well-stocked public library.”26 Furthermore, exploring electronic databases was fun. A representative for Dialog likened searching its system to going on an “adventure” and joked that it was “much less frustrating” than
the computer game of the same name.27 Indeed, many early modem owners came to believe that online information retrieval would be the
killer app propelling computer ownership into the mainstream.28

Yet it was not access to other machines but access to other people
that ultimately drove the adoption of telephone modems among micro-
computer owners. Just as email sustained a feeling of community among

ARPANET researchers and time-sharing brought thousands of Minne-

S
sota teachers and students into collaboration, dial-up modems helped

N
to catalyze a growing network of microcomputer enthusiasts.29 Whereas

96

Advertisement for the Novation CAT modem demonstrating its acoustic coupler inter-
face with the handset of a standard Western Electric Model 500 telephone. (“Cat Calls,”

Byte, December 1979)

S

N

97

9 8 sharing file s with s tr anger s
users of time-sharing networks tended to access a central computer
through a “dumb” terminal, users of microcomputer networks were of-
ten themselves typing on a microcomputer. In other words, there was
a symmetry between the users and hosts of microcomputer networks.

The same apparatus—a microcomputer and modem—used to dial into
a BBS could be repurposed to host one. Microcomputers were more ex-
pensive than simple terminals, but they were much cheaper than the
minicomputers deployed in contemporary time-sharing environments.

Like many fans and enthusiasts, computer hobbyists were eager to
connect with others who shared their passion for hands-on technology.

News and information about telephone networking spread through the
preexisting network of regional computer clubs, fairs, newsletters, and
magazines. At the outset of 1979, a first wave of modem owners was
meeting on bulletin board systems like CBBS in Chicago and ABBS in

San Diego to talk about their hobby. In a 1981 article for InfoWorld, Craig

Vaughan, creator of ABBS, characterized these early years as an awaken-
ing: “Suddenly, everyone was talking about modems, what they had read
on such and such a bulletin board, or which of the alternatives to Ma Bell

. . . was most reliable for long-distance data communication.”30 By 1982, hundreds of BBSs were operating throughout North America, and the
topics of discussion were growing beyond the computing hobby itself.31

Comparing the participatory culture of BBSs to amateur radio, Vaughan
argued that modems transformed the computer from a business tool to
a medium for personal expression.32 Sluggish connection speeds did not slow the spread of the modem world.

True to the original metaphor of the “computerized bulletin board,”

all early BBSs provided two core functions: read old messages or post a
new message. At this protean stage, the distinction between “files” and

“messages” could be rather fuzzy. In a 1983 how-to book for BBS soft-
ware developers, Lary Myers described three types of files accessible to
users: messages, bulletins, and downloads.33 While all three were stored and transmitted as sequences of ASCII characters, Myers distinguished

“the message file” as the defining feature of the BBS.34 Available day and night, the message file provided an “electronic corkboard” to the community of callers: a place to post announcements, queries, or comments

S

“for the good of all.”35 Myers’s example routine, written in BASIC, iden-N
tified each message by a unique number and stored all of the messages

98
sharing file s with s tr anger s 99
on the system in a single random-access file.36 A comment in Myers’s code suggested that eighty messages would be a reasonable maximum
for systems running on a TRS-80. A caller to such a system requested
messages by typing numbers on their keyboard, and the system retrieved
the corresponding sequence of characters from the message file. New
messages were appended to the end of the message file, and when the
maximum number of messages was reached, the system simply wrote
over the old ones. Like flyers on a corkboard, messages on a BBS were
not expected to stay up forever.

Beyond messages, however, the typical BBS provided access to at
least two other types of files, distinguished principally by their contents
and use. In Myers’s taxonomy, “bulletins” represented a special type of
message stored outside the rotating message file but still viewable on-
line. A bulletin might include general information about the BBS, the
minutes from a recent club meeting, technical reference material, prod-
uct recommendations, or advertisements. “Use your imagination,” en-
couraged Myers. “Just remember to keep a close tab on the amount of
space you have on your disk.”37

In contrast to bulletins, “downloads” included software programs
and data files that were not meant to be viewed online. The files available
from systems like Rich Schinnell’s Software Exchange BBS tended to fall
into this category. Myers characterized downloads as a type of software
circulating outside the commercial sphere: “thousands of programs that
have never been seen by the market and probably never will.”38 Typically, homebrew microcomputer software was written in BASIC and stored in
the same human-readable ASCII format as messages and bulletins. As
a result, Myers recommended using the exact same routine for transfer-
ring downloads as for bulletins.39 It was up to the caller to capture the incoming stream of data and save it to tape or floppy disk.

On early BBSs, the ambiguity between files and messages gave
rise to a novel form of electronic literature: the “textfile.” Building on
the countercultural values and aesthetics of fanzines and underground
comics, textfiles were documents that unsettled the boundary between
bulletins and downloads. Textfiles were well suited to home computers
equipped with 300 baud modems and floppy disks. No special software
or technical skills were required to create a textfile, and textfiles could

S
move between otherwise-incompatible platforms. As a distinct form of

N

99

10 0 sharing file s with s tr anger s
electronic publishing, textfiles began to take shape in the early 1980s and
remained a mainstay of BBS culture throughout the 1990s.

Initially, the term “textfile” was used to distinguish human-readable
documents from executable programs. But “textfile” soon came to sig-
nify a more specific form of electronic literature. Written for an audience
of fellow BBSers, there were few stylistic conventions or constraints on
the textfile. Textfiles ranged in tone from the silly to the serious. There
were satirical essays, high school rants, political manifestos, conspiracy
theories, technical reports, explicit sexual fantasies, and many, many
megabytes of teen poetry. Some textfiles were written by a single author,
others in collaboration, many using pseudonyms. Some were carefully
formatted and illuminated by bits of text-mode art, while others were
barely legible. While some textfiles were little more than clippings from
a forum or newsgroup, others were organized into “issues” and “vol-
umes” like a print periodical. Textfiles were the broadsides of the modem
world, an ephemeral street literature for the information superhighway.

The prevalence and aesthetic form of the textfile are reflected in the
default configurations of many BBS host programs.40 For example, a 1986 version of WWIV automatically created a subdirectory for “general
text files.”41 Callers accessed the textfiles area by pressing “G” at the main menu, leading to the use of “g-files” as a synonym for “textfiles.”42 The 1991 version of Oblivion/2 not only created a “TEXTFILES” subdirectory
by default but included a set of utilities for authoring textfiles that sys-
ops could invoke from within the BBS.43 One of the more common BBS
modifications during this period was to add an online textfile viewer so
that users could preview textfiles on-screen before downloading them.

As textfiles grew in visual complexity, so did the special-purpose software
for viewing them. DISPLAY, a modification for PCBoard, simply wrote
a stream of text to the caller’s terminal, while ANSI Gallery, a modifica-
tion for Oblivion/2, transformed a collection of textfiles into an online

“art gallery.”44

Unlike programming or graphic arts, textfiles provided a low-tech
medium for the circulation of new ideas and information on computer
networks. No special software was required to view, edit, or create a text-

S
file. As one enthusiast put it, “Everyone can use a textfile on the first

N
try.”45 While some textfiles were transcribed from preexisting print mate-100
sharing file s with s tr anger s 101
rials—such as a book or magazine—most were original works of creative
self-expression.46 Because textfiles were smaller in size than programs or images, multiple textfiles fit onto a single floppy. A CD-ROM or hard disk
drive held thousands. Furthermore, the portability of plain text across
heterogeneous computing platforms made textfiles mobile in ways that
their readers and authors were not.47 A textfile originating on one BBS
might pass through several others before appearing on a USENET news-
group, a BITNET discussion list, and a CompuServe forum. Eventually,
thousands of textfiles came to rest on the World Wide Web.

Positioned at the intersection of desktop publishing and dial-up net-
working, textfiles provide a historical bridge between the underground
publishers of the 1970s, such as Loompanics Unlimited, and web maga-
zines of the dot-com era, such as Suck.48 Many zine makers of the 1980s were directly involved with BBS culture, and many textfile authors were
active in the underground press. Tom Jennings, creator of FidoNet, pub-
lished seven issues of a radical queer zine titled HOMOCORE from 1988
to 1991.49 Mike Gunderloy, the founding editor of the influential Factsheet Five, ran a Factsheet Five BBS out of his home in East Greenbush, New

York, from 1988 to 1994.50 And before Boing Boing moved to the web in 1995, its editors—and self-described “happy mutants”—Carla Sinclair
and Mark Frauenfelder published fifteen print issues of the cybercul-
ture fanzine.51 Whether publishing in print or online, this loose network of writers shared a common vision of an alternative media system sustained through the democratization of tools for design, publishing, and
distribution.

Textfiles were common, but very few bulletin boards specifically fo-
cused on electronic literature. In March 1986, Jason Scott, a teenager
in Chappaqua, New York, founded The Works BBS in his childhood
bedroom using an IBM PC, a ten-megabyte hard drive, and a Hayes
modem.52 The 914 area code, not incidentally home to IBM corporate headquarters, was already host to a lively modeming scene.53 Inspired by print zines like Factsheet Five, on the one hand, and the early “modem
sub-culture,” on the other, Scott decided to differentiate his system by
designating it “text-files only.”54 Scott’s sense of humor and enthusiasm for textfiles pervaded The Works. In a short file pitching the system to
new callers, he noted that his pet ferret would serve as “co-sysop” and

S
encouraged his readers to print out the files they found on his system

N

101

102 sharing file s with s tr anger s

Advertisement for The Works BBS, included at the end of the second textfile released
by the system’s homegrown writing group, Octothorpe Productions, in 1986. (Courtesy
of Jason Scott)

and to read them “at school or at the job, or even on the beach.”55 After three months in operation, with dozens of callers and over nine hundred
textfiles, Scott declared his system “914’s Text-file BBS.” As one former
user recalled, The Works was “a text file heaven.”56

For BBS callers in North America, the use of the contraction “text-
files,” as opposed to, say, “electronic journal,” also signaled affinity for
a particular subculture. Textfiles flourished among modem users who
favored messaging, for whom the wit and wordplay of their fellow call-
ers superseded all other features of the modem world. Unlike activist
or evangelical users, these adherents of the textfile, many of whom self-
identified as “hackers” or “phreaks,” composed their files for an imagined
community of like-minded peers. In 1986, several regular callers to The

Works formed a “writing group” and began to publish an irregular series
of original files under the collective name “Octothorpe.”57 From 1986
to 1988, the group produced fifty-two files, the thematic range of which
reflected the interests and sense of humor of the dominant teen hacker
demographic. Parody pop lyrics reminiscent of “filk” music and articles
copied out of Playboy magazine sat alongside inscrutable technical files
detailing the inner workings of the local telephone network. Many files
satirized the modeming subculture itself with coded in-jokes skewering
specific users of The Works. “The Guide to Real Works Users,” for ex-

S
ample, included a list of one-liners such as, “Real Works Users thrive on

N

102
sharing file s with s tr anger s 103

Doritos, Diet Pepsi and dial tones.”58 For the most part, the messages posted to The Works discussion forums have been lost. But the textfiles
uploaded to the BBS survive, thanks to Scott’s own preservation work,
offering a glimpse of the fellowship among users and the day-to-day life
of the board.59

Beginning around 1990, as the boundaries among various networks
began to grow increasingly porous, a new form of textfile took hold. Elec-
tronic newsletters, magazines, and “e-zines” mimicked the conventions
of a print periodical. They were published on a consistent schedule, and
each file was assigned a “volume” and “issue” number. E-zines were a
primary channel for communication among participants in the growing
hacker subculture. Long-running publications such as Phrack and the

Computer Underground Digest served as online analogues to older print
zines like 2600.60 Collaborative writing groups like Cult of the Dead Cow published dozens of textfiles, becoming an influential voice for the “computer underground.”61 Starting an electronic periodical was relatively easy; maintaining one was hard. Hundreds of e-zines were assembled
and released, but few lasted beyond a handful of issues.62

The first textfiles produced by Cult of the Dead Cow, or “cDc,” ap-
peared on bulletin boards around Lubbock, Texas, in 1985. Using the
pen name “Swamp Rat,” the teen computer enthusiast Kevin Wheeler
published a satire of the violent recipes found in The Anarchist Cookbook
titled “Gerbil Feed Bomb,” followed by several detailed files about popu-
lar games for the Apple II.63 The combination of ironic humor and technical arcana in Wheeler’s first run of files became a trademark of the cDc.

Later topics ranged from “Twenty Ways to Disrupt School Assemblies”

and “Society Sucks (and what to do about it)” to area-code listings for the

North American Numbering Plan and a guide to hacking the Telenet
packet-switching network.64 Sequentially numbered and stamped with an ASCII art rendering of a cow’s skull, cDc textfiles became digital col-lectibles. New readers scoured BBSs for back issues, and fans ranked
and debated their favorites. At the outset of the 1990s, bolstered by the
visibility of cDc textfiles, the members of cDc became central figures in
the booming hacker culture. While others may have written more code,
the cDc provided the hacker movement with style and lore—a collective
identity and a story to tell about itself.

S

N

103

104 sharing file s with s tr anger s

The hacker panic of the late 1980s also prompted the creation of
the Computer Underground Digest, or CuD. In early 1990, federal grand
juries in Chicago and Atlanta indicted four members of the “Legion of

Doom” (LoD) hacker group on charges that they planned to disrupt the

911 emergency services of the local telephone system.65 As discussion of the LoD case threatened to overwhelm the moderators of the otherwise
straight-laced TELECOM mailing list, the sociologists Gorden Meyer
and Jim Thomas spun off the CuD as a new publication dedicated to “the
social world of phreaks, hackers, and pirates.” Unlike free-wheeling e-
zines like Phrack, however, Meyer and Thomas characterized CuD as an
open forum for disagreement and debate. “Although we encourage opin-
ion,” they wrote, “we suggest that these be well-reasoned and substanti-
ated with facts, citations, and other ‘evidence.’”66 Despite its mission, CuD retained a sense of humor. Thomas and Myer suggested that their
editorial ideal was a combination of the “World News” section of Phrack
and the long-running TV debate program Crossfire—as moderated by the
stand-up comedian Emo Phillips.

Publishing an e-zine involved an initial upload to one location fol-
lowed by a decentralized process of diffusion. New issues of Phrack
appeared first on the Metal Shop BBS, while new issues of Computer

Underground Digest circulated on a BITNET mailing list. Readers of both
publications acted as voluntary relays, manually transferring copies of
the newsletters across the gaps between these heterogeneous communi-
ties. As a result, e-zines like Computer Underground Digest and Phrack
were accessible to readers throughout the modem world, regardless of
their geographic location, computer platform, or access to commercial
networks.

The low barriers to entry, tolerance for transgressive content, and
predominance of young white men also made BBSs an attractive en-
vironment for right-wing extremists. During the 1980s, several pro-
ducers of racist and anti-Semitic media began to experiment with elec-
tronic publishing as a complement to their print and broadcast efforts.67

George Dietz, publisher of the openly racist Liberty Bell magazine and
self-described Nazi, was especially active in the adoption of new media
technologies. In the 1970s, Dietz claimed to have organized a network of

S
right-wing amateur radio operators, and in the 1980s, he helped to create

N
several American Nazi BBSs.68 Meanwhile, the neo-Nazi cable TV pro-

104
sharing file s with s tr anger s 10 5
ducer Tom Metzger promoted a California-based BBS to Canadian hate
groups as a means to circumvent local hate-speech regulations.69 In 1985, stories about the neo-Nazi computer networks ran on the ABC and CBS
evening news—the first appearance of dial-up BBSs on either program.70

The rhetoric on these systems was alarming, but the attention they re-
ceived from journalists far outstripped their reach in the online world.

In practice, neo-Nazi BBS networks were small and mostly disconnected
from other BBS networks.71 Textfile enthusiasts appear to have handled the neo-Nazi files of the mid-1980s as offensive oddities—digital contra-band comparable to other conspiracy theories. Yet these forays presaged
a mass migration of racist publishing from print to digital during the

1990s and a proliferation of white-supremacist material on the World

Wide Web.72

Not all of the alternative publishing communities of the 1980s were
represented in the electronic literature of the modem world. Young
women were among the most prolific, dedicated, and innovative cre-
ators of print zines during the 1980s and 1990s, but they are scarcely
visible in extant textfiles from the period.73 This absence from the available archives of BBS culture is underscored by an abundance of feminist
activity elsewhere online. Feminist forums, chat rooms, mailing lists,
and e-zines proliferated on a variety of commercial and noncommercial
computer networks including America Online, Prodigy, USENET, and
the web.74 Women-only BBS conferences such as The Women on The

WELL (WOW) occasionally produced collective publications, but there
were no explicitly feminist textfile writing groups or any analogue to

Xeroxed “riot grrl” fanzines on dial-up BBSs such as The Works.

Textfiles emerged out of the earliest microcomputer networks, a ver-
nacular form of electronic publishing shaped by the storage capacity of a
floppy disk and throughput of a 300 baud modem. For the computer en-
thusiasts drawn to this unusual literature, textfiles offered a glimpse into
a more participatory future for the media. In the absence of gatekeepers
or the material costs associated with print publishing, a cohort of young
writers carved out a new space for creative self-expression. Through in-
formal file-sharing networks, their writing reached thousands of readers.

Many found kinship with strangers through the exchange of ASCII char-
acters, an electronic epistolary network resulting in lifelong bonds. The

S
shortcomings of the textfile phenomenon—notably, the spread of racist

N

105

1 0 6
s h a r i n g f i l e s w i t h s t r a n g e r s
conspiracy theories and the absence of women’s voices—refl ect funda-
mental problems in US cyberculture that would reappear on a much
larger scale in the decades to come. It should be instructive that the only
systems to counter these biases involved active, hands-on moderation.

Textfi les survived the changing infrastructure of the modem world
and adapted to the aff ordances of new microcomputer technology. Rather
than disappear with the advent of faster modem speeds and cheaper stor-
age, textfi les continued to grow and spread. Some authors adorned their
fi les with ornate ASCII and ANSI art. Others collaborated with graphic
artists, programmers, and musicians to produce bundles of creative ma-
terial. Textfi les were the fi rst homegrown fi les to circulate on the modem
world, but changing technology and an expanding population of partici-
pants sparked a second form of electronic publishing: shareware.

Before faster data speeds made their way to the microcomputing
public, however, hobbyists found methods of fi le sharing that were de-
cidedly low-tech. At 300 baud, the communities built by dial-up BBSs
enabled networks of enthusiasts to trade fi les that were too large for an
online transfer. As the memoirist Rob O’Hara recalls, the key calcula-
tion for fi le traders was to compare the speed of an online transfer with
the speed of a car traveling down the freeway. In the hours that it would
take to transfer a single fl oppy disk over a noisy phone line, he could

“drive to the person’s house, copy an entire box-load of games, and drive
back home.”75 During his teen years, O’Hara began to routinely visit the homes of his online acquaintances, and during these unusual meetings, he found himself navigating unfamiliar social terrain. Duplicat-
ing fl oppy disks was a slow, monotonous activity after all, and the two
strangers were stuck in a room with each other. In O’Hara’s recollection,
the fi rst visit to another hobbyist’s home usually involved “coming up
with creative ways to fi ll the awkward silence.”76 Yet, for O’Hara and others, these awkward encounters occasionally resulted in long-term friend-
ships, blurring the boundary between fi le sharing and social networking.

The prevalence of low-speed and of f line fi le trading also gave rise
to BBS software that dispensed with messaging altogether in favor of a
minimal interface for uploading and downloading. In 1982, Bill Blue and

Mark Robbins wrote ASCII Express II “The Professional.”77 Among its
many features, AE Pro included an “unattended auto-answer” mode that
allowed remote users to browse a local fl oppy disk, viewing or download-
s h a r i n g f i l e s w i t h s t r a n g e r s

1 0 7
ing the fi les stored there.78 Systems running AE Pro, known colloqui-
ally as “AE Lines,” were spartan infrastructures that off ered few features
for communication between users. Unlike BBSs like CBBS that off ered
space for community to grow, AE Lines were little more than anonymous
caches of software hanging out on the public telephone network.

The AE Pro interface was impersonal and effi
cient: a list of fi lenames
and a command prompt. In advertisements and BBS lists, AE Lines were
conventionally marked with the initials “AE” next to their phone num-
bers so that readers would know not to expect thoughtful discussion or
online games. Yet AE Lines off ered a convenient fi le-sharing platform
that appealed to technically sophisticated users. By the mid-1980s, some

Apple BBSs advertised two phone numbers, one for the main system
and one for the AE Line. Others were modifi ed so that callers could jump
into AE Pro for fi le sharing and then jump back to the main system for
messaging.79 Despite the limitations of the software, AE users nevertheless found ways to communicate by naming their fi les with an audience
in mind. Files with names like “README,” “HELLO,” or “WELCOME”

served as an improvised form of public messaging comparable to the

“bulletins” on Myers’s BBS. Even the seemingly businesslike exchange
of fi les on an AE Line revealed a collective desire to communicate.

2 , 4 0 0 b i t s p e r s e c o n d

The standard 300 baud modem was adequate for trading messages and
textfi les and short BASIC programs, but it was clearly too slow for more
substantial fi les like applications, games, or digital images. When CBBS
came online in 1978, virtually all telephone modems ran at 300 baud.

Within ten years, however, the typical data rate had jumped to 2,400 bits
per second (bps), an eight-fold increase. The expansion in throughput
enabled more real-time communication functions, responsive user inter-
faces, and, crucially, faster downloads. At 2,400 bits per second, dial-up

BBS networks provided a plausible alternative infrastructure for the dis-
tribution of commercial software. As most of the industry struggled with
brick-and-mortar retail sales, the experimental “shareware” movement
took advantage of the growing capacity of the BBS network to convey
fi les throughout the world.

The shift from 300 bps to 2,400 bps happened gradually. As early as

1981, a minority of BBSs off ered 1,200 bps connections, but these faster

1 0 8
s h a r i n g f i l e s w i t h s t r a n g e r s
speeds always came at a cost. Whereas 300 baud modems universally
supported the Bell 103 standard, faster transmission rates lacked a de
facto standard protocol. Despite the premium pricing of “high-speed”

modems, their performance was inconsistent, and modems from dif-
ferent makers were frequently incompatible with one another. The
half-duplex 1,200 bps mode of the Novation Apple-CAT II, introduced
in 1981 and favored by computer-game traders, used a relatively uncom-
mon protocol, Bell 202, and required a Novation modem on both ends. 80

Racal-Vadic, meanwhile, supported multiple Bell standards alongside its
own proprietary protocols but aimed its devices at corporate customers
rather than individuals. Even the cost-conscious Pro-Modem 1200 from

Prometheus Products sold for more than twice the average price of a

300 baud model at Radio Shack. For most home computer owners, cost
and compatibility kept the modem world running at 300 bits per second
through the middle of the decade.

The barriers to faster modem connections were physical as well as
political and economic. In 1984, the European standard organization

CCITT published the V.22bis standard for 2,400 bps communications
over standard telephone lines, resolving some of the fragmentation in
the modem market and providing a common protocol for Europe and
the United States.81 At the end of that year, Kim Maxwell, founder of

Racal-Vadic, published a feature in Byte detailing the technical challenges
facing producers of “high-speed” modems for home computer owners.82

In Maxwell’s assessment, the key factor limiting data throughput was
the “twisted pair” of copper wires connecting residential telephones to
the larger network. The Bell 103 standard achieved simultaneous two-
way (or “full-duplex”) communication by carving two “channels” out of
the audible spectrum, one for each modem. To achieve greater through-
put in the same copper medium, “high-speed” modems employed more
complex modulation schemes, transmitting multiple bits simultane-
ously over narrower and narrower channels. Despite theoretical proof
of the feasibility of these modulation schemes, the signal processing
required to encode and decode the bits often exceeded the computa-
tional capability of the attached PCs. Indeed, Maxwell pointed out, the

ITU’s V.32 standard for 9,600 bps required 2.4 million multiplications
per second, an order of magnitude above the processing power of the

IBM PC.83
sharing file s with s tr anger s 10 9

Affordable 2,400 bps modems came to market in the latter half
of the 1980s. Between 1984 and 1986, semiconductor firms began to
manufacture signal-processing hardware specifically for high-speed data
communications. By 1986, there were more than a dozen 2,400 bps mo-
dems available to consumers, including offerings from market leaders
like Hayes and US Robotics.84 Standardization on the V.22bis protocol led, once again, to competition on special features, design, and price. In
the back pages of computer magazines, less well-known brands such as

Compu Com Corporation advertised no-frills modems compatible with
both the 300 and 2,400 bps standards for as low as $109.85 Eventually, Radio Shack added a 2,400 bps modem to its annual catalog, a sure sign
that the modem world had shifted gears to “high speed.”

The material difficulties of moving files from place to place were
magnified in the context of commercialization. The developers of PC
software were bedeviled by a lack of venues for promoting and selling
their products. Computer stores, bookstores, hobby shops, toy stores, and
department stores all sold microcomputer software; but shelf space was
limited, and logistics were costly. Catalog sales offered greater variety to
the customer, but mail order introduced new complexity when it came to
handling payments and customer-support requests. Magazine publish-
ers, meanwhile, provided an alternative distribution network. Initially,
programs were circulated on the pages of magazines as raw source code
for the reader to manually transcribe.86 Later, “software magazines” such as Softdisk published monthly anthologies on floppy disk. In some parts
of the world, public radio and television stations broadcast software over
the air.87 With the added burden of unauthorized copying, many software firms preferred to deal exclusively in business-to-business sales,
altogether abandoning the consumer market.

Computing folklore pegs the start of the consumer software mar-
ket to the release of VisiCalc, an attractive spreadsheet program for the

Apple II, in 1979.88 VisiCalc was one of the first applications to attract substantial interest outside hobbyist circles.89 Not only were existing Apple II owners willing to pay $250 for VisiCalc, but businesspeople
with no background in computers were spending thousands on “turn-
key” VisiCalc systems that included a brand-new Apple and printer.90 As the industry analyst Ben Rosen remarked, “[VisiCalc may be] the soft-S
ware tail that wags (and sells) the personal computer dog.”91

N

109

Modem prices in the annual Radio Shack catalog, 1980–96. Trends in the Radio Shack product line provide an approximate index of the technology available to a typical
consumer over time. During this period, Radio Shack sold forty-three different modems
including acoustic couplers, direct-connect peripherals, internal expansion cards, and
travel-sized models. Nearly three-quarters ran at either 300 or 2,400 bits per second

(bps). The latter first appeared in 1988 and remained the top speed until the introduc-
tion of an “awesome” 9,600 bps modem in 1993. Despite the breadth of Radio Shack’s

S
telecommunications line, the average cost of a modem in any given year hung steadily

N
around $150–$200. Yet the bang for your buck rose dramatically as the demand for

110
faster data rates drove down the cost of older (and still quite capable) models.

sharing file s with s tr anger s 111

But most PC software is not like VisiCalc. Whereas a good spread-
sheet program is useful to a wide range of computer owners, the major-
ity of software products will only be useful to a particular segment of po-
tential users. From health to education, hobbies to entertainment, there
seemed to be no limit to the applications imagined by microcomputer
enthusiasts—but developers had few outlets for promoting, selling, and
distributing their software products to these niches.92 Without access to retail shelf space, smaller-scale developers went DIY—taking out ads
in hobbyist magazines, packaging their software in Ziploc baggies with

Xeroxed manuals, and fulfilling orders at the post office. With tiny mar-
gins and no formal business structure, even successful ventures could
be overwhelmed by customer-support requests, returned packages, and
bounced checks. The market for microcomputer software had bugs.

Users were even more frustrated than developers by the problems
with the early software market. The typical commercial software trans-
action required computer owners to take on an unreasonable risk. With
little more than magazine reviews, advertisements, or the advice of a
store clerk to guide them, consumers paid up front before ever seriously
testing out a computer program. Critics called this risk the “shrink wrap
problem” and blamed it for sluggish sales across the industry. Mean-
while, the pages of popular computer magazines were filled with com-
plaints about unfixed bugs and undocumented incompatibilities, evi-
dence of users’ frustration with the existing software marketplace. It was
an unhappy arrangement for everyone.

The uncertainty of the broken software marketplace seemed to bind
users together. Word of mouth could make or break a new software
product, and BBSs provided a valuable medium for computer owners
to meet and discuss their experiences with various games and applica-
tions. When computer owners came across a piece of quality software,
they were eager to share their discovery with others. Making copies for
friends and acquaintances seemed like a natural extension of this peer
recommendation system, and the file-sharing function of BBSs pro-
vided a mechanism for this exchange. Such unauthorized trades were
decried as “piracy” by commercial software developers, who saw each
download as a potential loss. Beyond these accusations of theft, how-
ever, file-trading activity expressed an important quantum of economic

S
information. The number of unauthorized copies of a given program in

N

111

112 sharing file s with s tr anger s
circulation positively correlated to the value that it held for users. This
principle, which held as true for Microsoft BASIC in 1976 as for Micro-
soft Multiplan in 1982, provided a compelling puzzle for many small-
scale software developers. Could the work of this dynamic network of
traders be harnessed for commercial purposes? Might the impulse to
share files give rise to an alternative economy of consumer software?

At the intersection of a failing marketplace and a thriving file-trading
culture, “shareware” emerged as a novel approach to the business of
software. Shareware took advantage of both the infinite reproducibility
of digital media and the growing network of file-hungry modem own-
ers. Of all the new types of files cascading through BBS networks in the

1980s, shareware was the most uniquely at home in the modem world.

Rather than attempt to restrict access—whether through copy protection
or shrink wrap—shareware authors surrendered control to their users,
relying on an appeal to morality and a spirit of fraternity to sustain their
businesses. Advocates described shareware as a marketing scheme, an
ideology, business model, community of practice, genre, and stigma.

The shareware concept was invented by small-scale software develop-
ers in response to the ongoing failure of the microcomputer marketplace
to provide space for them. Shareware represented an alternative vision
for the future of consumer software, built on the technical affordances
of the nascent modem world. Instead of fighting with file-swapping en-
thusiasts, shareware authors encouraged users to make copies and pass
their programs along. By allowing users to “try before you buy,” they
reasoned, a quality shareware program sold itself. Plus, by empowering
users to copy programs for friends, they could reach potential customers
without spending any money on advertising. In the words of one soft-
ware publisher, the shareware model offered a new type of marketing:

“word of disk.”93

The typical shareware license granted users a short period during
which they were welcome to use the program free of cost. At the end of
this evaluation period, the user was obliged to mail a small “registration
fee” to the author. Registration fees were conventionally under $25 and
often included a printed manual, backup diskette, or promise of future

S
upgrades. Contemporary accounts frequently describe the shareware

N
protocol as a matter of “honor.” In the 1995 edition of The Secret Guide

112
sharing file s with s tr anger s 113
to Computers, Russ Walter encouraged readers to explore the available
shareware but reminded them that they were “honor-bound” to pay the
suggested fee for software they found useful.94 Rey Barry made a similar argument in his Guide to Free Shareware, published in the same year. The
shareware economy, he argued, is an “Honor System,” and as long as us-
ers continue to register their software, shareware authors will continue
to produce affordable programs of high quality, “as good as any you will
find [in a retail shop].”95

For approximately fifteen years, shareware was the dominant busi-
ness model of the modem world, adapted to a range of niche markets,
from small business owners to hardcore gamers. Today, the influence of
shareware lingers in the form of in-app purchases, premium upgrades,
and “Pro” versions of otherwise free utilities. Yet these models lack the
moral conviction at the heart of shareware, a belief that some people will
voluntarily pay for a product simply because paying another person for
their labor is the right thing to do.

Shareware origin stories typically begin in 1982. That year, critics
agreed that Andrew Fluegelman’s PC-TALK was the best telecommuni-
cations program available for IBM PC.96 Even better, Fluegelman gave away both the program and its source code free of charge. In return, he
asked that satisfied users mail a check to his home in Tiburon, Califor-
nia. Meanwhile, Jim Knopf, another hobbyist programmer, out in Belle-
vue, Washington, had begun to give away a database program called Easy

File with a very similar request for support.97 Within a few months, a user of both programs put the men in touch. Knopf and Fluegelman
agreed to embark on a “marketing experiment” together.98 Easy File was renamed PC-File, the prices of both programs were set at $25, and each
programmer added a notice about the other’s program to their bundle.

Knopf’s wife called him “a foolish old man” for thinking that anyone
would voluntarily send him money.99 Soon, however, checks began arriving to the family’s mailbox.

As Fluegelman and Knopf’s experiment began to take shape, a third
programmer independently took up the try-before-you-buy model. In

1983, Bob Wallace of Seattle, Washington, released PC-Write, a word
processor for the IBM PC. Wallace believed that users needed to try a
program to decide if it was right for them. The shareware model, he be-

S
lieved, “let software explain itself.”100 Not only did Wallace permit users N

113

114 sharing file s with s tr anger s
to copy his program, but he offered a financial incentive to file swappers.

Wallace paid registered users a $25 commission for converting others
into customers.101 For prominent hobbyists, the arrangement could be quite remunerative. The shareware advocate and frequent file swapper

Michael Callahan later recalled converting his $75 registration fee into
approximately $500 in commissions.102

The unexpected successes of PC-TALK, PC-File, and PC-Write pro-
vide the narrative backbone of shareware’s origin story.103 Shareware began as a form of hobby entrepreneurship, but it was never disconnected
from the conventional computing industry. In spite of being routinely
described as “amateurs,” all three of the men at the core of shareware’s
founding myth were previously employed in computing—Fluegelman
was the editor for a major computing magazine (as well as the Whole

Earth Review),104 Knopf had worked at IBM since 1967, and Wallace was one of the first employees at Microsoft. But these biographical details
should not undermine the authenticity of shareware as a form of user-
driven innovation. Rather, the defection of professional programmers
from corporate positions to self-employment illustrates how the organi-
zation of the software industry was upset by microcomputing. Amateurs
and professionals alike saw an opportunity to abandon conventional
employment in favor of work that served the computing community.105

Proponents often described shareware authors “making a living” doing
work they love.106

By 1984, dozens of programmers were experimenting with free-to-
copy online distribution, but there was little standardization from one
program to the next. Fluegelman had trademarked the term “freeware”;

Knopf preferred “user-supported software”; and Wallace was building
a business around the term “shareware.”107 Adding to the confusion, these terms were often used interchangeably with “public domain” (or
copyright-free). Tech journalists highlighted the low cost, wide availabil-
ity, and uneven quality of amateur software. One feature writer wryly
acknowledged the rampant disregard for copyright: “Believe it or not,
piracy isn’t the only way to get free software.”108 Given this tangle of ter-minology, new computer owners could be forgiven for thinking that any
program they downloaded or copied from a user group was free of cost

S
and copyright.

N

114
sharing file s with s tr anger s 115

To quell the confusion, Nelson Ford, maintainer of the Public (Soft-
ware) Library, or PsL, hosted a naming contest through his column in

Softalk for the IBM Personal Computer magazine. After a few weeks, the
results were in: readers preferred “shareware.” In 1987, Ford organized
a conference in Houston, Texas, for shareware programmers, vendors,
and BBS sysops that led to the creation of a trade organization known as
the Association of Shareware Professionals (ASP). The ASP sought to
further standardize the shareware model. It provided an ombudsman to
mediate disputes, helped shareware authors access credit card payment
services, and published a list of values such as “treat users with respect,”

“promise a minimum level of support,” and “[offer a] money-back guar-
antee.”109 Members promoted the ASP by indicating their membership
in the documentation of their software, a mark of legitimacy to reassure
potential customers.

In the late 1980s, the shareware economy boomed. Low-cost “IBM-
compatible” clones provided shareware authors with a platform for de-
velopment, and the modem world provided a network for distribution.

Several of the biggest BBSs in North America specialized in file shar-
ing, providing convenient hubs for shareware authors wishing to spread
their programs and communicate directly with users. In seeming defi-
ance of classical economic theory, the Association of Shareware Profes-
sionals boasted that its members were generating tens of millions in
annual revenue.

Shareware was especially popular among modem owners. Tele-
communications utilities such as Fluegelman’s PC-TALK and Smith’s

Procomm were consistent best-sellers. In spite of the overall scarcity of
modems among computer owners, lists of “top,” “recommended,” or

“essential” shareware invariably featured communications-related pro-
grams. The commercial success of modem-oriented applications under-
scored the fitness of the shareware model to the file-sharing practices
of the modem world.110 John Friel, author of Qmodem, argued that the shareware model was uniquely suited to telecommunications because
every modem owner needed quality communications software in order
to access online services and download files. 111 Consequently, hardware firms directly benefited from the widespread availability of programs
like PC-TALK. Modem manufacturers routinely shipped out copies of

S

N

115

116 sharing file s with s tr anger s
shareware programs with their new modems, a practice that continued
into the 1990s.

The commercial success and circulation of shareware also shaped
the decentralized, hierarchical structure of the growing North American

BBS network. A handful of large-scale systems, sprinkled across the con-
tinent, served as distribution hubs. In the early 1990s, the ASP mailed
out diskettes to a list of “approved” BBSs, which were guaranteed to have
the latest programs published by ASP members.112 Independent share-
ware authors uploaded new programs to these central nodes as well, from
which dozens of regional sysops downloaded new files for distribution
on their local boards. Commercial online services such as CompuServe
served a complementary function as meeting places for BBS sysops and
shareware authors.113 Although the steep costs of long-distance dialing meant that most shareware was downloaded from a local BBS, the decentralized network of “feeder” BBSs and nationwide services enabled
files to move quickly from the author’s home PC to thousands of re-
gional systems across the continent.

Shareware represented a vast industry of small- and medium-sized
software-development firms, many of which were, behind their PO
boxes, lone programmers working in their spare time. The shareware
business model—try now, pay later, pass it on—depended on bulletin
board systems as an infrastructure for the distribution of new software,
word-of-mouth marketing, and a decentralized customer-support net-
work. Large-scale BBSs specializing in file sharing deployed racks of CD-

ROM and hard disk drives to keep vast libraries of shareware online. For
example, the aptly named Infinite Data Source in Alexandria, Virginia,
hosted more than fifty gigabytes of files across sixty CD-ROMs near its
peak in 1996.114 Similarly, Exec-PC in Elm Grove, Wisconsin, the self-anointed “World’s Largest BBS,” advertised a library of “450,000 pro-
grams and files” available for free download. 115 As the shareware advocate Rey Barry put it plainly in 1995, without BBSs, the shareware industry
would have simply ceased to function.116

The initial success of shareware was the subject of some debate in
the computer industry. In a 1987 op-ed about the future of media eco-
nomics, Stewart Brand championed the shareware model as a “major

S
marketing innovation” that positioned microcomputer software as a “ser-

N
vice to which you subscribe” rather than a product that you buy. Brand

116
sharing file s with s tr anger s 117
compared shareware favorably to earlier grassroots innovations such
as the development of shortwave and packet radio communications by
ham radio operators. “Good money was made [by shareware authors],”

he remarked, “and the standard software distributors still haven’t caught
on to the lesson.” In Brand’s perspective, shareware entrepreneurs were
following, rather than fighting, a transition in the economics of informa-
tion: “It’s so easy to copy, send and transform [information] that the price
tag gets left far behind.” 117

Not all computer enthusiasts shared Brand’s affection for shareware,
however. In a letter to the editor, one reader argued that shareware was
a failure when measured against more traditional software products.

“Would Lotus 1-2-3 or Wordperfect have been successful if they had been
distributed for free?” he asked. “Of course not.”118 Shareware authors, meanwhile, tended toward a more nuanced skepticism. John Friel, author of Qmodem, chalked up his own success to “right place, right time.”

He described the market for PC-compatible shareware as “stalemated”

by 1990 because most of the major niches—text editors, spreadsheets,
terminal emulators—had been filled. Unless the underlying platform
changed substantially, he ventured, a small set of entrenched “winners”

would continue to dominate their respective niches.119

Shareware might have stalled out if not for a boom in games dis-
tributed by modem during the 1990s. Software Creations in Clinton,

Massachusetts, became known as a hub for shareware game makers like

Apogee Software. With over 134 simultaneous incoming lines, Software

Creations might have felt more like one of the nationwide commercial
information systems than a local hobbyist “one-liner.” Ranked the top

BBS in Boardwatch magazine’s Readers Choice Awards poll from 1993
to 1996, Software Creations was renowned for its comprehensive share-
ware archives. 120 On the log-in screen, Software Creations dubbed itself the “Home of Authors,” and reviewers gushed that it featured “more
than 100 new uploads every day.”121 Among the many shareware com-
panies that considered it their primary distribution node, Software Cre-
ations was particularly well known for hosting high-quality shareware
games from publishers and developers such as Apogee and id Software.

The shareware model depended on the willingness of authors and
publishers not only to permit but to encourage the autonomous circu-

S
lation of their software products. This permissive orientation toward

N

117

118 sharing file s with s tr anger s
copying facilitated a mutually beneficial relationship with BBS users and
sysops, who derived their own benefit from sharing new software. Al-
though a handful of large BBSs like Software Creations were marked
as “official” distribution sites for companies like id Software and Epic

Megagames, few gamers outside of the 508 area code in Massachusetts
could afford to stay on a toll call long enough to download from Soft-
ware Creations directly. Instead, shareware games like Doom were re-
layed throughout the BBS world by users and sysops who downloaded
files from one board and uploaded them to another. There were several
motivations for this sort of voluntary labor. Mike Nichols, the sysop of

Lamplighter BBS in Hobbs, New Mexico, remembers routinely dialing
into BBSs in Dallas, Ft. Worth, and Albuquerque to download the latest
shareware files. Nichols considered these occasional toll calls a form of
community service for the benefit of fellow BBSers in Hobbs who could
not afford to make the long-distance call on their own.122

The success of shareware games depended on an innovation in the
structure of video-game narratives led by id Software. In 1990, under
contract with Apogee, id Software produced Commander Keen, a 2-D
platformer in which players guided a precocious boy through a humor-
ous adventure battling goofy green aliens. Rather than release the en-
tire game, Apogee packaged the first few levels into an “episode” small
enough to fit on a single floppy or download over a 2,400 bps connec-
tion. The first episode ended in a cliffhanger, followed by a prompt to
call the Apogee sales line and order the rest of the game. Within days
of posting the first episode to Software Creations, KEEN1.ZIP had been
replicated throughout the North American BBS network, and calls were
pouring in from players who wanted to know the rest of the Keen story.

The success of Commander Keen proved the viability of the share-
ware model and prompted an explosion in new shareware games. The
sudden availability of free games provided a new motivation for joining
the modem world. Learning to navigate dial-up BBSs gave gamers ac-
cess to titles that would not appear in retail stores for months. Likewise,
the community functions of the BBS facilitated discussion, debate, and
collective intelligence among players grappling with the latest games.

In a positive feedback loop, the growing population of PC gamers in the

S
modem world spurred more game publishers to experiment with digital

N
distribution and the shareware business model.

118
sharing file s with s tr anger s 119

The initial release and reception of Doom, a wildly popular first-
person shooter from id Software, marked the interdependence of share-
ware, gaming, and the modem world. In December 1993, the first epi-
sode appeared as a single ZIP file on an anonymous FTP server at the

University of Wisconsin.123 Within hours, eager file traders had replicated the shareware across thousands of BBSs. Today, fans remember

Doom as an instant smash, but it would be months before the game was
available in a physical format. In a review for the April 1994 issue of

Compute! , the critic Denny Atkin enthused, “No computer game you’ve
ever seen has graphics and sound like this.”124 But at the time Atkin’s review appeared in print, readers still could not buy Doom at the mall.

Gamers who wanted to experience the graphics and sound described in

Atkin’s review needed to either access a BBS themselves or find a friend
to download it on their behalf. As anticipation for the game grew, id Soft-
ware continued to develop, tweak, and polish the game with the input
of players, a radically transparent form of participatory play-testing. Yet
only those players with a modem and the wherewithal to access a lo-
cal BBS could fully participate in the growing Doom phenomenon. Even
when the game was officially released, only the shareware version was
available in retail stores.125 Additional chapters were sold directly to players through mail order using the same model as Commander Keen.

Prior to forming id Software, the developers of Doom were steeped
in the technical culture of hobby computing.126 Doom was the first game designed from the ground up for the norms and values of the modem
world. Beyond its episodic structure and online distribution model,

Doom included a multiplayer game mode in which players connected to
one another via modem. In the same way that the availability of share-
ware games attracted players to BBSs, Doom’s multiplayer mode recast
the modem as an instrument of fun and entertainment. With so many
players discussing the game online, Doom became a site of considerable
user-driven innovation. Enthusiasts began to circulate modifications, or

“mods,” for Doom that changed the art and sound, altered the game’s
mechanics, or provided new maps designed for multiple players to ex-
plore.127 The same BBSs that carried the shareware release of Doom became repositories for Doom mods and maps. Soon, these practices were
adopted by other game cultures. By 1995, flight-simulator fans were

S
producing new scenery, mechanical models, and maps of US terrain.128

N

119

120 sharing file s with s tr anger s

Game-oriented BBSs like Software Creations were not merely distribu-
tion nodes but rather community spaces from which a more participa-
tory form of PC gaming culture emerged.

The boom in shareware games at the start of the 1990s occurred
in parallel with a second shift in modem speed. The dominance of

2,400 bps was not nearly as long-lived as 300 bps had been. Between

1988 and 1990, as even faster modems came to market, Radio Shack
slashed the cost of a 2,400 bps modem in half. By the time Doom cap-
tured the attention of the PC gaming public in 1994, modem speeds of

9,600 bps and higher were becoming routine. While the adoption of
faster modems facilitated the continued growth in shareware, modding,
and multiplayer gaming practices, it also accompanied a fundamental
shift in the visual culture of BBSing. At 9,600 bps, BBS networks began
to traffic in the rapid distribution of digital images.

9 , 6 0 0 b i t s per s ec ond

The demand for bandwidth is one of the many continuities from the
modem world to the present. Modems dubbed “high speed” in 1983 had
become commonplace by 1988, and the market clamored for modems
that could hit 9,600 bps and higher. In the summer of 1988, Byte ran
a cover story on new “ultra-high-speed” devices, profiling more than a
dozen modems capable of “accurately sending 3 megabytes across the
country in less than an hour.”129 To achieve this four-fold increase in throughput over the same noisy copper telephone lines, modem engineers adapted microchips designed for commercial leased lines with
new techniques in modulation, compression, error correction, and sig-
nal processing. Housed in molded plastic cases adorned with switches
and blinking lights, this gear looked, felt, and sounded high-tech. Plus, at
an average price of about $1,350, these were decidedly premium products
for a specialist audience.130 The apparent urgency with which modem makers brought this first wave of 9,600 bps products to market hinted
at an emerging battle for the modem world of the 1990s—a battle that
would be fought through protocols, standards, brand recognition, and
market share.

Between 1988 and 1994, the cost of modems fell across all catego-

S
ries, and the entire metanetwork of dial-up BBSs and online services be-

N
gan to speed up. Initially, the adoption of higher-speed modems was led

120
sharing file s with s tr anger s 121
by BBS sysops who created a brief bandwidth surplus. A reader survey
conducted by Boardwatch in early 1992 indicated that 38 percent of BBSs
supported 9,600 bps connections, while 66 percent of callers remained
at 2,400 bps.131 Leading modem makers like Courier and Hayes actively courted the BBS world with “sysop discounts” and other targeted promo-tions. For FidoNet sysops and shareware traders, the recurring savings
on long-distance telephone calls quickly covered the fixed cost of buying
a high-speed modem. By 1990, US Robotics reported that more than five
thousand BBSs had adopted one of its high-speed Courier modems. 132

Expanding the adoption of 9,600 bps modems beyond sysops re-
quired a fundamental change in technology and a substantial drop in
price. These came in January 1992 when Supra, Inc., known for its
cost-sensitive SupraModem, announced a new device combining novel
hardware with a “killer” price. 133 Enclosed in an aluminum case approximately the size of “two decks of playing cards,” the SupraFAXModem

14400 looked like a miniaturized clone of the Hayes Smartmodem.134

But inside the shiny housing, the SupraFAXModem employed a micro-
chip made exclusively by Rockwell that supported multiple communica-
tion protocols and an astonishing 14,400 bps transfer rate—all for $399.

At half the cost of less-capable modems from better-known competitors,
the new Supra modem effectively crashed the modem market. The ensu-
ing price war brought the cost of high-speed modems lower and lower.

By the start of 1993, a decent 9,600 bps modem could be had for as little
as $250. On file-oriented boards across the net, the kilobytes piled up.

With the growing availability of high-speed modems, the standard

2,400 bps modem became a commodity, a cheap add-on for any home
computer owner, removing one of the critical barriers to entry for the ex-
panding modem world. In 1991, the commercial online service Prodigy
produced a retail “start-up kit” that included a private-label 2,400 bps
modem—“$148.95 value for only $49.95.” 135 Occasionally offered at a discount for as low as $30, the Prodigy kit was one of the cheapest ways
to get your hands on a working modem. Nothing stopped a buyer from
using their Prodigy modem to dial into local BBSs, gaming systems, or
other commercial networks. 136 Meanwhile, competition drove the price of a new IBM-compatible system below $2,000. 137 PC makers like Com-paq and Gateway, to distinguish their beige boxes from their competi-

S
tors’ beige boxes, bundled in modems (along with sound cards, speakers,

N

121

12 2 sharing file s with s tr anger s

CD-ROM drives, printers, and other peripherals). In this frenzied com-
mercial environment, it was not uncommon for a new computer owner
to find themselves in the possession of a modem by accident. The expan-
sion in modem ownership and falling cost of higher-end devices con-
tributed to an overall acceleration in transfer speeds. By 1994, all of the
major nationwide online services boasted support for 9,600 bps connec-
tions, and Radio Shack was selling its own 9,600 bps modem—just in
time for Doom players to upgrade.

Climbing modem speeds did not immediately transform the
moment-to-moment experience of using a BBS. More than a decade
after the creation of CBBS, keyboard commands and text menus re-
mained the standard interface to the modem world.138 Rather, the immediate effect of adopting a high-speed modem was to lower the cost
of large file transfers, enabling users to become file explorers, casually
downloading files that they would have previously passed over. This new
exploratory style of downloading stimulated the production of new types
of files that could take advantage of the growing multimedia capabilities
of newly upgraded PCs. As the 1990s wore on, BBSs increasingly pro-
vided space to trade digitized photos, ray-traced graphics, procedurally
generated animations, and short video clips in their downloads areas.

Creating, collecting, and circulating digital images combined the
participatory feeling and illicit thrill of textfiles with the visual specta-
cle of games and demos. Simply put, home computer owners of the

1980s did not expect their machines to display digital photos and vid-
eos. The term “graphics” generally referred to the charts produced by
spreadsheet software or the pixel art of video games. To see a full-color
photographic image on a computer screen was still a remarkable thing
in 1990. High-resolution graphics required special software, hardware,
and operator expertise, and although creative professionals—from
home-video editors to console-game developers—had embraced multi-
media computers such as the Apple Macintosh, Atari ST, and Com-
modore Amiga, the consumer tech industry relegated these colorful
machines to a specialized niche.139 The mainstream home-computing industry converged on beige-boxed PC clones, many of which shipped
with monochrome displays by default. 140 As one tech writer put it in S

1990, “graphics [were] more of a perk than a foundation” for everyday

N
computer users. 141

122

Digitized images of spaceflight watermarked by the popular Aquila and EXEC-PC BBSs.

In the late 1980s, digitized photographs served multiple purposes. For some com-
puter owners, the mere possibility of displaying a photographic image was intrinsically
exciting. For others, BBSs provided access to categories of images—from satellite
photography to amateur pornography—that were otherwise difficult to obtain. Knowing

S
that high-quality images would circulate among collectors, BBS sysops appropriated
them as promotional media, stamping them with BBS telephone numbers and access

N
information.

123

12 4 sharing file s with s tr anger s

Yet the technical difficulties associated with graphical applications
only made them more appealing to computer enthusiasts. Unlike the
technical pleasures of programming or telecommunications, the joys of
colorful graphics and animation were immediate, visceral, and acces-
sible to nonexperts. What better way to show off your banging new PC to
friends and family than with a flashy graphic display? From procedurally
generated fractals to three-dimensional ray-traced scenes, the graphics
programs and files found on BBSs frequently served as visual marvels
rather than practical applications or informative resources. In a retail
context, the term “demo” referred to graphical programs serving no pur-
pose other than the delight and surprise of viewers.142 Artists and programmers traded tips on writing code to defy viewers’ expectations and
push the limits of a home computer’s graphical display.143

In addition to impressing others, the graphics files available on

BBSs could surprise computer owners themselves, revealing unknown
technical features of their machines. Multimedia computers traded on
their graphical capabilities, but the typical PC clone required special util-
ity programs to access higher-resolution video modes or decode images
stored in new file formats such as CompuServe’s Graphics Interchange

Format, or GIF.144 At the start of the 1990s, many shareware authors aimed at unlocking the graphical capabilities of DOS-based PCs. Astute
sysops listed popular shareware image-viewing programs like Com-
puShow in the same download folders as their collections of graphics
files.145 In the same sense that BBSs provided advanced access to games like Commander Keen and Doom, they offered a glimpse into a radically
new visual culture of computing.

Digitized photographs were difficult to create, expensive to transmit,
and complicated to view, but users could not get enough of them. The
insatiable demand for graphic files across the network drove the creation
of one of the most popular—and profitable—BBSs of all time. From 1983
until at least 1996, Jim Maxey, a sysop in Lake Oswego, Oregon, capital-
ized on the seemingly insatiable demand for digital images among BBS
callers. In 1983, Maxey, unemployed and living alone with his six-year-old
daughter, founded Event Horizons BBS with the intention of building an
online archive of astronomy-related images.146 Unlike many of his hobby-S
ist contemporaries, finding a way to turn a profit was paramount to his

N
continued participation in BBSing. Although Maxey’s space images were

124
sharing file s with s tr anger s 125
exquisite, the business side of Event Horizons picked up only after he
began to scan centerfolds from adult magazines.147 From 1987 to 1993, the hourly rate for access to Event Horizons jumped quickly from $1 to

$3 to $10.148 By 1992, Event Horizons was a profitable small business with office space and ten employees producing a steady stream of new files
for the modem world. Journalistic coverage of the “world’s most expen-
sive BBS” suggested revenues approaching $8,000 per day, more than

$3 million per year.149

Maxey and his crew were prolific digitizers. The digital photo li-
brary on Event Horizons BBS included many images scanned in-house.

Scanning high-resolution images and preparing them for download
was painstaking, but this labor justified Event Horizons’ premium
price.150 Consistent with the norm of interoperability throughout the modem world, CompuServe’s GIF became the de facto standard raster
image format on BBSs like Event Horizons.151 In addition to its use by CompuServe, a wide variety of freeware and shareware programs could
create and display GIF files. As one shareware author wrote, GIF was

“by design, an interchange format [and] the graphics can be ‘moved’

from one type of computer to another.”152 Rather than a flatbed scanner (which would have been prohibitively expensive in the mid-1980s),
the early images on Event Horizons were produced using specialized
hardware for capturing still images from composite video streams.153

To transform the resulting files into GIFs, a second piece of software
was required to crop the image, reduce the resolution, transform each
hue to one of just sixteen colors, and run the GIF compression algo-
rithm. Finally, a third program was required to overlay captions, titles,
or other text on the GIF. Overall, the human labor, computational time,
and hard-disk memory required to produce each image was consider-
able, but for users accustomed to spreadsheets and text-mode terminals,
the results were remarkable.

By 1992, hundreds of BBSs offered downloadable images, but the
runaway success of Event Horizons seemed to rest on a few specific
factors. First, Event Horizons included thousands of unique images
not available from other systems, including a particularly voluminous
collection of “adult” GIFs. Second, Maxey was committed to educat-
ing PC owners about the latent graphics capabilities of their systems.

S

Print advertisements in popular computer magazines assured readers,

N

125

126 sharing file s with s tr anger s

Watermarked “MaxiPic” that appears to have been created by Jim Maxey of Event Ho-
rizons BBS around 1987–88 . This image depicts a macro photo of a pansy. The source photo is unknown. The white text running around the border of the photograph details
the software used to create the image, invites viewers to call Event Horizons, and
encourages them to copy and trade images without charge.

“Viewing computer images is much easier than you might think,” while
also promising a visual thrill: “Experience your computer’s maximum
graphics ability!”154 In 1988, Maxey released a freeware program titled Universe that nicely conveyed his commitment to encouraging amateur
interest in space. Universe was an educational slideshow program fea-
turing eleven digitized astronomy photos. To ensure maximum compat-
ibility, the images were cropped to 640 by 350 pixels and encoded at a

4-bit color depth—settings that would display correctly on both older and
newer graphics hardware.155 Finally, a short caption appeared at the top of each image, including a title, brief description, and tagline with the

Event Horizons BBS telephone number. Even uncompressed, the entire
program fit easily on a single floppy, and Maxey explicitly permitted us-
ers to share copies with friends and local BBSs.

Event Horizons rightfully earned a reputation as the maker of

“mighty fine .GIFs,” and its work began to circulate beyond northwest-
ern Oregon. 156 The colorful titles displayed at the top of the Universe im-S
ages were characteristic of the captions added to each and every “Maxi-

N

Pic” found in the Event Horizons collection.157 In addition to describing 126
sharing file s with s tr anger s 127
the contents of the image, these captions included the phone number of
the Event Horizons BBS. As was the case with shareware, the captions
assured that as the images traveled floppy to floppy and BBS to BBS
throughout the country, viewers could find their way back to the source.

The BBS network may have been decentralized, but Maxey’s captions
marked a direct route to Event Horizons. One question lurked around
this growing community of GIF traders, however: Who owned these
digital reproductions?

The small staff at Event Horizons spent hours digitizing images, but
they were not out in the field with cameras photographing images. The
value of the resulting GIF depended on the combined labor and ingenu-
ity of both the photographer and the digitizer. When a reporter from
the Oregonian described Event Horizons’ archives as “breath-taking,” she
was clearly referring to the content of the images—“skiers in midflight,
landscapes with mountains or palm trees, [and] real astronomical im-
ages from NASA”—not their pixel density, accurate color, and high reso-
lution.158 Around 1990, with no legal precedent for guidance, Event Horizons issued a confusing policy regarding the redistribution of its images.

Though the images were clearly marked “freely distributable,” the new
policy stated that sysops of other BBSs should limit their collections of

“MaxiPics” to just twenty files. The rule was never enforced—indeed, en-
forcement would have been impractical—but sysops bristled at the no-
tion that they were obligated to follow a policy set by Event Horizons. “I
am not a huge BBS,” complained Eddie Rowe, the sysop of the HOTLine

BBS in Ruston, Louisiana. “It really pisses me off that a company who
gets free advertising has such a ‘rule.’”159 Rowe went on to call for a boy-cott of Event Horizons. He could not abide the inherent contradiction of
an enterprise that made its reputation (and fortune) on the free circula-
tion of digital media attempting to constrain the downstream uses of
that media.

The question of ownership came to a head on March 28, 1992, when

Playboy Enterprises announced that it was suing Event Horizons for
copyright and trademark infringement.160 The copyright claim asserted that Event Horizons was unlawfully selling Playboy’s property by charging users to download digital copies of nine photos that originally ap-
peared in Playboy magazine. In an article for Boardwatch magazine, the S
legal affairs columnist Lance Rose remarked that unauthorized GIFs

N

127

128 sharing file s with s tr anger s
had become a “well-known fact of life” for BBS users and that observ-
ers had long wondered “who will get nailed by a copyright owner, and
when.”161 The trademark claim, however, struck at the crux of the tension between labor and ownership. Playboy argued that because the files
were hosted by Event Horizons and Event Horizons had layered its own
name and phone number over the images, viewers may have mistakenly
believed that the photographs were originally taken by Event Horizons’

staff rather than scanned out of an issue of Playboy magazine.162 Rather than answer this charge dead-on, Jim Maxey pointed out that the file
libraries on Event Horizons contained numerous images contributed
by users, over whom Maxey had little control. Specifically, he argued
that the infringing photos were uploaded by an unknown user and that

Event Horizons staff had missed them in their routine check for infring-
ing files.163 With thousands of incoming calls each day and fewer than a dozen employees, the defense was plausible, but the notion that Maxey
was not ultimately in control of the files on his own computer was almost
incomprehensible to anyone outside of the small population of modem
users.164 Event Horizons ultimately settled the case out of court for a re-
ported sum of $500,000.165

At the heart of the short, fiery history of Event Horizons is a tension
between Maxey’s genuine interest in astronomy and the financial real-
ity that his core business was selling access to porn.166 By 1992, Event Horizons was known for its collection of X-rated images. The entry in

Boardwatch magazine’s BBS directory read simply, “64 Line Digitized

Graphics Image Library—Adult .GIF files.”167 In hindsight, we should see Event Horizons as a vanguard of the commercial web. The opportunity to view pornography at home, without having to venture out to an
adult bookstore or video-rental place, was transformative for American
computer owners and attracted untold thousands of new users to the
modem world. But despite this obvious explosion of interest, sysops like

Maxey equivocated.

Just as the promoters of shareware had to contend with the reality
of software piracy, the maintainers of large GIF libraries had to make
peace with the prevalence of pornographic images online. In 1990, Event

Horizons took out a series of ads in print magazines such as Byte and

S

PC Magazine that seemed to reveal a discomfort with its growing reputa-

N
tion as a source of pornography while acknowledging the allure of this

128
sharing file s with s tr anger s 129
material. A photo at the top of the ad depicted a young white woman with
her arms raised and hands behind her head. Cropped just a few inches
below her bare shoulders, the photo suggested that the model was top-
less. Above the photo, logos for Visa and MasterCard flanked the words

“Computer Images.” At the bottom of the ad, a second photo of the same
size appeared. This photo depicted Saturn and several of its moons in
sharp detail. Between these contrasting images, the ad copy promised
access to images of “astronomy,” “nature,” and “scenic” subjects, along
with a “huge adult section” featuring, simply, “girls.” As the board grew
more profitable, however, any subtlety vanished from the advertising
for Event Horizons. A full-page ad in Boardwatch from 1994 featured
a young, white woman in a bikini with the tagline, “Heavenly Bodies

Online.”168 Astronomy had been reduced to a fuzzy backdrop. After the Playboy settlement, Maxey told reporters that Event Horizons was shift-ing its resources away from images to focus on “games and programs for
children.”169 By that time, of course, BBSing was on decline in the United States. Modemers were increasingly turning to the web in their pursuit
of “heavenly” GIFs.

The proliferation of adult GIFs was not without precedent, of course.

Digital images were only the latest innovation in the integration of tele-
computing and human sexuality. Salacious stories in the spirit and style
of Penthouse letters had long circulated among textfile collections and messaging networks like USENET.170 Special-interest boards offered virtual meeting places for a diverse population of modem-equipped swing-
ers, queers, and self-described practitioners of “alternative lifestyles.”

And the adult-oriented chat rooms, or messageries roses, were notoriously
popular on Minitel in France.171 What distinguished Event Horizons from these earlier systems was not its files but its finances. As one anonymous
sysop put it, “adult files pay the rent.”172

Whether or not Jim Maxey was entirely comfortable selling access
to pornography, several other sysops were happy to follow his example.

With the high cost of image-capture equipment, most of the GIFs in cir-
culation during the late 1980s could be traced back to one of a dozen or
so BBSs. Like Event Horizons, the names and numbers of BBSs such as

DataShack, Farmer’s Daughter, Nitelog, and the Roman Empire appeared
alongside the images in their collections. Whereas the production activi-

S
ties at Event Horizons were limited to digitization, a few adult-oriented

N

129

130 sharing file s with s tr anger s

BBSs began to create their own images. Perhaps the best-known pro-
ducer of original BBS erotica was the General BBS in San Diego. The

General produced an ongoing series of nude and seminude photos fea-
turing local amateur models known as the “Giffy Girls.”173 The original-ity of each GIF was emphasized by the Giffy tagline, “On Location in

San Diego.” Similarly, the Ebony Shack BBS in Toledo, Ohio, boasted

“the largest collection of minority images,” including a combination of
digitized and original photographs.174 In a library of nearly fifty thousand images and video clips, the Black owned and operated BBS produced an
original series of photos featuring amateur women of color identified by
filenames beginning with “ES.” Outside of these few examples, however,
the cost of digitizing equipment was prohibitive for most BBS operators,
and everyday computer owners rarely produced their own pornographic
images for upload to BBSs. Truly amateur production remained the do-
main of VHS tapes and Polaroid cameras for several years to come.

b e yond b i t s per s ec ond

The cultural history of the modem world was enmeshed with the tech-
nological history of its infrastructure. From 1978 to 1994, the rate at
which data flowed between BBSs and their users expanded from 300
to 9,600 bits per second. The same 360 kilobyte floppy disk that would
have taken three hours to transmit in 1983 took less than five minutes
in 1993. This thirty-two-fold increase happened in bursts, reflecting step-
wise innovations in modem design and a competitive market for home
computer peripherals. At each step, enthusiasts unleashed new creative
practices on the modem world, quickly filling their surplus bandwidth
with a panoply of new files: electronic zines, shareware applications, dig-
ital images, and game mods. By changing the quantitative capacity of the
communication channel, high-speed modems changed the qualitative
capabilities of the human communication networks that relied on them.

With the spread of cheap, capable devices like the SupraFAXModem,

BBS advocates could dream about even-faster futures for the modem
world. But there would be no repeat of the 1980s. Dial-up modems were
speeding toward a wall spray-painted with Claude Shannon’s math-
ematical theory of communication. According to Shannon’s definition

S
of channel capacity, the maximum throughput of a 3 kilohertz analog

N
phone line is about 33,400 bits per second. 175 With 14.4 kilobit per sec-130
sharing file s with s tr anger s 131
ond (kbps) modems becoming abundant in 1992, Boardwatch editor Jack

Rickard cautioned, “the party is drawing to a close.”176 Cognizant of the limits of AT&T’s copper cabling, modem-world enthusiasts placed bets
on the likelihood of digital upgrades to the telephone network and spec-
ulated about alternative physical infrastructures like packet radio and
fiber optics. In 1988, the likeliest scenario seemed to be systems that ex-
tended the capabilities of the existing telephone infrastructure, like the

Integrated Services Digital Network, or ISDN. But by 1993, consumer

ISDN had yet to arrive at any significant scale.177 Despite the technical limitations, cyberspace would run on dial-up modems for at least an-
other decade.178

At any data-transfer rate, however, the promise of free files motivated
millions of computer owners to buy a modem and learn how to use it.

For these file hounds, the sheer joy of discovering new files to download
preceded—and overshadowed—the potential community functions of
the dial-up BBS. As a result, countless BBSs of the 1980s and 1990s
functioned mainly as file depots, hidden caches of data tucked away on
the side of the information superhighway, with little action in their dis-
cussion forums. Yet the ongoing pursuit of files and the affordances of
the network produced a range of new technical cultures and software
practices—bringing file traders into direct communication with one an-
other. The textfiles, shareware, and images circulating in this period bore
traces of the people who created them and the places they were collected:

inside jokes, ASCII art, phone numbers, and shout-outs. Files became
material markers of memory for otherwise-ephemeral communities.

Their README files and watermarked GIFs are the artifacts that remain.

S

N

131
chapter five

Cultivating Community
at the start of 1992, amid rising popular interest in the “informa-
tion superhighway,” Boardwatch magazine ran a poll to determine “the
best BBS in North America.”1 The winner of the “Reader’s Choice” award would be featured in a special issue of the magazine, and the system’s
owners would be given a free trip to ONE BBSCON, the first major BBS
trade show.2 In addition to naming the “best” BBS, the ballot also included an open response question asking readers to elaborate on their
choices. It was the first time that anyone had tried to capture the prefer-
ences of the modem world in its totality. The poll promised to address
long-standing speculation about what drove users to one BBS over an-
other. For years, enthusiasts had argued over the relative value of well-
curated files, convivial discussion forums, and interactive online games.

Boardwatch editor Jack Rickard encouraged BBS owners to actively cam-
paign by providing a digital ballot for users to download, print, and sub-
mit by mail. For Rickard, the poll was more than a popularity contest:

it was a survey, an opportunity to gather data on the decentralized BBS
movement. In aggregate, the ballots that arrived at his office in Colorado
represented a nonrandom sample of highly engaged BBS enthusiasts.

From demographic details to qualitative opinions, the reader responses

S
revealed, for the first time, how a vanguard population of modem owners

N
were making sense of the nascent online world.3

132

132
cultivating communit y 133

Top-Ranked BBSs in the Boardwatch “Reader’s Choice” Poll, 1992
rank name
area code
location
votes

1

Canada Remote Systems

416

Mississauga, ON, Canada

462

2

Pleasure Dome

804

Tidewater, VA, USA

416

3

Odyssey

818

Monrovia, CA, USA

360

4

PC-OHIO

216

Cleveland, OH, USA

320

5

Albuquerque ROS

505

Albuquerque, NM, USA

260

6

Micro Message Service

919

Raleigh, NC, USA

217

7

San Diego Connection

619

Spring Valley, CA, USA

207

8

Gay/Lesbian

703

Arlington, VA, USA

Information Bureau

(GLIB)

164

9

Stanford Palo Alto

415

Menlo Park, CA, USA

Computer Exchange

(SPACE)

149

10

After Hours

512

Austin, TX, USA

147

Note: For details on the contest rules, results, and supplemental survey, see “Boardwatch Magazine Announces the Boardwatch 100 Reader’s Choice BBS Contest,” Boardwatch, February 1992; David Hakala,

“Boardwatch 100 Readers’ Choice BBS Contest Update,” Boardwatch, May 1992; “ONE BBSCON,” Boardwatch, November 1992.

By the time that the May issue of Boardwatch went to press, the
editors believed that a clear set of winners was emerging. Of the 4,017
tallied responses, 1,234 of the voters named one of ten BBSs as their
favorite. To the editors’ surprise, seven of the top ten were categorized
as “socially oriented” systems.4 “Voters Favor Online Communities,” proclaimed Boardwatch writer David Hakala. The “social” category was ad-
mittedly broad, inclusive of any board organized around discussion and
chat rather than file downloads, online games, or commercial services.

The social boards that topped the poll ranged in content and theme from

“G-rated” discussion boards to sexually explicit “swinger’s clubs.” The
precise meaning of “social” notwithstanding, the dominance of person-
to-person communication in the poll results was undeniable. “BBSland
is not an information utility,” enthused Hakala; it is about “people com-

S
municating with people.”5

N

133

13 4 cultivating communit y

In retrospect, the use of BBSs for community and communication
might seem obvious. Why else would someone build an online database
of public messages if not for community use? A “computerized” bulle-
tin board would seem to naturally inherit the community function from
its paper-based forebear. Furthermore, the hobbyists who gave life to
early BBSs were already members of clearly articulated communities of
interest: computer clubs, church groups, Boy Scout troops. If the over-
whelming preference for “social boards” in the 1992 poll was surprising,
it wasn’t because community was a recent development but rather that it
had become taken for granted among longtime users.

The overwhelming preference for “social” BBSs among Boardwatch
readers is a mandate from the past to attend to the everyday culture of
the modem world. This mandate comes with a thorny methodological
challenge, however. Unlike textfiles or BBS software, the day-to-day mes-
sages that gave life to BBSs were rarely saved. On occasion, a particu-
larly humorous, rancorous, or informative post was copied to a floppy,
printed out, or, in some cases, stored as a textfile, but for the most part,

BBS messages were considered ephemeral by their authors and read-
ers. Every post eventually scrolled up off the top of the screen, never to
be read again.

During the 1980s and 1990s, small-scale BBSs were the primary
infrastructure for the emergence of computer-mediated “virtual” com-
munities in North America. The visibility of “nationwide” social boards
like Canada Remote Systems at the top of the Boardwatch list belies the
prevalence of thousands of smaller, regional BBSs that were nonetheless
vital gathering places for local enthusiasts. In fact, a preference for local

BBSs was revealed by the Boardwatch poll. An overwhelming majority of
readers (78 percent) voted for a BBS in their own area code.6 In smaller cities and towns, general-purpose BBSs provided local users with a
friendly meeting place to chat, flirt, and debate. These were idiosyncratic,
individual environments. Their architectures and aesthetics reflected the
personalities of the people who ran them. Their atmospheres were com-
parable to a local donut shop, dive bar, or CB radio channel. At a micro
scale, any one of these general-purpose local systems might include
fewer than one hundred regular callers. But at a continental scale, tens

S
of thousands of such systems come into view. Considered collectively,

N

134
cultivating communit y 135
the virtual waterholes dotting North America represented a dynamic, de-
centralized network of computer-mediated communities.

Geography was just one organizing principle for community-
oriented BBSs. By the late 1980s, many virtual communities developed
around interests or identities other than location, providing discursive
space for topics that could not draw enough users from a single area
code. On pop culture BBSs like the Batboard in Columbia, Missouri,
fans gathered to debate the finer points of favorite texts, while the file
areas were filled with fan-made artwork, episode guides, and photos
from related conventions.7 Fantasy sports leagues adopted BBSs, and boards dedicated to sports fandom appeared in West Virginia, Arkan-sas, Missouri, and Minnesota. Other interest-driven systems appealed to
users with religious or ideological affiliations. The sysops of the WinPlus

BBS in Kent, Washington, dubbed their system “the largest Christian
based BBS” and hosted family-friendly get-togethers such as pizza par-
ties and softball games.8 Farther down the West Coast, members of Burn This Flag BBS in San Jose, California, prided themselves on having thick
skins and exploring the limits of free speech.9 Still others were exclusively open to members of a profession or guild: the Backdraft BBS in

Key Largo, Florida, was populated by firefighters and emergency medi-
cal services professionals, and the Dissociation Network in Albany, New

York, was devoted to social work and mental health.10

In 1992, even a close observer would have been hard-pressed to gen-
eralize about the types of communities and activities emerging around

BBSs in North America. Modemers were in broad agreement that some-
thing new and important was happening, but they imagined wildly dif-
ferent futures for these grassroots systems. The editors of Boardwatch
touted individual economic liberation, a “new cottage industry” that

“thousands are leaving corporate America forever to join.”11 Activists like Keith Wade of New York City, a self-proclaimed “lover of freedom,”

saw the promise of radical social change and described BBSs as “five
hundred dollar anarchy machines.”12 Across the country, Colonel Dave Hughes, sysop of the Ross Perot for President BBS, was hard at work
campaigning for a candidate who envisioned “national town halls” en-
acted through interactive TV broadcasts. David Fox, author of Love Bytes,
meanwhile, encountered BBSs as friendly gathering spaces—“pubs

S

N

135

136 cultivating communit y
on the information superhighway”—catering to “every interest, every
hobby,” and packed with “colorful people,” some of whom might turn
out to be future friends or lovers.13

In spite of the divergent social meanings and purposes of these vi-
sions of online community, each was produced, fundamentally, by the
ritual of dialing into the same system, night after night. In the punc-
tuated temporality of BBSing, relationships developed gradually over
weeks, months, and years of asynchronous written communication.

Communities did not snap into existence, fully formed, when a BBS
came online. They required care and continuity on the part of BBS us-
ers and administrators. In the language of community moderators, gar-
dening metaphors were common. Communities “grow” and require

“tending.” Troublemakers are “weeded out.” But what was the object of
all this time and attention? What did they hope to make as they set about
cultivating virtual communities?

di a l - u p c omm uni t i e s

Community is a difficult concept to define. In the nineteenth century,
community principally referred to people living in proximity, such as
the residents of a neighborhood or village. By the mid-twentieth century,
community had taken on a more abstract meaning, describing relation-
ships based on shared interests or identities such as the Black commu-
nity, the medical community, the Jewish community, the gay community,
or the skateboarding community. Unlike a nation-state, belonging to a
community is a matter of social classification rather than citizenship or
taxation. You may not even think of yourself as a member of a particular
community until someone else hails you as one. In many Western cul-
tures, community is also widely accepted as a good thing. In the 1970s,

Raymond Williams observed that “community” had taken on a “warmly
persuasive” character in public debate, evoking a sense of authenticity in
contrast to the formal politics of government and the state.14 Since then, the term has continued to convey universally positive sentiments. Politicians of all stripes promise to “strengthen” or “rebuild” the communities
of their constituents. Service to the community—in the form of volun-
tary labor and charitable giving—is to be admired and encouraged. The

S
specific meaning of community may vary widely by context, but every-

N
one agrees that community is good.

136
cultivating communit y 137

One explanation for the expanded meaning of community is that
telecommunications media—from postcards to text messages—enable
people to experience a sense of communion and affiliation with people
living in faraway places.15 Indeed, the first large-scale computer networks were built at the same time that Raymond Williams was writing his reflections on the meaning of community. While earlier electronic media
may have brought about an “annihilation of distance,” computer net-
works seemed to produce new places and proximities.16 What was a time-sharing computer but a common space for group communication? In
the 1970s, educational networks like the Minnesota Education Comput-
ing Consortium aimed to provide a medium for students and faculty at
different K–12 schools to meet, play, and learn together.17 Intraorganizational “conferencing” systems like Electronic Information Exchange Sys-
tem used computer systems to structure collaborative decision-making
and collective intelligence activities.18 Hobbyist networks, meanwhile, began as extensions of local computer clubs, only to become meeting
places for far-flung computer enthusiasts who did not live close enough
to participate in face-to-face club meetings.

During the 1980s, communities flourished across the modem
world. Utilitarian applications such as free files attracted new users, but
it was the experience of community that kept them coming back. From
small-town BBSs to the international FidoNet, modem users spent hours
trading messages, building a sense of shared identity without the need
to meet in person. The very notion of the “modem world” reflected a
growing feeling among modem owners that the online world constituted
a unique community, apart from their offline relationships. But while
experienced users could see the value of this novel form of community,
it was difficult to convey to nonusers. In print and on TV, advertisements
for commercial services like America Online and CompuServe high-
lighted information-retrieval functions such as databases, market re-
ports, and news feeds rather than community-oriented features like chat
rooms and multiplayer games. Yet falling barriers to participation and
word of mouth spread awareness of the modem world among American
computer owners, and by the early 1990s, millions of people were com-
ing online specifically in search of community.

At the same time, community had become a principal focus for a new

S
cohort of cultural critics and academic researchers.19 In 1993, Howard N

137

138 cultivating communit y

Rheingold, longtime modemer and editor of The Whole Earth Review,
published The Virtual Community, an accessible exploration of several
thriving online communities.20 Appearing just months into the Clinton-Gore presidency, The Virtual Community offered a glimpse of a possible
future for the information superhighway. Faced with a widespread en-
closure of public space by commercial interests, Rheingold reasoned
that computer networks might provide alternative places for people to
gather, debate, learn, and play. In Rheingold’s view, virtual community
had the potential to transform society, enabling a more egalitarian form
of public culture to emerge. “The future of the Net,” he argued, “is con-
nected to the future of community, democracy, education, science, and
intellectual life.”21 Yet The Virtual Community described an online world that was itself on the precipice of change. By the time the book appeared
on library shelves, the commercialization of the internet was well under
way. The “virtual communities” documented by Rheingold—The WELL,

FidoNet, Minitel, USENET—either vanished or were folded into the all-
encompassing World Wide Web. Sensing that readers might never expe-
rience these systems for themselves, Rheingold cautioned that state sur-
veillance, corporate greed, or regulatory overreach could easily squash
the utopian potential of the virtual communities he described.22 In a review for the New York Times, the historian Bruce Mazlish summarized
the conflict at the heart of Rheingold’s book as a tension between “the
despotic and the democratic.”23

Meanwhile, a cohort of academics—most of them early in their ca-
reers—were building the field of internet studies by adapting methods
from communication, anthropology, and sociology to understand the so-
cial life of computer networks.24 The democratic possibilities celebrated by Rheingold became a central preoccupation of the nascent field, and
researchers set out to examine the growing number of virtual communi-
ties on the net. In a retrospective account of this period, the sociologist

Lori Kendall identifies group dialogue as one of the fundamental char-
acteristics of computer-mediated communities.25 Whether in asynchro-
nous conferences or real-time chat, groups of people typing messages
back and forth might come to a sense of shared identity and common
purpose. For all the excitement over 3-D games and graphics, any mes-

S
saging system could be adapted to group dialogue, enabling community

N
practices such as collective intelligence, mutual support, discussion and

138
cultivating communit y 139
debate, flirting, flaming, and fantasy roleplay. The emergence of virtual
community did not depend on complex technology as much as a willing-
ness on the part of users to return, day after day, and participate in ongo-
ing dialogue with the group.26

Despite the influence of bulletin board systems on the conceptu-
alization of “virtual community,” relatively little systematic research
was conducted on BBS communities during their heyday.27 Researchers
studying virtual communities in the early 1990s focused on USENET
and IRC, systems that were easily accessible to university students and
faculty with internet access but inaccessible to the general public. Yet the
virtual communities that developed around dial-up BBSs were shaped by
a different set of social, technical, and economic constraints from their
counterparts on the internet.

Dial-up BBSs were intrinsically place-based networks. Unlike na-
tional systems like Minitel or international networks like USENET,

North American BBS communities developed around local area codes,
which varied in geographic size by population density. This regional fo-
cus provided greater opportunity for offline interactions between users
and resulted in less emphasis on escaping from borders into an alterna-
tive “cyberspace.” BBS users were real people in real places. The cost of
long-distance dialing also restricted the choices available to most would-
be BBS users. Whereas studies of internet-based communities tended to
emphasize limitless choice and the opportunity for users to create highly
personalized niches, most BBS users made do with the systems available
in their local dialing areas. A side effect of BBS regionalism was that vir-
tual communities formed across multiple bulletin boards, defined more
by their shared area codes than the boundaries of any one system.

The architecture of dial-up BBSs allowed them to develop indepen-
dently from one another and autonomously from large institutions.

From the start, BBS host software was designed for tinkering and modi-
fication. The aesthetic and interactive features of a given system reflected
the individual priorities and personalities of the system’s owner. From
the structure of the discussion forums to interactive art and multiplayer
games, BBSs offered a degree of customization that was simply not
available on most other community-oriented networks. The control pro-
vided to individual BBS operators by the underlying software extended

S
to their governance as well. For better and worse, there were no central

N

139

140 cultivating communit y
authorities overseeing the practices of BBS operators. While internet ad-
vocates debated the merits of the National Science Foundation’s Accept-
able Use Policy and consumers decried the censorship on commercial
platforms, individual BBS operators enjoyed near-total control over the
governance of their systems.28 With the exception of pornography and piracy, which could attract the attention of state authorities, most BBSs
existed in a state of benign neglect.

Ultimately, the local culture of each BBS was shaped by the behavior
of its system operator, or “sysop.” From maintaining the software to re-
solving disagreements between users, the role of the sysop represented
a unique combination of technical and social responsibilities. Sysops en-
joyed nearly total control over the design and regulation of their systems,
enabling them to freely experiment without prior approval of their users.

By modifying the underlying software, sysops could separate users into
groups, create exclusive areas of the board, constrain the behaviors of
some users, or simply pull the plug, immediately taking the BBS offline.

The power of the BBS sysop was limited only by the relatively low cost
of exiting the system. If a sysop angered their users enough, the users
would simply leave and start their own system. To understand how com-
munity developed on BBSs, it is essential to begin with the figure of
the sysop.

the s ys o p s

As the owner of a BBS’s host computer, sysops enjoyed almost total au-
thority over their systems. They were responsible for configuring the
software, maintaining the hardware, paying the bills. But—as many
new sysops discovered by surprise—the job extended far beyond these
practical concerns.29 Sysops were the gatekeepers and moderators. Their personalities, interests, and aesthetic preferences were woven into every
facet of the system’s operation. They wrote and enforced any social poli-
cies, and their behavior set the norms for appropriate behavior. If a user
broke the rules, only the sysop could kick them off. In moments of con-
flict, sysops became mediators and amateur counselors. If operating
costs grew too high, it was the sysop who needed to raise money or so-
licit donations. As one veteran sysop observed, “words do not adequately

S
portray the emotional and physical requirements of this often misunder-

N
stood and frequently expensive hobby.”30

140
cultivating communit y 141

The sysop’s authority rested in their proximity to the power switch.

In a moment of frustration, they could always pull the plug, shutting
down the whole system in an instant. But a sysop’s power was limited by
the boundaries of their BBS. Outside the system, there remained a parity
between sysops and users. The barriers to creating a new BBS were suf-
ficiently low that nearly any user could start a BBS and become a sysop
themselves. Longtime modemers joked that every BBS caller would
eventually try running a system of their own.31 The relative accessibility of BBS technology and expertise provided an important check on the
power of the sysop. If an individual or group of users found themselves
in an unresolvable conflict, they could always quit and start a new board
on their own terms. The freedom to leave—so unusual in today’s social
media—provided a sense of mutual accountability and identification be-
tween BBS users and sysops.

So who were the sysops? The number of sysops is difficult to esti-
mate because of the ease with which any BBS user could step into the
role, but we can get a rough sense of the population through a few indi-
rect clues. By definition, every active BBS had at least one sysop, so there
were at least 100,000 in North America at one time or another. Between

1991 and 1994, the number of people traveling to attend national conven-
tions for BBS operators rose from about 400 at FidoCon in 1991 to 4,000
at ONE BBSCON in 1994.32 That same year, Boardwatch, a BBS specialist magazine, reported a circulation of approximately 80,000, and Phil

Becker, maker of the popular TBBS software, claimed that there were

250,000 active sysops.33 The proportion of modemers starting their own BBSs was relatively high, considering the time and resources required.

BBS advocates suggested that approximately one out of every 200 to

250 BBS users became a sysop. 34 Of course, sysops varied in how they viewed their role and their relationship to their BBSs. Some were hobbyists, running their boards purely for fun; others were entrepreneurs,
seeking to build a profitable business; and still others operated BBSs for
instrumental purposes, serving the needs of a preexisting organization
or community group.

The initial pathway from BBS caller to sysop was relatively straight-
forward. Running a BBS required a computer, modem, home telephone,
and host software. By the mid-1980s, a workable system could be set

S
up with secondhand equipment and public domain software for a few

N

141

14 2 cultivating communit y
hundred dollars. In practice, a more robust 24/7 BBS required a budget
in the range of $1,000 to $2,000 to cover a hard drive, high-speed mo-
dem, and dedicated phone line. 35 Many sysops took pleasure in tweaking and customizing their BBS software, but the initial configuration could
be daunting. One satirical textfile cautioned newbie sysops to expect little
from the documentation: “The manual for the BBS software was most
likely written by the author’s 10 year old and was mimeographed. It got
wet in the mail and smeared as well, so at least 30% of the manual will be
physically useless. The rest is just procedurally useless.”36 Before opening to the public, a new sysop needed to create a welcome screen, write
instructions for new users, define user roles and privileges, organize the
structure of the file area, select conference topics, arrange for feeds from
the BBS network, and install any third-party games, add-ons, or other
external “door” utilities. To figure all of this out, sysops relied on one an-
other for advice. Jerry Shifrin, the sysop of a popular programming BBS
out of Northern Virginia, urged newbies to make contact with other sys-
ops: “The vast majority . . . will be happy, even eager, to help you along.”37

Once the BBS was up and running, the sysop became solely respon-
sible for its day-to-day operations. Routine tasks such as scanning for
viruses, backing up the database, and reading system logs mirrored the
work of professional system administrators, but the BBS sysop was also
responsible for cultivating the community of users. They screened new
user applications, started conference topics, tracked down unusual files,
and installed new online games. Through this ongoing care work, sysops
came to identify with their BBSs. “Sysoping” became a lifestyle.38 It was
the first thing they did in the morning and the last thing at night.39

Sysops liked to joke about their thankless job—“Ask any Sysop and
he or she will tell you . . . ‘It ain’t worth it, pal!’”40—but there were clear benefits to owning one’s own BBS.41 From the start, many sysops created BBSs as an opportunity to learn more about computing and communi-
cations.42 In the late 1970s, starting a BBS became a popular collaborative project for microcomputer clubs. By the mid-1980s, however, most
future sysops were themselves avid BBS callers, calling BBSs around the
country and racking up long-distance charges. For these modem junk-
ies, the goal was to reverse the flow of data. Instead of always dialing

S
out, they would wait for the interesting files and people to come to them.

N

Running a BBS also conferred a certain social status within the techni-

142
cultivating communit y 143
cal culture of BBSing. “You are the center of attention,” wrote one teen
sysop in 1983. “You are the owner and controller of the board.”43 Lastly, some sysops saw their work in terms of service to the modem community. Jerry Shifrin cited the notion of “karma,” the “Golden Rule,” and the

Beatles. For Shifrin, running a board was “the love you make.”44

In their role as hosts, BBS sysops pioneered the difficult practice of
community moderation.45 Sysops may have possessed unlimited power
over the technical architecture of their boards, but if they acted like
jerks, their users were not likely to return. In 1992, Boardwatch readers
cited “friendly sysop” as one of the most important criteria in selecting
a BBS.46 Moderation took many forms—from screening new users to implementing strict time limits. By the late 1980s, “voice verification”

had become a standard feature of many BBS programs, and sysops grew
accustomed to greeting new users over the phone before granting access
to their systems. The sysops of boards serving large or diverse groups
of users often appointed one or more “co-sysops,” distributing authority
and responsibility to especially active members of the community. Much
of this interpersonal work occurred out of the sight of the casual user,
which led some sysops to feel underappreciated. Sysops complaining of

“burnout” often cited a lack of feedback from their users.47 “If only a few people would express a little compassion for the guy that runs their favorite board,” wrote John Olson in a piece for FidoNews, “it could insure
that [the BBS] will be there a while longer.”48 The tenure of a typical sysop seems to have varied quite widely, but there also seems to have been a
steady supply of newcomers willing to take a turn at the wheel.

The BBS sysop is a unique figure in the history of the net. Compared
to other online communities, from USENET to Facebook, BBS sysops
enjoyed an unmatched degree of control over the day-to-day life of their
communities.49 No other class of users experienced the challenges of life online as immediately as BBS sysops did. In 1995, as internet hype was
spilling into popular culture and thousands of companies were scram-
bling to stake a claim, Bob Metcalfe observed that sysops were among
the only specialists in the “art” of community building.50 Indeed, they were among the only living people with practical experience in both the
technical design and governance of computer-mediated social spaces.

Yet only a few sysops appear to have articulated their unique place at the

S
forefront of this new industry. “You have your finger on the pulse of the

N

143

14 4 cultivating communit y
next wave of human progress,” enthused one anonymous sysop. “You’re
one of the people making it happen.”51
a s t or y of t wo a r e a c od e s

Today, the Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link, or The WELL, is remembered
as an ideal instance of “virtual community” by scholars, critics, and for-
mer callers. Firsthand accounts by users portray The WELL as an un-
commonly collegial space in which participants from many walks of life
gathered to share the stories of their lives and debate the topics of the
day.52 Unlike the community-oriented hobby systems that were already spread throughout North America at the time of its founding, however,

The WELL was a profit-seeking venture and relied on subscription fees
to stay online. According to Fred Turner’s historical analysis, The WELL
was the latest iteration of an approach to social and industrial organiza-
tion that was first articulated by Stewart Brand during the publication
of the Whole Earth Catalog in the 1970s.53 Under the continued influence of Brand, The WELL served as a working model of a new form of
egalitarian community. An important detail often neglected in idealized
portrayals of The WELL, however, was the extent to which the intellec-
tual discussions cherished by journalists and futurists were supported
financially by the reliable subscription fees of a much larger population
of Grateful Dead fans. To fully appreciate the place of The WELL within
the larger history of North American BBSing, it is important to keep in
mind the political-economic realities that enabled its unmatched com-
munity to flourish.

In February 1985, The WELL came online from a small office in

Sausalito, California.54 Thanks to frequent mentions in Wired magazine and the firsthand reporting of Howard Rheingold and the tech journalist Katie Hafner, The WELL is now the most well-documented commu-
nity BBS of the 1980s and 1990s.55 In Mondo 2000’s encyclopedic User’s Guide, the editors of the magazine defined “The Net” as “an international
web of . . . bulletin board systems,” but The WELL was one of just two
systems mentioned by name.56 And yet, in spite of this visibility, The WELL was quite an atypical system among its homegrown contemporaries. Whereas most BBSs were hosted on a personal computer with

S
just one dedicated line, The WELL ran on a much more powerful, if

N
aging, VAX server with a bank of modems and phone lines. Further-

144
cultivating communit y 145
more, while most BBSs were operated on a voluntary basis by enthusi-
asts, The WELL was founded as a profit-seeking business with $90,000
in start-up capital and two paid staffers. The WELL was hardly flush with
cash, but it existed in a different economic sphere from its hobbyist con-
temporaries. Finally, although its roots were in the Bay Area, The WELL
eventually attracted users from around the globe, many of whom paid
significant long-distance tolls to access the system.57 And yet, though this technical infrastructure and political economy were organized like
nationwide commercial systems, The WELL’s core community of Bay

Area users more closely matched the kind of regional sociality found on
a dial-up BBS.58

Like the organizers of earlier experiments in social computing, the
founders of The WELL shared a commitment to free speech. Instead of
pursuing a radically open architecture to achieve this goal, however, they
implemented a small number of constraints to encourage accountability
among participants. First, users were welcome to adopt pseudonyms,
but they were required to register and reveal their “real” names.59 Second, each user’s past contributions were accessible in a message archive.

This public record of past behavior contributed to a system-wide prin-
ciple known as “You Own Your Own Words,” or “YOYOW.”60 Third, the
messaging area of the system was organized into a large hierarchy of

“conferences,” each of which was further divided according to special
topics. For example, the Arts and Letters conference included Art and

Graphics, Beatles, Books, Comics, Design, Jazz, MIDI, Movies, and so
on. Each of these architectural features shaped the types of interactions
that took place on The WELL.

To callers in the late 1980s, The WELL represented a culturally spe-
cific ideal community that matched the values of liberal progressives of
a certain age. The founders granted free accounts to well-known “inter-
esting people” in the Bay Area to act as “hosts” and attract users with
similar habitus. Rheingold compared The WELL’s conferences to an on-
going “Paris salon” with “somewhat more elevated [discourse] than the
usual BBS stuff,” an oblique reference to the preponderance of technical
minutiae on hobbyist systems at the time.61 The intellectual atmosphere of the salons was not to everyone’s taste, of course. Boardwatch’s Rickard
described the system as “very California” and joked that “at some point

S
you just damn near choke on all the visionary thinking going on.”62

N

145

146 cultivating communit y

Nevertheless, for dedicated WELLites, the system represented an ideal
form of computer-mediated public culture.

For its intellectual core, The WELL offered thoughtful discussions
of myriad topics from parenting to the social implications of networked
technology, but the financial survival of the parent organization de-
pended on revenue generated by an almost wholly distinct second popu-
lation of users. Grateful Dead fans—the “Deadheads”—were “by far” the
biggest collective source of income for The WELL.63 In 1992, access to The WELL cost $10 per month plus $2.50 per hour, a price comparable
to other large-scale subscription BBSs.64 The WELL’s Deadhead conferences provided not only a stream of revenue but also a bridge into a
preexisting community with its own norms of sharing and cooperation.65

And yet Rheingold also distanced the Deadheads of the 1980s from the

Deadheads of an earlier generation and, by association, The WELL’s
countercultural elite. He characterized The WELL’s Dead fandom as
having “drifted far from its counter-culture origins” and described the
majority of Deadheads on The WELL as “blithely unaware” of the high-
minded discourse occurring elsewhere on the system.66 For all that The WELL represented an idealized form of BBSing for its elite users, it was
not without its own internal boundaries and social distinctions.

In many ways, The WELL community of the 1980s and 1990s lives up
to its mythic reputation. In 1995, Boardwatch’s Rickard, a longtime user,
characterized The WELL’s discussion forums as “somehow a cut above,”

with a culture of an “immeasurable” quality. “No [sysop] knows quite
how to get it,” he wrote about the board’s culture, “but you can recognize
it when you see it.”67 The success of The WELL’s community-building
effort was not nearly so mysterious as Rickard’s poetic description sug-
gests. Unlike hobbyist sysops focused on tweaking the infrastructures
of their boards, the founders of The WELL consciously designed a
community-oriented system. To this end, they drew together a popula-
tion of users from a reasonably small geographic area and with shared
backgrounds, diverse expertise, and an existing social network. Notable
figures in the emerging “cyberculture” were given free accounts and en-
couraged to take leadership roles on a set of predetermined conference
topics. Furthermore, the experimental, niche areas of The WELL were

S
supported by a small but reliable stream of income generated by a large

N
population of tech-savvy Grateful Dead fans. An alternative history of

146
cultivating communit y 147

The WELL might describe it as primarily an interest-driven BBS for fans
of the Grateful Dead that occasionally featured salon-style conferences
hosted by well-known thinkers on the transformative potential of social
computing. But by the 1980s, followers of the Dead were no longer the
countercultural vanguard they once might have been, and a Deadhead

BBS was hardly headline material.68 At the same time that The WELL
began to gain visibility in the popular press, hundreds of online commu-
nities with their own unique cultures were developing elsewhere on not-
for-profit boards running on more modest hardware out of the homes of
volunteers.

Like The WELL, the TARDIS BBS in Indiana supported a deeply
engaged community of local users. Outside of the friendly tone of their
forums, however, the two systems differed in nearly every other detail.

The WELL was founded as a business, albeit a socially conscious busi-
ness; the TARDIS began as a hobby project. The WELL charged a fee
for access; the TARDIS was free to the public. The WELL could support
more than sixteen simultaneous users on its 1980 VAX-11/750 minicom-
puter; the TARDIS was a “one-liner” running off the floppy drive of an
old Apple II+.69 But the history of the TARDIS offers more than simply a scaled-down complement to the familiar myth of The WELL. As a labor
of love run by a hands-on team of sysops whose values, sense of humor,
and care for one another were interwoven in the sociotechnical fabric
of the system, the TARDIS was a practical realization of the democratic
potential of social computing valued by the champions of The WELL. In
the words of one former sysop, “All three [of the other sysops] were my
best friends and the board showed it.”70

In the long-running science fiction series Doctor Who, the TARDIS
is a vehicle for time-travel disguised as an ordinary telephone booth. Fan-
tasy and science fiction inspired the names of many BBSs, but “TARDIS”

was an especially popular choice. At various times between 1983 and

1998, more than thirty different BBSs in North America were named
after the quirky vessel.71 One reason for its popularity is that the Doctor’s TARDIS and the dial-up BBS play similar roles in the lives of their users.

In the same way that the familiar desktop computer belies the complex
social world of a BBS, the internal structure of the TARDIS is impossibly

S
large—far greater than the area inside a telephone booth. Further, like

N

147

14 8 cultivating communit y
the low-powered 8-bit computers that continued to host BBSs well into
the 1990s, the Doctor’s TARDIS is considered obsolete and unreliable by
many of his Time Lord peers. And yet, like the dedicated owners of Com-
modore and Atari systems, the Doctor and the ship share a deep, affec-
tive interdependence.72 According to Doctor Who mythology, the Doctor selected the TARDIS for its “soul” rather than its technical features.73 The TARDIS and the dial-up BBS are technologies that encourage a long-term commitment to maintain and care for them in the face of forced
obsolescence and relentless technological progress.

One of the earliest BBSs named after the TARDIS was founded in

1982 by Thomas O’Nan, an amateur radio operator living in Terre Haute,

Indiana, about a ninety-minute drive west from Indianapolis. O’Nan ini-
tially ran the BBS over the airwaves, rather than the telephone network,
using a “radio BBS” program called Super-Ratt for the Apple II.74 Like its dial-up counterparts, the radio BBS included messaging and file-transfer
features and was occasionally referred to as an “electronic mailbox.”75

Soon, however, O’Nan discovered dial-up BBSs and decided to migrate
from the airwaves to the telephone lines.

In the 1980s, Terre Haute shared an area code with several other
cities in southern Indiana, including several university campuses, but

O’Nan had trouble attracting users to his BBS. In his recollection, the
local hams were not interested in microcomputers and “refused to even
try” connecting to the bulletin board system.76 Upon moving to Indianapolis in 1985, however, O’Nan came across new BBS software for the

Apple and was inspired to bring his BBS back online. As he designed
the first iteration of the system, he incorporated numerous jokes and
pranks into its architecture, some of which were fannish references to
the board’s namesake and others that reflected his own weird sense of
humor. On one menu, he included an option to “Chat with the Sysop”

by pressing “C” but instead of connecting the caller to a sysop, the “C”

command invoked a modified version of ELIZA, Joseph Weizenbaum’s
infamous natural-language chat bot.77 More than a few new users found themselves talking in circles before realizing that they had been tricked.

Like a funhouse, the architecture of the TARDIS did not aim for effi-
ciency or elegance but was designed to delight and surprise its callers.

S

One of O’Nan’s goals for the new BBS was to ensure that “anybody,

N
using any equipment,” could access the system. One of the four sys-

148
cultivating communit y 149
tem operators, O’Nan’s longtime girlfriend, was deaf, and they gradually
learned that many of the board’s regular users were also deaf or blind.78

Modemers with a visual impairment generally used “screen readers”

to translate standard ASCII characters into sound or touch, but as BBS
sysops began to incorporate semigraphical characters in their menus,
they inadvertently made their systems inaccessible to visually impaired
callers. From 1985 to 1992, the TARDIS ran Prime BBS software on an

Apple II+ with few changes, upgrades, or modifications. Beyond the low
maintenance costs, sticking with a relatively simple platform ensured
that the TARDIS remained accessible to callers with disabilities. In spite
of—or perhaps because of—this modest infrastructure, the TARDIS at-
tracted 3,500 registered users, of whom O’Nan considered 750 “regu-
lars” and 40 “daily” callers.79 At its peak, the TARDIS logged more than five hundred calls per day on its sole incoming telephone line and car-
ried more than eleven million messages between its users.80

O’Nan could not have predicted it at the start of the TARDIS, but the

Prime BBS host software became known among Apple computer enthu-
siasts for its long-lasting reliability and accessible source code. In 1989,
the last of three programmers responsible for Prime, Daniel Haynes,
decided that he no longer had time to maintain the software. Rather than
hand it off to someone else, Haynes committed the source code to the
public domain, wrote up detailed documentation, and encouraged other

Prime BBS sysops to start sharing their upgrades, modifications, and
customizations with one another.81 By the early 1990s, Prime BBS was still being touted as the best host software for running a “smaller” system for ten to two hundred users.82 In fact, after Prime BBS was released to the public domain, its value rose dramatically, as volunteer programmers developed and shared more than seventy new add-on programs that
extended the core features of the system.83 With the diffusion of IBM-compatible clones at the end of the 1980s, secondhand Apple computers
were widely available for as little as $200. In a 1992 article circulated
among Apple users on GEnie, the BBS enthusiast Jerry Penner suggested
that readers “dig out that unused Apple II [ from the] back of the closet”

and build a new system on old hardware using Prime BBS.84 From the
initial release of Prime to its revival, the TARDIS lived on, uninterrupted.

The telephone number for the TARDIS was circulated through

S

BBS lists and local newsletters, but new users were not granted access

N

149

150 cultivating communit y

Prime BBS installation menu on an Apple II with a monochrome display. In 1989,

Daniel Haynes purchased Prime BBS from the original developers, released the source
code, and placed the software in the public domain. Written in Applesoft BASIC, Prime
was accessible for tinkering, maintenance, and customization. The program’s manual
promised to “stretch your imagination and creativity to the limit.”

immediately. First-time callers were asked to fill out a short question-
naire that included a combination of demographic questions—name,
address, phone number, age, gender—and silly questions: planet of ori-
gin, species, blood type, favorite M&M, and the rate at which their finger-
nails grew.85 All of the questionnaires were reviewed by one of the four sysops before the user was granted access to the system. If the user’s
answers seemed “bogus,” then the sysop would look up their name in
the phone book and, in some cases, verify the new user by voice. Prime

BBS allowed sysops to define nine different classes of users, and on the

TARDIS, users were sorted by age and gender. Certain areas of the board
were visible only to users in the “adult” or “female” classes. If a new caller
self-identified as a woman, then one of the two female sysops would call
them on the phone. New users were usually verified by one of the four
sysops within a few hours of their first call.86

One of the unique features of the TARDIS was that it provided a

S
safe space for women to gather, apart from the rest of the board. O’Nan

N

150
cultivating communit y 151
recalls that in the 1980s, women experimenting with BBSs frequently
experienced harassment from the men they encountered online. One
former member described being a woman on other BBSs as a “night-
mare” and credited the sysops of the TARDIS for actively intervening to
stop harassing behavior on their system.87 In addition to this hands-on approach to moderating the open forums, all administrative oversight
of the TARDIS’s exclusive “Ladies only” section was performed by the
women in the community. “I stayed out of it,” O’Nan later recalled. “[The
women] did it all.”88 Users classified as men on the TARDIS could neither see nor access the “Ladies only” area. Even O’Nan himself was restricted.

“To this day,” he remarked, “I don’t know what went on in that room!”89

Community and conversation were the central features of the

TARDIS BBS, and both the technical and social architectures of the
system reflected these priorities. Any user could introduce a new dis-
cussion topic on the TARDIS, and there were few constraints on what
could be said. O’Nan’s quirky sense of humor was evident throughout
the board and implicitly encouraged a friendly, casual tone.90 O’Nan characterized his core user population as “academic, moderate or liberal,” and, consequently, the only topics that regularly required sysop
intervention were, in O’Nan’s judgment, “extreme right wing” themes
because they sparked “flame wars.”91 Although O’Nan was the board’s
founder, moderation duties were distributed throughout the commu-
nity by the “co-sysop” arrangement he created with his girlfriend and
another couple. The TARDIS had no particular theme or core purpose
beyond building community. Within that broad mission, however, the
system provided invaluable spaces for groups of people who would have
been outnumbered, unwelcome, or mistreated on any other BBS.

Like The WELL, the TARDIS attracted a dedicated core group of
users who became fiercely loyal and personally invested in the board’s
culture. O’Nan recalls one instance in which a local technology writer
gave the TARDIS an unfavorable review in his monthly BBS column
because it offered very few IBM PC files for download. The users felt
personally insulted and responded with angry letters arguing that the re-
viewer misunderstood the purpose of the BBS. The TARDIS was a com-
munity constituted through its public and private message forums, not
downloading. O’Nan, for his part, did not participate in the controversy,

S

N

151

15 2 cultivating communit y
preferring to “let the users do their thing.”92 Consistent with the results of the 1992 Boardwatch poll, users valued the everyday culture of a BBS
over its technical features or media libraries.

Sadly, by 1992, the infrastructure of the TARDIS began to show
its age. Prime BBS could not support connection speeds higher than

2,400 bits per second. For the existing user population, this was hardly
a problem, and most were happy to continue using the BBS at the
speed they had grown accustomed to. Unfortunately, if a new user
attempted to connect with a faster modem, the system could behave
erratically and, in some cases, crash altogether. O’Nan recalls that a
group of kids “who wanted something destructive to do” discovered
this weakness and began to intentionally crash the TARDIS. For two
months, they repeatedly brought down the system and hogged the
phone lines, preventing any of the regular callers from getting through.

Failing to appeal to the boys’ better judgment, O’Nan solicited the help
of the telephone company. Instead of assisting him, however, the tele-
phone company argued that O’Nan was misusing his residential phone
line and threatened to start charging him at a higher business rate.

Desperate to stop the assault, O’Nan reported the boys as “nuisance
callers,” and they were subsequently arrested by the police. The boys’

parents became extremely upset and could not understand what their
children had done. Worn out from the experience, O’Nan decided to
close the TARDIS for good: “I just didn’t have the heart to run a system
anymore.”93

The WELL and the TARDIS were dial-up BBSs operating out of two
different area codes. Although virtually anyone with a microcomputer, a
modem, and a telephone line could have called either board, only nearby
callers could access the systems without paying an additional long-
distance toll. One consequence of this billing structure was that the core
populations of each system were constituted primarily of local callers.94

The histories of the two boards and the histories of their area codes are,
therefore, inextricably intertwined.

The WELL ran on a VAX minicomputer housed in a small office in
the waterfront town of Sausalito, California, just across the Golden Gate

S

Bridge from San Francisco.95 In 1985, Sausalito shared the 415 area code N
with most of the Bay Area, including the newly transformed “Silicon

152
cultivating communit y 153

Valley,” where the microcomputer industry was booming. In contrast,
when Tom O’Nan rebooted his TARDIS in Indianapolis in 1985, it took
up residence in the 317 area code, covering much of central Indiana. A
reasonable guess suggests that the flow of engineers to the Bay Area
would support a large number of local BBSs. After all, young engineers
have all the money, technical aptitude, and skills required to participate
in the modem world. Extant historical BBS lists, however, indicate that
the BBSing scene of central Indiana was as active (if not more so) than
that of the Bay Area during the same period of time.96 Indeed, from 1982
until the early 2000s, there was roughly the same ratio of boards to
working adults in each area—but among the population of adults work-
ing with computers in some fashion, there were nearly twice as many

BBSs in central Indiana (2.1 per 100 tech workers) as in the Bay Area (1.12
per 100 tech workers).97 In other words, during the BBS period, not only did the TARDIS host its own exemplary online community, but it was
part of a thriving local BBS scene in metropolitan Indianapolis.

It may seem counterintuitive that BBSing would be more prevalent
in Indianapolis than in Silicon Valley. But it comes down to the rela-
tionship of BBSs to one another within an area code. The WELL, with
its global ambitions, attempted to transcend its local area code. The

TARDIS, however, was embedded in a local community, and its callers
enjoyed network effects as a result. Each BBS in the 317 area code was, in
practice, a node in an internetwork of Indianapolis boards. The TARDIS
was known for its intimate, thoughtful community, but it was not neces-
sary for the TARDIS to also offer a large library of downloadable soft-
ware. Indeed, 317 was already home to several BBSs that specialized in
shareware,98 and gamers might have preferred the Doomsday Dungeon,
run by an Indianapolis high school student.99

The presence of Silicon Valley may have limited the emergence of
a complementary network of BBSs in the Bay Area. Modemers in the

Bay Area had access to a far wider variety of networks than those in
central Indiana, including local, dial-up access to packet-switching net-
works, which allowed users to reach BBSs in more than a dozen other
area codes for a flat monthly fee. Modemers in Indianapolis, meanwhile,
were limited to either costly nationwide commercial services or nearby

BBSs run by members of their local community. As a result, BBS callers

S
in each area code developed different spatial imaginaries.

N

153

15 4 cultivating communit y

The WELL, from its infrastructure to its political economy to its le-
gion of tech-savvy Deadheads, was in nearly every way atypical. When

BBSs are included in the history of networked computing, however,

The WELL is often the only system mentioned by name. Unfortunately,
this convention has produced a rather skewed picture of BBSing that
excludes considerable activity that occurred far from Silicon Valley. The

TARDIS, on the other hand, reflected a more widely shared experience
of North American BBSing. Although both the TARDIS and The WELL
developed unusually warm, welcoming, and thoughtful communities,
the roots of the TARDIS reached back much more clearly to the long
tradition of amateur telecommunications. Whereas the founders of The

WELL endeavored to create a profitable worldwide conferencing system,
the TARDIS was operated by four self-described best friends who ran the
system at the pleasure of their users. With its modest hardware, focus
on local community, and commitment to accessibility, the TARDIS em-
bodied a set of values that enabled the diffusion of computer-mediated
communication outside traditional centers of power.

The story of The WELL stands alone. Whether remembered as an

Eden or a vision of the future, The WELL is unfailingly singular. The

TARDIS, however, is a conjuncture of familiar people, places, and tech-
nologies. It is hard to imagine The WELL existing anywhere other than
the Bay Area, and it is hard to imagine that the Bay Area would not have
hosted a system like The WELL—of course those hippies would have
built a weird cybercommune! The TARDIS, on the other hand, chal-
lenges the accepted geography of the early internet. If the 317 area code
could have played host to such a vibrant online community, why not
any other?

c omm uni t i e s of int er e s t

By the late 1980s, BBS sysops increasingly created spaces for communi-
ties defined by qualities other than a common location. Groups of people
drawn together by niche cultural interests, marginalized sexual or gender
identities, new religious movements, and radical political commitments
turned to BBSs after being excluded from mainstream media systems
such as radio and TV. Like underground newspapers, BBSs operated out-

S
side the control of traditional media institutions. For communities that

N
could not safely congregate in person, a BBS offered desirable technical

154
cultivating communit y 155
features such as anonymity. For others, it provided a complement to face-
to-face meetings and other traditional forms of community organizing.

From pornography to political activism, community-oriented BBSing in
the late 1980s and early 1990s presaged the diversity of virtual communi-
ties on the World Wide Web a decade later. Yet the unusual spatial, tech-
nical, and economic characteristics of dial-up BBSs distinguished these
early communities from the systems that would come later. For many
communities of interest, a social BBS was not a substitute but rather a
tactical alternative to other forms of gathering.

Communities defined by sexual interest and gender identity provide
exemplary cases for thinking about the tactical use of community BBSs.

Sex and sexuality were common themes of adult-oriented BBSs. Many
sysops featured forums and games dedicated to dating, hooking up, or
personal ads. The use of dial-up BBSs for flirtation, romance, and sex
extended the metaphor of the BBS as an after-work hangout. In Love

Bytes, a “handbook” for BBS dating published in 1995, author David Fox
described the adult-only BBS as an idealized “electronic pub” and sug-
gested that online dating was an attractive alternative to the “real-world”

dating scene.100 His initial pitch for the electronic pub invoked familiar tropes of disembodiment—text chat rendering skin color, gender, age,
and “physical flaws” invisible—but his narrative centered on the BBS
world, a cyberspace that was very much rooted in place, rather than the
deterritorialized internet.101 “When it comes to making contacts with real people, for real-life dates, real relationships, and real commitments,” he
wrote, “it’s tough to beat a good ol’ local BBS.”102 “Compu-dating” on a local BBS involved the (potentially thrilling) knowledge that the person
on the other end of a sexy chat was dialing in from one’s own area code.

At the peak of BBSing in North America, meeting people online
was still a generally uncommon practice, and as popular interest in
the “information superhighway” began to grow, so did the occasional
human-interest story about computer-mediated sex and romance. These
accounts tended to approach online interactions as wholly distinct from

“traditional” forms of dating and focus on details that emphasized that
distinction. For example, in an early “hitch-hiker’s guide” to “America’s
information highway,” the Economist described “steamy” sex talk on

BBSs as the “textual equivalent of grunts and groans.”103 Others focused S
on the potential for fantastical sexual encounters. In Erotic Connections,

N

155

156 cultivating communit y
an early guide to cybersex, the pseudonymous author Billy Wildhack
compared an adults-only chat room to “a telepathic costume party” in
which the electronic utterances of other users stimulate the imagination
and “get the adrenaline going big time.”104 Fox was more pragmatic in Love Bytes. If meeting someone at the local singles bar could feel superficial, frustrating, or dangerous, the local singles BBS offered a fun,
low-risk opportunity to mingle with a different population of people, all
of whom were comfortable expressing themselves in writing. “There is
no dressing up, driving across town and getting lost, ordering drinks,
or squabbling over bills,” enthused Fox. “If the person you end up with
turns out to be a geek, jerk, lemon, frump, or nerd, it’s easy to mumble
some excuse and just hit a few keys, logging yourself off”—that is, as-
suming that a geeky frump is not exactly what you are looking for.105

The asynchronous messaging features of a one-liner BBS could be
adapted for online romance, but most adult-oriented BBS were multiline
systems with a range of special features specifically designed for match-
making. By the late 1980s, most BBS host software implemented a mod-
ular system for adding external programs from third-party developers,
known as “doors.” Door programs for matchmaking, such as ProMatch
by WoodyWare, were typically customizable, but their default configura-
tions revealed assumptions about the social circumstances within which
their authors expected them to be used.106 Most matchmaker programs
presumed a normative heterosexuality, but they also included opportuni-
ties for resistance, however superficial. The documentation for Intelli-
gent Match Maker by TcSoft suggested creating three distinct databases:

“Generic Match Maker,” “Gay Male Match Maker,” and “Gay Female

Match Maker.”107 Presumably, the “generic” database was for those who were seeking heterosexual relationships, but the program’s creator still
acknowledged the prevalence of gay BBSers through this recommended
setup. ProMatch, meanwhile, stored all of the users in a single database.

Whenever users were asked questions related to gender or sexuality,
they were presented with a catch-all option such as “Other” or “Plead
the fifth.” When entering a “Spin the Bottle” game, for example, users
were asked whether they wished to kiss “Females,” “Males,” or “Doesn’t

Matter.” The architecture of programs like Intelligent Match Maker and

S

ProMatch rarely posed a fundamental challenge to the dominance of

N
heterosexuality, but they universally acknowledged the existence and

156
cultivating communit y 157
legitimacy of same-sex desire. It was in these small moments that adult

BBSs afforded visibility to queer identities, even on boards that were not
explicitly coded “queer.”

Even as many BBS programs assumed heterosexuality by default,
this norm was routinely unsettled in practice. Boards with explicitly
sexual themes—say, swinging as opposed to dating—advertised areas
dedicated to “alternative lifestyles.” For example, Lifestyle Online was
an exceptionally popular BBS hosted on Long Island, New York.108 Al-
though it hosted no explicit GIFs, Lifestyle Online received over sixteen
hundred calls per day from users who interacted with one another in
subforums dedicated to “Swinging/B&D/S&M/Bi/TV/fetishes.”109 By marking queerness and kink as “interests,” the sysops of Lifestyle Online positioned them as accessible options for curious heterosexuals. In-
deed, each of these “alternative lifestyles” was presented online to callers
in the form of a browsable menu.

As with many preexisting subcultures, swingers constituted a par-
ticularly active part of the adult BBS world. The log-in screen for Lifestyle

Online boasted, “The Largest Swingers Correspondence Magazine in the

World!,” an explicit reference to the underground swingers mailing lists
that predated the modem world. Swinging, like dating, benefited from
both the social and spatial characteristics of BBS culture. “Tom Terrific,”

the pseudonymous sysop of The Pleasure Dome in Virginia Beach, Vir-
ginia, started the board in 1985 as a “meeting place” for the local swing-
ers community; each month, he hosted both “regular parties” and “swing
sessions” for his callers.110 As the system began to attract callers from outside its local area code, Terrific enforced the social focus of the board
through the architecture of the underlying software. Between 7 p.m. and
midnight every night, the file area was automatically shut down to en-
courage all users to participate in the late-night chat rooms. The chat
features on multiline adult boards like The Pleasure Dome enlarged the
space of possibility for many swingers. For some couples, sharing a mo-
dem, a screen, and a keyboard offered an accessible, “softer” form of
swinging than was previously available.

Consistent with many areas of the modem world, longtime partici-
pants in sexually themed adult BBSs unfailingly described their favorite
boards in terms of sociality rather than sexuality. In user testimonials,

S
words like “fun,” “open-minded,” “uncensored,” “village,” and “home”

N

157

158 cultivating communit y
are common, while details about the particular games, files, or techni-
cal features of the BBSs are seldom mentioned. The sexy side of adult
systems often provided an illicit edge to an otherwise conventional chat.

The Paradise Play Line BBS in Houston, Texas, for example, featured
fifty incoming lines and local access numbers throughout the 713 metro-
politan area code. With its tropical theme, erotic online games, live trivia,
and frequent get-togethers at a local bar, the Paradise Play Line offered
an atmosphere more akin to an adults-only cruise ship than a kinky after-
hours club.111 As one reviewer described it, the BBS offered “an island
paradise for Internet vacationers everywhere.”112

While the overwhelming number of men in the modem world en-
abled gay BBSs to thrive, the exclusion of women from BBSing for over
a decade posed an obvious problem for boards with a heterosexual ori-
entation. Wildhack estimated that on most adult boards, men outnum-
bered women five to one. 113 In the face of this imbalance, some sysops attempted to attract women through segmented pricing. But cost was
hardly the reason for women’s disinterest in sexually oriented spaces
dominated by men. For years, Compu-Erotica offered free access to
women, but men continued to make up more than 70 percent of its
membership.114 The Pleasure Dome added a dedicated line for women to call, but the results were similar: men continued to outnumber women
two to one. 115 Laura’s Lair BBS in Ava, Missouri, was one of a very few adult-oriented BBSs founded by women. Run by a team of four women,
including Laura Brito, Laura’s Lair featured moderated discussions that
went far beyond casual socializing to include collaborative storytelling,
safer sex information, and technical advice for producing amateur por-
nography. Unfortunately, Laura’s Lair was a singular exception amid
hundreds of clueless men. “We try to create an atmosphere that makes
women feel comfortable and unharassed,” wrote the sysop of one adults-
only BBS, “as we know they are a valuable online commodity.” 116

Of course, for some men seeking heterosexual online encounters,
the exclusion of women was not an insurmountable barrier. Text-mode
environments provided considerable flexibility for self-presentation, and
much of the ostensibly heterosexual sex occurring in “hot” chat rooms
was, in fact, the product of two men. Consistent with the dominant me-

S
dia frame of the time, the authors of Aether Madness described this as a

N

“tragicomic scenario,” but there is little evidence to suggest that all—

158
cultivating communit y 159
or even most—of the men participating in these mediated encounters
would have considered them acts of deception.117 Indeed, the exclusion of women from the modem world was widely known—though seldom described in terms of “exclusion”—as was the possibility, if not the practice,
of cross-gender presentation in sex-oriented online spaces. Indeed, in

Love Bytes, Fox suggested that the possibility of a coded same-sex encoun-
ter was “often part of the appeal” for men who participated in sexually
explicit chat.118 On BBSs like Lifestyle Online that encouraged fantasy, the tacit appeal of the “cross-gendered” user was preserved through an
absence of voice verification.119 Beyond paying subscription fees, users were not required to disclose any additional personal information.

The tacit acceptance of gender play on boards like Lifestyle Online
reflected a broader acceptance of queer life across BBS culture. For even
casual BBS users, queer culture was pervasive. In 1993, Boardwatch again
invited readers to vote for their favorite BBSs.120 As the results rolled in, the prevalence of queer life online was undeniable. The Gay and Lesbian Information Bureau, a nonprofit BBS in Arlington, Virginia, serv-
ing primarily gay, lesbian, and bisexual users, ranked in the top five. 121

The only systems that ranked higher were “monster BBSs” like Software

Creations and Exec-PC, with dozens of incoming lines, exclusive share-
ware, and commercial support. Further down, the top-one-hundred list
also included S-Tek BBS in Montréal—“Montréal’s premiere Gay & Les-
bian BBS”—and the Zoo BBS, an “adult social network” in Chicago that
advertised “gay, bi, straights welcome.” 122 In November 1992, The Gay & Lesbian BBS List, just one of the queer-themed BBS lists, included more
than 320 systems in North America alone. 123 To participate in the modem world in the late 1980s was to witness the emergence of a newly computerized gay culture: out of the closet and onto the net.

Multicom-4 was one of the largest queer systems in North America.

Although it started as a single-line hobbyist BBS in 1979, Multicom-4
grew into a mission-driven, nonprofit online community for gay, lesbian,
and bisexual people living in and around Rochester, New York. 124 Sysop Chaz Antonelli described the evolution of the system as a reflection of
his own growth: “When I came out of the closet as a gay man in the 80s,
my BBS soon followed.”125 To ensure the safety and confidentiality of the S

BBS community, Antonelli verified nearly every new user, often with a

N

159

Social and fundraiser event invitations displayed on Multicom-4 BBS during the early

1990s. (Courtesy of Chaz Antonelli; Sysop Chuck, Multicom-4 BBS)

S

N

160
cultivating communit y 161
one-on-one voice telephone call. Members without a PC or modem could
access the system from public terminals installed in gay-oriented busi-
nesses around the city, including Antonelli’s own leather shop. In the
early 1990s, membership blossomed into the thousands, and with the
help of a lawyer from the board, Antonelli created a nonprofit corpora-
tion to handle donations and support the growing community. By 1996,

Multicom-4 also provided low-cost access to the internet and World Wide

Web. At the end of the decade, there were over eighty-five hundred regis-
tered accounts in the user database, of which more than two-thirds had
been individually verified.

Not all queer BBSs started out as spaces for community. In many
cases, virtual communities emerged on services created to share infor-
mation. Founded in 1986 as a nonprofit service providing health and
legal advice to the “gay/lesbian/bi” community of Washington, DC, the

Gay and Lesbian Information Bureau quickly became an informal online
meeting place for gay men.126 In addition to health information, GLIB
users traded tips on gay nightlife in the nation’s capital city. By the time
of its Boardwatch award in 1992, GLIB was a lively social scene supported
by twenty-two incoming telephone lines, live multiuser chat, and per-
sonal profiles with GIF images. For gay men—including closeted gay
men—with a computer and a modem, GLIB provided a low-risk oppor-
tunity to explore the local gay community in DC. “This was a revelation,
that you could use your computer to connect with other gay people,”

remarked GLIB sysop Jon Larimore in an article from 2010 comparing

GLIB to gay-oriented mobile social software like Grindr.127 More adventurous callers might venture out to the GLIB Happy Hour, hosted weekly
in Dupont Circle, the city’s upscale gay enclave.

For BBS users interested in talking about politics and culture, BBSs
like GLIB offered a valuable alternative to the conservative-leaning
boards that predominated. Queer bulletin boards, like gay bookstores
and other queer-coded spaces offline, served multiple purposes. For lo-
cal callers, a BBS like GLIB might offer a fruitful cruising opportunity
one night and an opportunity to talk about Ross Perot’s candidacy on
another.128 In a 1995 guide to modeming, Gary Wolf and Michael Stein avoided characterizing queer BBSs as either hookup sites or information repositories; rather, they focused on the rich communities they en-

S
countered on these systems. Queer BBSs, they wrote, were among “the

N

161

162 cultivating communit y
most vibrant electronic subcultures of the online world.”129 Indeed, the authors speculated, the proximity of GLIB to Washington, DC, made it
a particularly rich forum for discussing politics, queer and otherwise.

Consistent with the predominance of men in the BBS world, queer

BBSs were largely frequented by men who identified as gay and bisex-
ual.130 As the majority, gay men implicitly dominated the representation of queerness throughout the modem world. The Gay & Lesbian BBS List,
for example, included a special designation for “women only” boards,
though no similar marker existed for men.131 Meanwhile, boards such
as the Male Box, the Male Room, and the Male Stop were not likely to
offer much by way of lesbian interest. In 1996, the anthropologist Kira

Hall described the obvious imbalance of the modem world as an “inten-
sification” of gendered discourse.132 Instead of unsettling or erasing conventional notions of gender, text-mode interactions seemed to exagger-
ate hegemonic conceptions of femininity and masculinity. In response,
a number of women sysops created separate “women-only” bulletin
boards. Sappho BBS in New York City, 10% Connection BBS in Chicago,
and the Oak Tree BBS in Denver were all open exclusively to women.133

In a study of a similar space—the SAPPHO mailing list—during the
first half of 1993, Hall observed a communal resistance in which partici-
pants produced a “female-gendered discourse” that actively opposed the
harassment they encountered elsewhere online by crafting an alternative
set of social norms.134 The participants in SAPPHO endeavored to create a cyberfeminist form of discourse distinct from the “poor example” exhibited by the men—gay, straight, and otherwise—who dominated most
online spaces. “Exclusion of men,” wrote one participant, “is a precon-
dition . . . not the purpose itself” of creating a newly feminist cyber-
culture.135 Defining the boundaries of the “women-only” space was an ongoing challenge, as the affordances of the mailing list did not allow for
the sort of personal verification that was carried out by the sysops of the

“Ladies only” area of the TARDIS. Instead, women on SAPPHO relied
on subjective assessment of the content of new participants’ posts: user-
names, return addresses, signatures, linguistic markers, and the like.

Some of the larger queer BBSs included areas specifically marked
as “exclusively for women.” GLIB, for example, featured a subboard

S
titled “Lesbians On Line,” and anecdotal evidence suggests that les-

N
bian users were an active part of the Backroom BBS.136 The Backroom

162
cultivating communit y 163

BBS, founded by Arthur Kohn in 1984, similarly appealed to men and
women.137 Indeed, a print advertisement for the Backroom from 1992
depicts both a pair of men and a pair of women gleefully typing to each
other through computer terminals with large lambdas on their screens.

By and large, however, the presumed user of most queer systems was a
gay man, and the systems were structured accordingly. To gain visibility
and voice in these spaces, lesbian women were forced either to negotiate
space within the existing architectures or to create their own separate
spaces.138 Not all adult boards marked by sexuality were overtly queer, of course. Within boards with a default heterosexual orientation, gender
was hailed, performed, and constrained very differently.

At the same time that queer culture was flourishing online, BBSs
became vital networks for the circulation of information about HIV and

AIDS. In 1986, the year that GLIB opened its electronic doors, thousands
were dead and dying from an epidemic exacerbated by fear, homophobia,
racism, and misinformation. For radical activist groups like ACT UP,
access to media networks was a lifeline. “Silence = Death” not only in-
voked the unheard voices of those suffering from the disease in isolation
but called out the health-care providers, policy makers, and educators
who censored themselves. Alongside fax networks and DIY publishing
efforts, BBSs offered another medium for the circulation of health infor-
mation, especially outside major metropolitan areas.139 For people suffering from HIV and AIDS, access to information could be the difference
between living and dying.

Activists turned to dial-up BBSs as a means of distributing infor-
mation and support to impacted communities. BBSs offered several key
advantages from the point of view of activists and health workers. First,
the BBS was a file-sharing machine: information could be updated con-
tinuously, and files could be circulated without centralized coordination.

Second, BBS technology was relatively accessible and could be run by a
small number of staff on a volunteer basis. And third, BBSs offered a
degree of anonymity and privacy that was critical because of the heavy
social stigma attached to both HIV/AIDS and homosexuality. Between

1985 and 1993, more than one hundred bulletin boards were set up spe-
cifically to share HIV/AIDS information with fellow users and their lo-

S
cal communities. During this period, BBSs became such critical hubs

N

163

164 cultivating communit y
for information and community support that the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention’s National AIDS Clearinghouse published “A Se-
lected Guide to AIDS-Related Electronic Bulletin Boards” with step-by-
step information about how to access dial-up BBSs.140

Misinformation about HIV/AIDS was rampant in the 1980s, and
without the careful oversight of trusted figures, BBS file-sharing prac-
tices would have been worth very little. In 1990, Sister Mary Eliza-
beth Clark founded the AIDS Education General Information System

(AEGIS), a not-for-profit BBS in her hometown of San Juan Capi-
strano, California.141 Drawing together information from a wide array of sources, AEGIS provided basic information about HIV/AIDS and
safer sex practices as well as the latest news regarding treatment, clini-
cal research, and related political affairs. AEGIS began as a typical “one-
liner,” but with the help of private donors, the board grew to accom-
modate twenty-four incoming lines and, eventually, a gateway to the
packet-switched internet and the World Wide Web.142 By January 1996, AEGIS had 1,265 registered members, received approximately twenty-five to seventy-five calls a day, and stored more than two gigabytes of
information, including 104,000 files from the National Library of Medi-
cine’s AIDSLINE database.143

The information posted to AEGIS was duplicated daily to a network
of related BBSs, each of which was dedicated to providing free, often
anonymous, access to HIV/AIDS information. AEGIS information also
circulated beyond the borders of the United States, through both the
grassroots FidoNet network and HIVNET, a European network dedicated
to HIV/AIDS information. Because of the fundamental decentralization
of BBS messaging networks, it was impossible to know exactly how far
this information traveled, but journalistic accounts estimate that AEGIS
reached more than twenty-four countries.144

During the 1990s, the AEGIS database stretched across the modem
world, accessible from BBSs, over the internet, and on the World Wide

Web. In practice, the system reflected the social and technical conver-
gence of these components of the emerging internet. Wynn Wagner, cre-
ator of Opus BBS, became involved with the organization, contributing
graphics for the website and an essay titled “Day One” aimed at people

S
just finding out that they have HIV. In frank, friendly language, the es-

N
say offered “five pointers for survival” and directed readers on where to

164
cultivating communit y 165
turn for information and support. 145 “Day One” became one of the most widely read pieces on the AEGIS site, where it was linked from the home
page, translated into several languages, and frequently reprinted by ad-
vocacy organizations.

The information stored in AEGIS served multiple audiences. On
the one hand, health-care professionals throughout the world accessed

AEGIS in order to provide the best care for their patients. Dial-up medi-
cal databases already existed, but none shared AEGIS’s focus on HIV/

AIDS or its commitment to low-cost access. This was particularly im-
portant for doctors working outside major metropolitan areas in North

America. Indeed, Sister Mary Elizabeth decided to start AEGIS after
meeting people living with HIV/AIDS in rural Missouri who had no ac-
cess to information about the disease. Her goal was to provide access to
information for “your average person with AIDS.”146 The hypothetical

“average person” may not have been able to interpret all of the technical
information in a newly published clinical trial, but they could use the
information to advocate for themselves when meeting with local doctors.

One user, after suffering from the side effects of drug therapy in 1995,
went to his doctor with a stack of new research that he downloaded from

AEGIS.147 In this ideal case, access to the online database provided a set of resources that facilitated local, face-to-face communication between a
doctor and a patient.

BBSs providing access to health information often also encour-
aged the growth of supportive online communities for visitors. In 1993,
the Computerized AIDS Ministries Network (CAM) in New York City
was founded under the slogan “There is more to living with AIDS than

AIDS.”148 Unlike most dial-up systems, CAM provided access through an 800 number so that callers could reach the system from anywhere in the

United States without paying a long-distance toll.149 CAM was operated by the Health and Welfare Ministries Program of the United Methodist

Church’s General Board of Global Ministries, and faith played an impor-
tant role in shaping its community. In addition to providing unrestricted
access to basic AIDS information (e.g., “Facts, Fiction, and How to Pre-
vent It”), CAM focused on bringing people suffering from AIDS out of
isolation and into a “safe . . . supportive community.”150 Isolation often affected the friends and family of people living with AIDS, and many of

S
the 750 registered members of CAM identified as “caregivers.”151

N

165

166 cultivating communit y

CAM was open to all users, and some callers would not have identi-
fied as Christian. Although no religious affiliation was required or ex-
pected of callers and CAM was not an explicitly evangelical project, the
emphasis on support and compassion was understood by many users to
be an expression of Christian values. Not all congregations in the United

Methodist Church were equally supportive of families and individuals
living with AIDS, and CAM provided access to a supportive community
that was nonetheless rooted in a familiar faith.152 One caller from Virginia contrasted the lack of compassion he encountered in his local church,
where AIDS was regarded by some members as “a plague sent by God to
punish the evil sinners,” with his experience dialing into CAM.153 “While there is no attempt made at CAM to preach or moralize,” he remarked,

“the love and faith that is found here shines like a beacon.” 154 Another caller, who later adopted the pseudonym Rusty, remembered coming to

CAM with apprehension after losing a cousin to AIDS. “Although I’ve
known some good people who are Christian,” recalled Rusty in a testi-
monial about her time on the site, “most I met seemed so full of judg-
ment and condemnation.”155 On CAM, however, Rusty was “grateful” to
find “a different kind of God,” ministered “without condemnation.”156

For believers, on the other hand, an encounter with AIDS could be
a significant challenge to their faith, and CAM provided a supportive
space for reflection and information seeking. Debbi Hood Johnson, a
devoted Christian and a particularly active user of CAM, joined the BBS
after learning that her husband was infected.157 Although Johnson lost her husband to AIDS in 1993, she continued to participate in the discussion forums on CAM. As a self-described “white heterosexual female in
the heart of the conservative South” who was also HIV-positive, Johnson
provided considerable support to other women in the community until
her own death in 1996.158 As a regular on CAM, Johnson befriended a
community of queer activists who practiced the sort of “unconditional
love” and “honest, unflinching AIDS prevention education” that she
found lacking in her religious community at home.159 “What about the rest of us?” she asked. “Where are the mainstream churches?”160 Rather than undermine her faith, Johnson’s experiences on CAM deepened
her commitment to a principle of compassion that she associated with

S

Christianity and enabled her to hold her church community to a higher

N
moral standard.161 Rev. Larry Mason, a regular caller from North Loup, 166
cultivating communit y 167

Nebraska, similarly credited his participation in CAM for helping him
achieve a “much deeper understanding and far more acceptance” of gay
and lesbian people.162
r e a l pe o p l e in r e a l p l ac e s

From the single-line “computerized bulletin board” to worldwide mes-
saging networks like FidoNet, the technical culture of BBSing was driven
by a desire for connection between people. The communities that devel-
oped on dial-up BBSs were different from those of commercial services
or the internet due to the persistence of place and the unique role of the
sysop in BBS culture. Whether connecting with nearby computer enthu-
siasts or far-flung strangers, BBS communities arose out of real people
in real places sending messages to one another, day after day, night after
night. Some of these users stepped into the role of the sysop, shaping the
environment and setting the terms by which communities flourished or
floundered. As one former sysop put it, running a BBS was a service,
provided to “a very special community of very special people.”163

The sysops and users who immersed themselves in BBS communi-
ties were among the first computer owners to experience the ups and
downs of a computer-mediated society. Their experiences chatting, trad-
ing files, and playing games online provided a foundation for the popu-
lar adoption of the commercial web a decade later. Across the tech and
media industries, observers and investors looked to the BBS world as
a model for the communication networks of the future. And yet com-
munity BBSs like the TARDIS, despite their rich histories, are rarely dis-
cussed as antecedents to the internet or social media. The influence of
the modem world on the social web was seldom overt. Rather, the sysops
and users of community BBSs carried their experiences with them as
they filtered into the booming tech industry. From Slashdot and gURL
pages to Reddit and Facebook, the structures and practices of BBS com-
munities have been continuously reproduced by Silicon Valley, albeit
without the autonomy, independence, or control enjoyed by their dial-up
ancestors.

S

N

167
chapter six

Becoming the Net
to most people in the United States, the internet arrived in
the summer of 1995.1 From the nightly news to the multiplex to the grocery-store checkout, cyberspace was inescapable. Cover stories in

Time magazine introduced the general public to “cyber porn,” “cyber de-
mocracy,” and “cyber war.” In a feature on the local tech industry, New

York magazine declared the arrival of “Cyber City.”2 Theater marquees featured one high-tech thriller after another: Johnny Mnemonic, The Net, Virtuosity, Hackers, and Strange Days all debuted between May and October.3 Prime-time dramas Law & Order and The X-Files featured computer-mediated creeps, and The Simpsons showed the Comic Book Guy posting
on a USENET newsgroup.4 In speeches and debates, Republicans and

Democrats agreed that the “information age” was imminent and the fu-
ture of US prosperity depended on “electronic cottages” and “informa-
tion superhighways.”5 Meanwhile, the unexpected success of Netscape’s initial public offering (IPO) drew a flood of investment capital to the
net.6 Sales of “multimedia” PCs with built-in modems were booming.

Microsoft’s new operating system, Windows 95, promised to get every
new PC owner online with user-friendly networking features.7 In cities and towns across the United States, tens of thousands of dial-up bulletin

S
boards were buzzing with callers, files, games, and forums.

N

168

168
becoming the ne t 169

And yet, despite all of this excitement for cyberspace, 1995 was the
beginning of the end of the modem world as long-time users had come
to know it. The dial-up bulletin board system, or BBS, did not survive
the cultural, economic, and technological changes brought about by the

World Wide Web, the dot-com boom, and the mainstreaming of cyber-
space. Buoyed by speculative investment following the Netscape IPO,
dozens of new services had begun to compete for modemers’ time and
money. “Nationwide” platforms like Prodigy sold “start-up” kits through

Radio Shack; America Online bombarded middle-class America with
free diskettes; and Microsoft bundled the Microsoft Network with every
new copy of Windows 95. Gradually, all of these platforms became on-
ramps to the internet and the World Wide Web.

By early 1996, BBS activity was in steep decline in North America.

BBSs throughout the continent were going permanently offline as their
users spent more and more time elsewhere. The number of nodes trad-
ing mail on FidoNet began to shrink for the first time in over a decade.8

While some sysops gave users advanced notice of the shuttering of their
systems, others simply pulled the plug after weeks of dormant phone
lines and stagnant forums: no forwarding addresses, no thank-you notes
for former callers. Longtime modemers grew accustomed to hearing the
prerecorded voice of a telephone operator through their PC speakers:

“We’re sorry. You have reached a number that has been disconnected
or is no longer in service. If you feel you have reached this recording in
error, please check the number and try your call again.”9 Little evidence remained of the systems that once thrived on the ends of these disconnected numbers. The very term “BBS” began to vanish from the Ameri-
can tech vocabulary. In 1997, the US Census retired a question about

BBSs, replacing it with one about the internet. In 1998, even Boardwatch
magazine—mouthpiece for the BBS industry—dropped “BBS” from its
masthead. For some residents of the modem world, the dot-com boom
was a bust.

The World Wide Web, in particular, seemed to draw all of the atten-
tion away from dial-up BBSs. In the memories of many former users, the
web’s graphical interface posed an existential threat to the text-oriented

BBS. Determined sysops struggled to survive, adopting new graphical
software and adding internet features to their boards, but the rhetorical

S

N

169

170 becoming the ne t

Taglines from the Cover of Boardwatch Magazine, 1991–98
first appearance
tagline

June 1991

Electronic BBS and Online Information Services

April 1992

Guide to the World of Online Services

May 1992

Guide to Electronic BBS and Online Information

Services

December 1993

Guide to Online Information Services and

Electronic Bulletin Boards

January 1996

Guide to the Internet, World Wide Web and BBS

March 1998

Guide to Internet Access and the World Wide Web
battle was already lost. As former users tell this morbid tale, the BBS is
said to have “fallen” or “died” at the hands of the internet.10 In the 2006
memoir of the former sysop Rob O’Hara, he described the arrival of the
internet as an almost instantaneous event that “crushed” all of the BBSs
and dial-up systems into “oblivion.”11 A terminal prognosis for the BBS
world propagated almost immediately after the arrival of public access
to the web. In August 1996, the software developer Rob Swindell, to oc-
casion the closing of his BBS company, Synchronet, circulated an es-
say titled, provocatively, “The Internet Killed the BBS Star.”12 As silence spread across North America’s BBS networks, few could disagree.

But what did it mean for so many thousands of BBSs to “die”? What
other explanations could there be for the sudden disappearance of these
dial-up networks? For a forensic analysis of the “killing” of the modem
world, we need to take a few steps back, to the years just before the

Netscape IPO and the release of Windows 95 and the Telecommunica-
tions Act of 1996 and the dot-com boom. At the start of the 1990s, BBS
sysops were a vanguard force in the emerging internet economy, some of
the only people on Earth with practical experience in the social and tech-
nical challenges of maintaining an online community. So how did these
longtime users respond when their friends and family started talking
about cyberspace? What did they imagine when they heard the president

S
touting the construction of an “information superhighway”? Did they

N

170
becoming the ne t 17 1
expect “the net” to change their lives? How did they react to the swiftly
changing cultural economy of the dot-com boom?

a c om ing - ou t pa r t y f or the b b s ind u s t r y

At the outset of the 1990s, BBS operators optimistically awaited public
access to the internet. During the previous decade, the internet had been
restricted to research institutions. Commercial uses—including ama-
teur BBSs—were discouraged. By 1990, however, an internal process of
privatization promised to open the high-speed data network to the gen-
eral public and create a competitive internet industry.13 Unregulated access to the packet-switched internet promised a new medium for linking

BBSs together, free of the costs and constraints of the telephone network.

The transformation of the internet from public to private paralleled a
transformation in the technical culture of BBS operators as well. In Au-
gust 1991, over four hundred FidoNet sysops and BBS diehards met in

Boulder, Colorado, for FidoCon ’91. Previous conventions had attracted
a smaller number of FidoNet insiders and focused on the immediate
problems of network growth and maintenance. An especially conten-
tious battle over forming a nonprofit corporation gave FidoCon a reputa-
tion for acrimony and arguing—as well as the unfortunate nickname

“Fight-O-Con.”14 But with the growing buzz of internet privatization in the background, the 1991 conference promised something different.

The organizers of FidoCon ’91 hoped to change the reputation of
the conference. Instead of an administrative meeting aimed at address-
ing arcane routing issues, they promised that FidoCon ’91 would be “the
biggest SysOp gathering in history.”15 Drawing on their prior experience running large “cons” for science fiction and fantasy enthusiasts, the organizers explicitly invited BBS users and neophytes to participate.16 Despite the specific name, FidoCon ’91 was broadly aimed at every modem
junkie and Echomail addict in the world, a gathering for anyone inter-
ested in “international BBSing and electronic communications.”17 It was the first time that anyone had attempted to bring the entire decentralized
network of dial-up BBSs together under one roof.

Promotional materials, circulated on BBS networks and computer
magazines, promised three days of workshops and events. A prelim-
inary program featured how-to sessions with FidoNet architects Tom

S

N

171

172 becoming the ne t

Jennings and Tim Požar, a presentation from John Perry Barlow and

Mitch Kapor of the newly founded Electronic Frontier Foundation, a
mud-pie-throwing contest to benefit a multiple sclerosis charity, and the

“real wedding” of Peter Stewart and Michele Hamilton, two sysops who
fell in love over Echomail.18 The response was overwhelming—the official conference hotel sold out, and vendors occupied all of the available
booths. More than twenty sysops attended from overseas, including Aus-
tralia, Finland, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. One registered sysop
from the Soviet Union was reportedly forced to cancel at the last minute
due to an attempted coup d’état by members of the Communist Party.19

To the hundreds of modemers who showed up, FidoCon ’91 was a
revelation. After years of BBSing in relative isolation, here they were,
shoulder-to-shoulder with hundreds of other people who knew the dif-
ference between XMODEM, QMODEM, and ZMODEM, people with
whom they had been trading files and messages for years, people who
shared a utopian vision for the future of computer-mediated communi-
cation. The hallways of the Sheraton buzzed with laughter as attendees
met face-to-face, shook hands, and embraced one another. After hours of
phone calls and thousands of kilobytes of email, the modem world was
meeting itself for the first time. Combining the awkward energy of a first
date with the easy humor of old friends, one attendee described the event
as more of a “revival” than a convention.20 Meanwhile, the invited speakers were just as colorful in person as on the boards. Tom Jennings turned
up with bleached blond hair and a kill-your-TV T-shirt. Dave Hughes ap-
peared in a cowboy hat and bolo tie. Barlow wore a kerchief around his
neck and a Grateful Dead steal-your-face badge on his lapel.21 Somehow, this hobby didn’t seem so marginal after all.

The unexpected turnout at FidoCon ’91 raised a new question for

BBS sysops: Was BBSing still just a hobby? Or was it becoming some-
thing else? A social movement? An industry? While attendees puzzled
over this shift in collective identity, two conference sponsors leapt ea-
gerly at the chance to redefine the meaning of “BBS” for the 1990s.

Phil Becker, creator of TBBS, and Jack Rickard of Boardwatch embraced

FidoCon ’91 as an opportunity for commercial growth and innovation.22

Initially, they compared FidoCon to the Dayton Hamfest, an annual gath-

S
ering of amateur radio operators that combined the commercialism of

N
a trade show with the conviviality of a county fair.23 But after attending 172
becoming the ne t 17 3
the convention, Rickard came to believe that something bigger was go-
ing on. In his next Boardwatch column, he described FidoCon ’91 as a

“turning point” for the “infant” BBS industry.24 Despite the “grumbling”

of some old-timers, the crowd seemed open to commercialization and
keen to learn more about the privatization of the internet. Something
had happened to BBS culture over the previous year, Rickard marveled:

“the kid gained his feet.”25

Riding the wave of excitement from FidoCon ’91, Rickard and Becker
announced plans to organize an event of their own in 1992. Dubbed the

Online Networking Exposition and BBS Conference, or “ONE BBSCON,”

the new event sought to cut ties with FidoNet and embrace commer-
cialization of the modem world. Jim Warren, organizer of the legendary

West Coast Computer Faire, offered informal mentorship and a degree
of legitimacy to the fledging organization.26 If amateur sysops felt any lingering discomfort with commercialism, they were free to continue
running FidoCon independently. To address the concerns of Fido sysops,

Rickard submitted an article to FidoNews outlining his vision of a “gen-
eral BBS industry and networking trade show” inclusive of commercial
platforms like CompuServe and Prodigy, BBS networks like RelayNet
and ILink, and internet services.27 Tom Jennings added a note of support to the article, emphasizing that he was not opposed to commercialization but rather protective of the autonomy of the Fido network. So long
as ONE BBSCON kept “Fido” out of its name, there would be no confu-
sion over the relationship between the amateur FidoNet and the com-
mercial BBS industry.

Tensions over commercialization revealed other fissures in North

American BBS culture. Although the population was growing in sheer
numbers, white men continued to make up a large majority. At FidoCon

’91, nearly everyone dragging a suitcase through the hotel lobby appeared
to fit this description. In October, Boardwatch ran a FidoCon feature in-
cluding several pages of snapshots from around the convention halls.

Not only were there no women listed as presenters or award recipients,
there was not a single woman in any of the photos. One attendee, who
identified herself as “the only Black Female” at FidoCon, returned home
from the conference feeling very differently from Rickard and Becker.

In an “open letter” published by Boardwatch, Lisa Downing describing

S
being snubbed and ignored all weekend: “I was relegated to the role of

N

173

174 becoming the ne t
nonperson at this conference.”28 In a brutal irony, she noted the frequency with which the invited speakers hailed the coming of an egalitarian virtual community, free of bias. “Don’t fool yourselves,” she remarked;

“[technology] will not erase the prejudices of the user.”29 Rickard issued a short response, showing little compassion or willingness to engage
with Downing’s critique. Instead, he dismissed the rudeness of other

FidoCon attendees as the harmless behavior of “maladjusted” computer
geeks and repeated the utopian belief that BBS users are “more tolerant
and accepting than most.” Yet Rickard also echoed the racial hostility of
the right-wing radio hosts whom he frequently lauded, bitterly suggest-
ing that any conflict that Downing felt at FidoCon stemmed from her
own identification as a Black woman: “I doubt you were as unique and
out of place as you apparently delight in thinking you were.”30

Unlike the conflict over commercialization, this startling exchange
between Rickard and Downing barely seemed to register in the public
discourse of the period. Not one follow-up letter appeared in the pages
of Boardwatch. Of course, Rickard might have suppressed the topic in
the interest of portraying FidoCon in a positive light, but notably, he did
not curb a debate over homosexuality that erupted a few weeks later.

Rickard did not speak for everyone in the modem world when it came
to race and racism—indeed, just six months later, Jennings published
an impassioned defense of racial justice activism in FidoNews 31—but the lack of response to Downing’s letter reflected an unwillingness on the
part of most white men to think seriously about race, class, and gen-
der. Sadly, Downing’s experience at FidoCon was not unique. Despite
the many contributions of women and Black people to early net culture,
the benefits of commercialization—from BBSs to social media—have
consistently gone to those who fit the stereotype of the white male com-
puter geek.32 Downing gave Rickard and the readers of Boardwatch an opportunity to follow a different path. They didn’t take it.

Over the next three years, the utopian vision of virtual community
went mainstream—from niche computer rags to the cover of Time—
thanks to the privatization of the internet. Commercial online services
like Prodigy created “start-up kits” bundling terminal software with
cheap modems to help curious computer owners get online, and sub-

S
scriber numbers spiked. America Online reportedly grew from fewer

N
than 180,000 users in 1992 to over one million in 1994.33 BBSs saw a 174
becoming the ne t 175
parallel spike in activity as thousands of new modem users sought an on-
line world beyond the walled gardens of CompuServe, Prodigy, and AOL.

The number of people traveling to BBS conventions in North America
more than doubled every year, hitting a peak of four thousand at the 1994
meeting of ONE BBSCON in Atlanta.34

Dial-up BBSs increasingly acted as local gateways to the newly priva-
tized internet, blurring the distinction between the two spheres. As more
of the public came online, the biases identified by Downing after Fido-

Con ’91 only intensified. Despite firsthand accounts of racism and sexual
harassment, BBS advocates clung to a vision of cyberspace as a medium
free of bias—a “society of the Mind,” as John Perry Barlow declared it.35

But the modem users targeted by harassment had different utopias in
mind. By 1994, more than two dozen BBSs were trading messages over

AfroNet, a Fido-based network initially organized by the graduate stu-
dent Ken Onwere to carry conferences on “African-American themes.”36

Long-running women-only spaces on BBSs like ECHO and The WELL
were welcoming new users. And queer spaces like the Gay and Lesbian

Information Bureau (GLIB) were taking calls from all over the country. A
common purpose to networks like these was helping people to find one
another out in cyberspace. The utopia promised by these networks was
not a disembodied virtual reality but rather a simultaneous blossoming
of translocal communication. Regardless of which utopia you were chas-
ing in 1992, the future of cyberspace looked less like the commercial web
and more like a worldwide network of BBSs.

s t orm ing the int erne t

Between 1992 and 1995, thousands of BBS sysops set about rebuilding
their BBSs as on-ramps and off-ramps to the internet. The energy and ex-
perience of the BBS community caught some longtime internet observ-
ers by surprise. After more than a decade of parallel development, they
could no longer ignore the cooperative, grassroots networks stretching
across the globe. Ethernet cocreator Bob Metcalfe joked about his BBS
blind spot: “Where have I been while cyberspace was being settled?”37

From Metcalfe’s view, BBS users and sysops were about to transform
the social fabric of the internet, bringing in new practices, new exper-
tise, and new expectations. Over the next few years, he wrote regularly

S
about BBSs in his column for InfoWorld and urged his readers to take

N

175

176 becoming the ne t
the community seriously. Today’s BBSs, he predicted, would soon serve
as the “local front ends” to the privatized internet. BBS users and sysops
would be the ones to grow the web.38

In addition to the persistent growth of BBSs in population and geo-
graphic reach, they also seemed to be surpassing their UNIX contempo-
raries in some technical regards. For example, while the user interface
of a text-mode BBS might look somewhat out of date next to Prodigy’s
point-and-click menus, the internet looked downright ancient. In 1991,
the internet’s user interface was the blinking cursor of a UNIX shell ac-
count, indistinguishable from the monochrome BBSs of a decade before.

Because BBS sysops and software developers had spent years exploring
the limits of ANSI-mode graphics, BBS screens of the early 1990s were
interactive, animated, and colorful—worlds away from the UNIX com-
mand line. As the internet software developer Brad Clements remarked
in 1993, many BBSs “blow-away” existing internet services.39 In a letter to Boardwatch, he offered to collaborate with BBS makers to enable incoming connections from the internet. In Clements’s view, internet users
would benefit from being able to connect to the BBS world as much as

BBS users would be curious to explore the internet.

A convergence of BBS and internet networks seemed mutually
beneficial. The internet would provide a robust infrastructure for shut-
tling data between the many BBS communities already thriving on the
dial-up telephone system. In the aftermath of FidoCon ’91, Jack Rickard
became an increasingly vocal proponent of this convergence. He urged

BBS sysops to see themselves as the primary point of contact between
the everyday computer owner and the internet’s “ivory tower.”40 “The ordinary electronic bulletin board will be the interface to the Internet,” he
enthused. “[It will be] the only Internet most people will see for some
time to come.”41 Along with Phil Becker, Rickard believed that much of the internet hype was misplaced. After all, so much of what sparked
cyberspace mania—virtual community, online learning, e-commerce—
was already happening on dial-up BBSs! “Peel away all the mystery,” they
asserted, and “[the internet] is the world’s largest BBS.”42 After meeting with Becker and Rickard at ONE BBSCON in 1993, Bob Metcalfe
was convinced that the “fabled” internet was about to undergo a cultural

S
transformation with the arrival of “millions” of users through BBS gate-

N

176
becoming the ne t 17 7
ways.43 “A warning for my friends on the Internet,” he wrote in InfoWorld: “[expect] an imminent invasion of BBS sysops.”44

Sysops eager to interconnect soon discovered that there were sub-
stantial hurdles—technical and administrative—to getting on the inter-
net. The complicated process of establishing an internet connection was
the subject of numerous textfiles, magazine articles, club meetings, and
conference workshops. Since 1985, BBS sysops had been exchanging
messages and files with internet networks through intermittent store-
and-forward gateways using a file-transfer utility known as Unix-to-Unix

Copy, or UUCP.45 However, these ad hoc points of connection required access to a UNIX machine and an employer who didn’t know (or didn’t
care) what you did with it after hours.46 Most sysops were out of luck until 1989, when the programmer Tim Požar released UFGATE, a UUCP
package for MS-DOS with full support for internet email and USENET
newsgroups.47 Požar made UFGATE available free of charge to noncom-
mercial users and offered to mail a physical copy to anyone who sent
him a blank disk and return postage.48 In 1990, a UFGATE BBS operated in Portland, Oregon, by the FidoNet contributor Randy Bush facilitated
the exchange of FidoNet, Echomail, USENET, and internet mail with

South Africa.49

By 1993, however, many BBS sysops were looking for more than
a store-and-forward gateway. They wanted a “real” internet connection
with a dedicated IP address and a domain name like “mybbs.com.” Such a connection would allow local BBS users to venture out and explore
internet services like Gopher and IRC while also accepting incoming
connections from people anywhere on the internet. While a standard
dial-up modem supported just one user at a time, a packet-switched
internet connection could support dozens of users simultaneously. The
problem was that the internet’s packet-switching protocols, TCP/IP,
were not designed for microcomputers. All of the early development of
the internet was done using the sorts of computers found at large institu-
tional facilities: mainframes, minicomputers, and workstations with the
networking-friendly UNIX operating system.50 Meanwhile, the modem
world ran on IBM-compatible PCs and MS-DOS, which did not support
networking by default. Third-party software tools were available for add-
ing the internet protocols to DOS, but they were notoriously difficult to

S

N

177

178 becoming the ne t
configure. In the preamble to a long how-to guide, the sysop Bernard

Aboba urged readers to persevere. “Lots of us are doing this,” he wrote.

“Don’t despair!”51

Configuring the software was just one part of the puzzle. Sysops
also needed to find an existing internet host willing to provide a connec-
tion.52 In the 1980s, store-and-forward gateways relied on establishing an informal arrangement such as a local university computer lab willing
to donate a few hours of telephone time per week. But a packet-switched
connection required a more substantial commitment of resources—a

24/7 link to the remote host.53 Since the ARPANET days, institutional networks relied on dedicated lines leased from the telephone company
for thousands of dollars a month—not an option for the typical hobby-
ist.54 Yet, despite the official “privatization,” in most North American cities and towns, there were simply no internet providers selling access
to consumers. A BBS sysop couldn’t simply call someone on the phone
and order “one internet, please!” In October 1992, Boardwatch published
a list of internet service providers for readers seeking connections.55 It included just ten commercial networks. Even the nationwide commercial
systems were struggling to move beyond the gateway paradigm.56

By 1994, sysops were experimenting with a variety of hacks and al-
ternative infrastructures to bring about the convergence of BBSs and the
internet. Consumer satellite services such as Planet Connect offered a

“firehose from the sky,” complete with USENET, Echomail, and streams
of real-time weather and stock market data. 57 Unfortunately, it was noninteractive. The high-bandwidth satellite feed traveled in one direction:

from the sky to the ground. Data sent back from the BBS traveled over
a standard telephone call. Early cable internet connections, meanwhile,
presented a similar problem. Due to the asymmetric design of the typi-
cal cable network, BBS users could access the internet at high speed,
but internet users could not access the BBS. 58 Despite these constraints, sysops continued to pry open the edges of the internet. Tom Jennings
briefly accessed the internet from home by dialing a friend with a con-
nection, attaching their modems, and never hanging up.59 Thanks to his flat-rate local dialing plan, there was no additional charge, despite being
continuously “on the phone” for weeks on end.

S

Regardless of the technical challenges, nearly five hundred sysops

N
succeeded in adding a two-way, packet-switched internet connection to

178

becoming the ne t 179
their BBSs during the early 1990s.60 Hybrid “internet BBSs” combined the local culture of a dial-up BBS with the global reach of the internet.

As the sysop of one internet BBS put it, the BBS offered a friendly, fa-
miliar place to “kick back and relax” after “roaming the cold vastness
of cyberspace.”61 Boardwatch and BBS Magazine ran features on internet BBSs and provided technical information to would-be sysops. In
the summer of 1992, The WELL announced that it was upgrading its
internet email gateway to include incoming and outgoing telnet connec-
tions, making it one of the first dial-up systems directly accessible from
the internet.62 Soon after, Women’s Wire split off from The WELL and formed its own BBS with connections to USENET and the internet.63

Toward the end of 1993, the burgeoning internet industry could scarcely
keep pace with the demand for interactive services. The BBS-friendly

Colorado SuperNet had to briefly suspend its UUCP gateway to provide
bandwidth for other customers.64

BBS sysops had reason to be optimistic about their future on the
internet. Throughout 1994, they had seen considerable growth and in-
novation among BBSs. From single-line hobbyist boards to large multi-
line systems, new BBSs were popping up all over North America. In
addition, updated BBS host software took advantage of faster modem

Classified ad for Dragon Keep International, a hybrid internet BBS in Gainesville, Flor-
ida, from the October 1994 issue of Boardwatch. The sysop, Richard Scott Mark, was S
the maintainer of a widely circulated list of internet-connected BBSs and an advocate
for the convergence of BBSs and the web. (Courtesy of Boardwatch, now Light Reading) N

179

18 0 becoming the ne t
speeds, faster processors, and multitasking operating systems to make
it easier for sysops to add internet services. In the spring, BBS Maga-
zine launched a new trade show, dubbed BBS Expo ’94, in Washington,

DC, aimed at the Northern Virginia internet industry. In the fall, ONE

BBSCON moved to Atlanta, Georgia, and attracted more attendees, ven-
dors, and press than any previous year. The longtime sysop Dave Hughes
characterized the crowd as “deadly serious about Internet connectivity”

and willing to fight for access at a fair price.65 Jack Rickard, in his first editorial of 1995, poked fun at “a bevy of latecomers” rushing to publish
books and magazines about BBSs and the internet. “It’s good to be ‘dis-
covered,’” he remarked.66 Yet the advantages of being first were short-lived. In January, a striking statistic on the cover of Boardwatch foreshad-
owed an abrupt end to the BBS moment: “World Wide Web Traffic . . .

1,814% Growth.”

Between January and December 1995, the web became the face of
the internet. At first glance, the graphical web would seem at odds with
text-mode BBSs, but internet BBSs embraced the new medium, serving
as both gateways and destinations. With a few technical modifications,
the sysops of internet BBSs could provide users with access to the graph-
ical web using the Serial Line Internet Protocol (SLIP).67 The procedure for connecting to the graphical web from a BBS was tedious (an article in

Boardwatch estimated that it took “a few hours” to get everything set up),
and the download speeds were agonizing (a site with a few images might
take fifteen minutes to load); but it worked about as well as any of the
other options available to home computer owners.68 Even crusty modem-world veterans like Jack Rickard were impressed with the experience of
clicking from page to page. “Yes,” he admitted, “we got a little excited.”69

In addition to gateways, however, many internet BBSs also styled
themselves as destinations for users of the web. Nearly every sysop cre-
ated a home page for their BBS. Learning HTML and planning a home
page were novel and enjoyable projects, even for experienced program-
mers. The typical BBS home page was little more than a digital advertise-
ment, inviting readers to leave the site and connect directly to the board
via telnet. Several large-scale BBSs went a step further, however, by re-
creating their systems within the idiom of the web. In 1995, The WELL

S
debuted an interactive web service that ran in parallel with the existing

N

PicoSpan software.70 The new point-and-click interface sought to provide 180

In 1995, The WELL added an interface to the World Wide Web. In this period of transi-
tion, the website functioned more as a portal than a replacement for the existing BBS.

Links on the site pointed visitors to member home pages, a how-to site for new internet
users, a Gopher server run by the community, and instructions for using telnet to
access the text-mode BBS. Today, the entire conferencing system is accessible through
the web, and the community continues to thrive. (Courtesy of The WELL Group)

S

N

181

182 becoming the ne t
a more accessible experience for newcomers while preserving the spirit
of the old dial-up system. Similar upgrades were on the way from com-
mercial BBS makers like Galacticomm and Mustang Software, both of
which provided out-of-the-box support for the web by 1996.

Sysops chased internet access because it offered a solution to the
central constraint on the growth of the modem world: long-distance dial-
ing. While the rest of the world dreamed of virtual reality, BBS enthusi-
asts saw the internet primarily as a replacement for the telephone net-
work. They imagined a future in which IP addresses and domain names
replaced area codes and telephone numbers, a future in which they no
longer needed to quickly calculate the cost of a long-distance call before
connecting to a new and interesting system. Bernard Aboba compared
the experience of internet access to a reconfiguration of space: “It be-
comes possible for you to communicate with someone half a world away
by calling a computer down the street!”71 For sysops, the appeal of internet access wasn’t about particular files or services or communities—
there were plenty of all of those in the modem world; rather, it was an
infrastructural upgrade with social consequences, a hot-swapping of one
medium for another that would bring BBS users and sysops together
from around the world. This transition would both reduce the cost of ex-
isting networks like FidoNet and enable the growth of interest-oriented
community BBSs like the Gay & Lesbian Information Bureau. Longtime
modemers were ecstatic to be free of the confines of their local dialing
area. One former user described their initial impression of the internet
as “a giant virtual convention that would never end.”72
d e ath of the b b s

The transformative events of 1995 interrupted BBS sysops’ vision of the
internet. As cyberspace splashed into popular culture and the Netscape

IPO made headlines, investment capital flooded into the industries asso-
ciated with data communications. But instead of BBSs, this new money
and attention flowed to firms touting the internet and the World Wide

Web. Regardless of the expertise and experience of BBS programmers,
sysops, and entrepreneurs, thousands were in danger of losing out on
the dot-com boom. Despite the convergence of the early 1990s, vocal

S
proponents of the internet had never embraced BBS culture. As a result,

N

182
becoming the ne t 183
anyone wishing to benefit from the boom eventually needed to shed
their past associations with the modem world and embrace the internet.

For proponents of the commercial internet, it was important that
the web seem cool, new, safe, and profitable.73 Whereas Jack Rickard argued for an inclusive definition of “online services,” internet advocates
rejected earlier attempts at building a public data infrastructure. Video-
tex, time-sharing, commercial services, and dial-up BBSs were all in the
past. The web was the future. Too old, too weird, too commercial, and too
small, BBSs were rejected, neglected, stigmatized, and forgotten.

The most common explanation for the decline of BBSs is that new us-
ers rejected the text-mode technology in favor of the graphical web. This
explanation tracks with the representation of the web in popular culture.

For years, the “information superhighway” had been presented through
the metaphor of “interactive TV”—a vision of the future with roots in
télématique systems of the late 1970s and early 1980s, such as Minitel.74

In 1993 and 1994, cover stories in Time and Popular Mechanics depicted the information superhighway as streams of television images—dramas,
sports, news, animation—zipping through space. Dial-up BBSs could
not produce the visual spectacle of these images, but neither could the
internet. When people accustomed to cable TV and console games heard
terms like “cyberspace” and “virtual reality,” they were not imagining the
blinking cursor of the UNIX shell. The graphical web, as seen through
the Mosaic browser, represented the first internet application approach-
ing the realization of interactive TV. As Megan Sapnar Ankerson argues,

Mosaic’s inline graphics and enjoyable user experience were just good
enough for users to imagine what the web might become in the future.75

But the snubbing of BBSs cannot be explained solely as a matter of
technology or market competition. After more than a decade, the exclu-
sivity of the internet had nurtured a culture of elitism among some us-
ers. “Little did we know,” observed the sysop Richard Scott Mark in 1996,
but some internet users were less than enthusiastic about the arrival of

BBS communities.76 Out of ignorance, they regarded BBS users as un-
sophisticated and inexperienced in the online world. This snobbishness
is evident in the bit of internet folklore known as “Eternal September.”77

Despite the name, “Eternal September” began in the spring of 1994,
when America Online first gained access to USENET.78 As the story S

N

183

18 4 becoming the ne t
goes, USENET was previously restricted to college students, academics,
researchers, and other internet insiders.79 With the arrival of new users from AOL, the quality of discussion on many newsgroups plummeted,
as longtime users were overwhelmed by posts from newcomers who
hadn’t yet learned the norms of behavior. To some internet users, BBSs
occupied an even lower social status than commercial services. In Sep-
tember 1994, Bob Metcalfe joked about the perception of BBSs: “If you
thought America Online, CompuServe, and Prodigy users were barbar-
ian newbies . . . here come the BBSes.”80 Of course, the sorts of BBS users seeking access to USENET were hardly newcomers. Many had been
online for a decade or more. Despite this irony, the negative perception
of BBSs seems to have been widespread among internet users.81

The low status afforded to BBS networks reflected technical, social,
and geographic biases among internet advocates. The norms and val-
ues of the early internet were shaped by the unique technical culture of

UNIX.82 Indeed, the internet protocols were initially distributed through a version of UNIX popular with academic computer labs. To many UNIX
devotees, microcomputer operating systems like MS-DOS seemed like
a technological backwater, safe to ignore.83 Yet this cultivated disinterest created an inward-facing technical culture that could feel radically
open and egalitarian to insiders, while also being structurally closed to
outsiders.84 Likewise, in the early 1990s, champions of the internet’s democratic culture tended to elide the inherent elitism of a network accessible only to people with a university affiliation. At best, internet users
regarded BBSs as “stepping stones” to the “real” internet, a hierarchical
view that overlooked the substantial social and technical innovation that
had taken place on BBS networks themselves during the 1980s.

Of course, BBS networks thrived in spite of the neglect of internet us-
ers. That neglect was replaced by stigma, however, with the emergence of
an internet industry. Dial-up BBSs provided an easy scapegoat for inter-
net spokespeople struggling to present the commercial web as safe and
fun. The stigmatization of BBSs was supported by more than a decade
of negative coverage. Since 1985, nearly every time that a BBS was men-
tioned on the nightly news, it was associated with something shady or
nefarious: hackers, foreign spies, neo-Nazis, or pornographers.85 These S
stories were not without merit, but there was no complementary cover-

N
age highlighting the vast majority of community-oriented BBSs and the

184
becoming the ne t 185
sysops who operated them. Indeed, the Electronic Frontier Foundation
was founded in 1990 to support the users and sysop of a BBS that had
been mistakenly targeted by the United States Secret Service.86

In 1993, a moral panic began to emerge over the accessibility of por-
nographic images online.87 Under the headline “Orgies On-Line,” Time magazine published an unsubstantiated claim that a “majority” of BBSs
offered “some form of digital titillation.”88 Whether or not this was true, it provided cover for heavily moderated platforms like Prodigy, which
sold themselves as a family-friendly alternative. BBS sysops were right-
fully frustrated, and the PC Magazine columnist John Dvorak decried
their unfair marginalization: “The media equates [BBSs] with child porn
while it equates the Net with ‘Information Superhighway’!”89 By July 1995, however, the “cyberporn” panic threatened to derail the commercialization of the web entirely. A poorly designed study of online pornog-
raphy prompted a sensational cover story in Time magazine claiming
that an overwhelming majority of the images found online were por-
nographic.90 In both the original study and the story published by Time, the term “BBS” was used to describe forums on CompuServe, USENET
newsgroups, anonymous FTP sites, and dial-up bulletin boards. The web
was mentioned only once, in passing: a potential “engine of economic
growth.”91

Unlike the web, internet BBSs were seldom described as a source of
prosperity, despite the enthusiasm of many sysops for entrepreneurship.

Magazines like Time framed the runaway commercial success of BBSs
such as Event Horizons and Rusty n Edie’s as ill gotten, due to their as-
sociation with porn and piracy.92 Yet profit and commercialization were much less controversial among BBS sysops than in the rarefied culture
of the internet. The problem wasn’t that BBSs were anticommercial but
that they were the wrong kind of commercial. Internet businesses were
emerging as national and international players, riding the neoliberal
wave of deregulation and free trade to compete with entrenched tele-
coms. Commercial BBSs, however, tended to be small and medium-
sized enterprises with a regional focus. They were run by families or
groups of friends out of small offices and spare bedrooms. In the lingo
of Silicon Valley, internet BBSs did not “scale.”

The final cause of death for the BBS was the ambiguous meaning

S
of the term “internet” itself.93 The internet transformed everything that N

185

Caricature of the sysops of Rusty n Edie’s BBS being “busted” for alleged copyright
infringement. The husband-and-wife team that ran Rusty n Edie’s liked to describe
their system as “the friendliest BBS in the world.” According to the FBI, unlicensed
commercial products were available alongside its massive collection of shareware and
adult GIFs. As BBSs came under increasing scrutiny from law enforcement, high-profile
busts contributed to an association of BBSs with unlawful activity, however undeserved.

(Courtesy of Boardwatch, now Light Reading)

S

N

186
becoming the ne t 187
it touched. Once a BBS added an internet connection, it was subsumed
into the massive network-of-networks. As BBS networks converged with
the internet, “BBS” became a vestigial category. To join the internet was
to vanish into the vastness of the internet. After years of being marginal-
ized, ignored, and neglected, many sysops threw in the towel. In 1994,
the BBS software maker Scott J. Brinker observed that his company’s pri-
mary product, The Major BBS, had outgrown the BBS label. It was soon
rebranded as Worldgroup—“an open platform for creating your own on-
line service”—and sold as a bridge between corporate intranets and the
public web.94 In 1995, the market research firm Nielsen reclassified all online services under the heading “Internet Access.”

Rhetorical closure around the term “internet” made it easier for
newcomers to find their way into cyberspace, but it also contributed
to a concentration of power on the web. BBS sysops enjoyed a degree
of autonomy from one another that was not available on the commer-
cial web. And since BBSs were materially isolated from one another,
users’ personal data did not follow them from one system to the next.

Although dial-up networks were less efficient than the packet-switched
internet, they nevertheless distributed control to edges of the network.

In addition, the technical architecture of BBSs enforced a kind of local
culture that was simply not a priority for the web. By the time former
users realized the intimate relationships they had lost, most BBSs were
already gone.

b i r th of the i s p

By 1996, a startling number of BBSs had vanished. From America On-
line to the World Wide Web, millions of modem users found themselves
dividing their online time among a much larger number of networks
and services. As users spent less time on their local BBSs, they set off a
negative feedback loop. Fewer callers today meant fewer messages for to-
morrow’s callers to read. In short time, BBS activity fell off precipitously.

As one former sysop told me, “The lines went dead.”

But something else was going on, out of sight of the typical user. Be-
tween 1994 and 1996, the telephone number (708) 820-8344 belonged
to an office in Aurora, Illinois. Situated just off the historic Ogden Av-
enue near the junction with Route 59, the office was home to Aquila

S

BBS, “Chicagoland’s Largest BBS.” An advertisement from Boardwatch

N

187

18 8 becoming the ne t
highlighted some of the attractive features of the BBS: hundreds of dis-
cussion areas, a library of over 120,000 files, an internet email gateway,
local weather, the digital edition of USA Today. By 1996, however, dialing

(708) 820-8344 no longer connected you to Aquila BBS. Instead, the
number now led to Aquila Internet Services. Operating out of the same
office in Aurora, Aquila Internet Services offered dial-up internet access,
commercial web design, and free web hosting for subscribers.

The sysops of systems like Aquila abandoned the term “BBS” and
reinvented themselves as “internet service providers” (ISPs).95 The same PCs, modems, hardware, and software used to run an internet BBS could
be adapted to running a local ISP. In fact, the makers of high-end BBS
software actively encouraged sysops to sell internet access to callers. The
fifth version of Wildcat!, released in 1996, promised to give sysops “the
power [to] develop into a full-blown Internet Service Provider.”96 As demonstrated by Aquila BBS, the difference between an “internet BBS” and
an “internet service provider” was just as often a matter of branding and
organizational identity as technology. By adopting the label “ISP,” entre-
preneurial sysops could avoid the stigma attached to the term “BBS” and
take part in the booming internet economy.

It is hard to know precisely how many BBSs transformed into ISPs
due to the protean state of the market, the absence of central authorities,
and the fuzzy definition of “ISP.” However, BBS publications from the
period offer some clues. In December 1995, Jack Rickard estimated—
somewhat implausibly—that “over 95%” of the ISPs created in the previ-
ous eighteen months were run by former BBS sysops.97 That same year, Richard Scott Mark offered a more conservative estimate: 40 percent of
all ISPs in the United States started out as a BBS.98 These numbers vary, in part, according to the definition of “ISP.” Would a BBS offering a

USENET feed and internet email gateway count? How about an ISP pro-
viding shell accounts and a local BBS but no access to the web? Or what
about an internet BBS offering home-page hosting and a web interface
but no traditional text-mode services? In 1996, entrepreneurial sysops
offered a broad range of network services at highly varied rates. Everyone
was still trying to figure out just what it meant to be an “ISP.”

Hindsight offers additional evidence of the transformation of BBSs

S
into ISPs. From 1994 to 1996, Richard Scott Mark published an elec-

N
tronic list of BBSs accessible via telnet, to encourage internet users to

188

In October 1994, Aquila BBS boasted about being “Chicagoland’s Largest BBS” with
features that rivaled nationwide commercial services. By October 1996, however, it had
reinvented itself as “Aquila Internet Services,” with the BBS as just one component of

S
its online business. Despite this change of face, the telephone number to reach Aquila
remained the same. (Print advertisement courtesy of Boardwatch, now Light Reading) N

189

19 0 becoming the ne t
explore the growing number of internet BBSs. Mark’s list was circu-
lated on USENET, posted to the web, republished in BBS Magazine, and
eventually compiled into a softcover book. The longest version of the
list included 462 BBSs, of which 428 included a link to a page on the

World Wide Web.99 Tracing these BBS home pages through the Internet

Archive’s Wayback Machine reveals that approximately one-third of the
web-enabled boards on Mark’s list had explicitly rebranded themselves
as ISPs by 1999. Sysops dropped any trace of their former BBSs and
adopted the language of the internet economy. The Big Easy BBS had
become “the region’s premier Internet Service Provider!”; Access Nevada
promised to “put your business on the Web!”; and CyberNet sold itself as
a provider of “leading-edge Internet/intranet technologies.”

At the start of the dot-com boom, thousands of BBSs seemed to dis-
appear within the space of a few months. Of those with an internet con-
nection, however, a substantial proportion reemerged as ISPs. Beyond
these direct metamorphoses, we can imagine tens of thousands of for-
mer BBS sysops and users carrying their past experiences into new jobs
in the nascent internet industry. The years that they spent learning how
to build dial-up networks and moderate online communities qualified
them for a variety of roles, from infrastructure maintenance and system
administration to web design and custom support. As the commercial
web became the dominant medium of the twenty-first century, it was
shaped—almost invisibly—by a cohort of online professionals who had
cut their teeth swapping files and messages on a dial-up BBS.

r ememb er ing a di ffer ent int erne t

In 1995, something happened to dial-up BBS networks in North America.

A year that seemed poised to bring BBSs into the mainstream instead
marked their sudden decline. Today, former users and sysops gener-
ally accept that the aesthetic advantages of the graphical web spelled the

“death” of the text-mode BBS. But looking back at the events of the early

1990s, a more complicated picture emerges. BBS enthusiasts foresaw
a future in which the web was not only a hypertext publishing medium
but a platform for computer-mediated communication. To bring about
this transformation, they sought a convergence of BBSs and the newly

S
privatized internet. As they endeavored to interconnect, however, BBS

N
sysops encountered resistance on the part of longtime internet users and

190
becoming the ne t 191
wound up abandoning the term “BBS.” So BBSs did not simply vanish
in 1995. They migrated to the internet, giving up their distinct identity
in the process.

By accepting a technological explanation for the demise of the dial-
up BBS, we have been misremembering the internet and the early web.

From the perspective of a home computer owner with a dial-up modem,
the web of 1995 was scarcely serviceable. It was tedious to set up and
slow to use.100 To understand why the web generated so much excitement, it is necessary to look at the broader media ecology of the early

1990s. People in North America had been promised high-speed, inter-
active telematics since the early 1980s, but the political economy of the

Bell System breakup left no room for long-range planning or serious
investment in digital infrastructure.101 After nearly two decades pushing the residential telephone network to its limit, BBS enthusiasts were casting about for a new infrastructure. From the perspective of a BBS sysop,
public access to the internet’s “backbone” looked like an opportunity to
expand beyond the local area code, fundamentally reordering the spatial
imaginary of the modem world. The point-and-click web interface en-
abled BBS enthusiasts to envision what it might feel like to navigate a
hybridized BBS-internet in the future.

The BBS sysop’s optimistic vision of a convergence of BBSs and the
internet allows us to remember the early web differently. Instead of see-
ing the web as a competitor or a replacement for the dial-up BBS, we
can see the web as a continuation of the modem world. “Our primary
goal was to expand our little BBS community to a world wide audience,”

recalled sysop Richard Scott Mark when thinking about his motivations
for connecting to the internet.102 In the case of BBSs becoming ISPs, the continuity was even more concrete. The exact same telecommunications
apparatus that once carried FidoNet messages and ANSI log-in screens
was repurposed to handle HTML pages and animated GIFs. In cities and
towns around North America, the internet was literally made of BBSs.

S

N

191
chapter seven

Imagining a Better Future for the Internet
a few years ago, something went weird in one of my under-
graduate internet history courses. As I was grading final exams, I dis-
covered that a handful of students had come away with an unexpected
misunderstanding of early online culture. With deep nostalgia for a past
they hadn’t experienced, they described AOL as an online service pri-
marily for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and trans people to connect with one
another. They similarly offered a highly romanticized vision of BBSs as a
place of queer, feminist, and antiracist organizing. For them, the history
of the social internet was one of decline: once it had been utopia; now it
was just Facebook.

I was both puzzled and a little amused by this inaccurate but enthu-
siastic misunderstanding of the history. As I looked back over my notes
from the course, I could see where things had gone awry. I had intended
for the course to upend stereotypes about the people who built the inter-
net. While we covered in detail the histories of packet switching, time-
sharing, and the Cold War, the syllabus was also filled with articles and
activities highlighting the contributions of marginalized people to the
networks that would become social media. In some ways, these were the
most fun aspects to teach. Students’ eyes glazed over as I tried to get

S
them to marvel at TCP/IP, but they lit up when we talked about HIV/

N

AIDS support groups, Afrofuturism, and cyberfeminist e-zines.

192

192
imagining a be t ter fu t ure for the interne t 193

When I told my friends about the confusion, they laughed. Was

AOL, so crucial to our 1990s high school and college experiences, really
such ancient history? But I was troubled by the students’ misunderstand-
ing. It simply is not true that AOL was overwhelmingly gay or that most

BBS networks were experiments in radical organizing. In the early days,
as now, the computer-geek stereotype had some basis in fact. White men
with modems outnumbered everyone else. In my effort to challenge the
standard narrative, I had conveyed the exceptional as the typical. And in
doing so, I had stripped these extraordinary events from the conditions
of oppression, exclusion, violence, and neglect in which they took place.

In this book, I have offered stories from the modem world as a set
of narrative resources, but turning to the past for help with the present
is risky. A toxic nostalgia lurks around the history of consumer technol-
ogy, particularly where men’s technical hobbies are concerned. Certainly,
some people prefer a past uncomplicated by issues of injustice. It’s more
fun to kick back and remember the good old days spent tinkering with
computers, playing Legend of the Red Dragon, and flaming losers online,
and that’s one way that the history of the modem world could be told.

But as my students’ confusion illustrates, it’s easy to overcorrect in
the other direction. I want to tell a version of the past that celebrates
the contributions of those whose stories have not been sufficiently told,
but I also want to offer meaningful context. Misogyny, homophobia, and
white supremacy were problems on the networks of the 1980s, just as
they are today. Even emphasizing the remarkable stories of queer life
on BBSs obscures another set of intersectional exclusions. Every BBS
in North America operated within a cultural matrix of race and gender
marking personal computers as the domain of white men. Replacing
one oversimplified story with another is not the way forward.

Nevertheless, the stories from the modem world gathered in this
book are real, and they are important. For more than two decades, dial-
up bulletin board systems, or BBSs, were a primary form of popular net-
worked computing in North America. The users and sysops of grassroots

BBSs stood at the forefront of computer-mediated communication, carv-
ing out a space between nationwide commercial services and subsidized
university systems. From the moral economy of shareware to the coop-
erative networks of HIV/AIDS activists, BBS communities adapted the

S
simple idea of a “computerized bulletin board” to an array of socially

N

193

19 4 imagining a be t ter fu t ure for the interne t
valuable purposes. Their experiments with file sharing and community
building during the 1980s provided a foundation for the blogs, forums,
and social network sites that drove the popularization of the World Wide

Web more than a decade later. But, today, these systems are almost totally
absent from the internet’s origin story.

Instead of emphasizing the role of popular innovation and amateur
invention, the dominant myths in internet history focus on the trajec-
tory of a single military-funded experiment in computer networking: the

ARPANET. Though fascinating, the ARPANET story excludes the every-
day culture of personal computing and grassroots internetworking. In
truth, the histories of ARPANET and BBS networks were interwoven—
socially and materially—as ideas, technologies, and people flowed be-
tween them. The history of the internet could be a thrilling tale inclusive
of many thousands of networks, big and small, urban and rural, com-
mercial and voluntary. Instead, it is repeatedly reduced to the story of the
singular ARPANET.

The tales that we tell about ARPANET and the Cold War, Silicon

Valley and the early web have become a founding mythology for the
internet—narrative resources that we rely on to make sense of our
computer-mediated world.1 Activists, critics, executives, and policy mak-
ers routinely call on this mythology to advance arguments on issues re-
lated to technology and society. In debates about censorship, national
sovereignty, privacy, net neutrality, cybersecurity, copyright, and more,
advocates refer to a few oft-repeated tales in search of fundamental
truths about how the internet ought to be governed. The stories that peo-
ple—especially people in power—believe about the internet of the past
affect the lives of everyone who depends on the internet in the present.

Forgetting has high stakes. As wireless broadband approaches ubiq-
uity in many parts of North America, the stories we tell about the origins
of the internet are more important than ever. Faced with crises such as
censorship and surveillance, policy makers and technologists call on a
mythic past for guidance. In times of uncertainty, the most prominent
historical figures—the “forefathers” and the “innovators”—are granted a
special authority to make normative claims about the future of telecom-
munications. As long as the modem world is excluded from the inter-

S
net’s origin story, the everyday amateur will have no representation in

N

194
imagining a be t ter fu t ure for the interne t 195
debates over policy and technology, no opportunity to advocate for a dif-
ferent future.

The paradox running through this book is that the modem world
refuses to be a single, stable object of analysis. In life and in memory,
it was multiple, different, conflicting networks at the same time. This
complexity was written into the architecture of the networks themselves.

Before 1996, the modem world was not yet the internet, not yet a single,
universal information infrastructure bound together by a shared set of
protocols. In the days of USENET and BBSs and Minitel, cyberspace was
defined by the interconnection of thousands of small-scale local systems,
each with its own idiosyncratic culture and technical design, a dynamic
assemblage of overlapping communication systems held together by
digital duct tape and a handshake. It looked and felt different depending
on where you plugged in your modem.

The standard history of the internet jumps from ARPANET to the
web, skipping right past the mess of the modem world. A history that
consists of mostly ARPANET and the web isn’t incorrect; indeed, it is
quite valuable. There is much to learn from these networks about in-
formal collaboration, international cooperation, public-private partner-
ships, and bottom-up technical innovation.

But we’ve been telling the same story about ARPANET and the web
for twenty-five years, and it isn’t satisfying anymore. It doesn’t help us
understand the social internet we have now: it doesn’t explain the emer-
gence of commercial social media, it can’t solve the problems of plat-
formization, and it won’t help us to imagine what comes after.2

Today’s social media ecosystem functions more like the modem
world of the late 1980s and early 1990s than like the open social web
of the early twenty-first century. It is an archipelago of proprietary plat-
forms, imperfectly connected at their borders. Any gateways that do ex-
ist are subject to change at a moment’s notice. Worse, users have little
recourse, the platforms shirk accountability, and states are hesitant to
intervene.

Before the widespread adoption of internet email, people com-
plained about having to print up business cards with half a dozen differ-
ent addresses: inscrutable sequences of letters, numbers, and symbols

S

N

195

19 6 imagining a be t ter fu t ure for the interne t
representing them on CompuServe, GEnie, AOL, Delphi, MCI Mail, and
so on.3 Today, we find ourselves in the same situation. From nail salons to cereal boxes, the visual environment is littered with the logos of incompatible social media brands. Facebook, Google, Twitter, and Insta-
gram are the new walled gardens, throwbacks to the late 1980s.

In recent years, it has become commonplace to blame social media
for all our problems. There are good reasons for this. After decades of
techno-optimism, a reckoning came due. But I am troubled by how often
people—not platforms—are the object of this criticism. We’re told that
social media is making us vapid, stupid, intolerant, and depressed, that
we should be ashamed to take pleasure from social media, that we are

“hardwired” to act against our own best interest. Our basic desire to con-
nect is pathologized, as if we should take the blame for our own subjuga-
tion. I call shenanigans.

People aren’t the problem. The problem is the platforms. By looking
to the history of the modem world, we can begin to extricate the tech-
nologies of sociality from what we’ve come to call “social media.” Under-
lying many of the problems we associate with social media are failures
of creativity and care. Ironically, for an industry that prides itself on in-
novation, platform providers have failed to develop business models and
operational structures that can sustain healthy human communities.

Silicon Valley did not invent “social media.” Everyday people made
the internet social. Time and again, users adapted networked comput-
ers for communication between people. In the 1970s, the ARPANET
enabled remote access to expensive computers, but users made email
its killer app. In the 1980s, The Source and CompuServe offered troves
of news and financial data, but users spent all their time talking to one
another on forums and in chat rooms. And in the 1990s, the web was de-
signed for publishing documents, but users created conversational guest
books and message boards. The desire to connect with one another is
fundamental. We should not apologize for the pleasures of being online
together.

Commercial social media platforms are of a more recent origin. Ma-
jor services like Facebook formed around 2005, more than a quarter cen-

S
tury after the first BBSs came online. Their business was the enclosure

N
of the social web, the extraction of personal data, and the promise of per-

196
imagining a be t ter fu t ure for the interne t 197
sonalized advertising. Through clever interface design and the strategic
application of venture capital, platform providers succeeded in expand-
ing access to the online world. Today, more people can get online and
find one another than was ever possible in the days of AOL or FidoNet.

Yet commercial social media failed to produce equitable, sustainable
business models. Despite massive user populations, remarkable engi-
neering, and pervasive cultural influence, all major social media plat-
forms depend on a revenue stream that has not changed for two decades:

the exploitation of personal data for the purposes of advertising. This was
true when Google launched Adwords in the year 2000. It was true when

Google acquired YouTube in 2006. It was true when Facebook and Twit-
ter went public in 2012. And it was still true in 2021. Despite the “moon
shots” and “big bets,” these firms draw an overwhelming proportion of
their revenue from the mundane business of placing ads on screens.4

The modem world shows us that other business models are possible.

BBS sysops loved to boast about “paying their own bills.” For some, the

BBS was an expensive hobby, a money pit not unlike a vintage car. But
many sysops sought to make their BBSs self-sustaining. Absent “angel”

investors or government contracts, BBSs became sites of commercial
experimentation. Many charged a fee for access—experimenting with
tiered rates and per-minute or per-byte payment schemes. There were
also BBSs organized like a social club. Members paid “dues” to keep the
hard drive spinning. Others formed nonprofit corporations, soliciting
tax-exempt donations from their users. Even on the hobby boards, sysops
sometimes passed the virtual hat, asking everybody for a few bucks to
buy a new modem or knock out a big telephone bill.

The other key, and closely related, failure of the social media in-
dustry is in its disregard for the needs of the communities that rely on
them. In public debate, commercial social media providers like Face-
book portray themselves as “tech” firms rather than “media” publishers,
merely “neutral platforms.”5 This allows them to disclaim liability for the things that people do on their platform and entitles them to regulate
user behavior through capricious “Terms of Service” agreements. Users
who rely on these platforms for social support and economic opportu-
nity click through the inscrutable terms without reading them. When
harmed, they are left with no recourse, no avenues for redress, and no

S
practical pathways to exit. Of course, the platforms want it both ways.6 At N

197

19 8 imagining a be t ter fu t ure for the interne t
the same time that they deny responsibility for their users, they promote
themselves as places for people to gather and share the intimate details
of their lives. These are undemocratic, private spaces masquerading as
a public square.

The modem world, again, offers different models. The stewardship
of an online community takes work. The literature of the modem world
is replete with textfiles, magazine articles, and how-to books about culti-
vating communities, moderating discussions, handling troublesome us-
ers, and avoiding burnout. The role of the bulletin board system operator
required a unique mix of technical acumen and care for the community.

Former BBS sysops recall late nights spent answering email, verifying
new users, tweaking software settings, cleaning up messy files, and try-
ing to quell flame wars.

This work is still being done on platforms like Facebook and reddit.

But unlike the sysops who enabled the flourishing of early online com-
munities, the volunteer moderators on today’s platforms do not own the
infrastructures they oversee. They do not share in the profits generated
by their labor.7 They cannot alter the underlying software or implement new technical interventions or social reforms. Instead of growing in social status, the role of the sysop seems to have been curtailed by the
providers of platforms. If there is a future after Facebook, it will be led by
a revival of the sysop, a reclamation of the social and economic value of
community maintenance and moderation.

Platforms didn’t invent the social use of computer networks. Ama-
teurs, activists, educators, students, and small business owners did. Sili-
con Valley turned their practices into a product, pumped it full of specu-
lative capital, scaled it, and so far refuse to treat the lives we live through
it with care. The stories we tell about the early internet must disentangle
the grassroots origin of social media from its capture and commodifica-
tion. I do not expect that new models for online sociality will look exactly
like the BBSs did in the 1980s, but the history of the modem world cen-
ters on the interests of everyday people, a reorganization of narrative
resources from which to envision alternative futures.

While I absolutely need to teach a history of the internet that is accu-

S
rate, I also want to retain my students’ enthusiasm for the extraordinary

N
people who brought the modem world to life. The constellation of his-

198
imagining a be t ter fu t ure for the interne t 199
torical narratives that will allow us to imagine an internet after Facebook
must situate these moments of brilliance and possibility within the com-
plex—often ugly—circumstances in which they originally unfolded. The
historian Joy Lisi Rankin urges us to “overwrite” the narrow mythology of

Silicon Valley exceptionalism with histories of the many different worlds
of computing that have existed since the 1960s.8 And indeed, there is an abundance of history that remains unwritten.

From the late 1970s to the mid-1990s, millions of people living and
working in cities and towns throughout the continent collectively trans-
formed the personal computer into a medium for social communication.

They were the first to voluntarily spend hours in front of a computer,
typing messages to strangers. Their experiments in community build-
ing and information sharing provided a foundation for the practices that
now compel us to open our laptops and reach for our smartphones each
day: love, learning, commerce, community, and faith.

In the words of one former sysop, the BBS was the original cyber-
space.9 This book offers one set of stories, but there are countless left to be told. These stories remind us that many different internets have
already existed. An internet after social media is still possible; the inter-
net of today can still become something better, more just, equitable, and
inclusive—a future worth fighting for.

S

N

199

This page intentionally left blank
acknowledgment s

This book is about the millions of amateurs who brought the modem
world into being. After years exploring the things they left behind, I am
still astounded by the creativity of this sprawling community. There are
countless stories yet to be written about the people who transformed
computer networks into spaces for human sociality. I look forward to a
future in which their legacy is more widely recognized. In this spirit, I
wish to honor the memories of Sven and Rik Wallin, Randy Suess, Jack

Rickard, Mark “Sparky” Herring, my uncle Fred Ziegler (KB1LLO), and
all the modemers who passed away during the writing of this book.

Many BBS users and sysops gave their time to help me understand
this history. I was especially fortunate to cross paths with Tom Jennings.

His candid and critical perspective stuck with me as I dug deeper into
the archives. I am also grateful to Chaz Antonelli, Rey Barry, Frédéric

Cambus, Mike Nichols, Tom O’Nan (N9CXI), and Ben Thornton (NI5B)

for sharing their experiences and expertise. Brian Grace led me through
a hangar of dinosaur bones to see the computer collections at the New

Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science.

A special thank-you goes to rogue archivist Jason Scott. This book
would have been impossible without Jason’s commitment to preserving
the material history of BBS culture and passion for making it accessible

S
to the public. I also depended on the archival labor of Benj Edwards, Josh

N

201

201

202 acknowled gment s

Renaud, and Kay Savetz. Floppies and tapes and magazines and manuals
don’t digitize and organize themselves.

I began this work at the Annenberg School for Communication and

Journalism at the University of Southern California. Henry Jenkins, my
advisor, impressed upon me a spirit of curiosity, a pedagogy of generos-
ity, and a commitment to social justice. My committee members, Alison

Trope and François Bar, approached my work with rigor and care. I also
benefited from discussions with Sarah Banet-Weiser, G. Thomas Good-
night, Tara McPherson, and Kjerstin Thorson, as well as a “shadow com-
mittee” from the Culture Digitally research network: Tim Jordan, Hector

Postigo, and Thomas Streeter.

At Microsoft Research New England, I found a home in the Social

Media Collective. Special thanks to Nancy Baym, Tarleton Gillespie,

Mary L. Gray, Jessa Lingel, Sarah Brayne, Kate Crawford, danah boyd,

Sharon Gillett, Andrea Alarcón, Rebecca Hoffman, Stefanie Duguay,

Caroline Jack, Nick Seaver, Megan Finn, Dan Greene, Dylan Mulvin,

Henry Cohn, Nicolo Fusi, Butler Lampson, Jennifer Listgarten, and

Irene Money. Jennifer Chayes and Christian Borgs provided unparal-
leled leadership and support.

I presented work in progress to several audiences, including

ROFLCon II; the Free Art & Technology Lab Public Access program,
organized by Bennett Williamson; Comparative Media Studies at MIT;

Mistakes Were Made, organized by Laine Nooney; the Boston Hassle

Telethon; Computer Networks Histories, organized by Gabriele Balbi,

Paulo Bory, and Gianluigi Negro; the German Historical Institute, or-
ganized by Elisabeth Engel and Anne Schenderlein; Home Computer

Subcultures and Society Before the Internet Age, organized by Gleb

Albert, Julia Erdogan, and Markku Reunanen; the Media School collo-
quium at Indiana University; Web Archiving at the Open University of

Israel, organized by Anat Ben-David and Vered Silber-Varod; The Web

That Was, organized by Anne Helmond and Michael Stevenson; and
the Club for Internet and Society Enthusiasts, organized by Polina Kolo-
zaridi and Leonid Yuldashev.

Thank you to my other fellow travelers in the study of communica-
tion, media, and information, including Amelia Acker, Bo An, Megan

S

Sapnar Ankerson, Niels Brügger, Finn Brunton, Dayna Chatman, Paul

N

Dourish, Avery Dame-Griff and the Queer Digital History Project, Joan

202
acknowled gment s 203

Donovan, Barbara Gibbons and everyone in the Department of Media

Studies at University of Virginia, Lee Humphreys, Jeremy Hunsinger,

Julien Mailland, Annette Markham, Fenwick McKelvey, Camille Paloque-

Berges, Joy Lisi Rankin, Valérie Schafer, Nathan Schneider, Stephanie

Schulte, Kat Tiidenberg, Fred Turner, and Shawn Walker. Shout out to
my dissertation writing group at USC and faculty writing group at UVA.

A small army helped me to wrangle the physical materials for this
book, including Parker Bach, Joshua Beckman, Asher Caplan, Dan Gold-
berg, Hannah Royer, Brittany Shook, and Rahul Zalkikar.

Thank you to Joseph Calamia, Seth Ditchik, Andrew Katz, Karen

Olson, and Jeff Schier from Yale University Press for their stewardship
of this book. Kate Larson helped me to sharpen my arguments and find
my voice. Sarah O’Brien provided valuable advice at a critical stage.

Thank you to my family and friends, especially Mary, Ed, Mark, Ka-
tie, Callum, Ronan, Marilyn, Kayte, and, in memoriam, Cooper. Big hugs
to Eva Marigold and all of my heart to Lana Swartz.

S

N

203

This page intentionally left blank
note s
chapter 1. recalling the modem world

1. Richard Scott Mark, Internet BBSs: A Guided Tour (Greenwich, CT: Manning,

1996), x.

2. See Tim Berners-Lee and Mark Fischetti, Weaving the Web: The Past, Present
and Future of the World Wide Web by Its Inventor (London: Orion Business,

1999); Megan Sapnar Ankerson, Dot-Com Design: The Rise of a Usable, Social,

Commercial Web (New York: New York University Press, 2018).

3. Mark, Internet BBSs, 155.

4. Mark, ix.

5. Mark, vii.

6. Mark, x.

7. Mark, 6–7.

8. On the politics of coolness and the early web, see Megan Sapnar Ankerson,

“How Coolness Defined the World Wide Web of the 1990s,” Atlantic, July 15,

2014, http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/how-coolness

-defined-the-world-wide-web-of-the-1990s/374443/.

9. Mark, Internet BBSs, 5.

10. Kevin Driscoll, “Demography and Decentralization: Measuring the Bulletin

Board Systems of North America,” WiderScreen 23, nos. 2–3 (June 18, 2020),
http://widerscreen.fi/numerot/2020-2-3/demography-and-decentralization

-measuring-the-bulletin-board-systems-of-north-america/.

11. Bradley Fidler, “The Evolution of Internet Routing: Technical Roots of the

Network Society,” Internet Histories 3, nos. 3–4 (October 2, 2019): 364–87,
https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2019.1661583.

S

N

20 5

205

20 6 note s to page s 5–7

12. Kevin Driscoll and Camille Paloque-Berges, “Searching for Missing ‘Net His-
tories,’” Internet Histories 1, nos. 1–2 (2017): 47–59, https://doi.org/10.1080/

24701475.2017.1307541.

13. Learning about protocols is essential, however, for understanding how user
behavior may be regulated and community practices constrained. For a criti-
cal look at the “daemons” that possess our networks, see Fenwick McKelvey,

Internet Daemons: Digital Communications Possessed (Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 2018), https://doi.org/10.5749/9781452961743.

14. Morten Bay, “What Is ‘Internet’? The Case for the Proper Noun and Why It Is

Important,” Internet Histories 1, no. 3 (May 4, 2017): 209–11, https://doi.org/10

.1080/24701475.2017.1339860.

15. For more detail on networking research at Xerox PARC and the PARC Uni-
versal Packet (PUP) protocol, see Paul Dourish, The Stuff of Bits: An Essay on
the Materialities of Information (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017), https://
mitpress.mit.edu/books/stuff-bits.

16. Janet Abbate, Inventing the Internet (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999), 122;

Thomas Streeter, “Internet,” in Digital Keywords, ed. Benjamin Peters (Prince-
ton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016), 184–96.

17. Quarterman’s cybergeography began with an informal listing of networks
circulated among graduate students at the University of Texas in 1984 and an
article for the Communications of the ACM in 1996. Following the publica-
tion of The Matrix in 1990, he founded a consultancy called Matrix Informa-
tion and Directory Services (MIDS). In addition, he continued to document
the growth of the internet in a newsletter titled Matrix News and a series of
maps and graphs titled Matrix Maps Quarterly. See John S. Quarterman, The

Matrix: Computer Networks and Conferencing Systems Worldwide (Bedford, MA:

Digital, 1990); John S. Quarterman and Josiah C. Hoskins, “Notable Com-
puter Networks,” Communications of the ACM 29, no. 10 (October 1, 1986):

932–71, https://doi.org/10.1145/6617.6618; Quarterman, “About Matrix News (MN),” Matrix Information and Directory Services, January 21, 1998, https://
web.archive.org/web/19980121022331/http://www.mids.org/mn/about.html;

“Matrix Maps Quarterly,” Matrix.net, January 24, 2001, https://web.archive

.org/web/20010124082100/http://www.matrix.net/publications/mmq/index

.html.

18. Quarterman, Matrix, 277–79.

19. Quarterman, xxiii.

20. William J. Clinton, “Address before a Joint Session of the Congress on the

State of the Union,” January 25, 1994, accessed at American Presidency

Project, https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before

-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-12; Brian McCullough,

“She Gave the World a Billion AOL CDs—An Interview with Marketing

Legend Jan Brandt,” Internet History (podcast), August 2014, http://www

S

.internethistorypodcast.com/2014/08/she-gave-the-world-a-billion-aol-cds-an

N

206
note s to page s 8 – 9 207

-interview-with-marketing-legend-jan-brandt/; Matthew Gray, “Web Growth Summary,” MIT, 1996, https://www.mit.edu/~mkgray/net/.

21. Philip Elmer-Dewitt and David S. Jackson, “Battle for the Soul of the Inter-
net,” Time 144, no. 4 (July 25, 1994): 52.

22. America Online’s “Internet Center” was an especially critical gateway for the
expansion of the 1990s internet. The “Internet Center” was an area within

America Online for users to access resources outside of the closed platform.

In June 1992, AOL introduced an internet email gateway and provided users
with @aol.com addresses. During the winter and spring of 1993–94, it added
access to Gopher, USENET, and WAIS. By the end of 1994, it was aggres-
sively opening its platform to the internet through the implementation of a
custom web browser and the acquisition of the backbone provider ANS. See

“America Online Expands Capacity and Internet Support,” Information Today,

May 1994; Peter H. Lewis, “America Online Buys 2 Internet Companies: A

Company Warms Up to the World Wide Web,” New York Times, November

10, 1994, sec. Business Day; Jared Sandberg, “America Online, Capital Cities/

ABC Plan New Service,” Wall Street Journal, July 7, 1994, sec. Technology and

Telecommunications; Kara Swisher, AOL.com: How Steve C ase Beat Bill Gates, Nailed the Netheads, and Made Millions in the War for the Web (New York:

Times Business, 1998).

23. “America’s Information Highway: A Hitch-Hiker’s Guide,” Economist, De-
cember 25, 1993.

24. In January 1995, Crocker posted a message to the Big-Internet listserv solicit-
ing thoughts on a new typology of internet access. In his initial message,

Crocker indicated that it was the discussion around a New York Times article
that had inspired him to start thinking about definitions. See Dave Crocker,

“Who Is on the Internet?,” Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au, January 24, 1995; Crocker, “RFC 1775 To Be ‘On’ the Internet,” Network Working Group,

March 1995, https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1775.

25. With the spread of mobile broadband and affordable smartphones, approxi-
mately 90 percent of all American adults now report using the internet. In
wealthier cities and towns, internet access is as common as electrical lighting
and indoor plumbing. Pew Research Center, “Demographics of Internet
and Home Broadband Usage in the United States,” Internet & Technology,

June 12, 2019, https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/internet

-broadband/.

26. Susannah Fox and Lee Rainie, “The Web at 25 in the U.S.,” Internet & Tech-
nology, Pew Research Center, February 27, 2014, http://www.pewresearch

.org/internet/2014/02/27/the-web-at-25-in-the-u-s/.

27. For further discussion of the strange overlapping temporalities of the early
web, see Ankerson, Dot-Com Design, 27–29.

28. For a contemporary analysis of this historiographic moment, see Roy Rosen-
zweig, “Wizards, Bureaucrats, Warriors, and Hackers: Writing the History

S

N

207

20 8 note s to page s 9 –10
of the Internet,” American Historical Review 103, no. 5 (December 1, 1998):

1530–52, https://doi.org/10.2307/2649970.

29. Ed Krol, The Whole Internet: User’s Guide & Catalog (Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly, 1992); Kiersten Conner-Sax and Ed Krol, The Whole Internet: The Next

Generation: A Completely New Edition of the First and Best User’s Guide to the

Internet (Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly, 1999).

30. Krol, Whole Internet, 3.

31. Bruce Sterling, “‘Internet’ [aka ‘A Short History of the Internet’],” Magazine
of Fantasy and Science Fiction, February 1993, http://w2.eff.org/Net_culture/
internet_sterling.history.txt.

32. “If you don’t own a computer and a modem,” wrote Sterling, “get one.” The
essay was stored in the digital archives of the Electronic Frontier Foundation
for more than a decade in a folder titled “Net_culture” under the filename

“internet_sterling.history.” Electronic Frontier Foundation, “EFF ‘Net Culture

& Cyber-Anthropology’ Archive,” March 13, 2003, http://w2.eff.org/Net

_culture/.

33. The historian Philip Shiman made note of this theme in the title of his re-
view: “Credits for the Information Highway,” Science 274, no. 5293 (Decem-
ber 6, 1996): 1627–28, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.274.5293.1627.

34. Katie Hafner and Matthew Lyon, Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins of
the Internet (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996), 10.

35. The focus on ARPA is even clearer in the cheeky title to the German edition
of Hafner and Lyon’s book: ARPA Kadabra oder die Anfänge des Internet (Hei-
delberg: Dpunkt-Verl., 2008).

36. The political implications of ARPA funding were thoroughly examined in
an academic book published that same year: Paul N. Edwards, The Closed

World Computers and the Politics of Discourse in Cold War America (Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press, 1997). To see how ARPANET fit into the larger goals of the

Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO) at ARPA, see Arthur L.

Norberg, Judy E. O’Neill, and Kerry J. Freedman, Transforming Computer Tech-
nology: Information Processing for the Pentagon, 1962–1986 (Baltimore: Johns

Hopkins University Press, 1996).

37. For more details on the reception of Wizards, see Daniel Akst, “Cyberculture: Sometimes Dry, Detail of Magic of 1st Internet ‘Wizards,’” Los Angeles Times,

August 26, 1996; David Colker, “Looking into the Origins of the Online Uni-
verse,” Los Angeles Times, August 20, 1996; L. Goeller, “Insomniac Wizards

Revisited,” IEEE Technology and Society Magazine 19, no. 2 (2000): 6–9; Lau-
rel Graeber, “New & Noteworthy Paperbacks,” New York Times Book Review,

March 22, 1998; Robert D. Hof, “Where Did the Net Come From, Daddy?,”

BusinessWeek, September 16, 1996; Stephen Manes, “The Info Footpath: How
the Internet Got Its Start in the Early Days,” New York Times, September 8,

1996; Stewart Brand, “The Revolution Will Be Netcast,” Wired, September

S

1996; Katie Hafner, “Ghosts in the Machine,” Wired, July 1999, http://archive

.wired.com/wired/archive/4.07/ghosts.html.

N

208
note s to page s 10 –12 20 9

38. Abbate, Inventing the Internet; Janet Abbate, “From ARPANET to Internet: A

History of ARPA-Sponsored Computer Networks, 1966–1988” (PhD diss.,

University of Pennsylvania, 1994), ProQuest.

39. “In the years since the Internet became a media sensation, a number of more
popular books have appeared that deal in some way with its origins, often in
heroic manner.” Abbate, Inventing the Internet, 221n2.

40. For a detailed history of this period from the UK perspective, see Dorian

James Rutter, “From Diversity to Convergence: British Computer Networks
and the Internet, 1970–1995” (PhD diss., University of Warwick, 2005).

41. Thomas Streeter, The Net Effect: Romanticism, Capitalism, and the Internet

(New York: New York University Press, 2011).

42. For more information on implementations of TCP/IP for home computers,
see J. Saltzer, D. Clark, J. Romkey, and W. Gramlich, “The Desktop Computer
as a Network Participant,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communica-
tions 3, no. 3 (1985): 468–78, https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.1985.1146219;

Kaare Christian, “Using the Internet: Getting the Clarkson Packet Drivers,”

PC Magazine, May 28, 1991; Ian Wade, NOSintro: TCP/IP over Packet Radio:

An Introduction to the KA9Q Network Operating System (Dunstable, UK:

Dowermain, 1992).

43. Ronald R. Kline, “The Modem That Still Connects Us,” in Historical Studies
in Computing, Information, and Society: Insights from the Flatiron Lectures, ed.

William Aspray (Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2019).

44. Examples of the “modem world”: The Nomad, “The Modem Life. Is It

Really Worth It?,” May 26, 1985, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/100/
modemlif.hac; Hanne Borland and Jytte Mansfeld, Living in a Modem World (Hørsholm, Denmark: Focus, 1991); Chris, “The Fall of the Modem World,”

August 1, 1991, archived at http://textfiles.com/bbs/fotmw.txt; Charles P.

Hobbs, “The Modem World,” 2000, archived at http://textfiles.com/history/
modemwld.txt.

45. The brain as a metaphor for a universal information system predates the
availability of programmable digital computers. For example, H. G. Wells,

World Brain (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, 1938). See also Ronald E.

Day, Indexing It All: The Subject in the Age of Documentation, Information, and

Data (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2014).

46. See, for example, Nathan Ensmenger, The Computer Boys Take over Comput-
ers, Programmers, and the Politics of Technical Expertise (Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press, 2010).

47. For a detailed examination of the role of time-sharing in the production of
personal computing, see Joy Lisi Rankin, A People’s History of Computing in the

United States (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018). For a closer
look at the technology and commercial exploitation of time-sharing, see Mar-
tin Campbell-Kelly and Daniel D. Garcia-Swartz, “Economic Perspectives on
the History of the Computer Time-Sharing Industry, 1965–1985,” IEEE Annals

S
of the History of Computing 30, no. 1 (January 2008): 16–36, https://doi.org/10

N

209

210 note s to page s 12–14

.1109/MAHC.2008.3; T. Van Vleck, “Electronic Mail and Text Messaging in CTSS, 1965–1973,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 34, no. 1 (January

2012): 4–6, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2012.6; D. Hemmendinger, “Messaging in the Early SDC Time-Sharing System,” IEEE Annals of the History
of Computing 36, no. 1 (January 2014): 52–57, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC

.2013.44; Jens Brammer, “Time-Sharing in Denmark in 1968,” in History of Nordic Computing 4, ed. Christian Gram, Per Rasmussen, and Søren Duus

Østergaard, vol. 447 (Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2015), 167–70, http://
link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-17145-6_18; Steve Jones and Guillaume Latzko-Toth, “Out from the Plato Cave: Uncovering the Pre-Internet History
of Social Computing,” Internet Histories 1, nos. 1–2 (January 2, 2017): 60–69,
https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2017.1307544; Alexander Mirowski, “At the Electronic Crossroads Once Again: The Myth of the Modern Computer Utility
in the United States,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 39, no. 2 (2017):

13–29, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2017.12.

48. Joy Rankin, “From the Mainframes to the Masses: A Participatory Computing

Movement in Minnesota Education,” Information & Culture 50, no. 2 (May 1,

2015): 197–216, https://doi.org/10.7560/IC50204.

49. R. M. Fano, “The MAC System: The Computer Utility Approach,” IEEE

Spectrum 2, no. 1 (January 1965): 56–64, https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.1965

.5531878; Mirowski, “At the Electronic Crossroads.”

50. Nick Montfort et al., 10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1));:GOTO 10 (Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press, 2013); Jones and Latzko-Toth, “Out from the Plato Cave.”

51. Rankin, People’s History of Computing in the United States.

52. Kristen Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,

2008).

53. For a closer look at the emergence of microcomputers, see Martin Campbell-

Kelly and William Aspray, Computer: A History of the Information Machine

(New York: Basic Books, 1996); Paul E. Ceruzzi, A History of Modern Comput-
ing (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998).

54. Hobbyist newsletters have proved especially valuable sources for historians
of this period. For example, see Kevin Gotkin, “When Computers Were Ama-
teur,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 36, no. 2 (April 2014): 4–14,
https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2014.32; Kevin Driscoll, “Professional Work for Nothing: Software Commercialization and ‘An Open Letter to Hobbyists,’” Information & Culture 50, no. 2 (May 1, 2015): 257–83, https://doi.org/

10.7560/IC50207; E. Petrick, “Imagining the Personal Computer: Conceptualizations of the Homebrew Computer Club 1975–1977,” IEEE Annals of the

History of Computing 39, no. 4 (October 2017): 27–39, https://doi.org/10.1109/

MAHC.2018.1221045.

55. Martin Campbell-Kelly, William Aspray, Nathan Ensmenger, and Jeffrey R.

Yost, Computer: A History of the Information Machine, 3rd ed. (New York: Rout-

S
ledge, 2018), 248–49, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429494017.

N

210
note s to page s 14–18 211

56. John J. Welch, “Item 20: To Ward & Randy: History of CBBS???,” Novem-
ber 9, 1986, archived at http://textfiles.com/bbs/CBBS/history.cbbs; Ward Christensen, “C(omputerized)BBS—Thanks for Remembering 25th,”

Slashdot, February 17, 2003, https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=54081&
cid=5317919.

57. Messages about these other bulletin boards were posted to CBBS itself dur-
ing the first few months of operation. See Jason Scott, “BBS Textfiles: CBBS:

The Dead CBBS Scrolls,” textfiles.com, accessed July 2, 2020, http://www

.textfiles.com/bbs/CBBS/SCROLLS/.

58. For a reproduction of the CBBS welcome screen, see Ward Christensen and

Randy Suess, “Hobbyist Computerized Bulletin Board,” Byte, November

1978, 154.

59. “What Might Be Called CACHE’s On Line Graffitti (COG),” Byte, June 1978.

60. Christensen and Suess, “Hobbyist Computerized Bulletin Board.”

61. “Small Firm Offers Home Computer Owners Range of Data Features,” Wall

Street Journal, January 30, 1980.

62. “MicroNET,” Byte, January 1980.

63. On the influence of WarGames on US attitudes about computer networks and
internet culture, see Stephanie Ricker Schulte, Cached: Decoding the Internet
in Global Popular Culture (New York: New York University Press, 2013).

64. This regional focus reflected the economics of 1980s telephony in North

America. Most people paid a flat monthly fee for unlimited calling within the
local area, but calls to another city or state were billed according to duration,
distance, and time of day. The ten digits of a North American telephone
number included an “area code” and “exchange.” A careless long-distance call
could cost a hundred dollars or more. Learning to decode these numbers was
an essential skill for any BBS explorer who hoped to avoid going into debt.

Most BBS users simply stuck to the boards in their local calling area.

65. The Amateur Radio Relay League (ARRL) started in 1914 with the goal of
creating a formal messaging network. After more than a century, the ARRL
remains a key advocacy group for ham radio in the United States. On the
origin of the ARRL, see Susan J. Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting,

1899–1922 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987), 205–6.

66. C. Partridge, “The Technical Development of Internet Email,” IEEE Annals of
the History of Computing 30, no. 2 (April 2008): 3–29, https://doi.org/10.1109/

MAHC.2008.32; Abbate, Inventing the Internet, 106–11.

67. Camille Paloque-Berges, “Mapping a French Internet Experience: A Decade
of Unix Networks Cooperation (1983–1993),” in Routledge Companion to

Global Internet Histories, ed. Gerard Goggin and Mark McLelland (New York:

Routledge, 2017), 153–70.

68. In fact, both hobbyists and professional researchers had been bouncing
around the idea of networking PCs since before the advent of CBBS. There
were letters published in computer magazines and discussion on ARPANET

S

N

211

212 note s to page s 18 – 20
of building a “PCNET” for microcomputers. See Dave Caulkins, “Personal

Computer Network,” People’s Computers, August 1977; Caulkins, “PCNET,

1979,” People’s Computers, October 1977.

69. Jennings’s self-description appeared in a newsletter circulated to all FidoNet
sysops in 1991: Tom Jennings, “Editorial,” FidoNews, September 2, 1991.

70. For more information on English-language textfile groups, see Jason Scott,

“Textfile Writing Groups,” textfiles.com, accessed February 5, 2021, http://
www.textfiles.com/groups/.

71. Gleb J. Albert, “From Currency in the Warez Economy to Self-Sufficient Art

Form: Text Mode Graphics and the ‘Scene,’” WiderScreen 20, nos. 1–2 (2017),
http://widerscreen.fi/numerot/2017-1-2/from-currency-in-the-warez-economy

-to-self-sufficient-art-form-text-mode-graphics-and-the-scene/; Kevin Driscoll,

“Hobbyist Inter-Networking and the Popular Internet Imaginary: Forgot-
ten Histories of Networked Personal Computing, 1978–1998” (PhD diss.,

University of Southern California, 2014), 191, http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/
cdm/compoundobject/collection/p15799coll3/id/444362/rec/2; Michael A. Hargadon, “Like City Lights, Receding: ANSi Artwork and the Digital

Underground, 1985–2000” (MA thesis, Concordia University, 2011), http://
mhargadon.ca/media/mhargadon-thesis.pdf.

72. Early ANSI artpacks are now accessible on the public web. See 16colo.rs—

ANSI/ASCII Archive, accessed July 31, 2019, https://16colo.rs/.

73. For more information on BBS game development, see Josh Renaud, “Break

Into Chat,” Break Into Chat—BBS Wiki, accessed May 13, 2014, http://
breakintochat.com/wiki/Break_Into_Chat.

74. Queer Digital History Project, “The Backroom,” accessed February 3, 2021,
http://queerdigital.com/items/show/42.

75. J. Scott Christianson and Dan Wendling, “Econet: The Ecology Network,”

Boardwatch, December 1992.

76. Howard Rheingold, The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic

Frontier (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1993); Katie Hafner, “The Epic Saga
of The WELL,” Wired, May 1997, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.05/
ff_well_pr.html; Hafner, The WELL: A Story of Love, Death, and Real Life in the Seminal Online Community (New York: Carroll and Graf, 2001); Fred Turner,

“Where the Counterculture Met the New Economy: The WELL and the Ori-
gins of Virtual Community,” Technology and Culture 46, no. 3 (2005): 485–512,
https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2005.0154.

77. Chip Berlet and Carol Mason, “Swastikas in Cyberspace: How Hate Went

Online,” in Digital Media Strategies of the Far Right in Europe and the United

States, ed. Patricia Anne Simpson and Helga Druxes (Lanham, MD: Lex-
ington Books, 2015), 21–36. See also Jessie Daniels, Cyber Racism: White

Supremacy Online and the New Attack on Civil Rights (Lanham, MD: Rowman
and Littlefield, 2009).

S

78. For a closer look at the demographics of the modem world, see Driscoll,

“Demography and Decentralization.”

N

212
note s to page s 20 – 23 213

79. Jason Scott, The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List, accessed June 15,

2021, http://bbslist.textfiles.com/.

80. For a contemporaneous discussion of gender and BBSing, see Stacy Horn,

Cyberville: Clicks, Culture, and the Creation of an Online Town (New York: War-
ner Books, 1998).

81. US Census Bureau, “Appendix Table A. Households with a Computer and

Internet Use: 1984 to 2009,” in Computer and Internet Use in the United

States: 1984 to 2009 (Washington, DC: US Census Bureau, February 2010),
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/computer-internet/
computer-use-1984-2009.html.

82. Bob Metcalfe, “Sysops Are Reaping the Benefits in the Wake of a BBS Explo-
sion,” InfoWorld 16, no. 36 (September 5, 1994): 52; Metcalfe, “Internet Dwell-
ers Beware: BBS Movement Is Planning an Invasion,” InfoWorld 16, no. 37

(September 12, 1994): 50.

83. Lacking organizational infrastructure and institutional affiliation, BBS net-
works did not have their needs and interests directly represented at a series
of workshops on privatization held by the Harvard Information Infrastruc-
ture project in the early 1990s. See Brian Kahin, “RFC 1192 Commercializa-
tion of the Internet Summary Report,” Network Working Group, November

1990, http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1192; Brian Kahin, James Keller, and Harvard Information Infrastructure Project, Public Access to the Internet (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995); Brian Kahin, Building Information

Infrastructure: Issues in the Development of the National Research and Educa-
tion Network (New York: McGraw-Hill Primis, 1996); Brian Kahin, Ernest

J. Wilson, and Global Information Infrastructure Commission, National

Information Infrastructure Initiatives Vision and Policy Design (Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press, 1997). See also Janet Abbate, “Privatizing the Internet:

Competing Visions and Chaotic Events, 1987–1995,” IEEE Annals of the

History of Computing 32, no. 1 (2010): 10–22, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC

.2010.24.

84. For some detail on the use of leased lines, see Fenwick McKelvey and Kevin

Driscoll, “ARPANET and Its Boundary Devices: Modems, IMPs, and the

Inter-structuralism of Infrastructures,” Internet Histories 3, no. 1 (January 2,

2019): 31–50, https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2018.1548138.

85. On the “cyberporn” panic of 1995 and later moral panics, see Philip Elmer-

Dewitt and Hannah Bloch, “On a Screen near You: Cyberporn,” Time 146,
no. 1 (July 3, 1995): 38–45; Alice E. Marwick, “To Catch a Predator? The

MySpace Moral Panic,” First Monday 13, no. 6 (May 19, 2008), https://doi

.org/10.5210/fm.v13i6.2152.

86. See Kira Hall’s discussion of “cybermasculinity” in “Cyberfeminism,” in

Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social, and Cross-Cultural Per-
spectives (Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1996), 147–70.

87. Horn, Cyberville; Charlton D. McIlwain, Black Software: The Internet and S

Racial Justice, from the AfroNet to Black Lives Matter (New York: Oxford

N

213

214 note s to page s 23 – 26

University Press, 2019); Avery Dame-Griff, “TGNet Map,” Mapping TGNet,

Queer Digital History Project, 2018, http://queerdigital.com/tgnmap/index

.html.

88. McIlwain, Black Software.

89. See Tung-Hui Hu, A Prehistory of the Cloud (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,

2015).

90. See Megan Sapnar Ankerson, “Writing Web Histories with an Eye
on the Analog Past,” New Media & Society 14, no. 3 (2011): 384–400,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811414834.

91. In 1992 and 1993, FidoNet contributor Randy Bush attempted to extrapolate
demographics from the FidoNet nodelist. More recently, Avery Dame-Griff
has been mapping queer histories of the modem world through the recon-
struction of networks using FidoNet technology such as TGNet. See Randy

Bush, “FidoNet: Use, Technology, and Tools,” in Proceedings of INET ’92:

International Networking Conference, Kobe, Japan, June 15–18, 1992, ed. Haru-
shisa Ishida (Reston, VA: Internet Society, 1992); Bush, “FidoNet: Technol-
ogy, Tools, and History,” Communications of the ACM 36, no. 8 (August 1993):

31–35, https://doi.org/10.1145/163381.163383; Dame-Griff, “TGNet Map.” See
also Scott, “TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List.”

92. For a detailed examination of the available sources of demographic data, see

Driscoll, “Demography and Decentralization.”

93. Kevin Driscoll, “Cooperative Mode for Amateur and Academic Game Histo-
ries,” ROMchip 1, no. 1 (July 1, 2019), http://romchip.org/index.php/romchip

-journal/article/view/71.

94. In 1999, Scott cited the lack of BBS material on the web as one of the motiva-
tions for creating the site. After searching for the names of BBSs he called
as a teenager, he was dismayed that they were not represented on the web.

Speaking to the Denver Post in 1999, he recalled, “All these important (to me)

people and places were nowhere to be found.” David Thomas, “Online Pio-
neer’s Web Site Chronicles Phenomenon’s Beginning,” Denver Post, August 1,

1999, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/thoughts/denver.art.

95. Joe Ashbrook Nickell, “Return of the Living BBS,” Wired, March 1, 1999,
https://www.wired.com/1999/03/return-of-the-living-bbs/.

96. Jason Scott, “TEXTFILES.COM File Statistics,” textfiles.com, July 1, 2005,
http://www.textfiles.com/filestats.html.

97. Jason Scott, “BBS: A Documentary: The Pitch,” BBS: The Documentary, ac-
cessed February 2, 2014, http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/longpitch.html.

98. Jason Scott, “BBS Documentaries,” Internet Archive, accessed February 2,

2014, https://archive.org/details/bbs_documentary.

99. For a close look at early Apple culture through the lens of Softalk magazine, see Laine Nooney, Kevin Driscoll, and Kera Allen, “From Programming to

Products: Softalk Magazine and the Rise of the Personal Computer User,”

S

Information & Culture 55, no. 2 (June 18, 2020): 105–29.

100.Driscoll and Paloque-Berges, “Searching for Missing ‘Net Histories.’”

N

214
note s to page s 29 – 32 215
chapter 2. computerizing hobby radio

1. “Snowfall a Nuisance Here, Deadly in East,” Chicago Tribune, January 15,

1978; Roy Halt, “Freight Car Tumbles off Viaduct,” Chicago Tribune, Janu-
ary 15, 1978.

2. This storm would soon be overshadowed by two even more punishing
storms: the “Cleveland Superbomb” from January 25 to 27 in the Midwest
and the “Blizzard of ’78” from February 5 to 8 in the Northeast.

3. A comment in the source code from January 26, 1978, read, “Originally Writ-
ten, Sitting Home Snowbound by Ward Christensen.” See Ward Christensen,

“Comments and Prologues to CBBS up to Version 3.2,” BBS Software Direc-
tory, 1979, http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/history.txt.

4. Teleprinters were already in limited use among time-sharing systems and
relatively common in surplus and secondhand shops. In fact, teleprinters
were previously appropriated by computer hobbyists as interfaces to kit
computers such as the Altair 8800. See Martin Campbell-Kelly and William

Aspray, Computer: A History of the Information Machine (New York: Basic

Books, 1996), 238.

5. Much of the CBBS software was burned onto an EEPROM rather than saved
on a floppy. As Suess later recalled, the system was under near-constant revi-
sion: “Musta re-programmed that sucker 10 times a week for a few months.”

Ward Christensen and Randy Suess, “The Birth of the BBS,” Chinet, 1989,
https://www.chinet.com/html/cbbs.html.

6. Ward Christensen and Randy Suess, “Hobbyist Computerized Bulletin

Board,” Byte, November 1978, 157.

7. The January 1975 issue of Popular Electronics featured a cover story on the

MITS Altair 8800. Sold as a kit, the architecture of the Altair was widely imi-
tated and became a de facto standard for microcomputers of the mid-1970s.

Campbell-Kelly and Aspray, Computer, 240–44. See also H. Edward Roberts
and William Yates, “Altair 8800 Minicomputer, Part 1,” Popular Electronics,

January 1975.

8. Christensen and Suess, “Birth of the BBS.”

9. The Hayes modem was designed to fit into the S-100 bus found on kit
computers like the Altair 8800. Byte magazine ran an early advertisement for
the Hayes modem alongside the story about CBBS. Christensen and Suess,

“Hobbyist Computerized Bulletin Board,” 157.

10. Distributed throughout North America and western Europe, Byte was one of
the premier venues for learning about new products, techniques, organiza-
tions, and ideas in computing. Even in communist states where access to US
periodicals could be limited, hobbyists found ways to read Byte. The histo-
rian Patryk Wasiak found that the members of informal computer clubs in

Poland pooled their funds and shared subscriptions to “Western” computer
magazines such as Byte. See Wasiak, “Playing and Copying: Social Practices
of Home Computer Users in Poland during the 1980s,” in Hacking Europe:

S

From Computer Cultures to Demoscenes, ed. Gerard Alberts and Ruth Oldenziel

N

215

216 note s to page s 32– 3 4

(London: Springer, 2014), 129–50. Regarding my circulation estimate, the

February 1978 issue included an apology letter from the publisher blaming
recent fulfillment problems on the magazine’s success: “From its inception
in September of 1975, BYTE has experienced colossal growth to a circulation
of over 110,000.” I rounded this number down to one hundred thousand,
reflecting my skepticism at the publisher’s statistic while also allowing for
an unknown number of readers in circumstances such as those described
by Wasiak. See Virginia Peschke Londner, “Letter from the Publisher,” Byte,

February 1978.

11. “People who are successful will of course be known to us, but people who are
unsuccessful won’t. That’s not right, as it gives a falsely biased view of the
system’s success. I therefore ask people who are unsuccessful in communi-
cating to call me, Ward, at (312) 849-6279.” Ward Christensen, “Computer

Network Poll,” Dr. Dobb’s Journal of Computer Calisthenics & Orthodontia,

July 1978.

12. “What Might Be Called CACHE’s On Line Graffitti (COG),” Byte, June 1978.

13. In personal communication published by Jason Scott, Christensen wrote,

“It received almost a quarter million callers on its one phone line over the
course of its life.” Scott, “Customized: S-100 Kit Computer: CBBS,” BBS Soft-
ware Directory, accessed February 17, 2021, http://software.bbsdocumentary

.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/.

14. To put the eight pages of Helmers’s editorial about modems—and, implicitly,
his enthusiasm for CBBS—in context, the modal page length for Helmers’s
editorials in 1978 was three (mean = 3.67, SD = 3.08).

15. Carl Helmers, “Some Thoughts about Modems,” Byte, July 1978.

16. Christensen and Suess, “Hobbyist Computerized Bulletin Board.”

17. PCNET was a Bay Area organization founded at the first West Coast Com-
puter Faire in April 1977. With connections to the ARPANET community,

Caulkins and the PCNET group were early to envision networks of micro-
computers. In 1989, Christensen and Suess indicated that they were in touch
with PCNET and excited about the potential of the idea but “frustrated by
the lack of DOERS” in the group. See Dave Caulkins, “Personal Computer

Network,” People’s Computers, August 1977; Caulkins, “PCNET, 1979,” People’s Computers, October 1977; Christensen and Suess, “Birth of the BBS.”

18. Ward Christensen and Randy Suess, “CBBS—COOKBOOK Rev. 3.5 11/28/81,”

BBS Software Directory, November 28, 1981, http://software.bbsdocumentary

.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/cookbook.txt.

19. Christensen, “Computer Network Poll.”

20. The exact date that Christensen and Suess began to sell CBBS is not clear. It
was available for mail order by 1981, as several documents indicate; how-
ever, the recollections of the two men from 1989 suggest that it was for sale
around the time of the Byte article’s publication.

S

21. Christensen and Suess, “Birth of the BBS.”

22. Christensen and Suess.

N

216
note s to page s 3 4– 37 217

23. Ben Bronson, “Installing a Computer Bulletin Board Program,” BBS Soft-
ware Directory, April 1981, http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/

CBBS/cpmnet81.apr.txt.

24. Christensen and Suess, “Birth of the BBS.”

25. Ward Christensen and Randy Suess, “Part-Time Msg Sys. Phone #s,” BBS

Software Directory, September 27, 1981, http://software.bbsdocumentary

.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/parttime.txt; Christensen and Suess, “Other Message Sys. Phone #s,” BBS Software Directory, December 26, 1981, http://
software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/parttime.txt; Christensen
and Suess, “Midwest Remote CP/M Systems,” BBS Software Directory, July 7,

1981, http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/1981cbbslist

.txt; Christensen and Suess, “CBBS Phone #s,” BBS Software Directory,

December 26, 1981, http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/
parttime.txt.

26. “What Might Be Called CACHE’s On Line Graffitti (COG).”

27. John J. Welch, “Item 20: To Ward & Randy: History of CBBS???,” Novem-
ber 9, 1986, archived at http://textfiles.com/bbs/CBBS/history.cbbs.

28. Hacking for the sake of hacking mirrors the pursuit of “contacts” of ham ra-
dio operators, who pursued two-way wireless communication for the sake of
making contact itself rather than exchanging messages. See Susan J. Doug-
las, Listening In: Radio and the American Imagination: From Amos ’n’ Andy
and Edward R. Murrow to Wolfman Jack and Howard Stern (New York: Times

Books, 1999), 333. Also Kristen Haring, “The ‘Freer Men’ of Ham Radio: How
a Technical Hobby Provided Social and Spatial Distance,” Technology and

Culture 44, no. 4 (2003): 734–61, https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2003.0164.

29. “What Might Be Called CACHE’s On Line Graffitti (COG).”

30. Initially titled The CACHE Flash.

31. The club formally announced its name, CACHE, in a note to Byte maga-
zine published in 1976. “Clubs and Newsletters,” Byte, February 1976. The
number for the hotline was published in the monthly newsletter. CACHE

Register 6, no. 1 (January 1981). Christensen mentioned the hotline in a post
on CBBS in 1986. Welch, “Item 20.”

32. In particular, Christensen hoped that club members would use the bulletin
board to “modem in” new articles for the newsletter. Welch, “Item 20.”

33. Joe Kasser, “The Sky’s the Limit,” Byte, November 1978.

34. CBBS began to take on a mythical status while it was still in operation. In a
post to CBBS from 1986, Ward Christensen remarked, “I have told [the ori-
gin story] so many times I’m burned out.” Indeed, Christensen tried to resist
the valorization of his system by downplaying the significance of being first:

“It was no big deal. I just happened to be first. It wasn’t great, or even very
good—but it was first.” For a full transcript of Christensen’s remarks from

1986, see Welch, “Item 20.”

35. For example, see Robert X. Cringely, Accidental Empires: How the Boys of Sili-

S
con Valley Make Their Millions, Battle Foreign Competition, and Still Can’t Get a

N

Date (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1991).

217

218 note s to page s 37 –43

36. Welch, “Item 20.”

37. For more on this case in the context of ARPANET, see Fenwick McKelvey and

Kevin Driscoll, “ARPANET and Its Boundary Devices: Modems, IMPs, and
the Inter-structuralism of Infrastructures,” Internet Histories 3, no. 1 (Janu-
ary 2, 2019): 31–50, https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2018.1548138.

38. Michel Carpentier, Sylviane Farnoux-Toporkoff, Christian Garric, and C. P

Skrimshire, Telecommunications in Transition (Chichester, UK: Wiley, 1992), 1.

39. Jared Barton and Tyler Watts, “‘I Can’t Drive 55’: The Economics of the CB

Radio Phenomenon,” Independent Review 15, no. 3 (2011): 383–97.

40. The Amateur Radio Relay League described the adoption of VHF equipment
in the 1970s as a “revolution” for ham radio operators. See Jim Maxwell

(W6CF), “Amateur Radio: 100 Years of Discovery,” QST, January 2000,
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Ham_Radio_100_Years.pdf.

41. Kevin Gotkin, “When Computers Were Amateur,” IEEE Annals of the His-
tory of Computing 36, no. 2 (April 2014): 4–14, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC

.2014.32.

42. See Patrick Parsons, Blue Skies: A History of Cable Television (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2008), 19–21; Paula Petrik, “The Youngest Fourth

Estate: The Novelty Toy Printing Press and Adolescence, 1870–1886,” in

Small Worlds: Children and Adolescents in America, 1850–1950, ed. Elliott

West and Paula Petrik (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1992), 125–42;

Christian Sandvig, “Disorderly Infrastructure and the Role of Government,”

Government Information Quarterly 23, nos. 3–4 (2006): 503–6, doi:10.1016/j.

giq.2006.07.008.

43. Kristen Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,

2008).

44. In amateur radio, “contact” is a noun that refers to the successful exchange
of call signs between two radio operators. For more on the cultural practices,
as well as the racial and gendered dimensions, of radio hobbyist communica-
tion, see Susan J. Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting, 1899–1922 (Balti-
more: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987); Douglas, Listening In; Jonathan

Sterne, The Audible Past: Cultural Origins of Sound Reproduction (Durham,

NC: Duke University Press, 2003); Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture;

Art M. Blake, “Audible Citizenship and Audiomobility: Race, Technology, and

CB Radio,” American Quarterly 63, no. 3 (September 1, 2011): 531–53.

45. See Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting; Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture.

46. Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting, 216–39.

47. Maxim is a central figure in the history of amateur radio in the United States.

See Chris Codella, “Hiram Percy Maxim,” QST, February 2014.

48. Douglas, Inventing American Broadcasting, 297.

49. Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture, 147–48.

S

50. Gary Pearce, “VHF/UHF-FM, Repeaters, Digital Voice and Data,” in The

ARRL Operating Manual for Radio Amateurs, 9th ed. (Newington, CT: Ama-

N
teur Radio Relay League, 2010), 2-1–2-29.

218
note s to page s 43 –49 219

51. One notable transceiver produced in this period was the 1969 Motorola

HT-220. The HT-220 was a large handheld radio that was used as a prop in
numerous police dramas on television and in film. The radio continues to be
used today, and a small memorial page is kept online by the HT-220 Preser-
vation Society. “HT-220 Page,” Michael Wright Page, accessed February 9,

2014, http://mfwright.com/HT220.html.

52. The size of a transmitting antenna scales proportionally with the wavelength
of the signals to be transmitted. While some hams rejected the integrated
circuit as an inscrutable black box that resisted tinkering, others welcomed
the lower cost of equipment and began to experiment with new applications
for the smaller scale components.

53. Pearce, “VHF/UHF-FM, Repeaters, Digital Voice and Data,” 2-2.

54. Tom Szerencse (WB9VTZ), “The History of ECRA Repeaters in Elkhart

County,” Elkhart County Radio Association, accessed February 9, 2014, http://
web.archive.org/web/20090926025125/http://www.ecra.us/history.html.

55. Szerencse.

56. More recently, hams have begun to use internet gateways to “link” various
repeaters into decentralized networks such as WinLink that cover a much
larger area. Although this activity is beyond the scope of the present discus-
sion, it is nevertheless a fitting demonstration of the ongoing culture of
innovation in amateur telecommunications.

57. Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture, 154.

58. Radio Shack, Radio Shack Catalog (1965).

59. Ernest Dickinson, “Business Tunes In on Citizens Band: Giants Enter Boom-
ing Market for 2-Way Sets,” New York Times, March 7, 1976, sec. Business &

Finance.

60. Radio Shack, Radio Shack Catalog (1975); Dickinson, “Business Tunes In on

Citizens Band.”

61. Dickinson, “Business Tunes In on Citizens Band.”

62. “Gay Ballad Is Joined by ‘Savage,’” Billboard, November 13, 1976.

63. Harvey A. Daniels, “Breaker, Break, Broke: Citizens Band in the Classroom,”

English Journal 65, no. 9 (December 1, 1976): 55, doi:10.2307/815750.

64. Daniels, 55.

65. Art M. Blake, “Audible Citizenship and Audiomobility: Race, Technology, and

CB Radio,” American Quarterly 63, no. 3 (September 1, 2011): 534.

66. Blake.

67. Shawn D. Lewis, “10-4, Bro,” Ebony, October 1976.

68. Blake, “Audible Citizenship and Audiomobility,” 533.

69. Robert Rosenthal, “Busing Foe: South Boston Ready to Defend Itself,”

Boston Globe, April 21, 1976; Blake, “Audible Citizenship and Audiomobility,”

544–45.

70. Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture, 157.

71. The ham and CB radio populations were not as distinct as my narrative

S
might suggest. Dave Hall (N3CVJ) recalls on a webpage about his CB radio

N

219

2 20 note s to page s 50 – 53
experiences that CBers with “some knowledge and a lot of free time” were ca-
pable of setting up a CB repeater in the late 1970s. Hall, “CB Repeater,” Spew

Radio Inc., accessed February 11, 2014, http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj/repeater

.htm.

72. Evidence of the resonance across these activities appears regularly in their ar-
chives, e.g., the first nontechnical mailing list on ARPANET was SF-LOVERS
for fans of science fiction. Kristen Haring has also explored some connec-
tions among twentieth-century technical cultures in the United States. See

Katie Hafner and Matthew Lyon, Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins of
the Internet (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996), 201; Haring, “‘Freer Men’

of Ham Radio.”

73. Ham radio mentors are known as “Elmers,” and mentoring is known as

“Elmering.” For more on the origin of this aspect of ham radio culture, see

Rod Newkirk, “How’s DX,” QST, March 1971.

74. Haring, “‘Freer Men’ of Ham Radio.”

75. Martin Campbell-Kelly and Daniel D. Garcia-Swartz, “Economic Perspectives
on the History of the Computer Time-Sharing Industry, 1965–1985,” IEEE

Annals of the History of Computing 30, no. 1 (January 2008): 16–36, https://doi

.org/10.1109/MAHC.2008.3.

76. Joy Lisi Rankin, A People’s History of Computing in the United States (Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018); Rankin, “From the Mainframes
to the Masses: A Participatory Computing Movement in Minnesota Educa-
tion,” Information & Culture 50, no. 2 (May 1, 2015): 197–216, https://doi.org/

10.7560/IC50204; Rankin, “Toward a History of Social Computing: Children, Classrooms, Campuses, and Communities,” IEEE Annals of the History of

Computing 36, no. 2 (2014): 86–88.

77. Hackers: Wizards of the Electronic Age, dir. Fabrice Florin, 1984, DVD, http://
hackersvideo.com; Campbell-Kelly and Aspray, Computer.

78. On the cultural values of early hobby computing, see E. Petrick, “Imagining
the Personal Computer: Conceptualizations of the Homebrew Computer

Club 1975–1977,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 39, no. 4 (October

2017): 27–39, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2018.1221045.

79. M. Mitchell Waldrop, The Dream Machine: J. C. R. Licklider and the Revolution

That Made Computing Personal (New York: Penguin Books, 2001), 339.

80. Haring, Ham Radio’s Technical Culture.

81. “73” is an affectionate salutation in the on-air argot of amateur radio.

82. Wayne Green (W2NSD/1), “Computers Are Here—Are You Ready?,” 73, Octo-
ber 1975.

83. In 1969, Ed Roberts and Forest M. Mims III, a pair of Air Force engineers
working out of the Weapons Lab in Albuquerque, cofounded Micro Instru-
mentation and Telemetry Systems (MITS) to provide electronics kits for
model rocket builders. Mims went on to create an influential workbook titled

S

Getting Started in Electronics that sold through Radio Shack and has remained
in print for more than thirty years. More information about early MITS

N

220
note s to page 53 2 21
products may be found on Mims’s personal home page: “About Forrest M.

Mims III,” Forrest Mims’s website, accessed February 18, 2014, http://www

.forrestmims.org/biography.html.

84. The parallel rows of lights and switches on the Altair resembled several vari-
ants of the front panels in the DEC PDP-11 series of minicomputers. See also

Waldrop, Dream Machine, 430.

85. The article was authored by Ed Roberts and Microsoft founder Bill Gates,
misattributed as “William Yates.” See H. Edward Roberts and William Yates,

“Altair 8800 Minicomputer, Part 1,” Popular Electronics, January 1975.

86. Early microcomputer programmers wrote their code by hand using a set of
mnemonic “opcodes.” For example, the 8080 machine language instruction
for halting a program might be the binary value 1111111, but the programmer
would use the mnemonic “HLT” when planning out a program. To prepare
the program for execution on the Altair, programmers referred to a printed
table of opcodes and machine language instructions to translate their pro-
gram into a list of binary numbers. See Charles Petzold, Code: The Hidden

Language of Computer Hardware and Software (Redmond, WA: Microsoft

Press, 1999), 236.

87. Following the Popular Electronics feature, MITS was overwhelmed by orders
for the Altair kit and shortly developed a reputation for slow shipping and
poor customer service. Further, those who received their kits were likely to
become frustrated by the complexity of the kit and the arduous programming
experience. To satisfy the needs of this newfound customer base, MITS soon
announced bundled systems that included printers, disk drives, tape readers,
and keyboards along with the Altair. Unfortunately for MITS, the market-
place had grown more competitive, and it had largely lost its advantage. See
also Campbell-Kelly and Aspray, Computer; Waldrop, Dream Machine, 431.

88. Martin Campbell-Kelly, From Airline Reservations to Sonic the Hedgehog: A His-
tory of the Software Industry (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), 201–28.

89. Rankin, People’s History of Computing in the United States; Nick Montfort et al., 10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1));:GOTO 10 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,

2013).

90. John Evans Williams (W2BFD), “The Story of Amateur Radio Teletype,” QST,

October 1948.

91. Stanley P. Levy (WB6SQU), “A Morse to RTTY Converter—Using a Mi-
croprocessor,” in Hobby Computers Are Here! , ed. Wayne Green (W2NSD/1)

(Peterborough, NH: 73 Publications, 1976), 78–81.

92. Sally O’Dell (KB1O), “Clubs and Computers: A Simple Interface (Club Cor-
ner),” QST, July 1983.

93. David P. Allen (W1UKZ), “Computer Net Info (Strays),” QST, November

1980.

94. The W6TRW swap meet continues to operate monthly in the parking lot of
a Northrop Grumman building in Redondo Beach, California. In 1967, this

S
location also served as the setting for an Earth colony on the fictional planet

N

221

2 2 2 note s to page s 56 – 60
of Deneva Prime in season 1, episode 29, of Star Trek. For more informa-
tion, see W6TRW Swap Meet, accessed February 18, 2014, http://www.w6trw

.com/swapmeet/index.htm; Memory Alpha, “TRW Space and Defense Park,”

accessed June 4, 2021, https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/TRW_Space

_and_Defense_Park.

95. Christensen and Suess, “Hobbyist Computerized Bulletin Board.”

96. Lary L. Myers, How to Create Your Own Computer Bulletin Board (Blue Ridge

Summit, PA: TAB Books, 1983), 202–8.

97. Between 1975 and 1980, 78 of 675 reader letters published in Byte mentioned
modems, telecommunications, or radio.

chapter 3. building an internet for everyone

1. Denise Caruso, “Networking Bulletin Boards,” InfoWorld, August 27, 1984.

2. John Madill, “FidoNet History,” July 30, 1993, archived by Metro Olografix at
http://www.olografix.org/gubi/estate/archivio/fido/fido.htm.

3. Tom Jennings’s communication utilities were called Minitel and Telink. The
name “Minitel,” occasionally styled “MiniTel,” was just a historical coinci-
dence with the French videotex platform.

4. Tom Jennings, “FOSSIL Drivers’ Ancient History,” FidoNews, February 3,

1992, http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/library/PROGRAMS/NETWORK/

FOSSIL/.

5. Madill, “FidoNet History.”

6. Tom Jennings, “Some Preliminary Ideas for the FidoNet,” April 30,

1984, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/

STANDARDS/fidonet.doc.txt.

7. There is some inconsistency in the precise date of this first connection,
but it seems to have happened around May or June 1984. FidoNet on the

Internet, “FOTIs FidoNet Timeline Page,” accessed October 12, 2019, http://
www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/tl.htm; “The International FidoNet—15,649 Bulletin Boards Worldwide with a Connection,” Boardwatch,

October 1992.

8. Tom Jennings, “The History of FidoNet: An Interview with Tom Jennings,”

interview by Marge Robbins, October 1993, archived at http://www.textfiles

.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/HISTORY/tomj_mrobbins.txt.

9. Ben Baker, “An Informal History of FidoNet,” FidoNews, November 23, 1987.

10. Baker.

11. Baker.

12. For a deeper dive on “telephonic” histories of technology, see Gabriele Balbi
and Christiane Berth, “Towards a Telephonic History of Technology,” His-
tory and Technology 35, no. 2 (April 3, 2019): 105–14, https://doi.org/10.1080/

07341512.2019.1652959.

13. Fenwick McKelvey and Kevin Driscoll, “ARPANET and Its Boundary Devices:

S

Modems, IMPs, and the Inter-structuralism of Infrastructures,” Internet His-
tories 3, no. 1 (January 2, 2019): 31–50, https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2018

N

.1548138.

222
note s to page s 61– 64 2 23

14. The details of the Numbering Plan were first circulated outside of AT&T
in a series of memos to the United States Independent Telephone Associa-
tion (USITA) in 1945. The memos were then published in Telephony, the

USITA trade magazine, to inform independent telephone companies about
the coming changes. In accordance with the universal ambitions of the

Numbering Plan, it provided codes for the independent companies, and the
new AT&T switching equipment was designed to be interoperable with the
older “manual” switchboards in use at many independent exchange offices.

Cooperation with independents was essential for the Bell System to convey a
sense of universality to North American telephone subscribers. “Nationwide

Operator Toll Dialing (Part 1 of 5),” Telephony 130 (January 12, 1946): 13–26;

“Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 2 of 5),” Telephony 130 (January 19,

1946): 28–30, 46; “Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 3 of 5),” Telephony

130 (January 26, 1946): 16–18, 35; “Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 4 of

5),” Telephony 130 (February 2, 1946): 18–19; “Nationwide Operator Toll Dial-
ing (Part 5 of 5),” Telephony 130 (February 2, 1946): 20–26.

15. Billy Wildhack, Erotic Connections (Corte Madera, CA: Waite Group, 1994), 21.

16. One rather tedious approach to discovery was to write a program that would
systematically dial every telephone number in a given range and log whether
a modem answered at the other end. This practice was known colloquially as

“war dialing” after it was dramatized in the 1983 film WarGames.

17. Tom Jennings, “Fido’s Operating Manual,” November 1, 1984, archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/PROGRAMS/FIDO-10/.

18. Tom Jennings, “FidoNet History and Operation,” February 8, 1985, archived
at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/HISTORY/fidohist.1

.txt.

19. Jennings.

20. Baker, “Informal History of FidoNet.”

21. Jennings, “Fido’s Operating Manual.”

22. Jennings.

23. Notably, the FidoNet crew were not the first BBS enthusiasts to imagine
building a computerized relay network. In 1993, Jennings relayed a story to
the historian Marge Robbins about a system that predated FidoNet: “There
was a system in Andover Mass run by Wayne something? Andover CNODE
it was a CP/M-80 (Zilog Z80) machine he had a whole bunch of harddisks
and a lot of programs to download. and about 8 logical drives like from A: to

H: or something. He had a MINICBBS BBS (stripped-down version of CBBS

. . . utterly minimal) that he would run as a separate program from it. Some
user of his system had this idea about what if we had bulletin boards that
just hopped a message across the country by going local call to local call to
local call. And while it was an intriguing idea, when you stop to think about it
mindboggling and ridiculous. But it got some tiny amount of message traffic
and of course we put it away like all ideas like that, but it kinda stuck with

S
me.” Jennings, “History of FidoNet.”

N

223

2 2 4 note s to page s 64–70

24. Jennings.

25. “The Birth of BYTEnet,” Byte, October 1984.

26. Cost estimates based on commentary in Tom Jennings, “European Fido,”

FidoNews, December 24, 1984.

27. Tom Jennings, “The First FidoNet Newsletter,” FidoNews, December 1, 1984.

28. Jennings.

29. Thom Henderson, “Electronic Hate,” FidoNews, May 13, 1985.

30. Fido sysops jokingly called it “The Snooze.” See Michael Schuyler, “Big

Dummy’s Guide to FidoNet,” FidoNet.us, 1992, http://www.fidonet.us/
dummyguide.html.

31. Tom Jennings and others, “FidoNet History,” August 20, 1985, archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/HISTORY/fidohist

.2.txt.

32. Plutopia News Network, “Tom Jennings Interview (1993),” Plutopia Blog,

April 9, 2018, https://plutopia.io/tom-jennings-interview-1993/.

33. Jennings, “Fido’s Operating Manual.”

34. Tom Jennings, “As you all probably know by now . . . ,” FidoNews, March 18,

1985.

35. Thom Henderson, “The New Kid on the Block,” FidoNews, April 1, 1985;

Henderson, “Change of Command,” FidoNews, March 25, 1985; Henderson,

“ARC? What’s an ARC?,” FidoNews, October 14, 1985.

36. Henderson, “New Kid on the Block.”

37. Tom Jennings, “Hot News,” FidoNews, January 16, 1985.

38. Ben Baker, “New Look for FidoNet,” FidoNews, April 22, 1985.

39. Baker.

40. Tom Jennings, “Fido #1 in Net # . . . ,” FidoNews, April 22, 1985.

41. “FidoNet, Sidekick, Apple, Get Organized!, And Handle,” Byte, October

1984, 357.

42. “International FidoNet—15,649 Bulletin Boards.”

43. Jennings, “Fido #1 in Net #.”

44. Baker, “Informal History of FidoNet.”

45. Jennings and others, “FidoNet History.”

46. Thom Henderson, “Special Issue,” FidoNews, April 22, 1985.

47. Jennings, “Fido #1 in Net #,” 1.

48. Under the new system, net and node numbers could range from 1 to 32,767,
the maximum value of a short signed integer in the C programming lan-
guage. See Jennings, “Fido #1 in Net #”; Ken Kaplan, “Obtaining a Fido Net

Number,” FidoNews, June 3, 1985. For a more detailed explanation of the net/
node system, see also Schuyler, “Big Dummy’s Guide to FidoNet.”

49. Jennings and others, “FidoNet History.”

50. “In the Crowd: Tom Jennings,” Thrasher, November 1986.

51. Ben Baker, “Coordinators List,” FidoNews, June 10, 1985.

S

52. “In the Crowd: Tom Jennings.”

53. Ben Baker and Ken Kaplan, “The Duties of a Network or Region Coordina-

N
tor,” FidoNews, June 3, 1985.

224
note s to page s 70 –7 3 2 25

54. Van Olmstead, “Sauntering Sysops Batman,” FidoNews, July 22, 1985.

55. Olmstead.

56. Not only had FidoNet reached the 250 node ceiling, but Ken’s wife, Sally,
had just given birth to a son. A heartfelt notice in FidoNews dubbed him “the
first FidoBaby” and joked that Ken hadn’t yet given him a node number.

The young Kaplan’s first birthday was also added to the FidoNews calendar
in 1986, and in 1990, Kaplan noted that his son and multinet Fido were the
same age. Baker, “New Look for FidoNet”; “The First FidoBaby,” FidoNews,

June 10, 1985; “The Interrupt Stack,” FidoNews, April 28, 1986; Ken Kaplan,

“Editorial: Happy Birthday FidoNet,” FidoNews, June 11, 1990.

57. See Thom Henderson, “Any Day Now,” FidoNews, May 6, 1985; Henderson,

“Fido 10i,” FidoNews, May 20, 1985.

58. Tom Jennings, “Fido’s Operating Manual, Fourth Edition,” August 1985, ar-
chived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/PROGRAMS/

FIDO-10/.

59. Ben Baker, “go! go! go!—June 12 Is it,” FidoNews, June 10, 1985.

60. Baker, “Informal History of FidoNet.”

61. Baker.

62. Thom Henderson, “Editorial: Future Directions,” FidoNews, November 11,

1985.

63. Baker, “Informal History of FidoNet.”

64. Nodelist data in this paragraph are based on an independent analysis of the
nodelist published on Friday, October 3, 1986. In March 1986, Ben Baker an-
nounced that the nodelist had grown too large to distribute weekly. Instead,
they planned to distribute a “NODEDIFF” file representing only those entries
that had changed since the last major update. A special utility program was
required to update the local nodelist. Ben Baker, “New NODELIST Distribu-
tion Method,” FidoNews, March 3, 1986; Ben Baker, Ken Kaplan, and Henk

Wevers, eds., “The International FidoNet Nodelist, Day Number 276,” Inter-
national FidoNet Association, October 3, 1986, http://www.textfiles.com/
fidonet-on-the-internet/n1986/nodelist.276.

65. Tom Jennings, “Editorial,” FidoNews, December 16, 1985.

66. Jennings.

67. Vin McLellan, “Out of the Doghouse,” Digital Review, August 1985, fido0231

.nws.

68. Ken Shackelford, “Fido BBS Christmas Wish List (Early),” FidoNews, Octo-
ber 14, 1985.

69. Richard Polunsky, “Fido Catalog Author Seeks Heko,” FidoNews, April 14,

1986; Polunsky, “Fido Utility Catalog,” FidoNews, May 5, 1986.

70. Tom Jennings, “HOMOCORE Issues 1 through 7,” Sensitive Research,
accessed June 15, 2021, https://web.archive.org/web/20210618022530/
https://www.sr-ix.com/Etc/HOMOCORE/index.html; Jennings, “Shred of Dignity Skaters Union, ca. 1989,” Sensitive Research, accessed June 15, 2021,

S
https://web.archive.org/web/20210618022646/https://www.sr-ix.com/Etc/

N
myQueerSF/Shipley/index.html.

225

2 26 note s to page s 7 3 –74

71. Jack Boulware and Silke Tudor, “Shred of Dignity,” Gimme Something Better,

2009, http://gimmesomethingbetter.com/excerpts/shred-of-dignity. See also Boulware and Tudor, Gimme Something Better: The Profound, Progressive, and

Occasionally Pointless History of Bay Area Punk from Dead Kennedys to Green

Day (New York: Penguin Books, 2009).

72. Jennings, “[FidoNet Is Growing].”

73. Jennings.

74. Jennings.

75. Jennings.

76. Jennings; Robert Briggs, “Creating Fido Source,” FidoNews, April 14, 1985;

Briggs, “Fido Re-write,” FidoNews, April 29, 1985; Bob Hartman, “This is
simply a request for information . . . ,” FidoNews, July 15, 1985; Paul Kelly and Jim Lynn, “A Few Ideas about the Rewrite of Fido,” FidoNews, July 22, 1985;

Hartman, “Fido Re-write,” FidoNews, July 29, 1985; John Plocher, “More Fido

Rewrite Ideas,” FidoNews, December 30, 1985.

77. Bob Hartman, “Rover, Rovermsg, Renum, and the UN*X Gateway,”

FidoNews, December 9, 1985.

78. The meaning of “packet” and “packet switching” in early FidoNet docu-
mentation is different from packet-switching networks like CYCLADES or

ARPANET. Whereas packet-switching usually refers to real-time “datagram”

protocols such as TCP/IP, FidoNet “packets” were compressed bundles of
mail transmitted through the store-and-forward network. “For historical rea-
sons, the term ‘packet’ is used in FidoNet to represent a bundle of messages,
as opposed to the more common use as a unit of communication, which is
known as a block in FidoNet.” Randy Bush, “A Basic FidoNet(tm) Techni-
cal Standard, Draft FSC001-9,” FidoNet Technical Standards Committee,

December 27, 1987, http://ftsc.org/docs/fsc-0001.000.

79. During the production of BBS: The Documentary, Jason Scott began collect-
ing BBS programs with an emphasis on software written before 1995. As of

2020, the collection includes 857 BBS programs for thirty-seven platforms.

See Scott, BBS Software Directory, accessed August 4, 2020, http://software

.bbsdocumentary.com/.

80. See Susan Leigh Star and Martha Lampland, “Reckoning with Standards,”

in Standards and Their Stories: How Quantifying, Classifying, and Formalizing

Practices Shape Everyday Life, ed. Martha Lampland and Susan Leigh Star

(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009), 3–34.

81. Alexander R. Galloway, Protocol: How Control Exists after Decentralization

(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004).

82. See Andrew L. Russell, “‘Rough Consensus and Running Code’ and the In-
ternet-OSI Standards War,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 28, no. 3

(2006): 48–61; Russell, “OSI: The Internet That Wasn’t,” IEEE Spectrum,

July 30, 2013, http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/osi-the-internet

S

-that-wasnt; Russell, Open Standards and the Digital Age: History, Ideology, and Networks (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014).

N

226
note s to page s 75–7 7 2 27

83. Caruso, “Networking Bulletin Boards.”

84. In 2014, Wynn Wagner III changed his name to Sven Andréas Wallin. He
continued to use “Wynn Wagner” as a pen name. For consistency, I will use
his former name when referring to events from the past and in citations to
his writing. See Sven Andréas Wallin, “Naming Convention,” SAW (blog),

February 1, 2014. http://web.archive.org/web/20160903205902/http://www

.svenandreaswallin.com/tag/wynn-wagner/.

85. Wynn Wagner, “History of Opus-CBCS,” July 7, 1997, http://web.archive.org/
web/19970707073934/http://www.global.org/opus/history/opushist.html;

Wagner, “OPUS Computer-Based Conversation System Version 1.0,” ed. John

Miller, June 14, 1987, http://cd.textfiles.com/masterdisc/SS/CMM/0004/

OPUSDOC.TXT.

86. Wagner, “History of Opus-CBCS.”

87. For a more detailed examination of BBS graphics for the IBM PC platform,
see Michael A. Hargadon, “Like City Lights, Receding: ANSi Artwork and the

Digital Underground, 1985–2000” (MA thesis, Concordia University, 2011),
http://mhargadon.ca/media/mhargadon-thesis.pdf.

88. Wagner, “OPUS Computer-Based Conversation System.”

89. Contact information for AIDS-related charities was hard-coded into the

Opus executable from its first release in 1986. Initially, Wagner directed
funds to the Shanti Project in San Francisco. Later, he asked that donations
be sent to AmFAR in Los Angeles. To comply with the donation require-
ment, European Opus users found local AIDS-related charities. Although the
exact number of donations are not known, one estimate places the number
in the range of $1 million. Wagner notes that “Opus Sysops” were listed in
the Shanti Project newsletter alongside large corporate donors. See Wagner,

“History of Opus-CBCS”; John R. Selig, “Sit Down, Shut-Up and Row: Wynn

Wagner Helps Build the HIV/AIDS Information Superhighway,” John Selig’s
website, March 2001, http://www.johnselig.com/commentary/row/.

90. Wagner, “History of Opus-CBCS.”

91. Jennings previously documented the message and packet formats along
with the “lower layers of the protocol.” Tom Jennings, “FidoNet Electronic

Mail Protocol,” October 20, 1984, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/

FIDONET/JENNINGS/STANDARDS/fidomail.doc.txt.

92. Randy Bush, “FidoNet Standards Committee,” FidoNews, July 28, 1986.

93. Thom Henderson, “What a Weekend!,” FidoNews, August 25, 1986.

94. Allen Miller, “International Fido Conference, August 14–17, 1986,” FidoNews, September 8, 1986.

95. Thom Henderson, “Editorial: Double Dawns,” FidoNews, November 10, 1986.

96. Henderson.

97. An archive of documents produced by the FidoNet Technical Standards

Committee since 1987 is available on the public web. See FidoNet Technical

Standards Committee, “FTSC Documents,” accessed August 5, 2020, http://

S
ftsc.org/docs/.

N

227

2 28 note s to page s 78 –79

98. For a closer look at the decision-making practices embedded in the internet
community’s “Request for Comments” system, see Sandra Braman, “Internet

RFCs as Social Policy: Network Design from a Regulatory Perspective,” Pro-
ceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 46, no. 1

(January 1, 2009): 1–29, https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2009.1450460254;

Braman, “The Interpenetration of Technical and Legal Decision-Making
for the Internet,” Information, Communication & Society 13, no. 3 (April 1,

2010): 309–24, https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180903473814; Braman,

“The Framing Years: Policy Fundamentals in the Internet Design Pro-
cess, 1969–1979,” Information Society 27, no. 5 (October 1, 2011): 295–310,
https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2011.607027.

99. Bush, “Basic FidoNet(tm) Technical Standard.”

100.Bush.

101. Bush.

102. Bush was an ecumenical technician and later brought his expertise to the

Internet Engineering Task Force.

103. Notably, the message-storage format used by Fido in 1987 assigned only
two characters to the year and was, therefore, not Y2K compliant. For more
on the consequences of this and similar design choices, see Dylan Mulvin,

“Distributing Liability: The Legal and Political Battles of Y2K,” IEEE An-
nals of the History of Computing 42, no. 2 (July 2020): 26–37, doi:10.1109/

MAHC.2020.2973630.

104. SEAdog reflected Henderson’s opinion that Fido BBS should be broken up
into interoperable components. See Thom Henderson, “Public Domain

Fido,” FidoNews, April 14, 1985.

105. In 1987, the nodelist included several codes describing the technical features
of each node. The code “#CM” meant “Accepts mail 24 hours per day.” The
nodelist published on October 16 included 1,880 unique telephone num-
bers, of which 1,015 included the “#CM” code. See FidoNet on the Internet,

“FidoNet Nodelist,” October 16, 1987, http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the

-internet/n1987/nodelist.289. The December 1992 nodelist included 18,238
unique telephone numbers, and 15,469 were marked “CM.” See FidoNet on
the Internet, “FidoNet Nodelist,” December 25, 1992, http://www.textfiles

.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/n1992/nodediff.360.

106.FrontDoor evolved from a simple add-on utility for Fido into a complete elec-
tronic mail system like SEAdog. FrontDoor was originally created by Joaquim

Homrighausen, a teenaged programmer living in Sweden. Commercial inter-
est in FrontDoor enabled Homrighausen to travel and work internationally,
though his employers and benefactors were not always satisfied. Homrighau-
sen was an occasional contributor to FidoNews, and the rocky development of

FrontDoor became a subject of gossip for several years. For one perspective,
see Peter Adenauer, “fdhist.txt,” FidoNet on the Internet, December 1993,

S
http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/history/fdhis.txt.

107. The FidoNet addressing scheme referred to single-user nodes as “points.”

N

Points were not included on the nodelist. Instead, all mail destined for a

228
note s to page s 8 0 – 81 2 29
point was routed to a “boss node” that agreed to hold mail for the point.

FidoNet point addresses are identifiable by a “dot” notation. For example, in

1987, Thom Henderson’s FidoNet address was 1:107/6.1. All of his mail was
routed through Node 6 in Net 107.

108. Comparisons between FidoNet and USENET were common in the 1980s, but

Echomail provided several functions missing from USENET, such as the op-
tion to attach files to messages. For a technical comparison, see Jack Decker,

“USENET vs. FidoNet—A Quick Comparison,” FidoNews, February 24, 1992.

109.Caruso, “Networking Bulletin Boards,” 31; Jennings, “Fido’s Operating

Manual.”

110. Wynn Wagner, “History of Echomail,” The Documentary Photo Album and

Interview Page, accessed June 4, 2021, http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/
photos/140wynn/FILES/echomail.txt.

111. Details on the first week of Echomail are based on the account included in
the Opus 1.0 manual. See Wagner, “OPUS Computer-Based Conversation

System,” 96–97.

112. For more details regarding the technical procedures required to partici-
pate in Echomail at various points in its history, see John Dashner, “Ham

Radio EchoMail Conference,” FidoNews, October 13, 1986; Steve Bonine,

“New-Sysop Orientation Information,” International FidoNet Association,

February 22, 1988, http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/

STANDARDS/newsysop.txt; Schuyler, “Big Dummy’s Guide to FidoNet.”

113. See Josh Gordon, “EchoMail and Host Routing: A Plea for Sanity,” FidoNews,

June 9, 1986; Ben Baker, “View from the Top: Echomail,” FidoNews,

June 30, 1986; David James, “EchoMail Can Help You Find Your Roots,”

FidoNews, July 28, 1986; Todd Looney, “Vietnam Veterans Bulletin Board,”

FidoNews, August 11, 1986; Mitch Kessler and Gerrie Blum, “Adult but Not

X-Rated,” FidoNews, August 18, 1986; “Notices,” FidoNews, August 25, 1986; Todd Looney and Nancy Looney, “A Cry for Support! Dedicated to Vietnam

Veterans,” FidoNews, September 8, 1986; Jim Kay, “I wish to register a loud
complaint . . . ,” FidoNews, September 15, 1986; Randall Kobetich, “I.P.R.

Echomail (Interpersonal Relationships),” FidoNews, September 22, 1986;

Dashner, “Ham Radio EchoMail Conference”; Roger Smith, “Record Collec-
tors EchoMail Conference,” FidoNews, October 20, 1986.

114. Ben Baker and Tom Jennings seem to have observed this new user behavior
independently of each other. Baker, “View from the Top: Echomail”; Jennings,

“History of FidoNet.”

115. The “origin” line was eventually standardized in the Echomail specification.

See Bob Hartman, “FTS-0004 EchoMail Specification Version 3.31,” FidoNet

Technical Standards Committee, December 12, 1987, http://www.textfiles

.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/fs/fts_0004.txt; Mark Kimes, “FSC-0068 A Proposed Replacement For FTS-0004,” FidoNet Technical Standards Com-
mittee, December 13, 1992, http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/

S
fs/fsc_0068.txt.

N

229

230 note s to page s 81– 85

116. Echomail traffic was a recurring topic in FidoNews throughout 1986. See, for example, Gordon, “EchoMail and Host Routing”; J. Brad Hicks, “Echomail,

Host-Routing, and Topology,” FidoNews, June 23, 1986; Baker, “View from the

Top: Echomail”; Butch Walker, “Echomail Coordinators,” FidoNews, Octo-
ber 6, 1986.

117. Thom Henderson, “Editorial: One Year Later,” FidoNews, March 31, 1986.

118. Wagner, “OPUS Computer-Based Conversation System.”

119. Grey Mist, “Conference Report,” FidoNews, August 25, 1986.

120. For more on the impact of Echomail, see the evolution of FidoNet policy
from 1985 to 1986: FidoNet on the Internet, “FidoNet Policy and Procedures

Guide Version 2,” June 26, 1986, http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the

-internet/history/policy2.txt; FidoNet on the Internet, “FidoNet Policy and Procedures Guide Version 3,” October 24, 1986, http://www.textfiles.com/
fidonet-on-the-internet/history/policy3.doc.

121. Thomas Kenny, “I’m very interested in Echomail networking . . . ,” FidoNews, May 12, 1986.

122. Thomas Kenny, “The First Echomail Conference List,” FidoNews, March 9,

1987.

123. Kenny.

124. GAYNET and BIBLE were each created within weeks of the introduction of

Echomail. Wynn Wagner, “History of Echomail,” Opus CBCS, July 7, 1997,
http://web.archive.org/web/19970707073957/http://www.global.org/opus/
history/echomail.html.

125. See Wagner’s 1997 home page, archived here: http://web.archive.org/web/

19970707042730/http://www.global.org/wynn/.

126. Baker, “View from the Top: Echomail.”

127. Jennings, “History of FidoNet.”

128. Bonine, “New-Sysop Orientation Information.”

129. The Echomail backbone represented a different topology from FidoNet, with
routing independent of the nodelist. See John Souvestre, George Peace, Jim

Bodger, and John Johnson, “FidoNet Echomail Backbone,” ONE BBSCON

1994, 1994, http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/zips/index.htm.

130. Michael G. Fuchs began publishing a list of echoes in 1988. The oldest copy I
have been able to track down is from 1991. See Fuchs, “Echomail Conference

List Report,” FidoNet on the Internet, July 1, 1991, http://www.textfiles.com/
fidonet-on-the-internet/e1991/elist107.txt.

131. Ken Kaplan reported that the head of US Robotics in 1985 told him, “there
ain’t nobody out there who has anything that can match [FidoNet] right now.”

McLellan, “Out of the Doghouse”; see also Bob Hartman, “What Is the Story
on 9600 Baud Modems,” FidoNews, March 9, 1987.

132. For more details on PageSat and Planet Connect, providers of FidoNet by
satellite, see Jason Scott, “Concepts: Services: Satellites,” BBS Documentary

S

Library, accessed February 4, 2021, http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/library/

CONCEPTS/SERVICES/SATELLITES/.

N

230
note s to page s 85– 8 8 231

133. Roy Timberman, “FidoNet Basics,” ONE BBSCON 1994, 1994,
http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/zips/index.htm.

134. The earliest gateways between FidoNet and USENET were created in 1985. By
the early 1990s, several Echomail conferences were mirrored on USENET as
newsgroups. The “k12.*” hierarchy on USENET began as a FidoNet Echo. For
more information on gateways, see Hartman, “Rover, Rovermsg, Renum, and
the UN*X Gateway”; Tim Požar, “Late Night Software Is Proud to Announce

UFGATE,” FidoNews, January 30, 1989; Tom Jennings and Tim Požar, “Edito-
rial,” FidoNews, June 3, 1991.

135. See George Peace’s comments on internet gateways here: Souvestre et al.,

“FidoNet Echomail Backbone.”

136. Souvestre et al.

137. The creation and dissolution of the International FidoNet Association (IFNA)

deserves closer historical attention than is possible here. In short, IFNA
aimed to serve as an umbrella organization to represent the interests of BBS
sysops, administer the nodelist, and support future efforts at standardiza-
tion. It was explicitly inspired by the Amateur Radio Relay League (ARRL), a
voluntary membership organization supporting ham radio operators.

138. In September 1988, an Alternet-FidoNet gateway went into service, carry-
ing messages between the two networks. See David Dodell and Ben Baker,

“FidoNet-Alternet Technical Agreement,” FidoNews, September 5, 1988.

139. For a more comprehensive account of early othernets, see Ralph Merritt, “A

Listing of Known Othernets,” FidoNews, November 25, 1991; William J. Shef-
ski, Free Electronic Networks (Rocklin, CA: Prima, 1994); Adam Michlin, “A

Listing of Known Othernets,” NETLAND, January 1, 1995, http://www.nfbnet

.org/files/magazine/NETL0195.ZIP.

140. For access to historical nodelists, see FidoNet Net 282, “The FidoNet Node-
list Historical Analysis,” February 2, 2005, http://web.archive.org/web/

20170629084903/http://www.rxn.com/~net282/nodelist/; FidoNet on the Internet, “FOTIs FidoNet Nodelist/Nodediff Archive Page,” 2004, http://
textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/nodediff.htm.

141. Don Daniels, “IFNA Welcomes Poland to FidoNet,” FidoNews, September 7,

1987; Jacek Szelozynski, “Something Exotic—Polish Traffic in Net/Echo

Mail,” FidoNews, June 5, 1989, fido0623.nws; Jan Stozek, “FidoNet in Po-
land,” Pigulki, June 5, 1991, https://ftp.icm.edu.pl/packages/pigulki/pigulki6

.pub.

142. Several issues of Komputer are available on the public web via the Internet

Archive: https://archive.org/details/computermagazines.

143. Daniels, “IFNA Welcomes Poland to FidoNet”; Szelozynski, “Something

Exotic.”

144. Szelozynski, “Something Exotic.”

145. FidoNet may take a more prominent role in the memories of longtime

Russian internet users than in the United States or Europe. Prior to 1991,

S

FidoNet was already functioning in cities throughout the Soviet Union, and

N

231

232 note s to page s 8 8 – 9 0
it continued to grow in the years after the fall of the Soviet Union. Anecdotal
evidence such as the prevalence of the term “Фидонет” on Twitter and a
comparative analysis of the relevant Russian Wikipedia entries underscores
the important technological and cultural connections between the historical

FidoNet and the Russian internet, or “Runet.” For a closer look at the local
histories of the internet in Russia, see the latest work of Polina Kolozaridi
and the Club for Internet and Society Enthusiasts, e.g., Gregory Asmolov
and Polina Kolozaridi, “The Imaginaries of RuNet,” Russian Politics 2, no. 1

(March 9, 2017): 54–79, https://doi.org/10.1163/2451-8921-00201004; Polina Kolozaridi and Dmitry Muravyov, “The Narratives We Inherit: The Local and

Global in Tomsk’s Internet History,” Internet Histories 4, no. 1 (January 2,

2020): 49–65, https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2020.1723980.

146. The debate took place over an Echomail conference for members of the Inter-
national FidoNet Association. To date, I have not found records of this confer-
ence, so my characterization of the debate is based on a report published in

FidoNews.

147. See Don Daniels, “IFNA Status Report for October 1987,” FidoNews, Octo-
ber 5, 1987.

148. Randy Bush, “FidoNet: Technology, Tools, and History,” Communications of
the ACM 36, no. 8 (August 1993): 31–35, https://doi.org/10.1145/163381.163383.

149. For more details on Bush’s gateways, see Randy Bush, “How FidoNet™ Tun-
nels the Internet,” September 21, 1992, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/
bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/STANDARDS/tunnel.msg.txt.

150. Travis Good, “Building the LATINO Net,” FidoNews, November 9, 1987; Pablo

Kleinman, “FidoNet en Sudamerica,” FidoNews, November 23, 1987.

151. Juan Davila, Pablo Kleinman, and Travis Good worked together on the
creation of Latin American network links for FidoNet, including economical
routing paths, Spanish-language Echomail conferences, and region and zone
coordination. See Good, “Building the LATINO Net”; Juan Davila, “Como Ob-
tener un Número de Nodo en FidoNet 367 (RED de Puerto Rico),” FidoNews,

February 1, 1988; Kleinman, “FidoNet en Sudamerica.”

152. For the history of FidoNet in China, also known as “CFido,” see Bo An,

“Infrastructure, Amateurism, and Radical Networking: FidoNet in China

(1995–1998)” (paper presented at Computer Networks Histories: Local,

National and Transnational Perspectives, Università della Svizzera italiana,

Lugano, Switzerland, 2017), https://www.infoclio.ch/en/computer-networks

-histories-local-national-and-transnational-perspectives.

chapter 4. sharing files with strangers

1. John Markoff, “In Focus: Personal Computers Communicate,” InfoWorld,

November 1, 1982.

2. For more variations of the name of Rich Schinnell’s BBS, see the

S

TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List: http://bbslist.textfiles.com/301/
oldschool.html.

N

232
note s to page s 9 0 – 93 233

3. The members of the Communications SIG of the Capital PC User’s Group

(CPCUG) made several key contributions to the BBS infrastructure of the
early 1980s. HostComm, the first program used by Schinnell’s BBS, was writ-
ten by Don Withrow on a dare. Schinnell bet him a “steak dinner” that he
couldn’t do it. While Withrow went on to sell copies of HostComm, several
members of the SIG began to play with a program called RBBS-PC, written
by Russ Lane. CPCUG shortly took over the development of RBBS, adding
countless features and bug fixes. RBBS gained a reputation as an accessible,
extensible host program and powered thousands of systems running on

IBM-compatible PC hardware. Documentation of the early development of

HostComm and RBBS is plentiful but scattered. See D. Thomas Mack and

Jon Martin, “Remote Bulletin Board System for the IBM Personal Computer

Version CPC12.1,” BBS Software Directory, January 29, 1984, http://software

.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/RBBS/rbbs121.txt; D. Thomas Mack, Ken Goosens, and Doug Azzarito, “Remote Bulletin Board System for the

Personal Computer Version 17.4: Technical Reference Guide,” BBS Software

Directory, June 21, 1992, http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/

RBBS/; Markoff, “In Focus”; Jason Scott, “A Story of RBBS (and PC-Talk, and Andrew Fluegelman),” ASCII by Jason Scott (blog), September 2, 2008,
http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/1440.

4. Rich Schinnell, “Rich’s Ramblings January 2004,” Rich Schinnell’s web-
site, January 2004, https://web.archive.org/web/20040211225245/http://
schinnell.org:80/ramb/ramb0401.html.

5. Markoff, “In Focus.”

6. To PC owners in 1982, “free software” referred strictly to price, e.g., “free as
in beer.” The free and open-source software movement associated with the

GNU Project and Free Software Foundation had not yet begun and did not
cross over from UNIX systems to personal computing until the early 1990s.

7. “In Focus,” InfoWorld, June 27, 1983.

8. Tom Shea, “Free Software,” InfoWorld, June 27, 1983.

9. John Markoff, “Freeware Hunt with IBM PC Shoots Numerous Prey,” Info-

World, June 27, 1983.

10. Paul E. Ceruzzi, A History of Modern Computing (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,

1998), 236.

11. Bill Gates, “An Open Letter to Hobbyists,” Computer Notes, February 1976.

12. Kevin Driscoll, “Professional Work for Nothing: Software Commercialization
and ‘An Open Letter to Hobbyists,’” Information & Culture 50, no. 2 (May 1,

2015): 257–83, https://doi.org/10.7560/IC50207.

13. Alf Rehn, “The Politics of Contraband: The Honor Economies of the Warez

Scene,” Journal of Socio-Economics 33, no. 3 (July 1, 2004): 359–74, https://doi

.org/10.1016/j.socec.2003.12.027; Markku Reunanen, “How Those Crackers Became Us Demosceners,” WiderScreen 17, nos. 1–2 (April 15, 2014), http://
widerscreen.fi/numerot/2014-1-2/crackers-became-us-demosceners/; Gavin S

Mueller, “Piracy as Labour Struggle,” TripleC: Communication, Capitalism &

N

233

23 4 note s to page s 93 – 9 6

Critique: Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 14,
no. 1 (May 15, 2016): 333–45; Patryk Wasiak, “Telephone Networks, BBSes, and
the Emergence of the Transnational ‘Warez Scene,’” History and Technol-
ogy 35, no. 2 (April 3, 2019): 177–94, https://doi.org/10.1080/07341512.2019

.1652432; safe crackers, “The Art of Warez,” video, 2019, https://safecrackers

.com/.

14. Kevin Driscoll and Joshua Diaz, “Endless Loop: A Brief History of Chip-
tunes,” Transformative Works and Cultures 2 (March 15, 2009), https://doi

.org/10.3983/twc.2009.096; Markku Reunanen, “Times of Change in the Demoscene: A Creative Community and Its Relationship with Technology”

(University of Turku, Finland, 2017), http://doria32-kk.lib.helsinki.fi/handle/

10024/130915.

15. For a closer look at the social implications of the ASCII character set, see

Daniel Pargman and Jacob Palme, “ASCII Imperialism,” in Standards and

Their Stories: How Quantifying, Classifying, and Formalizing Practices Shape

Everyday Life, ed. Martha Lampland and Susan Leigh Star (Ithaca, NY: Cornell

University Press, 2008), 177–206.

16. American Telegraph and Telephone Company, “Data Set 103 A,” March 1963;

“Data Set 103F Interface Specification,” Bell System Data Communications

Technical Reference, American Telephone and Telegraph Company, May 1964;

American Telegraph and Telephone Company, “Data Set 103A Type Identifi-
cation and Operation,” Bell System Practices: Plant Series, no. 5 (January 1967); American Telegraph and Telephone Company, “Data Set 103A Interface

Specification,” Bell System Data Communications Technical Reference, February

1967.

17. Charles P. Bourne and Trudi Bellardo Hahn, A History of Online Information

Services, 1963–1976 (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004).

18. Lee Felsenstein, “Build ‘Pennywhistle’: The Hobbyist’s Modem,” Popular

Electronics, March 1976.

19. “Hayes Stack,” Byte, June 1981.

20. “The Phone Link Acoustic Modem,” Byte, December 1980.

21. “Cat Calls,” Byte, December 1979.

22. “The Hayes Micromodem II,” Byte, December 1981.

23. “Cat Calls.”

24. The fantasy of a worldwide supercomputer has roots in a collection of specu-
lative essays by the science fiction author H. G. Wells published in 1938.

Although Wells had imagined the world brain as a precursor to global har-
mony, by the 1960s, the all-knowing supercomputer had become a symbol
of antihuman technocracy. See H. G. Wells, World Brain (Garden City, NY:

Doubleday, Doran, 1938); Kevin Driscoll, “From Punched Cards to ‘Big Data’:

A Social History of Database Populism,” Communication +1 1, no. 1 (August

29, 2012), http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cpo/vol1/iss1/4.

S

25. Stan Miastkowski, “Information Unlimited: The Dialog Information Re-
trieval Service,” Byte, June 1981, 108.

N

234
note s to page s 9 6 –10 0 235

26. Steven K. Roberts, “Online Information Retrieval: Promise and Problems,”

Byte, December 1981.

27. Miastkowski, “Information Unlimited,” 108.

28. Outside the United States, public videotex projects such as Minitel in France
and Telidon in Canada aimed to bring database access to the general public.

By 1983, computer enthusiasts in the United States would have been hear-
ing about videotex from a variety of sources, including a special issue of Byte.

See “Videotex,” Byte, July 1983; Julien Mailland and Kevin Driscoll, Minitel: Welcome to the Internet (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017); Valérie Schafer
and Benjamin G. Thierry, Le Minitel: L’enfance numérique de la France (Paris:

Nuvis, 2012).

29. Janet Abbate, Inventing the Internet (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999),

106–10; Joy Rankin, “From the Mainframes to the Masses: A Participatory

Computing Movement in Minnesota Education,” Information & Culture 50,
no. 2 (May 1, 2015): 197–216, https://doi.org/10.7560/IC50204; Rankin, A People’s History of Computing in the United States (Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press, 2018).

30. Craig W. Vaughan, “Bulletin-Board Evolution Enhances Communication,”

InfoWorld, May 25, 1981, 33.

31. See Lary L. Myers, How to Create Your Own Computer Bulletin Board (Blue

Ridge Summit, PA: TAB Books, 1983), 202–8.

32. Vaughan, “Bulletin-Board Evolution,” 33.

33. Myers, How to Create Your Own Computer Bulletin Board.

34. Myers, 7.

35. Myers, 7.

36. Myers, 8–9.

37. Myers, 36.

38. Myers, 36.

39. Myers, 36–37.

40. On the political consequences of software defaults, see Wendy Hui Kyong

Chun, Control and Freedom: Power and Paranoia in the Age of Fiber Optics

(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006).

41. Wayne Bell, WWIV, version v3.21d (1986).

42. The documentation for later versions suggested that the “G-files” section
might be divided into separate sections for “Communications files,” “Hu-
morous files,” and “ANSI pictures.” Wig De Moville, “The User’s Guide to

WWIV,” WWIV, version 4.21a (1991).

43. Eric Katz and Rony Daher, Oblivion/2 Bulletin Board System, version 2.40

(Darkflame Enterprises, 1995).

44. Mindcrime, ANSI Gallery, version 1.00 (ACiDic, a division of ACiD Produc-
tions, 1994), ARTSCENE: The Textfiles.com Computer Art Collection, http://
artscene.textfiles.com/acid/BBSMODS/.

45. Jason Scott, “Why I Prefer Textfiles,” February 27, 1987, archived at http://

S
www.textfiles.com/groups/OCTOTHORPE/whytext.oct.

N

235

236 note s to page 101

46. The unauthorized transcription of text documents seems not to have at-
tracted the legal scrutiny of publishers. One reason for this may have been
the fact that many important texts were already in the public domain, so
creating a digital copy was not only legal but socially valuable. Also, PCs were
not yet seen as devices for reading long texts, and printing a long text would
be costly; so publishers may have regarded digital bootlegging as mostly
harmless.

47. “Plain text” is a colloquialism and not a technical term. In practice, “text”

comes in a variety of formats, most of which are at least partially inter-
operable. See Pargman and Palme, “ASCII Imperialism.”

48. See Stephen Duncombe, Notes from Underground: Zines and the Politics of

Alternative Culture (London: Verso, 1997); Megan Sapnar Ankerson, Dot-Com

Design: The Rise of a Usable, Social, Commercial Web (New York: New York

University Press, 2018); Kate Anastas, “Underground Newspapers: The

Social Media Networks of the 1960s and 1970s,” Mapping American Social

Movements through the 20th Century, University of Washington, accessed

February 6, 2020, http://depts.washington.edu/moves/altnews_geography

.shtml.

49. Although computing was scarcely mentioned in HOMOCORE, Jennings ac-
cepted submissions on floppy disk or cassette tape. In 2010, he told me that
all of the text was formatted in raw T X. Tom Jennings, “HOMOCORE Issues

E

1 through 7,” Sensitive Research, accessed June 15, 2021, https://web.archive

.org/web/20210618022530/https://www.sr-ix.com/Etc/HOMOCORE/index

.html.

50. Jason Scott, “518 Area Code BBSes through History,” The TEXTFILES.COM

Historical BBS List, accessed April 28, 2014, http://bbslist.textfiles.com/518/.

For history of Factsheet Five and the milieu it served, see Duncombe, Notes
from Underground.

51. Mark Frauenfelder, “bOING bOING Advertisement in Factsheet Five #33

(1989),” Boing Boing, August 7, 2009, http://boingboing.net/2009/08/19/
boing-boing-advertis.html. In 2013, Boing Boing reorganized its site from a blog-and-comments format to a blog-and-BBS format. Editor Rob Beschizza
joked that the new format would be “a bulletin board system, accessible
exclusively via dial-up modem,” which prompted several readers to reminisce
about their favorite BBSs. “I would have been so stoked if you had really
gone dial up BBS for comments,” wrote one reader. “Can you still play the
dial-up modem tones when we log-in to our accounts?” asked another. See

Beschizza, “Can We Talk?,” Boing Boing, June 27, 2013, http://web.archive

.org/web/0/https://boingboing.net/2013/06/27/can-we-talk.html.

52. Jason Scott, “Overview of The Works,” July 16, 1986, archived at http://www

.textfiles.com/groups/OCTOTHORPE/allworks.bbs.

53. Between 1978 and 2003, 914 was home to over five hundred bulletin

S
board systems. Jason Scott, “914 Area Code BBSes through History,” The

TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List. accessed April 29, 2014, http://bbslist

N

.textfiles.com/914/.

236
note s to page s 101–104 237

54. Jason Scott, The Works BBS, cache cow, accessed April 29, 2014, http://web

.archive.org/web/20011115192625/http://cache.cow.net/works/.

55. Scott, “Overview of The Works.”

56. doctor_x, “Curt Vendel on the BBS Documentary,” AtariAge, May 18,

2010, http://atariage.com/forums/topic/163089-curt-vendel-on-the-bbs

-documentary/?p=2016015.

57. The textfiles produced by Octothorpe are available in Scott’s archive. See

Jason Scott, “Groups: Octothorpe Productions,” accessed April 29, 2014,
archived at http://www.textfiles.com/groups/OCTOTHORPE/.

58. Jason Scott and The Cruiser, “The Guide to Real Works Users,” February 26,

1987, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/groups/OCTOTHORPE/works2

.oct.

59. The Works BBS was uncommonly well preserved among contemporary
systems. When Scott moved to Boston to attend Emerson College in 1988,
one of his users took over as the primary sysop of the BBS, and The Works
continued for another five years from the new sysop’s home in Lexington,

Massachusetts. In the late 1990s, Scott began to collect and curate the digital
history of networked personal computing at textfiles.com, a project that
led ultimately to the production of BBS, a documentary series on BBSing,
released on DVD in 2005. Scott’s preservation efforts in this area are un-
matched. See Jason Scott, “Does the BBS Guy Run a BBS?,” ASCII by Jason

Scott (blog), October 21, 2003, http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/753.

60. For a closer reading of Phrack in the context of hacker culture, see Douglas Thomas, “Representing Hacker Culture: Reading Phrack,” in Hacker Culture

(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002), 115–40.

61. Joseph Menn, Cult of the Dead Cow: How the Original Hacking Supergroup

Might Just Save the World (New York: PublicAffairs, 2019).

62. Jason Scott’s collection of e-zines includes more than four hundred unique ti-
tles founded during the 1980s and 1990s. See Scott, “Electronic Magazines,”

textfiles.com, accessed April 30, 2014, http://textfiles.com/magazines/.

63. Swamp Rat, “The Infamous . . . Gerbil Feed Bomb,” Cult of the Dead Cow,

1985, http://textfiles.com/groups/CDC/cDc-0001.txt.

64. To access Cult of the Dead Cow textfiles from the 1980s, see Jason Scott,

“Groups: The Cult of the Dead Cow,” textfiles.com, accessed February 4,

2021, http://textfiles.com/groups/CDC/.

65. For contemporaneous analysis of the Legion of Doom case, see volume 10
of the TELECOM Digest mailing list: Patrick Townson, TELECOM Digest

Archives, accessed February 4, 2021, http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/.

66. Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer, “Statement of Intent,” Computer Under-
ground Digest, March 28, 1990, http://www.textfiles.com/digest/CUD/
cud0100.txt.

67. During the production of BBS: The Documentary, Jason Scott collected a
small number of files related to Chip Berlet’s study of racist BBSs during the

S
mid-1980s. Despite a minor media panic in the mid-1980s, Scott concluded

N
that racist BBSs were so few in number—he dubbed them an “anomaly”—

237

238 note s to page s 104–10 6
that they did not merit inclusion in the documentary. See Scott, “Controversy:

BBSes of Evil and Fear: Racist BBSes,” BBS Documentary Library, 1985,
http://bbsdocumentary.com/library/CONTROVERSY/EVIL/RACISTBBSES/.

68. Chip Berlet and Carol Mason, “Swastikas in Cyberspace: How Hate Went

Online,” in Digital Media Strategies of the Far Right in Europe and the United

States, ed. Patricia Anne Simpson and Helga Druxes (Lanham, MD: Lexing-
ton Books, 2015), 21–36.

69. Berlet and Mason, 27–28.

70. CBS, “Computer Network / Neo-Nazi Network,” CBS Evening News, May 10,

1985, https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/303493; ABC, “Special As-
signment (The Radical Right) (Part II),” ABC Evening News, May 30, 1985,
https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/96423.

71. Three days after a segment on Neo-Nazi BBSs ran on CBS Evening News,

Thom Henderson wrote an article for FidoNews reporting on his experience
logging onto the BBS of a hate group in Texas. Alarmed by the violent, racist
materials he encountered there, Henderson solicited help from his fellow

Fido sysops. “I am at somewhat of a loss as to exactly what we should do,”

he admitted. “Does anyone have any suggestions?” Despite Henderson’s
concern, there was no further discussion in FidoNews. See Thom Henderson,

“Electronic Hate,” FidoNews, May 13, 1985.

72. The sociologist Jessie Daniels notes that hate groups struggled to find a
foothold on commercial services like Prodigy or America Online due to the
active moderation policies on those systems. The flourishing of racist sites
on the commercial internet was due, in part, to the decentralized, peer-to-
peer structure of the participatory web. See Daniels, Cyber Racism: White

Supremacy Online and the New Attack on Civil Rights (Lanham, MD: Rowman
and Littlefield, 2009), 91–116.

73. Catherine Driscoll, “Girl Culture, Revenge and Global Capitalism: Cybergirls,

Riot Grrls, Spice Girls,” Australian Feminist Studies 14, no. 29 (1999): 173–93, doi:10.1080/08164649993425; Melanie A. Ferris, “Resisting Mainstream

Media: Girls and the Act of Making Zines,” Canadian Woman Studies 21, no. 1

(April 1, 2001), http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/cws/article/view/

6906; Alison Piepmeier, Girl Zines: Making Media, Doing Feminism (New York: New York University Press, 2009); Janice Radway, “Zines, Half-Lives,
and Afterlives: On the Temporalities of Social and Political Change,” PMLA

126, no. 1 (January 1, 2011): 140–50, doi:10.1632/pmla.2011.126.1.140.

74. See Ellen Balka, “Womantalk Goes On-Line: The Use of Computer Networks
in the Context of Feminist Social Change” (PhD diss., Simon Fraser Univer-
sity, 1991), https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/56369048.pdf.

75. Rob O’Hara, Commodork: Sordid Tales from a BBS Junkie (self-published,

2006), 28.

76. O’Hara, 28.

S

77. Blue was an experienced developer of BBS software for the Apple II. He is
also the cocreator, along with Craig Vaughn, of the Apple Bulletin Board Sys-

N

238
note s to page s 107 –10 9 239
tem (ABBS) and the People’s Message System (PMS). Mack, Goosens, and

Azzarito, “Remote Bulletin Board System,” 27-1.

78. Bill Blue and Mark Robbins, ASCII Express “The Professional,” version 3.4x

(Santee, CA: Southwestern Data Systems, 1982).

79. Omega, Lord Vision, and Rock ’n Roll Doctor, “Getting AE/CATFUR to Work
with Apple-Net,” July 9, 1986, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/apple/
applenet.txt.

80. James A. Pope, “Apple-CAT II: A Communications System from Novation,”

Byte, January 1983.

81. International Telecommunication Union, “ITU-T Recommendation V.22 Bis:

2400 Bits per Second Duplex Modem Using the Frequency Division Tech-
nique Standardized for Use on the General Switched Telephone Network
and on Point-to-Point 2-Wire Leased Telephone-Type Circuits” (International

Telecommunication Union, 1988).

82. Kim Maxwell, “High-Speed Dial-Up Modems,” Byte, December 1984.

83. Maxwell, 182.

84. John J. Hunter, “Three V.22bis Modems, One Clear Winner,” InfoWorld,

September 1986.

85. “$109 2400 Baud Modem,” Byte, June 1988.

86. Curiously, the print-based distribution mechanism produced its own cottage
industry. Typing services such as Amtype Corporation charged a small fee to
transcribe programs and mail them on diskette. Kudos to the Atari historian

Kevin Savetz for spotting the Amtype Corp. advertisement and posting it
to Twitter: @KaySavetz, “1/Saw this ad . . . ,” Twitter, November 16, 2017,
https://twitter.com/KevinSavetz/status/931045389247037440.

87. See Alison Gazzard, Now the Chips Are Down: The BBC Micro (Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press, 2016).

88. The historian Martin Campbell-Kelly describes VisiCalc’s place in comput-
ing lore as “the ‘killer app’ hypothesis.” While his analysis suggests that any
number of “productivity” programs might have similarly launched the early

PC software industry, VisiCalc remained a top-selling PC product for another
half decade. In 1983, VisiCalc continued to top the market for productivity
software, selling more than twice as many licensed copies as its nearest com-
petitor. See Campbell-Kelly, From Airline Reservations to Sonic the Hedgehog: A

History of the Software Industry (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003), 215.

89. B. Grad, “The Creation and the Demise of VisiCalc,” IEEE Annals of the His-
tory of Computing 29, no. 3 (July 2007): 20–31, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC

.2007.4338439.

90. Martin Campbell-Kelly, “Number Crunching without Programming: The

Evolution of Spreadsheet Usability,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing

29, no. 3 (July 2007): 8, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2007.4338438.

91. Benjamin M. Rosen, “VisiCalc: Breaking the Personal Computer Bottleneck,”

Morgan Stanley Electronics Letter, July 11, 1979, http://www.bricklin.com/

S
history/rosenletter.htm.

N

239

2 40 note s to page s 111–114

92. At the peak of VisiCalc’s success, a quarter of PC software sales were through
mail order, and half came via retail chains such as ComputerLand. See

Richard P. Rumelt and Julia Watt, “VisiCorp 1978–1984 (Revised)” (Los An-
geles, CA: Anderson School at UCLA, 1985, rev. 2003), archived at http://web

.archive.org/web/20031101141127/http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty/dick

.rumelt/Docs/Cases/Visicorp.pdf.

93. David Kushner, Masters of Doom: How Two Guys Created an Empire and Trans-
formed Pop Culture (New York: Random House, 2003), 61.

94. Russ Walter, Secret Guide to Computers (Somerville, MA: Self-published,

1995), 65.

95. Rey Barry, Guide to Free Software (Charlottesville, VA: Freeware Hall of Fame, 1995), xi–xiii.

96. E.g., Doug Clapp, “Clapp-Trapp,” InfoWorld, November 21, 1983; Markoff,

“Freeware Hunt”; Katie Seger, “From One Program to Another,” PC Maga-
zine, January 1983.

97. The capitalization of software titles is inconsistent in the literature of this
period. In this text, I have followed the author’s own capitalization whenever
possible.

98. Jim Knopf, “The Origin of Shareware,” Association of Software Profession-
als, 1995, http://web.archive.org/web/0/http://www.asp-software.org/users/
history-of-shareware.asp.

99. Knopf.

100.“Shareware lets the software explain itself.” Wallace, quoted in Michael E.

Callahan, aka Dr. File Finder, “The History of Shareware,” Paul’s Picks Share-
ware Library, 1999, https://web.archive.org/web/20090403094743/http://
paulspicks.com:80/history.asp.

101. John Markoff, “Word-Processing Package Costs $10 under New Marketing

Scheme,” InfoWorld, September 19, 1983.

102. Callahan, “History of Shareware.”

103. The Association of Shareware Professionals promotes the simultaneous
inventions of shareware by Fluegelman, Knopf, and Wallace as “the his-
tory of shareware.” See Nelson Ford, “The History of Shareware & PsL,”

Association of Software Professionals, 2000, http://web.archive.org/web/

20100522020415/http://www.asp-software.org/users/history-of-shareware

.asp.

104. Fluegelman’s background as a writer shaped his transition into software. He
later claimed that his motivation for writing the first version of PC-TALK was
to facilitate trading drafts of a manuscript with his coauthor. Dennis Erokan
and Mary Eisenhart, “Andrew Fluegelman: PC-Talk and Beyond,” Micro-

Times, May 1985, 22.

105. Bob Wallace left Microsoft with $15,000 in the bank and the goal of creating
software to “empower people and advance society.” Mike Callahan and Nick

S

Anis, Dr. File Finder’s Guide to Shareware (Berkeley, CA: Osborne McGraw-

Hill, 1990), 33.

N

240
note s to page s 114–118 2 41

106.There are many variations on this sentiment. For example, Michael Callahan
profiled Sammy Mitchell, author of QEdit, in 1990. In 1985, Mitchell quit a

“cushy, safe, well-paid job” to write shareware full-time. Shareware allowed
the authors of QEdit “to write software for a living”: “which is what we love to
do.” Callahan and Anis, 55.

107. Wallace remembers reading the term “shareware” in a computer magazine.

It seems likely that he encountered it in an article by Jay Lucas for InfoWorld.

I have not found the original article, but there are plenty of references in
subsequent issues of InfoWorld, including a letter to the editor from June 27,

1983. In a recollection from 1993, Bob Metcalfe pins the Lucas article to May

30, 1983. Metcalfe, “Shareware Should Not Be Shunned at All,” InfoWorld,

March 15, 1993. See also John C. Dvorak, Chris Pirillo, and Wendy Taylor,

“The History of Shareware,” in Online! The Book (Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Prentice Hall Professional, 2004), 226–28.

108. Markoff, “Freeware Hunt with IBM PC.”

109.Ford, “History of Shareware & PsL.”

110. The use of shareware to distribute shareware suggests a comparison with
the “recursive public” of free and open-source software. See Christopher M.

Kelty, Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software (Durham, NC: Duke

University Press, 2008).

111. John Friel: “[The] Shareware [model] works better for communication pro-
grams than any other type of Shareware,” as quoted in Callahan and Anis,

Dr. File Finder’s Guide to Shareware, 47.

112. Jay Caplan, “Effective Shareware Distribution via the BBS Channel, Version

1.2,” August 10, 1992, archived at http://textfiles.com/bbs/bbstip12.txt.

113. For a discussion of the economic barriers to CompuServe as a shareware-
trading space, see Ford, “History of Shareware & PsL.”

114. Richard Scott Mark, Internet BBSs: A Guided Tour (Greenwich, CT: Manning,

1996), 203.

115. Exec-PC, “Sorry Prodigy,” Boardwatch, May 1992.

116. Barry, Guide to Free Software, xii.

117. Stewart Brand, “Finding a Balance in the Slippery Economics of an Informa-
tion Age,” Los Angeles Times, November 8, 1987, sec. Part IV.

118. David W. Batterson, “Information Age Is Coming, but ‘Freeware,’ ‘Share-
ware’ Won’t Be There Making Money,” Los Angeles Times, November 22,

1987, http://articles.latimes.com/1987-11-22/business/fi-23979_1_shareware

-freeware-bullet-train.

119. Callahan and Anis, Dr. File Finder’s Guide to Shareware, 46–47.

120. Dvorak Telecommunications Awards, “1995 Dvorak Awards Winners,” ac-
cessed April 25, 2014, http://web.archive.org/web/19961031202539/http://
www.citivu.com/dvorak/95awds.html#bbswebsite; Thomas J. Glover and

Millie M. Young, Pocket PCRef, 3rd ed. (Littleton, CO: Sequoia, 1993), 484.

121. Mark, Internet BBSs, 283.

S

122. Mike Nichols, telephone interview with the author, April 15, 2014.

N

241

2 4 2 note s to page s 119 –12 2

123. Kushner, Masters of Doom, 151–52.

124. Denny Atkin, “We’re DOOMed,” Compute! , April 1994.

125. In 1994, I saw Doom shareware diskettes sold near the cash register along-
side other “impulse buys” at a video-game store in a mall in Massachusetts.

126. John Romero, the designer of Doom, began his career in the early 1980s
selling games to magazines such as inCider that published them in print
as source-code listings. See Retro Gamer, “John Romero,” January 17, 2014,
http://www.retrogamer.net/profiles/developer/john-romero/; MobyGames,

“Scout Search for Apple II (1984),” accessed April 25, 2014, http://www

.mobygames.com/game/scout-search.

127. David Kushner, “It’s a Mod, Mod World,” IEEE Spectrum 40, no. 2 (February

2003): 56–57, https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2003.1176517; Kushner, Masters of Doom; Sue Morris, “WADs, Bots and Mods: Multiplayer FPS Games as

Co-creative Media,” in Level Up Conference Proceedings (University of Utrecht,

2003), http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/05150.21522

.pdf; Hector Postigo, “Of Mods and Modders Chasing Down the Value of Fan-Based Digital Game Modifications,” Games and Culture 2, no. 4 (October 1, 2007): 300–313, doi:10.1177/1555412007307955.

128. Robin Nelson, “The Spirit of Cyberflight,” Popular Science, April 1995.

129. John H. Humphrey and Gary S. Smock, “High-Speed Modems,” Byte, June

1988.

130. The Byte article listed prices for sixteen models and configurations (mean =

$1,355.38, SD = $370.75). Humphrey and Smock.

131. David Hakala, “Best BBS Contest Update,” Boardwatch, April 1992.

132. Lamont Wood and Dana Blankenhorn, “State of the BBS Nation,” Byte,

January 1990.

133. Jonathan Roy, “SupraFAXModem,” freenet.sci.comp.atari.news, February 1,

1992, http://web.archive.org/web/20030109030157/http://www.atariarchives

.org/cfn/12/03/0028.php.

134. Roy.

135. “Prodigy Numbers,” Boardwatch, June 1992; Prodigy, “Prodigy Interactive

Personal Service Start-Up Kit,” 1991, The Henry Ford Museum, Dearborn,

MI, accessed June 15, 2021, https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and

-research/digital-collections/artifact/361296.

136. Gayle Ehrenman, “Prodigy Interactive Personal Service,” PC Magazine, Feb-
ruary 23, 1993.

137. Peter H. Lewis, “Low-Cost, High-Feature PCs,” PC Magazine, February 23,

1993.

138. While the makers of “multimedia” PCs touted their ability to display high-
resolution imagery, only a few games or CD-ROM applications took advan-
tage of these capabilities. Even in point-and-click environments such as the

Apple Macintosh, BBS terminal software tended to favor interoperability over

S
innovation when it came to user interface design. Several BBS software pack-
ages supported graphical interfaces including the NAPLPS standard used by

N

242
note s to page s 12 2–12 4 2 43

Prodigy and the proprietary RIPscrip by TeleGrafix Communications, Inc.,
but they were not widely adopted. See “Online Graphics—The Next Frontier,”

Boardwatch, October 1992; “NAPLPS Graphics Gains Legs,” Boardwatch,

December 1992; John Kwasnik, “RIP Graphics,” John Kwasnik’s website, July

2015, http://www.kwasstuff.altervista.org/RIP/index.html.

139. Reviewers of both the Atari ST and Amiga families of PCs tended to focus
on their large color palettes and high-resolution displays, but, generally, they
portrayed these systems being used to create new computer art and spe-
cial effects, rather than manipulating digitized photographs. Indeed, Andy

Warhol was famously commissioned by Commodore International to create a
series of original drawings using the new Amiga 1000 in 1985. Instead of in-
corporating the Amiga into his well-known photographic silkscreen process,

Warhol doodled on-screen using the Amiga mouse. Rich McCormick, “Andy

Warhol’s Amiga Computer Art Found 30 Years Later,” The Verge, April 24,

2014, http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/24/5646554/andy-warhols-lost

-amiga-computer-art-photo-essay; Jimmy Maher, The Future Was Here: The Commodore Amiga (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012), 43–44; Emily Meyer,

“Press Release: The Andy Warhol Museum Announces Newly Discovered

Amiga Experiments,” Andy Warhol Museum, April 24, 2014, http://www

.warhol.org/uploadedFiles/Warhol_Site/Warhol/Content/The_Museum/

Press_room/documents/The_Warhol_Amiga_Project_Release_4-24-14.pdf.

140. Nearly every PC dealer advertising in the May 1990 issue of PC Magazine
charged $200–$600 extra for color and high-resolution displays. All base PC
packages remained monochrome.

141. Bradley Dyck Kliewer, “VGA to the Max,” Byte, December 1990, 360.

142. Reunanen, “Times of Change in the Demoscene.” See also the discussion of
the Amiga “Boing Ball” demo in Maher, Future Was Here.

143. Some systems focused on the generation of novel computer art rather than
digitized copies of existing photos. Leo’s Graphics in Torrance, California,
offered four CD-ROMs of files related to computer graphics programming
including source code in C, C++, Pascal, and BASIC. Markus W. Pope, Que’s

BBS Directory (Indianapolis, IN: Que, 1994), 123. For more on personal com-
puters and ray tracing, see Kliewer, “VGA to the Max”; Steve Upstill, “Graph-
ics Go 3-D,” Byte, December 1990.

144. For a snapshot of the state of image compression in 1992, see Lori Grunin,

“Something Lossed, Something Gained: Image Compression for PC Graph-
ics,” PC Magazine, April 28, 1992, http://books.google.com/books?id=

HERlo0BgpGYC&lpg=PP1&dq=supervga&pg=PT321#v=onepage&q=targa&f

=false.

145. Within a year of VESA’s Super VGA standards, Byte magazine reported that

“several shareware programs” already supported the new standard. Kliewer,

“VGA to the Max.” Rey Barry’s Guide to Free Software lists more than twenty
different freeware image viewers (22).

S

N

243

2 4 4 note s to page s 12 4–128

146. Fran Gardner, “Entrepreneur Hits Bulletin Board Bull’s Eye,” Oregonian, February 10, 1994; Nick Jones, “Jim Maxey Interview,” Boston Sun, July 19, 2003,
http://www.bostonsun.com/archives/story_a1933_part1.htm.

147. “America’s Information Highway: A Hitch-Hiker’s Guide,” Economist, De-
cember 25, 1993.

148. Jim Maxey, “README.TXT,” Universe (Event Horizons, 1988), http://cd

.textfiles.com/multimediamania/GAMES/UNIVERS/README.TXT; Jack Rickard, “Home-Grown BB$,” Wired, October 1993. http://www.wired.com/
wired/archive/1.04/bbs.html.

149. “Playboy Magazine Sues Event Horizons BBS for Copyright Infringement,”

Boardwatch, May 1992; Rickard, “Home-Grown BB$.”

150. Gardner, “Entrepreneur Hits Bulletin Board Bull’s Eye.”

151. Jason Eppink, “A Brief History of the GIF (So Far),” Journal of Visual

Culture 13, no. 3 (December 1, 2014): 298–306, https://doi.org/10.1177/

1470412914553365.

152. Bob Berry, “Q&A.DOC,” CompuShow, version Standard Version 8.50a (Se-
dona, AZ: Canyon State Systems and Software, 1992).

153. The description of Event Horizons’ production process is based on investiga-
tive work by Benj Edwards of the Vintage Computing and Gaming blog. See

Edwards, “Digitized Autumn Leaves,” Vintage Computing and Gaming (blog),

January 11, 2013, http://www.vintagecomputing.com/index.php/archives/918.

154. Event Horizons, “Computer Images,” PC Magazine, December 1990.

155. For further detail concerning the screen resolutions and color depth of PCs
in this period, see Adam Bellin and Pier Del Frate, “True Color for Windows,”

Byte, December 1990.

156. Eddie Rowe, “A New Call to Arms—Event Horizons vs. Joe Sysop?,” Fi-
doNews, October 28, 1991, http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/

FIDONEWS/fido0843.nws.

157. “MaxiPic” was one of several graphics-related terms coined by Maxey, includ-
ing (purportedly) the term “Super VGA,” which later became an industry
standard. Kliewer, “VGA to the Max.”

158. Gardner, “Entrepreneur Hits Bulletin Board Bull’s Eye.”

159. Rowe, “New Call to Arms.”

160.Lance Rose, “Playboy’s New Playmate—Event Horizons BBS,” Boardwatch,

June 1992.

161. Rose.

162. In the mid-2000s, image-oriented blogs began to watermark the images on
their sites. Once again, watermarking was at the center of public conflicts
regarding authorship and labor in the production of digitized images. For an
example of one such conflict, see the back-and-forth published in Jason Scott,

“The Passion of the Scanner,” ASCII by Jason Scott (blog), March 11, 2006,
http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/950. For an analysis of the broader context S
within which this new form of watermarking emerged, see Ryan M. Milner,

The World Made Meme: Public Conversations and Participatory Media (Cam-

N
bridge, MA: MIT Press, 2016).

244
note s to page s 128 –132 2 45

163. Maxey also told Boardwatch that Playboy had sent “an enormous man” to
the Event Horizons office to intimidate his staff. Further, he claimed that
this “250–300 pound” man had “smashed the receptionist against the door,”

causing her to miss a month of work while she recovered from a hip injury.

Rose, “Playboy’s New Playmate.”

164. Notably, Playboy had yet to build a BBS of its own, although it was still
reportedly working “furiously” to build one in 1993. Rickard, “Home-Grown

BB$.”

165. Rickard.

166.Maxey was not alone, of course. Few champions of the internet wanted to
acknowledge the role of pornography in driving adoption!

167. “National List of Electronic Bulletin Board Systems and On-Line Information

Services,” Boardwatch, May 1992.

168. Event Horizons, “World’s Most Expensive BBS,” Boardwatch, September

1994.

169.Gardner, “Entrepreneur Hits Bulletin Board Bull’s Eye.”

170. Apuleius, “The Alt.Sex.Stories.* Hierarchy and Related Groups FAQ, Version

2.03,” Alt Sex Stories Text Repository, June 19, 2000, https://www.asstr.org/
files/FAQs_and_Information/ass_faq.txt.

171. Mailland and Driscoll, Minitel.

172. Billy Wildhack, Erotic Connections (Corte Madera, CA: Waite Group, 1994), 73.

173. Wildhack, 89.

174. “The Ebony Shack BBS,” BBS Magazine, August 1995.

175. The reality of dial-up networking is that 56 kilobits per second (kbps) is
rarely achieved over standard analog telephone lines. In the 1990s, optimists
mused about “anti-Shannon” devices capable of dynamically detecting and
canceling nonrandom sources of noise—but these devices could only deliver
marginal improvements. Meaningful growth in capacity depended on mov-
ing beyond the infrastructure of the twentieth-century Bell System.

176. “What Happened to ISDN?,” Boardwatch, December 1992, 29.

177. Humphrey and Smock, “High-Speed Modems”; John H. Humphrey and

Gary S. Smock, “Whither the Modem?,” Byte, January 1989.

178. Pew Research Center, “Broadband vs. Dial-Up Adoption over Time,” Internet

& Technology, accessed October 21, 2015, http://www.pewinternet.org/data

-trend/internet-use/connection-type/.

chapter 5. cultivating community

1. “Boardwatch Magazine Announces the Boardwatch 100 Reader’s Choice Bul-
letin Board Contest,” Boardwatch, May 1992.

2. Jack Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” Boardwatch, February 1992.

3. A few biases of the Boardwatch poll should be noted. First, the raw count of votes necessarily favored large-scale, centralized boards over intimate, local
systems. Only two “one-liners” appeared in the Top 100. Second, with an

S
emphasis on commercialization and professionalism, Boardwatch appealed

N
to an older subset of the modem-using population. While teenage boards

245

2 46 note s to page s 133 –137
were flourishing in the early 1990s, more than 50 percent of the voters in
the Boardwatch poll identified their ages falling between thirty and fifty years old (reported range: eight to seventy-seven years old).The outcomes of the
poll reflected the preferences of an older, more tech-savvy sample of North

American BBSers. David Hakala, “Best BBS Contest Update,” Boardwatch,

April 1992; Hakala, “Boardwatch 100 Readers’ Choice BBS Contest Update,”

Boardwatch, May 1992.

4. “Voters Favor Online Communities,” Boardwatch, May 1992.

5. Hakala, “Boardwatch 100 Readers’ Choice BBS Contest Update,” 23.

6. Hakala, 23.

7. Markus W. Pope, Que’s BBS Directory (Indianapolis, IN: Que, 1994), 109.

8. Gary Wolf and Michael Stein, Aether Madness: An Offbeat Guide to the Online

World (Berkeley, CA: Peachpit, 1995), 128–29.

9. Pope, Que’s BBS Directory, 111.

10. “Backdraft Bulletin Board System,” ModemNews Magazine, 1993; Pope, Que’s BBS Directory, 115.

11. “Subscribe to Boardwatch Magazine,” Boardwatch, May 1992.

12. Keith Wade, The Anarchist’s Guide to the BBS (Port Townsend, WA: Loom-
panics Unlimited, 1990), 2.

13. David Fox, Love Bytes: The Online Dating Handbook (Corte Madera, CA: Waite

Group, 1995), 3.

14. Raymond Williams, Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society (New York:

Oxford University Press, 1976), 76.

15. The routine practice of checking a bulletin board for new messages was es-
sential to sustaining a sense of community and shared temporality among
participants. James W. Carey identified “the maintenance of society in time”

as one of the characteristics of the “ritual” view of communication. Carey, “A

Cultural Approach to Communication,” in Communication as Culture: Essays
on Media and Society (Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1989), 11–28.

16. The phrase “annihilation of distance” was first used to describe the trans-
atlantic telegraph in the mid-nineteenth century. See “The Atlantic Telegraph:

General Manifesto of the Directors to the People of Both Continents; Orga-
nization of the Company Official History of the Great Enterprise, Interest-
ing and Important Report of Preliminary Electrical Experiments,” New York

Times, August 27, 1857, sec. Archives, https://www.nytimes.com/1857/08/27/
archives/the-atlantic-telegraph-general-manifesto-of-the-directors-to-the.html.

17. Joy Rankin, “Toward a History of Social Computing: Children, Classrooms,

Campuses, and Communities,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing

36, no. 2 (2014): 86–88; Rankin, “From the Mainframes to the Masses: A

Participatory Computing Movement in Minnesota Education,” Information

& Culture 50, no. 2 (May 1, 2015): 197–216, https://doi.org/10.7560/IC50204;

Rankin, A People’s History of Computing in the United States (Cambridge, MA:

S

Harvard University Press, 2018).

18. Starr Roxanne Hiltz and Murray Turoff, The Network Nation: Human Commu-

N
nication via Computer (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978); Murray Turoff

246
note s to page s 137 –138 2 47
and Starr Roxanne Hiltz, “An Overview of Research Activities in Computer

Mediated Communications from 1976 to 1991 Conducted by the Computer-
ized Conferencing and Communications Center,” New Jersey Institute of

Technology, 1992, https://web.njit.edu/~turoff/Administrative/ccc.htm.

19. See, for example, Ellen Balka, “Womantalk Goes On-Line: The Use of Com-
puter Networks in the Context of Feminist Social Change” (PhD diss., Simon

Fraser University, 1991), https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/56369048.pdf;

Nancy K. Baym, “Interpreting Soap Operas and Creating Community: Inside
a Computer-Mediated Fan Culture,” Journal of Folklore Research 30, nos. 2–3

(1993): 143–76; Baym, “From Practice to Culture on Usenet,” Sociological

Review 42, no. S1 (May 1, 1994): 29–52, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X

.1994.tb03408.x; Baym, “Communication, Interpretation, and Relationship: A Study of a Computer-Mediated Fan Community” (PhD diss., University of

Illinois, 1994), http://hdl.handle.net/2142/19011; Eric E. Butow, “A Content Analysis of Rule Enforcement in the Virtual Communities of FidoNet

Echomail Conferences” (master’s thesis, California State University, Fresno,

1996); Shelley Correll, “The Ethnography of an Electronic Bar: The Les-
bian Cafe,” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 24, no. 3 (October 1, 1995):

270–98, https://doi.org/10.1177/089124195024003002; humdog, “Pandora’s Vox: On Community in Cyberspace,” 1994, Alphaville Herald, May 2004,
http://alphavilleherald.com/2004/05/introducing_hum.html; Michael L.

James, “An Exploratory Study of the Perceived Benefits of Electronic Bulle-
tin Board Use and Their Impact on Other Communication Activities” (PhD
diss., Florida State University, 1992); Steven G. Jones, CyberSociety: Computer-

Mediated Communication and Community (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996);

Jones, Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety (London:

Sage, 1997); Kenneth Lansing, “FidoNet: A Study of Computer Networking”

(master’s thesis, Texas Tech University, 1991); Annette N. Markham, Life On-
line: Researching Real Experience in Virtual Space (Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira,

1998); David Martin Myers Jr., “Putting It on the Line: The Evolution of

Home Computer Networks” (PhD diss., University of Texas at Austin, 1984);

Christine Ogan, “Listserver Communication during the Gulf War: What

Kind of Medium Is the Electronic Bulletin Board?,” Journal of Broadcasting

& Electronic Media 37, no. 2 (March 1, 1993): 177–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/

08838159309364214; Elizabeth M. Reid, “Electropolis: Communication and Community on Internet Relay Chat” (University of Melbourne, 1991), http://
www.aluluei.com/electropolis.htm; Rob Shields, Cultures of Internet: Virtual Spaces, Real Histories, Living Bodies (London: Sage, 1996); Carla G. Surratt,

Netlife: Internet Citizens and Their Communities (Commack, NY: Nova Science,

1998); Richard Clark MacKinnon, “Searching for the Leviathan in Usenet”

(master’s thesis, San Jose State University, 1992), https://doi.org/10.31979/
etd.vzvh-hkn4.

20. Howard Rheingold, The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic

S

Frontier (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1993). For a closer look at the recep-

N
tion and influence of The Virtual Community, see Fred Turner, “Where the

247

2 4 8 note s to page s 138 –139

Counterculture Met the New Economy: The WELL and the Origins of Virtual

Community,” Technology and Culture 46, no. 3 (2005): 486–87n4, https://doi

.org/10.1353/tech.2005.0154.

21. Howard Rheingold, introduction to the electronic version of The Virtual

Community, accessed February 4, 2021, https://www.rheingold.com/vc/book/
intro.html.

22. For a closer look at some of the thorny problems that accompanied early on-
line communities, see Finn Brunton, Spam: A Shadow History of the Internet

(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013).

23. Bruce Mazlish, “A Highway or a Trap?,” New York Times, October 31, 1993,
sec. Books, https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/31/books/a-highway-or-a-trap

.html.

24. For a thorough review of the virtual community research of this period, see

David Silver, “Looking Backwards, Looking Forward: Cyberculture Studies

1990–2000,” in Web.Studies: Rewiring Media Studies for the Digital Age, ed.

David Gauntlett (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 19–30, http://rccs

.usfca.edu/intro.asp.html; Nicholas W. Jankowski, “Creating Community with Media: History, Theories and Scientific Investigations,” in Handbook of

New Media, ed. Leah A. Lievrouw and Sonia M. Livingstone, Social Shap-
ing and Consequences of ICTs (London: Sage, 2002), 39–49, https://hdl

.handle.net/2027/uc1.32106011430425; Lori Kendall, “Virtual Community,”

in Encyclopedia of New Media, ed. Steve Jones (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage,

2003), 467–70, https://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015055882594; David

Ellis, Rachel Oldridge, and Ana Vasconcelos, “Community and Virtual

Community,” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 38, no. 1

(September 22, 2005): 145–86, https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.1440380104; Jan Fernback, “Beyond the Diluted Community Concept: A Symbolic Inter-actionist Perspective on Online Social Relations,” New Media & Society 9, no. 1

(February 1, 2007): 49–69, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807072417; Lori

Kendall, “Community and the Internet,” in The Handbook of Internet Studies

(New York: Wiley, 2011), 309–25, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444314861.ch14.

25. Kendall, “Community and the Internet.”

26. For a contemporary reflection on the rise and fall of a virtual community, see

Amy Bruckman and Carlos Jensen, “The Mystery of the Death of Medi-
aMOO: Seven Years of Evolution of an Online Community,” in Building Vir-
tual Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace, ed. K. Ann Renninger
and Wesley Shumar (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 21–33.

27. Notable early studies of BBSs include Myers, “Putting It on the Line”; Sheizaf

Rafaeli, “The Electronic Bulletin Board: A Computer-Driven Mass Medium,”

Computers and the Social Sciences 2 (1986): 123–36, https://doi.org/10.1177/

089443938600200302; Lansing, “FidoNet”; Benjamin J. Bates and Kenneth P. Lansing, “The New World of Democratic Telecommunications: FidoNet as

S
an Example of the New Horizontal Information Networks” (paper presented
at 42nd annual conference of the International Communication Association,

N

Miami, FL, 1992); M. James, “Exploratory Study”; Joseph Charles Maille,

248
note s to page s 140 –143 2 49

“Virtually Gutenberg: Computer Bulletin Boards and the First Amendment
through United States v. Riggs and Neidorf” (master’s thesis, San Jose State

University, 1993).

28. For more on the role of the Acceptable Use Policy in the debate over privati-
zation of NSFNET, see Janet Abbate, “Privatizing the Internet: Competing Vi-
sions and Chaotic Events, 1987–1995,” IEEE Annals of the History of Comput-
ing 32, no. 1 (2010): 10–22, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2010.24.

29. Jerry Shifrin, “So You Want to Start a BBS?,” May 23, 1987, archived at http://
www.textfiles.com/bbs/start-bb.txt.

30. James C. Goldbloom, “SysOp Suicide! (A Day in the Life of a System Opera-
tor),” March 1988, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/sysopsui.txt.

31. “How to Become an Unsuccessful, Burned-Out SysOp,” n.d., archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/100/howtobbs.txt.

32. “ONE BBSCON,” Boardwatch, November 1992.

33. Dave Hughes, “The Year of Internet at BBSCON ’94,” Cook Report on Inter-
net–> NREN, October 1994; Bob Metcalfe, “Sysops Are Reaping the Ben-
efits in the Wake of a BBS Explosion,” InfoWorld 16, no. 36 (September 5,

1994): 52.

34. “ONE BBSCON—Getting It All Together,” Boardwatch, July 1992, 47; Randy

Bush, “FidoNet: Technology, Tools, and History,” Communications of the ACM

36, no. 8 (August 1993): 32, https://doi.org/10.1145/163381.163383.

35. For example budgets, see Goldbloom, “SysOp Suicide!”; Pazuzu, “Tips on

Starting Your Own BBS,” November 11, 1993, archived at http://www.textfiles

.com/bbs/startbbs.txt.

36. Wally Byczek, “So You Want to Be a Sysop?,” 1989, archived at http://textfiles

.com/bbs/be-sysop.txt.

37. Shifrin, “So You Want to Start a BBS?”

38. The use of “sysoping” as a verb seems to have been relatively rare. For
context, see Tim Knight, “Establishing Your Own Bulletin Board Service,”

SoftSide, November 1983.

39. Mike Butler, “A Day in the Life of an Overworked UK Sysop—or—How
to Survive a Business, BBS and Family without Cracking Up,” FidoNews,

February 3, 1992; Mitchell Harding, “A Day in the Life of a Teenage Sysop,”

FidoNews, February 24, 1992.

40. Goldbloom, “SysOp Suicide!”

41. For a firsthand discussion of the benefits of running a BBS, see Shifrin, “So

You Want to Start a BBS?”; Byczek, “So You Want to Be a Sysop?”

42. Tony Frey, “The UltraViolet Cafe’s Guide to Better Modeming Cuisine,” 1989,
archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/guide.txt.

43. Knight, “Establishing Your Own Bulletin Board Service.”

44. Shifrin, “So You Want to Start a BBS?”

45. For a closer look at BBS moderation practices, see Kevin Driscoll, “Thou

Shalt Love Thy BBS: Distributed Experimentation in Community Mod-

S
eration,” in Computer Network Histories: Hidden Streams from the Inter-

N
net Past, ed. Paolo Bory, Gianluigi Negro, and Gabriele Balbi, Histoire et

249

250 note s to page s 143 –145

Informatique / Geschichte und Informatik 21 (Zürich: Chronos Verlag,

2019), 15–34, 10.33057/chronos.1539.

46. Hakala, “Best BBS Contest Update”; Hakala, “Boardwatch 100 Readers’

Choice BBS Contest Update.”

47. “How to Become an Unsuccessful, Burned-Out SysOp”; John Olson, “How
to Avoid Sysop Burnout,” FidoNews, April 14, 1986; Kris Lewis, “Abuse.BBS,”

1987, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/abuse.txt.

48. Olson, “How to Avoid Sysop Burnout.”

49. One caveat to the total control of the BBS sysop is in the case of Echomail
conferences. FidoNet conferences, or “echoes,” were moderated separately
from the local BBS conferences. Each echo had its own moderator who
created rules specific to their conference. If a user broke the rules or caused
trouble in the echo, the moderator of the echo and the local BBS sysop were
supposed to collaborate in resolving the problem. For more detail on this ar-
rangement, see Butow, “Content Analysis of Rule Enforcement.”

50. Bob Metcalfe, “How Many Sysops Will Show up for BBSCon—and Just What

Is a Sysop?,” InfoWorld 17, no. 5 (January 30, 1995): 49.

51. “One Sysops Opinion,” n.d., archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/
opinion.txt.

52. Katie Hafner, The WELL: A Story of Love, Death, and Real Life in the Seminal

Online Community (New York: Carroll and Graf, 2001); Rheingold, Virtual

Community.

53. Fred Turner, From Counterculture to Cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole

Earth Network, and the Rise of Digital Utopianism (Chicago: University of Chi-
cago Press, 2006), 141.

54. Ron Pernick, “WELL Historical Timeline—the Good, Great Place,” Well.com,

1995, http://www.well.com/conf/welltales/timeline.html.

55. Hafner, WELL; Rheingold, Virtual Community.

56. The other BBS mentioned in Mondo 2000’s awesomely weird book was Pri-
vate Idaho, a system run out of Boise, Idaho. The sysop Robert Carr was de-
scribed as “the man who brought you the famous Mac programs Momonoids
from the Deep, Porno Writer, and MacJesus.” Rudy von Bitter Rucker, R. U.

Sirius, and Queen Mu, Mondo 2000: A User’s Guide to the New Edge (New

York: HarperPerennial, 1992), 188.

57. Rheingold, Virtual Community, 54–55.

58. The comparison with nationwide commercial systems is not coincidental.

NETI, the company responsible for The WELL’s software infrastructure, also
designed the software for General Electric’s nationwide GEnie service. See

Jack Rickard, “The New BBS on the Web—Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link,”

Boardwatch, October 1995.

59. Rheingold, Virtual Community, 49.

60. In this context, “owning” your words took on two meanings. Colloquially,

S
it meant that each user was responsible for and accountable to their posts.

Legally, however, it meant that The WELL considered each post the prop-

N

250
note s to page s 145–14 8 251
erty of its owners. This was intended both to protect the property rights of
contributors and to limit the organization’s liability for unlawful speech acts
such as copyright infringement, libel, and obscenity.

61. Rheingold, Virtual Community, 42.

62. Rickard, “New BBS on the Web,” 44.

63. Rheingold, Virtual Community, 49.

64. “National List of Electronic Bulletin Board Systems and On-Line Information

Services,” Boardwatch, May 1992, 73.

65. When Grateful Dead guitarist Jerry Garcia passed away in 1995, Gail Ann

Williams, director of The WELL, posted a short reflection on her experi-
ence with the band’s fans. “The Dead have a lot to do with why I fell in
love with cyberspace,” she wrote. In Williams’s estimation, Dead fandom
represented a “true virtual community” that was “simply looking for a
medium” when The WELL came along. See Williams, “Grateful for Jerry, the

Dead, the Deadheads,” Gail Williams’s pages, August 10, 1995, http://web

.archive.org/web/19961220053904/http://www.well.com/user/gail/grateful

-dead.html.

66. Rheingold, Virtual Community, 49.

67. Rickard, “New BBS on the Web,” 42.

68. The WELL wasn’t the only dial-up system for Deadheads. Indeed, several
other boards were organized specifically for Dead fandom. The Mars Hotel

BBS in Roachdale, Indiana, and Terrapin Station in Darien, Connecticut,
were each named after Grateful Dead albums.

69. Both The WELL and the TARDIS were upgraded occasionally during their
lifetimes, but neither changed substantially from its original architecture
until 1995, when The WELL opened a portal on the World Wide Web.

70. Tragically, three of the sysops of the TARDIS were killed by a drunk driver
at the peak of their board’s popularity. Tom O’Nan, email to the author,

March 26, 2014.

71. These data are drawn from the historical BBS database at BBSmates.com.

72. A 2011 episode of the Doctor Who TV series explores the emotional relation-
ship between the TARDIS and the Doctor when the “matrix” of the ship is
transferred into the body of a human woman and the two can finally speak

“with mouths.” See “The Doctor’s Wife (TV Story),” Tardis Data Core: Doc-
tor Who Wiki, accessed March 21, 2014, http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The

_Doctor%27s_Wife_(TV_story).

73. “When the Doctor first decided to leave Gallifrey, he had the chance to take a

Type 53, but dismissed it as ‘soulless’ in favour of the Type 40.” See “Doctor’s

Wife.”

74. Timothy Daniel (N8RK), “Super-Ratt RTTY/CW Program with RBBS,” 73,

September 1983.

75. Robert J. Foster (WB7QWG/9), “Unlock the New Electronic Mailboxes,” 73,

April 1983.

S

76. O’Nan, email to the author.

N

251

25 2 note s to page s 14 8 –153

77. ELIZA has been reproduced many times, and readers will have no trouble
locating a version of the program to try on their own computers. For Weizen-
baum’s original description of the program, see Joseph Weizenbaum,

“ELIZA: A Computer Program for the Study of Natural Language Commu-
nication between Man and Machine,” Communications of the ACM 9, no. 1

(January 1966): 36–45, doi:10.1145/365153.365168.

78. The precise number of callers with disabilities was not known. The decision
not to keep records regarding the board’s users was a political decision. As

O’Nan put it, “I didn’t believe in classifying people that way” (email to the
author).

79. Thomas O’Nan, email to jason@textfiles.com, “Love Your Site,” Novem-
ber 17, 2006, archived at http://textfiles.com/history/onan.txt.

80. Jason Scott, “317 BBS List,” The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List, accessed March 21, 2014, http://bbslist.textfiles.com/317/.

81. “Prime Bulletin Board System: Zippety-Doo-Dah! Zippety-Day!,” BBS Soft-
ware Directory, [1992?], http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/APPLE/II/

PRIME/primebbs.txt.

82. Jerry Penner, “Running Your Own BBS!,” GEnieLamp, August 1, 1992, http://
software.bbsdocumentary.com/APPLE/II/PRIME/primebbs.genie.txt.

83. “Prime Bulletin Board System.”

84. Penner, “Running Your Own BBS!”

85. O’Nan, email to the author.

86. O’Nan.

87. Scott, “317 BBS List.”

88. O’Nan, “About the T.A.R.D.I.S. BBS.”

89. O’Nan.

90. All over the TARDIS, O’Nan made offhand references to a “red button.” If
users opted to “push the red button” from the main menu, they were humor-
ously logged off and disconnected from the system. See Scott, “317 BBS List.”

91. O’Nan, “About the T.A.R.D.I.S. BBS.”

92. O’Nan.

93. O’Nan.

94. Some savvy modemers reduced the cost of long-distance calling by sub-
scribing to a packet-switched intermediary service such as PC Pursuit. Less
scrupulous users avoided the tolls by using stolen calling cards. Neither case
was typical of all modemers, however.

95. Rheingold’s account of visiting The WELL’s office in 1985 is a wonderful
example of a user paying loving tribute to their favorite system ( Virtual Com-
munity, 38–39).

96. The best-known record of historical BBSs was compiled by Jason Scott with
the help of other retrocomputing enthusiasts. Area-code splits are a vexing
problem because some BBSs are listed twice under various area codes. This

S
bias would seem to favor the Bay Area since it experienced two splits. To the
extent that this error is present in the current analysis, it does not undermine

N

252
note s to page s 153 –159 253
the conclusions. For human-readable access to the data, see Jason Scott, The

TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List, accessed June 15, 2021, http://bbslist

.textfiles.com/.

97. “Tech workers” include individuals in one of three categories defined in
the 1980 US Census: “Engineers,” “Technologists and technicians, except
health,” and “Computer equipment operators.” See, for example, US Census

Bureau, General Social and Economic Characteristics: California (Washington,

DC: US Census Bureau, 1983); US Census Bureau, General Social and Eco-
nomic Characteristics: Indiana (Washington, DC: US Census Bureau, 1983).

98. Wolf and Stein, Aether Madness, 153.

99. Scott, “317 BBS List.”

100.Fox, Love Bytes, 4.

101. Adult BBSs such as Compu-Erotica in Chicago provided digitizing services so
that users would have a photograph to upload. For some, this may have been
the first time they had seen themselves depicted in a digital image.

102. Fox, Love Bytes, 4.

103. “America’s Information Superhighway: Hitch-Hiker’s Guide,” Economist,

December 25, 1993.

104. Billy Wildhack, Erotic Connections (Corte Madera, CA: Waite Group, 1994), 51.

105. Fox, Love Bytes, 14.

106.Jerry Woody, ProMatch, version 3.0 (Cullman, AL: WoodyWare, 1995).

107. Tom Cunha, TcSoft’s Intelligent Match Maker, version 4.9 (San Antonio, TX:

TcSoft, Inc., 1995).

108. Wildhack, Erotic Connections, 193.

109.Richard Scott Mark, Internet BBSs: A Guided Tour (Greenwich, CT: Manning,

1996), 218.

110. Phil Robinson and Nancy Tamosaitis, The Joy of Cybersex: The Underground

Guide to Electronic Erotica (New York: Brady, 1993).

111. Wildhack, Erotic Connections, 206

112. Mark, Internet BBSs, 261.

113. Wildhack, Erotic Connections, 54.

114. Wildhack, 54.

115. Jason Scott, “Commented BBS List,” The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS

List, accessed May 10, 2014, http://bbslist.textfiles.com/comments.html.

116. Mark, Internet BBSs, 159.

117. Wolf and Stein, Aether Madness, 101.

118. Fox, Love Bytes, 30 .

119. Mark, Internet BBSs, 218.

120. “Announcing Winners in the Boardwatch 100 Readers’ Choice BBS Con-
test 1993,” Boardwatch, 1993, http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/mp3/

93BBSCON/bw100.txt.

121. Queer Digital History Project, “Gay and Lesbian Information Bureau (GLIB),”

accessed February 16, 2021, https://queerdigital.com/items/show/55.

S

122. “Announcing Winners.”

N

253

25 4 note s to page s 159 –163

123. Leedell J. Miller, “The Gay & Lesbian BBS List,” soc.motss, Novem-
ber 2, 1992, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/soc.motss/
mdXaPe3cw2k/NWGHeaoz0KkJ.

124. Chaz Antonelli, “The BBS Documentary and Multicom-4,” When Pigs Fly,

November 7, 2015, https://mc4bbs.livejournal.com/246094.html; The Empty Closet, July 1992, Digital Collections, University of Rochester, https://
digitalcollections.lib.rochester.edu/ur/empty-closet-1971-current; Rochester Public Library, “Guide to the Gay Alliance of the Genesee Valley Ephemera

Collection 2017.023,” 2017, https://roccitylibrary.org/special-collections/;

Queer Digital History Project, “Multicom-4,” accessed February 16, 2021,
https://queerdigital.com/items/show/72.

125. Antonelli, “BBS Documentary.”

126. Community Educational Services Foundation, “Welcome to GLIB,” Gay and

Lesbian Information Bureau, accessed May 9, 2014, http://web.archive.org/
web/19970228045752/http://www.glib.org/.

127. Hugh Ryan, Brian Joseph Ferree, and Jennifer Livingston, “You Can Buy

Gaydar at the Apple Store,” Details, February 16, 2010, http://www.details

.com/sex-relationships/dating-and-cheating/201003/gay-fool-proof-hookups

-tech-savy.

128. Perot’s candidacy was felt throughout the modem world in many and sur-
prising ways. In June 1992, a group of Perot supporters created an internet
mailing list specifically to “facilitate the education of potential presidential
candidate Ross Perot about bisexuals, gays, lesbians, &c, and our issues and
concerns.” The list was titled, appropriately, “Bisexual Gay Lesbian & Other

Educating Perot mailing list,” or “bglo-teach-perot” for short. See bglo-
teach-perot, “New Mailing List for an Impromptu Task Force,” June 8, 1992,

18:20:52 PDT, http://www.qrd.org/qrd/electronic/1992/perot.glb.email-06

.08.92.

129. Wolf and Stein, Aether Madness, 58.

130. See also David F. Shaw, “Gay Men and Computer Communication: A Dis-
course of Sex and Identity in Cyberspace,” in Virtual Culture: Identity and

Communication in Cybersociety, ed. Steven Jones (London: Sage, 1997), 123–32.

131. Miller, “Gay & Lesbian BBS List.”

132. Kira Hall, “Cyberfeminism,” in Computer-Mediated Communication: Lin-
guistic, Social, and Cross-Cultural Perspectives (Amsterdam: John Benjamins,

1996).

133. Miller, “Gay & Lesbian BBS List.”

134. Hall, “Cyberfeminism,” 148.

135. Hall, 163.

136. Nina Wakeford, “New Technologies and ‘Cyber-Queer’ Research,” in Hand-
book of Lesbian and Gay Studies, ed. Diane Richardson and Steven Seidman

(London: Sage, 2002), 119.

S

137. For a closer look at the culture of mutual support that developed on the Back-
room, see Kathryn Brewster and Bonnie Ruberg, “SURVIVORS: Archiving

N

254
note s to page s 163 –166 255
the History of Bulletin Board Systems and the AIDS Crisis,” First Monday 25,
no. 10 (October 2020), https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i10.10290.

138. See Cait McKinney, Information Activism: A Queer History of Lesbian Media

Technologies (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2020).

139. Cait McKinney, “Printing the Network: AIDS Activism and Online Access
in the 1980s,” Continuum 32, no. 1 (January 2, 2018): 7–17, https://doi.org/10

.1080/10304312.2018.1404670.

140. CDC National AIDS Clearinghouse, “A Selected Guide to AIDS-Related

Electronic Bulletin Boards,” US Department of Health and Human Services,

April 2, 1993, http://cd.textfiles.com/internetinfo/answers/sci/aids-faq/part4.

141. Wolf and Stein, Aether Madness, 171–72.

142. Jean O. Pasco, “A Life of Service: Sister Mary, Whose Past Has Seen Many

Painful Twists and Turns, Now Brings Comfort to Others with the World’s

Most Comprehensive Web Site on AIDS and HIV,” Los Angeles Times, Decem-
ber 1, 1997, http://ww1.aegis.org/news/lt/1997/lt971201.html.

143. Sister Mary Elizabeth, “AEGIS Affidavit in ACLU, et al. v. Reno,” ACLU, Feb-
ruary 25, 1996, https://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/aegis-affidavit

-aclu-et-al-v-reno.

144. American Health Consultants, Inc., “AIDS Computer Bulletin Boards Gain-
ing Popularity,” AIDS ALERT, November 1993, http://web.archive.org/web/

19961018135646/http://hwmin.gbgm-umc.org/CAM/unique.html.

145. Wynn Wagner, “HIV+: Day One,” AEGIS, 1996, http://web.archive.org/web/

20000818090555/http://www.aegis.com/topics/dayone/.

146. Abe Opincar, “Holy Megabytes: In Her Crusade against AIDS, a Social Justice

Nun Goes Online to the World,” Reader, October 8, 1992.

147. Pasco, “Life of Service.”

148. Computerized AIDS Ministries, home page, March 7, 1996, http://web

.archive.org/web/19961018015652/http://hwbbs.gbgm-umc.org/.

149. United Methodist News Service, “Computer AIDS Network Offers Support
without Judgment,” Computerized AIDS Ministries, August 1995, http://web

.archive.org/web/19980425034431/http://gbgm-umc.org/CAM/camnews

.html.

150. Mark, Internet BBSs, 126.

151. United Methodist News Service, “Computer AIDS Network Offers Support.”

152. The AIDS ministry out of which CAM was built was part of a larger UMC
community in New York City with a long history of supporting gay and
lesbian people. The Washington Square United Methodist Church was
renowned for its support of the gay and lesbian communities of New York

City. In 1970, for example, the church hosted meetings of the Gay Liberation

Front. Later, the openly gay pastor Rev. Paul Abels served as the church’s
pastor from 1973 until 1984, when the national UMC voted to bar “practic-
ing homosexuals” from the clergy. See “Gay Liberation Front Meeting at

Washington Square Methodist Church,” Digital Collections, Manuscripts and

S

Archives Division, New York Public Library, accessed June 17, 2021, https://

N

255

256 note s to page s 166 –168
digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e3-57c4-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99;

Anne Hughes-Hinnen, “My Memories of Washington Square United

Methodist Church, 1981–2005,” People of the Village (blog), accessed May 8,

2014, http://peopleblog.churchofthevillage.org/my-memories-of-washington

-square-united-methodist-church-1981-2005/.

153. Richard B. Cory, “The UMC, CAM, and Me,” Computerized AIDS Ministries,

July 26, 1995, http://web.archive.org/web/19970129083713/http://gbgm-umc

.org/CAM/cam-me.html.

154. Cory.

155. Rusty, “Testimony and Thank You,” Computerized AIDS Ministries, June 14,

1995, http://web.archive.org/web/19980425034516/http://gbgm-umc.org/

CAM/rusty.html.

156. Rusty.

157. Debbi Hood Johnson, “I Wear a Red Ribbon,” Computerized AIDS Minis-
tries, 1994, http://web.archive.org/web/19980425032633/http://gbgm-umc

.org/cam/i-wear.html.

158. Tragically, Johnson was killed in a car accident on February 24, 1996

(Johnson).

159. Johnson.

160.Johnson.

161. The comments quoted in this paragraph draw on a short essay that Johnson
first posted to CAM that was then republished through both the UMC’s

Health and Welfare Ministries and Sister Mary Elizabeth’s AEGIS network.

162. United Methodist News Service, “Computer AIDS Network Offers Support.”

163. “One Sysops Opinion.”

chapter 6. becoming the net

1. Numerous accounts of internet history, from the scholarly to the biographi-
cal, mark 1995 as a year of transition.

2. Michael Krantz, “The Great Manhattan Geek Rush of 1995,” New York, No-
vember 13, 1995.

3. Eric S. Faden, “The Cyberfilm: Hollywood and Computer Technology,” Strate-
gies: Journal of Theory, Culture & Politics 14, no. 1 (May 2001): 77–90, https://
doi.org/10.1080/10402130120042370.

4. Ed Sherin, dir., “Rebels,” Law & Order, NBC, September 27, 1995; David Nutter, dir., “2Shy,” The X-Files, Fox, November 3, 1995, https://web.archive.org/
web/20010331101254/http://www.thexfiles.com/episodes/season3/3x06.html;

Susie Dietter, dir., “Radioactive Man,” The Simpsons, Fox, September 24, 1995,
https://simpsons.fandom.com/wiki/Radioactive_Man; Alan Siegel, “How alt

.tv.simpsons Embiggened a Generation of Obsessive Fans,” Slate, Septem-
ber 26, 2013, https://slate.com/culture/2013/09/the-history-of-simpsons

-message-board-alt-tv-simpsons.html.

S

5. The “electronic cottage” refers to a vision of telework outlined by the futurist

Alvin Toffler. Newt Gingrich, Republican Speaker of the House and Time

N

256
note s to page s 168 –17 1 257

“Man of the Year” for 1995, routinely referenced Toffler’s futurist literature.

For background, see Toffler, “The Electronic Cottage,” Creative Comput-
ing, December 1980; Tom Forester, “The Myth of the Electronic Cottage,”

Futures 20, no. 3 (June 1, 1988): 227–40, https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287

(88)90079-1; Karen Tumulty and Paul Gray, “Inside the Minds of Gingrich’s Gurus,” Time 145, no. 3 (January 23, 1995): 20. Faith in the information
economy was similarly axiomatic for elected Democrats. The American

Presidency Project lists sixty-seven occasions when President Clinton used
the phrases “information age” or “information superhighway” in remarks in

1995. See https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu.

6. For a rich history of the boom, see Megan Sapnar Ankerson, Dot-Com Design:

The Rise of a Usable, Social, Commercial Web (New York: New York University

Press, 2018).

7. Joshua Quittner and Tom Curry, “Ho, Ho, Ho, Crash!,” Time 145, no. 1 (Janu-
ary 9, 1995): 61; Judy Brown, “Microsoft Gives Business View from Windows

95 Preview Copies of the Long-Awaited New Operating System Are Avail-
able,” Milwaukee Journal, March 27, 1995, sec. Business, 95.

8. From RXN’s site about the 1:282 Net: “FidoNet (TM) is an amateur electronic
mail network, established in 1984, that had grown by 1995 to include almost

40,000 electronic bulletin board systems world-wide. It has since decreased
in size . . . :(” See FidoNet Net 282, March 28, 2004, http://web.archive.org/
web/20160310164528/http://www.rxn.com/~net282/.

9. The exact wording of this message varied throughout North America.

Examples of these “intercept recordings” may be heard today thanks to
several enthusiast collections on the web, e.g., Telephone World, “Telephone

Sounds & Recordings,” accessed June 15, 2021, https://web.archive.org/web/

20190701182135/http://www.phworld.org/sounds/.

10. One notable variant of the BBS death narrative involves the mass mailing of

AOL diskettes. See The Vann Cave, “Telegraph Road; Social Media before the

Internet,” YouTube, March 20, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

FYY821nv4rc.

11. Rob O’Hara, Commodork: Sordid Tales from a BBS Junkie (self-published,

2006), 14.

12. Rob Swindell, “The Digital Manifesto: ‘The Internet Killed the BBS Star,’”

Synchronet Wiki, August 1996, http://wiki.synchro.net/history:manifesto;

Sash, “Adventures in BBSing: BBSing Nostalgia in the Twin Cities or ‘Inter-
net Killed the BBS Star,’” 2000, archived at http://www.textfiles.com/history/
minn.txt.

13. On the conditions and consequences of privatization, see Janet Abbate,

“Privatizing the Internet: Competing Visions and Chaotic Events, 1987–

1995,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 32, no. 1 (2010): 10–22, https://
doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2010.24.

14. Jack Rickard later described it as a “tough crowd” that turned off potential

S
sponsors. See Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” Boardwatch, June 1991.

N

257

258 note s to page s 17 1–174

15. “The 1991 International BBSing and Electronic Communications Confer-
ence,” FidoNews, August 12, 1991.

16. Zone 1 Region Coordinators and Zone 1 Zone Coordinator, “FidoCon 1991—

The New Beginning,” FidoNews, July 30, 1990.

17. See ad in Boardwatch, June 1991, 37.

18. See ad in Boardwatch, June 1991, 37.

19. “FidoCon 91—408 Attend Biggest BBS Bash Ever,” Boardwatch, October 1991.

20. Stephen Laliberte, “A Tale of Two Cities: Impressions of FidoCon91 and the

VIA Convention,” Boardwatch, October 1991, 31.

21. See the photos published in the October 1991 issue of Boardwatch.

22. Earlier in the summer, Rickard had announced a “coming out party” for the

BBS industry at COMDEX in Las Vegas, but a disagreement with the trade-
show organizers led to the BBS pavilion falling through. The experience
of attending FidoCon appeared to restore Rickard’s resolve to promote the
modem world as an industry. See Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” June 1991.

23. Rickard.

24. Jack Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” Boardwatch, October 1991.

25. Rickard.

26. Rickard.

27. Jack Rickard, “FidoCon91, Commercialization, and The ONE BBSCON,”

FidoNews, September 9, 1991.

28. “Letters,” Boardwatch, October 1991.

29. “Letters.”

30. “Letters.”

31. Tom Jennings, “Editorial,” FidoNews, May 11, 1992.

32. For a rich account of the contributions of Black people to the technology
and culture of BBSs and the early internet, see Charlton D. McIlwain, Black

Software: The Internet and Racial Justice, from the AfroNet to Black Lives Matter

(New York: Oxford University Press, 2019).

33. Accurate data from the big commercial services are scarce. My estimates here
are based on data reported in the business press. See, for example, William

Grimes, “Computer as a Cultural Tool: Chatter Mounts on Every Topic,” New

York Times, December 1, 1992, sec. The Arts; Daniel Southerland, “America

Online’s Rapid Rise: It’s the Hottest Player in Dial-Up Computer Services,
but Stiff Competition Looms,” Washington Post, November 8, 1993; Sandra

Sugawara, “Coaxing GEnie Out of Its Bottle: GE Has at Least 3 Wishes for

On-Line Service: Profits, Growth and a Beefed-Up Product,” Washington Post,

June 15, 1994; Sugawara, “Washington Business: On-Line and on the Move

Vienna’s Computer Service Attracts the Attention of Consumers, Competi-
tors,” Washington Post, August 8, 1994; Jared Sandberg, “America Online,

Capital Cities/ABC Plan New Service,” Wall Street Journal, July 7, 1994, sec.

Technology and Telecommunications; Steve Lohr, “Steve Case at a Crossroad:

S

America Online Is a Leader, but He’s Watching the Rear-View Mirror,” New

York Times, August 14, 1995, sec. Business Day.

N

258
note s to page s 175–17 7 259

34. FidoNet sysops continued to organize meetings in North America and Eu-
rope (as EuroCon) for several years. These meetings tended to be smaller in
size, self-organized, and less commercial than either FidoCon ’91 or the sub-
sequent ONE BBSCON trade shows. The organizers of FidoCon ’91 created
the nonprofit International BBSing and Electronic Communication Confer-
ence (IBECC) in 1992 to run head-to-head with ONE BBSCON. The first

(and only) meeting of the IBECC was held in Denver across town from ONE

BBSCON. The IBECC ’92 theme was “Socially Responsible Computing” and
featured a compelling program on topics ranging from education to science
fiction. Few people made it to both events, however. Even Tom Jennings
failed to make an appearance despite being in Denver for the BBSCON.

After 1992, the IBECC organizers focused their energies on the Anaconism
science fiction convention. See “IBECC,” BBS Magazine, May 1992; Tom Jen-
nings, “Editorial: (I’m about to) Snooze,” FidoNews, August 17, 1992.

35. In addition to the firsthand experiences of early modem users, as academic
researchers began to study virtual community, they quickly poked holes in
the characterization of computer-mediated communication as free of preju-
dice. See, for example, Amy Bruckman, “Gender Swapping on the Internet,”

in High Noon on the Electronic Frontier: Conceptual Issues in Cyberspace, ed.

Peter Ludlow (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996), 317–26; Byron Burkhalter,

“Reading Race Online,” in Communities in Cyberspace, ed. Marc A. Smith and

Peter Kollock (London: Routledge, 1999), 60–75; Lisa Nakamura, Cybertypes:

Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet (New York: Routledge, 2002);

Megan Boler, “Hypes, Hopes and Actualities: New Digital Cartesianism
and Bodies in Cyberspace,” New Media & Society 9, no. 1 (February 1, 2007):

139–68, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807067586.

36. By 1994, more than two dozen BBSs had joined AfroNet. See McIlwain, Black

Software, 91–106.

37. Bob Metcalfe, “On the Wild Side of Computer Networking,” InfoWorld,

March 29, 1993.

38. Bob Metcalfe, “How Many Sysops Will Show Up for BBSCon—and Just What

Is a Sysop?,” InfoWorld 17, no. 5 (January 30, 1995): 49.

39. See letter from Brad Clements in “Letters to the Editor,” Boardwatch, April

1993.

40. Jack Rickard, “The BBS to Internet Connection,” Boardwatch, February 1992.

41. “Letters to the Editor,” Boardwatch, June 1993.

42. Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” June 1991. Jack Rickard was not the only one de-
scribing the internet as a “large” or “overgrown” BBS. See also Erik Delfino,

“‘Transfer, Please’—The Low-Down on Downloading,” Online 18, no. 3 (May

1994): 112.

43. Bob Metcalfe, “Internet Dwellers Beware: BBS Movement Is Planning an

Invasion,” InfoWorld 16, no. 37 (September 12, 1994): 50.

44. Bob Metcalfe, “Sysops Are Reaping the Benefits in the Wake of a BBS Explo-

S
sion,” InfoWorld 16, no. 36 (September 5, 1994): 52.

N

259

260 note s to page s 17 7 –178

45. The overlapping interests and duplicate efforts of UUCP and BBS networks
was a point of frustration for people with access to both systems. As Richard

P. Wilkes complained to Tom Jennings in 1984, “People in the micro BBS
environ often are totally unaware that there is a working, free, network of
mini and microcomputers exchanging gigabytes of mail around the country

(by phone).” Wilkes, “FidoNet: Response,” May 24, 1984, archived at http://
www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/STANDARDS/fidonet.rpw.txt.

46. Hartman’s gateway started as a one-way link from UUCP to FidoNet and
relied on connections paid for by Hartman’s employer. See Bob Hartman,

“Fido <==> UNIX Mail,” FidoNews, August 19, 1985.

47. UFGATE grew out of a prior collaboration between Tim Požar and John

Gilmore and included contributions from several others. In 1987, Gilmore
wrote an implementation of the Unix-to-Unix Copy Protocol (UUCP) in
the C programming language. Požar added modifications for compatibility
with MS-DOS and created UFGATE, enabling PCs to trade files and mes-
sages with UNIX networks. UFGATE also included code contributed by John

Galvin and Garry Paxinos. Požar thanked Randy Bush, David Dodell, and “a
host of others” for testing the software. In 1988, Lee Damon, Lisa Gronke,
and Dale Weber published the first how-to guide for sending internet email
from a BBS running UFGATE. And in January 1989, Požar officially an-
nounced UFGATE in FidoNews. John Gilmore, Uuslave, version hoptoad-1.11

(1987); Lee Damon, Dale Weber, and Lisa Gronke, “How to Use the UUCP

<===> Fido-Net<tm>,” December 9, 1988, archived at https://www.lns.com/
papers/ufgate/UFGATE.HOW; Tim Požar, “Late Night Software Is Proud to Announce UFGATE,” FidoNews, January 30, 1989; Tom Jennings and Tim

Požar, “Editorial,” FidoNews, June 3, 1991. See also Požar’s personal recol-
lections and an archived copy of the UFGATE software: Požar, “UFGATE—

FidoNet/UUCP Gateway,” Late Night Software, accessed October 1, 2020,
https://www.lns.com/papers/ufgate/.

48. The mere availability of UFGATE did not guarantee interconnection, of
course. The sysops of a FidoNet node in South Africa obtained a copy of

UFGATE but were not able to bring up a working gateway. See Mike Lawrie,

“History of the Internet in South Africa,” Uninet Home Page, 1997, accessed

June 15, 2021, http://web.archive.org/web/20041205093635/http://www2.frd

.ac.za/uninet/history/.

49. In September 1990, Bush traveled to Makhanda, South Africa (known at
the time as “Grahamstown”), to participate in a special FidoCon celebrating
the start of Zone 5. For a firsthand account of the conference, see Niel Uys,

“FidoCon 1990—Zone 5,” FidoNews, October 8, 1990.

50. Of course, there were thriving networks running on Commodore Amiga,

Atari ST, and Apple Macintosh systems, but these were exceptions. In North

America, IBM-compatible PCs were the dominant BBS platform of the early

S

1990s.

51. Bernard Aboba, “TCP/IP on the IBM PC—an Introduction,” Boardwatch,

N

June 1993.

260
note s to page s 178 –18 0 261

52. For details regarding the availability of internet access to BBS sysops in the
early 1990s, see the recurring “Internet News” column in Boardwatch maga-
zine from 1991 to 1995.

53. See, for example, Jeff Torello, “Accessing the Internet,” Major News, Spring 1994.

54. Fenwick McKelvey and Kevin Driscoll, “ARPANET and Its Boundary Devices:

Modems, IMPs, and the Inter-structuralism of Infrastructures,” Internet His-
tories 3, no. 1 (January 2, 2019): 31–50, https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2018

.1548138.

55. “How and Why to Access the Internet,” Boardwatch, October 1992.

56. The World in Brookline, Massachusetts, was one of the few services selling
consumer internet access. See “Internet Access at $3 per Month—Delphi

Makes the Global Connection,” Boardwatch, April 1993; Spike Ilacqua, “The

First ISP,” USENIX, March 15, 1999, https://web.archive.org/web/

20100603211424/http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/1999-2/isp

.html.

57. Tracy Mickley, “Planet Connect Satellite System—FidoNet/USENET Mail

Firehose from the Sky,” Boardwatch, January 1994.

58. Bernard Aboba, “Cable Data: The Shape of Things to Come,” Boardwatch,

January 1994.

59. Tom Jennings, Q&A with Tom Jennings, ROFLcon II, May 1, 2010.

60. Richard Scott Mark, “Guide to Select BBS’s on the Internet (SBI List),” Au-
gust 1995, archived at http://cd.textfiles.com/group42/FAQS/AINTBBS.TXT;

Mark, Internet BBSs: A Guided Tour (Greenwich, CT: Manning, 1996).

61. Mark, Internet BBSs, 6.

62. “The WELL Now Available via Internet,” Boardwatch, May 1992.

63. Claire L. Evans, Broad Band: The Untold Story of the Women Who Made the

Internet (New York: Portfolio/Penguin, 2018).

64. Jack Rickard, “Rumors & Factoids,” Boardwatch, January 1994.

65. Dave Hughes, “The Year of Internet at BBSCON ’94,” Cook Report on Internet

–> NREN, October 1994.

66. Jack Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” Boardwatch, January 1995.

67. Internet BBSs needed to support either SLIP or PPP to provide access to the
graphical web. The Serial Line Internet Protocol (SLIP) and Point-to-Point

Protocol (PPP) were essential to the provision of dial-up internet services.

In 1984, Rick Adams, the future founder of UUNET, implemented SLIP for

UNIX systems. In 1988, the Internet Engineering Task Force published a
specification of SLIP and example implementation as RFC 1055. By 1996,
it was common to see “SLIP/PPP” in the fine print of advertisements for
commercial ISPs. See John L. Romkey, “RFC 1055: Nonstandard for Trans-
mission of IP Datagrams over Serial Lines: SLIP,” Network Working Group,

June 1988, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1055; Drew D. Perkins, “RFC 1134: The Point-to-Point Protocol: A Proposal for Multi-protocol Transmission of

S

Datagrams over Point-to-Point Links,” Network Working Group, November

N

1989, http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1134; Aboba, “TCP/IP on the IBM PC.”

261

262 note s to page s 18 0 –18 4

68. To actually visit a webpage, the user would first dial into their local BBS,
enter their log-in information, invoke the SLIP command on the remote
system, start up Trumpet Winsock on their local machine, wait for the con-
nection to be verified, start Mosaic, enter a URL, and wait fifteen minutes or
more for the page to load.

69. Jack Rickard, “Mosaic and the World Wide Web,” Boardwatch, January 1994.

70. The reinvention of The WELL began in 1994, when Bruce Katz, founder of
the Rockport Shoe Company and longtime modem user, took ownership of
the system. Under Katz’s direction, The WELL not only became a web BBS
but also provided dial-up internet access to the Bay Area. See Jack Rickard,

“The New BBS on the Web—Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link,” Boardwatch,

October 1995.

71. Bernard Aboba, The BMUG Guide to Bulletin Boards and Beyond (Berkeley,

CA: BMUG, 1992).

72. The Extremist, “Dead Alive,” March 12, 2000, archived at http://www.textfiles

.com/history/dalive.

73. See Ankerson, Dot-Com Design.

74. See John Carey and Martin C. J. Elton, “The Other Path to the Web: The

Forgotten Role of Videotex and Other Early Online Services,” New Media &

Society 11, nos. 1–2 (2009): 241–60; Hallvard Moe and Hilde Van den Bulck,
eds., Teletext in Europe: From the Analog to the Digital Era (Göteborg: Nordi-
com, 2016); Julien Mailland and Kevin Driscoll, Minitel: Welcome to the Inter-
net (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017).

75. Ankerson, Dot-Com Design, 41.

76. Mark, Internet BBSs, xv.

77. See Michael Hauben and Ronda Hauben, Netizens: On the History and Impact
of Usenet and the Internet (Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society, 1997),
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/; Bradley Fidler, “Eternal October and the End of Cyberspace,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 39,
no. 1 (January 2017): 6–7, https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2017.9.

78. Historically, USENET users associated the month of September with the
disruptive arrival of college freshmen. With the popularization of internet
access, “Eternal September” or “the September that never ended” implied an
end to this seasonal cycle. Instead of arriving all at once, new users would
now arrive continuously. Over time, “Eternal September” has been mistakenly
described as the arrival of America Online users in the fall of 1993. But, in
fact, America Online did not open a USENET portal until the spring of 1994.

Furthermore, one possible origin of the phrase “Eternal September” is a Jan-
uary 1994 post on alt.folklore.computers by the artist Dave Fischer. America

Online is not mentioned in Fischer’s post. Instead, Fischer was comment-
ing on “the Imminent Death of the Net” as a recurring topic on USENET,
harking back to the arrival of FidoNet users in 1985. Unfortunately, this error

S
is enshrined in the Jargon File and has been reproduced in multiple places
on Wikipedia. See Wendy Grossman, “The Making of an Underclass: AOL,”

N
chapter 3 in Net.Wars (New York: New York University Press, 1999), https://

262
note s to page s 18 4–185 263
web.archive.org/web/20110505003755/http://www.nyupress.org/netwars/
pages/chapter03/ch03_.html; Dave Fischer, “Longest USENET Thread Ever,”

alt.folklore.computers, January 25, 1994, https://groups.google.com/g/alt

.folklore.computers/c/wF4CpYbWuuA/m/jS6ZOyJd10sJ; Eric S. Raymond,

“September That Never Ended,” Jargon File, version 4.4.7, December 29,

2003, http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/September-that-never-ended.html.

79. Although gateways existed between FidoNet and USENET, anecdotal evi-
dence suggests that FidoNet users were a relatively small proportion of the
overall USENET population.

80. Metcalfe, “Internet Dwellers Beware.”

81. Another possible explanation for the negative perception of BBSs is that
many college students of the early 1990s had cut their teeth on “kiddie
boards” of the late 1980s. For these former users, the move from BBSs to the
internet coincided with the transition from high school to university, from
adolescence to adulthood. It is difficult to assess the prevalence of this life
path, but it seems like a plausible explanation for at least some of the anti-

BBS sentiment among college-aged internet users.

82. See Janet Abbate, Inventing the Internet (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999);

Tara McPherson, “U.S. Operating Systems at Mid-century: The Intertwining
of Race and UNIX,” in Race after the Internet, ed. Lisa Nakamura, and Peter

Chow-White (New York: Routledge, 2012), 21–37; Camille Paloque-Berges,

“Mapping a French Internet Experience: A Decade of Unix Networks Coop-
eration (1983–1993),” in Routledge Companion to Global Internet Histories, ed.

Gerard Goggin and Mark McLelland (New York: Routledge, 2017), 153–70.

83. A thorough examination is beyond the scope of this book, but debates over

UNIX and microcomputing routinely appeared in the pages of Byte magazine
during the 1980s.

84. For example, the founding of the GNU Project in 1983 marked the begin-
ning of the free and open-source software movement, but GNU software was
not available to microcomputer users until the creation of the Linux kernel
almost a decade later.

85. Examples of negative BBS coverage from the Vanderbilt TV News Archive
include CBS, “Computer Network / Neo-Nazi Network,” CBS Evening News,

May 10, 1985, https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/303493; ABC, “New Jersey / Teenage Computer Hackers,” ABC Evening News, July 17, 1985,
https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/97232; CBS, “Computer Virus /

Morris,” CBS Evening News, November 8, 1988, https://tvnews.vanderbilt

.edu/broadcasts/319238; NBC, “Espionage / New Orleans, Louisiana /

Computer Spy Ring,” NBC Evening News, March 4, 1989, https://tvnews

.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/567753; NBC, “Focus (Cyberspace Pornography),”

NBC Evening News, July 30, 1994, https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/

600970.

86. Tom Jennings, “Are All Sysops Criminals?,” FidoNews, November 26, 1990;

S

Electronic Frontier Foundation, “A History of Protecting Freedom Where Law

N
and Technology Collide,” October 7, 2011, https://www.eff.org/about/history.

263

264 note s to page s 185–197

87. Alice E. Marwick, “To Catch a Predator? The MySpace Moral Panic,” First

Monday 13, no. 6 (May 19, 2008), https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v13i6.2152.

88. Philip Elmer-Dewitt, “Orgies On-Line,” Time 141, no. 22 (May 31, 1993): 61.

89. John C. Dvorak, “Stagnant Ponds and Bill Clinton,” Boardwatch, January

1994.

90. Marty Rimm, “Marketing Pornography on the Information Superhighway:

A Survey of 917,410 Images, Descriptions, Short Stories, and Animations

Downloaded 8.5 Million Times by Consumers in over 2000 Cities in Forty

Countries, Provinces, and Territories,” Georgetown Law Journal 83 (1994–95):

1849–1934; Philip Elmer-Dewitt and Hannah Bloch, “On a Screen near You:

Cyberporn,” Time 146, no. 1 (July 3, 1995): 38–45.

91. Elmer-Dewitt and Bloch, “On a Screen near You,” 40.

92. The Time story on cyberporn described pornography as “a big moneymaker”

and implied that the profitability of all large BBSs depended on the allure of

“X-rated material.” Elmer-Dewitt and Bloch, “On a Screen near You,” 40.

93. Thomas Streeter, “Internet,” in Digital Keywords, ed. Benjamin Peters (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016), 184–96.

94. Scott J. Brinker, “President’s Corner,” Major News, Spring 1994.

95. Jack Rickard of Boardwatch claims to have coined the term “internet service provider.”

96. Wildcat! , Version 5.0 (Mustang Software, Inc., 1996).

97. Jack Rickard, “Editor’s Notes,” Boardwatch, December 1995, 66.

98. Mark, Internet BBSs, 6.

99. Mark.

100.Netscape was the first web browser designed to work well over a dial-up
connection. Previous browsers, including Mosaic, were made for people with
high-speed institutional connections to the internet. For a contemporary ac-
count of Mosaic by modem, see Jack Rickard, “Editor’s Notes: Webulism and
the Cable Fable,” Boardwatch, December 1994. See also Ankerson, Dot-Com

Design, 39–41.

101. In the early 1990s, articles in Boardwatch and InfoWorld often lamented the stymied diffusion of digital ISDN. See, for example, “What Happened to

ISDN?,” Boardwatch, December 1992.

102. Mark, Internet BBSs, xiii.

chapter 7. imagining a better future for the internet

1. Thomas Streeter, The Net Effect: Romanticism, Capitalism, and the Internet

(New York: New York University Press, 2011).

2. Anne Helmond, “The Platformization of the Web: Making Web Data

Platform Ready,” Social Media + Society 1 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1177/

2056305115603080.

3. See Jack Rickard, “Internet News,” Boardwatch, May 1991.

S

4. See Google, Inc., “Annual Report, Form 10-K” (Washington, DC: US Securi-
ties and Exchange Commission, December 31, 2006), https://www.sec.gov/

N

264
note s to page s 197 –199 265

Archives/edgar/data/0001652044/000165204421000010/goog-20201231

.htm; Facebook, Inc., “Annual Report, Form 10-K” (Washington, DC: US

Securities and Exchange Commission, December 31, 2012), https://www.sec

.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000132680113000003/fb-12312012x10k

.htm; Alphabet, Inc., “Annual Report, Form 10-K” (Washington, DC: US

Securities and Exchange Commission, December 31, 2020), https://www

.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001652044/000165204421000010/goog

-20201231.htm.

5. Tarleton Gillespie, Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation,
and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media (Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press, 2018).

6. Tarleton Gillespie, “The Politics of ‘Platforms,’” New Media & Society 12, no. 3

(May 1, 2010): 347–64, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809342738.

7. For a closer examination of the history of volunteer moderation on com-
mercial services, see Hector Postigo, “Emerging Sources of Labor on the

Internet: The Case of America Online Volunteers,” International Review
of Social History 48, no. S11 (December 2003): 205–23, https://doi.org/10

.1017/S0020859003001329; Postigo, “America Online Volunteers: Lessons from an Early Co-production Community,” International Journal of Cultural Studies 12, no. 5 (September 1, 2009): 451–69, https://doi.org/10.1177/

1367877909337858.

8. Joy Lisi Rankin, A People’s History of Computing in the United States (Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2018), 242.

9. Joe Draganosky (Kaboom), “BBSing.com, Remembering the Original Cyber-
space,” bbsing.com, accessed June 18, 2021, http://web.archive.org/web/

20041205085956/http://www.bbsing.com/.

S

N

265

This page intentionally left blank
bibliogr aphy

Abbate, Janet. “From ARPANET to Internet: A History of ARPA-Sponsored Com-
puter Networks, 1966–1988.” PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1994.

———. Inventing the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.

———. “Privatizing the Internet: Competing Visions and Chaotic Events,

1987–1995.” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 32, no. 1 (2010): 10–22.

https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2010.24.

ABC. “New Jersey / Teenage Computer Hackers.” ABC Evening News, July 17,

1985. https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/97232.

———. “Special Assignment (The Radical Right) (Part II).” ABC Evening News,

May 30, 1985. https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/96423.

Aboba, Bernard. The BMUG Guide to Bulletin Boards and Beyond. Berkeley, CA:

BMUG, 1992.

———. “Cable Data: The Shape of Things to Come.” Boardwatch, January 1994.

———. “TCP/IP on the IBM PC—an Introduction.” Boardwatch, June 1993.

Adenauer, Peter. “fdhist.txt.” FidoNet on the Internet, December 1993. http://
www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/history/fdhis.txt.

Akst, Daniel. “Cyberculture: Sometimes Dry, Detail of Magic of 1st Internet ‘Wiz-
ards.’” Los Angeles Times, August 26, 1996.

Albert, Gleb J. “From Currency in the Warez Economy to Self-Sufficient Art

Form: Text Mode Graphics and the ‘Scene.’” WiderScreen 20, nos. 1–2

(2017). http://widerscreen.fi/numerot/2017-1-2/from-currency-in-the-warez

-economy-to-self-sufficient-art-form-text-mode-graphics-and-the-scene/.

Allen, David P. (W1UKZ). “Computer Net Info (Strays).” QST, November 1980.

Alphabet, Inc. “Annual Report, Form 10-K.” Washington, DC: US Securities and

S

Exchange Commission, December 31, 2020. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/

N
edgar/data/0001652044/000165204421000010/goog-20201231.htm.

267

267

268 biblio gr aphy

American Health Consultants, Inc. “AIDS Computer Bulletin Boards Gaining

Popularity.” AIDS ALERT, November 1993. http://web.archive.org/web/

19961018135646/http://hwmin.gbgm-umc.org/CAM/unique.html.

American Telephone and Telegraph Company. “Data Set 103A.” March 1963.

———. “Data Set 103A Interface Specification.” Bell System Data Communications

Technical Reference, February 1967.

———. “Data Set 103A Type Identification and Operation.” Bell System Practices:

Plant Series, no. 5 (January 1967).

———. “Data Set 103F Interface Specification.” Bell System Data Communications

Technical Reference, May 1964.

“America Online Expands Capacity and Internet Support.” Information Today,

May 1994.

“America’s Information Highway: A Hitch-Hiker’s Guide.” Economist, Decem-
ber 25, 1993.

An, Bo. “Infrastructure, Amateurism, and Radical Networking: FidoNet in China

(1995–1998).” Paper presented at Computer Networks Histories: Local,

National and Transnational Perspectives, Università della Svizzera italiana,

Lugano, Switzerland, 2017. https://www.infoclio.ch/en/computer-networks

-histories-local-national-and-transnational-perspectives.

Anastas, Kate. “Underground Newspapers: The Social Media Networks of the

1960s and 1970s.” Mapping American Social Movements through the 20th

Century, University of Washington. Accessed February 6, 2020. http://depts

.washington.edu/moves/altnews_geography.shtml.

Ankerson, Megan Sapnar. Dot-Com Design: The Rise of a Usable, Social, Commer-
cial Web. New York: New York University Press, 2018.

———. “How Coolness Defined the World Wide Web of the 1990s.” Atlantic,

July 15, 2014. http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/how

-coolness-defined-the-world-wide-web-of-the-1990s/374443/.

———. “Writing Web Histories with an Eye on the Analog Past.” New Media &

Society 14, no. 3 (2011): 384–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811414834.

“Announcing Winners in the Boardwatch 100 Readers’ Choice BBS Con-
test 1993.” Boardwatch, 1993. http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/mp3/

93BBSCON/bw100.txt.

Antonelli, Chaz. “The BBS Documentary and Multicom-4.” When Pigs Fly, No-
vember 7, 2015. https://mc4bbs.livejournal.com/246094.html.

Apuleius. “The Alt.Sex.Stories.* Hierarchy and Related Groups FAQ, Version

2.03.” Alt Sex Stories Text Repository, June 19, 2000. https://www.asstr.org/
files/FAQs_and_Information/ass_faq.txt.

Aquila Internet Services. October 23, 1996. http://web.archive.org/web/

19961023022329/http://www.aquila.com/.

Asmolov, Gregory, and Polina Kolozaridi. “The Imaginaries of RuNet.” Russian

Politics 2, no. 1 (March 9, 2017): 54–79. https://doi.org/10.1163/2451-8921

S

-00201004.

Atkin, Denny. “We’re DOOMed.” Compute! , April 1994.

N

268
biblio gr aphy 269

“Atlantic Telegraph, The: General Manifesto of the Directors to the People of

Both Continents. Organization of the Company Official History of the Great

Enterprise, Interesting and Important Report of Preliminary Electrical

Experiments.” New York Times, August 27, 1857, sec. Archives. https://www

.nytimes.com/1857/08/27/archives/the-atlantic-telegraph-general-manifesto

-of-the-directors-to-the.html.

“Backdraft Bulletin Board System.” ModemNews Magazine, 1993.

Baker, Ben. “Coordinators List.” FidoNews, June 10, 1985.

———. “go! go! go!—June 12 Is it.” FidoNews, June 10, 1985.

———. “An Informal History of FidoNet.” FidoNews, November 23, 1987.

———. “New Look for FidoNet.” FidoNews, April 22, 1985.

———. “New NODELIST Distribution Method.” FidoNews, March 3, 1986.

———. “View from the Top: Echomail.” FidoNews, June 30, 1986.

Baker, Ben, and Ken Kaplan. “The Duties of a Network or Region Coordinator.”

FidoNews, June 3, 1985.

Baker, Ben, Ken Kaplan, and Henk Wevers, eds. “The International FidoNet

Nodelist, Day Number 276.” International FidoNet Association, October 3,

1986. http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/n1986/nodelist.276.

Balbi, Gabriele, and Christiane Berth. “Towards a Telephonic History of Technol-
ogy.” History and Technology 35, no. 2 (April 3, 2019): 105–14. https://doi.org/

10.1080/07341512.2019.1652959.

Balka, Ellen. “Womantalk Goes On-Line: The Use of Computer Networks in the

Context of Feminist Social Change.” PhD diss., Simon Fraser University,

1991. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/56369048.pdf.

Barry, Rey. Guide to Free Software. Charlottesville, VA: Freeware Hall of Fame,

1995.

Barton, Jared, and Tyler Watts. “‘I Can’t Drive 55’: The Economics of the CB Radio

Phenomenon.” Independent Review 15, no. 3 (2011): 383–97.

Bates, Benjamin J., and Kenneth P. Lansing. “The New World of Democratic Tele-
communications: FidoNet as an Example of the New Horizontal Information

Networks.” Paper presented at 42nd annual conference of the International

Communication Association, Miami, FL, 1992.

Batterson, David W. “Information Age Is Coming, but ‘Freeware,’ ‘Shareware’

Won’t Be There Making Money.” Los Angeles Times, November 22, 1987.

http://articles.latimes.com/1987-11-22/business/fi-23979_1_shareware

-freeware-bullet-train.

Bay, Morten. “What Is ‘Internet’? The Case for the Proper Noun and Why It Is

Important.” Internet Histories 1, no. 3 (May 4, 2017): 203–18. https://doi.org/

10.1080/24701475.2017.1339860.

Baym, Nancy K. “Communication, Interpretation, and Relationship: A Study of
a Computer-Mediated Fan Community.” PhD diss., University of Illinois,

1994. http://hdl.handle.net/2142/19011.

———. “From Practice to Culture on Usenet.” Sociological Review 42, no. S1

S

(May 1, 1994): 29–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1994.tb03408.x.

N

269

270 biblio gr aphy

———. “Interpreting Soap Operas and Creating Community: Inside a Computer-

Mediated Fan Culture.” Journal of Folklore Research 30, nos. 2–3 (1993):

143–76.

Bell, Wayne. WWIV. Version v3.21d. 1986.

Bellin, Adam, and Pier Del Frate. “True Color for Windows.” Byte, December

1990.

Berlet, Chip, and Carol Mason. “Swastikas in Cyberspace: How Hate Went

Online.” In Digital Media Strategies of the Far Right in Europe and the United

States, edited by Patricia Anne Simpson and Helga Druxes, 21–36. Lanham,

MD: Lexington Books, 2015.

Berners-Lee, Tim, and Mark Fischetti. Weaving the Web: The Past, Present and

Future of the World Wide Web by Its Inventor. London: Orion Business, 1999.

Berry, Bob. “Q&A.DOC.” CompuShow. Version Standard Version 8.50a. Sedona,

AZ: Canyon State Systems and Software, 1992.

Beschizza, Rob. “Can We Talk?” Boing Boing, June 27, 2013. http://web.archive

.org/web/0/https://boingboing.net/2013/06/27/can-we-talk.html.

bglo-teach-perot. “New Mailing List for an Impromptu Task Force.” June 8, 1992,

18:20:52 PDT. http://www.qrd.org/qrd/electronic/1992/perot.glb.email-06

.08.92.

“Birth of BYTEnet, The.” Byte, October 1984.

Blake, Art M. “Audible Citizenship and Audiomobility: Race, Technology, and CB

Radio.” American Quarterly 63, no. 3 (September 1, 2011): 531–53.

Blue, Bill, and Mark Robbins. ASCII Express “The Professional.” Version 3.4x.

Santee, CA: Southwestern Data Systems, 1982.

“Boardwatch Magazine Announces the Boardwatch 100 Reader’s Choice Bulletin

Board Contest.” Boardwatch, May 1992.

Boler, Megan. “Hypes, Hopes and Actualities: New Digital Cartesianism and Bod-
ies in Cyberspace.” New Media & Society 9, no. 1 (February 1, 2007): 139–68.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807067586.

Bonine, Steve. “New-Sysop Orientation Information.” International FidoNet

Association, February 22, 1988. http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/

JENNINGS/STANDARDS/newsysop.txt.

Borland, Hanne, and Jytte Mansfeld. Living in a Modem World. Hørsholm, Den-
mark: Focus, 1991.

Boulware, Jack, and Silke Tudor. Gimme Something Better: The Profound, Progres-
sive, and Occasionally Pointless History of Bay Area Punk from Dead Kennedys to

Green Day. New York: Penguin Books, 2009.

———. “Shred of Dignity.” Gimme Something Better, 2009. http://
gimmesomethingbetter.com/excerpts/shred-of-dignity.

Bourne, Charles P., and Trudi Bellardo Hahn. A History of Online Information

Services, 1963–1976. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004.

Braman, Sandra. “The Framing Years: Policy Fundamentals in the Internet

S

Design Process, 1969–1979.” Information Society 27, no. 5 (October 1, 2011):

295–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2011.607027.

N

270
biblio gr aphy 27 1

———. “Internet RFCs as Social Policy: Network Design from a Regulatory

Perspective.” Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and

Technology 46, no. 1 (January 1, 2009): 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet

.2009.1450460254.

———. “The Interpenetration of Technical and Legal Decision-Making for the

Internet.” Information, Communication & Society 13, no. 3 (April 1, 2010):

309–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180903473814.

Brammer, Jens. “Time-Sharing in Denmark in 1968.” In History of Nordic

Computing 4, edited by Christian Gram, Per Rasmussen, and Søren Duus

Østergaard, vol. 447, 167–70. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2015. http://link

.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-17145-6_18.

Brand, Stewart. “Finding a Balance in the Slippery Economics of an Information

Age.” Los Angeles Times, November 8, 1987, sec. Part IV.

———. “The Revolution Will Be Netcast.” Wired, September 1996.

Brewster, Kathryn, and Bonnie Ruberg. “SURVIVORS: Archiving the History of

Bulletin Board Systems and the AIDS Crisis.” First Monday 25, no. 10 (Octo-
ber 2020). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i10.10290.

Briggs, Robert. “Creating FIDO Source.” FidoNews, April 14, 1985.

———. “Fido Re-write.” FidoNews, April 29, 1985.

Brinker, Scott J. “President’s Corner.” Major News, Spring 1994.

Bronson, Ben. “Installing a Computer Bulletin Board Program.” BBS Software

Directory, April 1981. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/

CBBS/cpmnet81.apr.txt.

Brown, Judy. “Microsoft Gives Business View from Windows 95 Preview Copies
of the Long-Awaited New Operating System Are Available.” Milwaukee Jour-
nal, March 27, 1995, sec. Business.

Bruckman, Amy. “Gender Swapping on the Internet.” In High Noon on the

Electronic Frontier: Conceptual Issues in Cyberspace, edited by Peter Ludlow,

317–26. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.

Bruckman, Amy, and Carlos Jensen. “The Mystery of the Death of MediaMOO:

Seven Years of Evolution of an Online Community.” In Building Virtual

Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace, edited by K. Ann Ren-
ninger and Wesley Shumar, 21–33. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

2002.

Brunton, Finn. Spam: A Shadow History of the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press, 2013.

Burkhalter, Byron. “Reading Race Online.” In Communities in Cyberspace, edited
by Marc A. Smith and Peter Kollock, 60–75. London: Routledge, 1999.

Bush, Randy. “A Basic FidoNet(tm) Technical Standard, Draft FSC001-9.” FidoNet

Technical Standards Committee, December 27, 1987. http://ftsc.org/docs/fsc

-0001.000.

———. “FidoNet Standards Committee.” FidoNews, July 28, 1986.

———. “FidoNet: Technology, Tools, and History.” Communications of the ACM

S

36, no. 8 (August 1993): 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/163381.163383.

N

271

272 biblio gr aphy

———. “FidoNet: Use, Technology, and Tools.” In Proceedings of INET ’92: Inter-
national Networking Conference, Kobe, Japan, June 15–18, 1992, ed. Harushisa

Ishida. Reston, VA: Internet Society, 1992.

———. “How FidoNet™ Tunnels the Internet.” September 21, 1992. Archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/STANDARDS/tunnel

.msg.txt.

Butler, Mike. “A Day in the Life of an Overworked UK Sysop—or—How to Sur-
vive a Business, BBS and Family without Cracking Up.” FidoNews, Febru-
ary 3, 1992.

Butow, Eric E. “A Content Analysis of Rule Enforcement in the Virtual Commu-
nities of FidoNet Echomail Conferences.” Master’s thesis, California State

University, Fresno, 1996.

Byczek, Wally. “So You Want to Be a Sysop?” 1989. Archived at http://textfiles

.com/bbs/be-sysop.txt.

CACHE Register 6, no. 1 (January 1981).

Callahan, Michael E., aka Dr. File Finder. “The History of Shareware.” Paul’s Picks

Shareware Library, 1999. https://web.archive.org/web/20090403094743/
http://paulspicks.com:80/history.asp.

Callahan, Mike, and Nick Anis. Dr. File Finder’s Guide to Shareware. Berkeley, CA: Osborne McGraw-Hill, 1990.

Campbell-Kelly, Martin. From Airline Reservations to Sonic the Hedgehog: A History
of the Software Industry. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.

———. “Number Crunching without Programming: The Evolution of Spread-
sheet Usability.” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 29, no. 3 (July

2007): 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2007.4338438.

Campbell-Kelly, Martin, and William Aspray. Computer: A History of the Informa-
tion Machine. New York: Basic Books, 1996.

Campbell-Kelly, Martin, William Aspray, Nathan Ensmenger, and Jeffrey R. Yost.

Computer: A History of the Information Machine. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge,

2018. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429494017.

Campbell-Kelly, Martin, and Daniel D. Garcia-Swartz. “Economic Perspectives
on the History of the Computer Time-Sharing Industry, 1965–1985.” IEEE

Annals of the History of Computing 30, no. 1 (January 2008): 16–36. https://doi

.org/10.1109/MAHC.2008.3.

Caplan, Jay. “Effective Shareware Distribution via the BBS Channel, Version 1.2.”

August 10, 1992. Archived at http://textfiles.com/bbs/bbstip12.txt.

Carey, James W. “A Cultural Approach to Communication.” In Communication as

Culture: Essays on Media and Society, 11–28. Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1989.

Carey, John, and Martin C. J. Elton. “The Other Path to the Web: The Forgotten

Role of Videotex and Other Early Online Services.” New Media & Society 11,
nos. 1–2 (2009): 241–60.

Carpentier, Michel, Sylviane Farnoux-Toporkoff, Christian Garric, and C. P Skrim-

S
shire. Telecommunications in Transition. Chichester, UK: Wiley, 1992.

Caruso, Denise. “Networking Bulletin Boards.” InfoWorld, August 27, 1984.

N

272
biblio gr aphy 27 3

“Cat Calls.” Byte, December 1979.

Caulkins, Dave. “PCNET, 1979.” People’s Computers, October 1977.

———. “Personal Computer Network.” People’s Computers, August 1977.

CBS. “Computer Network / Neo-Nazi Network.” CBS Evening News, May 10, 1985.

https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/303493.

———. “Computer Virus / Morris.” CBS Evening News, November 8, 1988.

https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/319238.

CDC National AIDS Clearinghouse. “A Selected Guide to AIDS-Related Electronic

Bulletin Boards.” US Department of Health and Human Services, April 2,

1993. http://cd.textfiles.com/internetinfo/answers/sci/aids-faq/part4.

Ceruzzi, Paul E. A History of Modern Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,

1998.

Chris. “The Fall of the Modem World.” August 1, 1991. Archived at http://textfiles

.com/bbs/fotmw.txt.

Christensen, Ward. “Comments and Prologues to CBBS up to Version 3.2.” BBS

Software Directory, 1979. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/

CBBS/history.txt.

———. “C(omputerized)BBS—Thanks for Remembering 25th.” Slashdot, Febru-
ary 17, 2003. https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=54081&cid=5317919.

———. “Computer Network Poll.” Dr. Dobb’s Journal of Computer Calisthenics &

Orthodontia, July 1978.

Christensen, Ward, and Randy Suess. “The Birth of the BBS.” Chinet, 1989.

https://www.chinet.com/html/cbbs.html.

———. “CBBS—COOKBOOK Rev. 3.5 11/28/81.” BBS Software Directory, No-
vember 28, 1981. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/
cookbook.txt.

———. “CBBS Phone #s.” BBS Software Directory, December 26, 1981. http://
software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/parttime.txt.

———. “Hobbyist Computerized Bulletin Board.” Byte, November 1978.

———. “Midwest Remote CP/M Systems.” BBS Software Directory, July 7, 1981.

http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/1981cbbslist.txt.

———. “Other Message Sys. Phone #s.” BBS Software Directory, December 26,

1981. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/parttime.txt.

———. “Part-Time Msg Sys. Phone #s.” BBS Software Directory, September 27,

1981. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/CBBS/parttime.txt.

Christian, Kaare. “Using the Internet: Getting the Clarkson Packet Drivers.” PC

Magazine, May 28, 1991.

Christianson, J. Scott, and Dan Wendling. “Econet: The Ecology Network.” Board-
watch, December 1992.

Chun, Wendy Hui Kyong. Control and Freedom: Power and Paranoia in the Age of

Fiber Optics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006.

Clapp, Doug. “Clapp-Trapp.” InfoWorld, November 21, 1983.

Clinton, William J. “Address before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State

S
of the Union.” January 25, 1994. Accessed at American Presidency Project,

N

273

274 biblio gr aphy
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session

-the-congress-the-state-the-union-12.

“Clubs and Newsletters.” Byte, February 1976.

Codella, Chris. “Hiram Percy Maxim.” QST, February 2014.

Colker, David. “Looking into the Origins of the Online Universe.” Los Angeles

Times, August 20, 1996.

Community Educational Services Foundation. “Welcome to GLIB.” Gay and

Lesbian Information Bureau. Accessed May 9, 2014, http://web.archive.org/
web/19970228045752/http://www.glib.org/.

Computerized AIDS Ministries. Home page. March 7, 1996. http://web.archive

.org/web/19961018015652/http://hwbbs.gbgm-umc.org/.

Conner-Sax, Kiersten, and Ed Krol. The Whole Internet: The Next Generation: A

Completely New Edition of the First and Best User’s Guide to the Internet. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly, 1999.

Correll, Shelley. “The Ethnography of an Electronic Bar: The Lesbian Cafe.” Jour-
nal of Contemporary Ethnography 24, no. 3 (October 1, 1995): 270–98. https://
doi.org/10.1177/089124195024003002.

Cory, Richard B. “The UMC, CAM, and Me.” Computerized AIDS Ministries, July

26, 1995. http://web.archive.org/web/19970129083713/http://gbgm-umc

.org/CAM/cam-me.html.

Cringely, Robert X. Accidental Empires: How the Boys of Silicon Valley Make Their

Millions, Battle Foreign Competition, and Still Can’t Get a Date. Reading, MA:

Addison-Wesley, 1991.

Crocker, David. “RFC 1775 To Be ‘On’ the Internet.” Network Working Group,

March 1995. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1775.

———. “Who Is on the Internet?” Big-Internet@munnari.oz.au, January 24, 1995.

Cunha, Tom. TcSoft’s Intelligent Match Maker. Version 4.9. San Antonio, TX:

TcSoft, Inc., 1995.

Dame-Griff, Avery. “TGNet Map.” Mapping TGNet, Queer Digital History Project,

2018. http://queerdigital.com/tgnmap/index.html.

Damon, Lee, Dale Weber, and Lisa Gronke. “How to Use the UUCP <===>

Fido-Net<tm>.” December 9, 1988. Archived at https://www.lns.com/
papers/ufgate/UFGATE.HOW.

Daniel, Timothy (N8RK). “Super-Ratt RTTY/CW Program with RBBS.” 73, Sep-
tember 1983.

Daniels, Don. “IFNA Status Report for October 1987.” FidoNews, October 5, 1987.

———. “IFNA Welcomes Poland to FidoNet.” FidoNews, September 7, 1987.

Daniels, Harvey A. “Breaker, Break, Broke: Citizens Band in the Classroom.”

English Journal 65, no. 9 (December 1, 1976): 52–57. https://doi.org/10.2307/

815750.

Daniels, Jessie. Cyber Racism: White Supremacy Online and the New Attack on Civil

S

Rights. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2009.

N

274
biblio gr aphy 275

Dashner, John. “Ham Radio EchoMail Conference.” FidoNews, October 13, 1986.

Davila, Juan. “Como Obtener un Número de Nodo en FidoNet 367 (RED de

Puerto Rico).” FidoNews, February 1, 1988.

Day, Ronald E. Indexing It All: The Subject in the Age of Documentation, Informa-
tion, and Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2014.

Decker, Jack. “USENET vs. FidoNet—A Quick Comparison.” FidoNews, Febru-
ary 24, 1992.

Delfino, Erik. “‘Transfer, Please’—The Low-Down on Downloading.” Online 18,
no. 3 (May 1994): 112.

De Moville, Wig. “The User’s Guide to WWIV.” WWIV. Version 4.21a. 1991.

Dickinson, Ernest. “Business Tunes In on Citizens Band: Giants Enter Boom-
ing Market for 2-Way Sets.” New York Times, March 7, 1976, sec. Business &

Finance.

Dietter, Susie, dir. “Radioactive Man.” The Simpsons. Fox. September 24, 1995.

https://simpsons.fandom.com/wiki/Radioactive_Man.

“Doctor’s Wife, The (TV Story).” Tardis Data Core: The Doctor Who Wiki. Ac-
cessed March 21, 2014. http://tardis.wikia.com/wiki/The_Doctor%27s_Wife

_(TV_story).

doctor_x. “Curt Vendel on the BBS Documentary.” AtariAge, May 18, 2010, http://
atariage.com/forums/topic/163089-curt-vendel-on-the-bbs-documentary/?p

=2016015.

Dodell, David, and Ben Baker. “FidoNet-Alternet Technical Agreement.”

FidoNews, September 5, 1988.

Douglas, Susan J. Inventing American Broadcasting, 1899–1922. Baltimore: Johns

Hopkins University Press, 1987.

———. Listening In: Radio and the American Imagination: From Amos ’n’ Andy
and Edward R. Murrow to Wolfman Jack and Howard Stern. New York: Times

Books, 1999.

Dourish, Paul. The Stuff of Bits: An Essay on the Materialities of Information. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017.

Draganosky, Joe (Kaboom). “BBSing.com, Remembering the Original Cyber-
space.” bbsing.com. Accessed June 18, 2021. http://web.archive.org/web/

20041205085956/http://www.bbsing.com/.

Driscoll, Catherine. “Girl Culture, Revenge and Global Capitalism: Cybergirls,

Riot Grrls, Spice Girls.” Australian Feminist Studies 14, no. 29 (1999): 173–93.

doi:10.1080/08164649993425.

Driscoll, Kevin. “Cooperative Mode for Amateur and Academic Game Histories.”

ROMchip 1, no. 1 (July 1, 2019). http://romchip.org/index.php/romchip

-journal/article/view/71.

———. “Demography and Decentralization: Measuring the Bulletin Board

Systems of North America.” WiderScreen 23, nos. 2–3 (June 18, 2020).

http://widerscreen.fi/numerot/2020-2-3/demography-and-decentralization

-measuring-the-bulletin-board-systems-of-north-america/.

S

N

275

276 biblio gr aphy

———. “From Punched Cards to ‘Big Data’: A Social History of Database Popu-
lism.” Communication +1 1, no. 1 (August 29, 2012). http://scholarworks

.umass.edu/cpo/vol1/iss1/4.

———. “Hobbyist Inter-Networking and the Popular Internet Imaginary: Forgot-
ten Histories of Networked Personal Computing, 1978–1998.” PhD diss.,

University of Southern California, 2014.

———. “Professional Work for Nothing: Software Commercialization and ‘An

Open Letter to Hobbyists.’” Information & Culture 50, no. 2 (May 1, 2015):

257–83. https://doi.org/10.7560/IC50207.

———. “Thou Shalt Love Thy BBS: Distributed Experimentation in Community

Moderation.” In Computer Network Histories: Hidden Streams from the Internet

Past, edited by Paolo Bory, Gianluigi Negro, and Gabriele Balbi, 15–34. His-
toire et Informatique / Geschichte und Informatik 21. Zürich, Switzerland:

Chronos Verlag, 2019. 10.33057/chronos.1539.

Driscoll, Kevin, and Joshua Diaz. “Endless Loop: A Brief History of Chiptunes.”

Transformative Works and Cultures 2 (March 15, 2009). https://doi.org/10

.3983/twc.2009.096.

Driscoll, Kevin, and Camille Paloque-Berges. “Searching for Missing ‘Net His-
tories.’” Internet Histories 1, nos. 1–2 (2017): 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/

24701475.2017.1307541.

Duncombe, Stephen. Notes from Underground: Zines and the Politics of Alternative

Culture. London: Verso, 1997.

———. “Stagnant Ponds and Bill Clinton.” Boardwatch, January 1994.

Dvorak, John C., Chris Pirillo, and Wendy Taylor. “The History of Shareware.”

In Online! The Book, 226–28. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Profes-
sional, 2004.

Dvorak Telecommunications Awards. “1995 Dvorak Awards Winners.” Accessed

April 25, 2014. http://web.archive.org/web/19990218160124/http://www

.citivu.com/dvorak/.

“Ebony Shack BBS, The.” BBS Magazine, August 1995.

Edwards, Benj. “Digitized Autumn Leaves.” Vintage Computing and Gamin (blog),

January 11, 2013, http://www.vintagecomputing.com/index.php/archives/918.

Edwards, Paul N. The Closed World Computers and the Politics of Discourse in Cold

War America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997.

Ehrenman, Gayle. “Prodigy Interactive Personal Service.” PC Magazine, February

23, 1993.

Electronic Frontier Foundation. “EFF ‘Net Culture & Cyber-Anthropology’ Ar-
chive.” March 13, 2003. http://w2.eff.org/Net_culture/.

———. “A History of Protecting Freedom Where Law and Technology Collide.”

October 7, 2011. https://www.eff.org/about/history.

Elizabeth, Sister Mary. “AEGIS Affidavit in ACLU, et al. v. Reno.” ACLU, February

25, 1996. https://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/aegis-affidavit-aclu-et

S

-al-v-reno.

N

276
biblio gr aphy 27 7

Ellis, David, Rachel Oldridge, and Ana Vasconcelos. “Community and Virtual

Community.” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 38, no. 1

(September 22, 2005): 145–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.1440380104.

Elmer-Dewitt, Philip. “Orgies On-Line.” Time 141, no. 22 (May 31, 1993): 61.

Elmer-Dewitt, Philip, and Hannah Bloch. “On a Screen near You: Cyberporn.”

Time 146, no. 1 (July 3, 1995): 38–45.

Elmer-Dewitt, Philip, and David S. Jackson. “Battle for the Soul of the Internet.”

Time 144, no. 4 (July 25, 1994): 50–56.

Empty Closet, The. July 1992. Digital Collections, University of Rochester. https://
digitalcollections.lib.rochester.edu/ur/empty-closet-1971-current.

Ensmenger, Nathan. The Computer Boys Take over Computers, Programmers, and
the Politics of Technical Expertise. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010.

Eppink, Jason. “A Brief History of the GIF (So Far).” Journal of Visual Cul-
ture 13, no. 3 (December 1, 2014): 298–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/

1470412914553365.

Erokan, Dennis, and Mary Eisenhart. “Andrew Fluegelman: PC-Talk and Be-
yond.” MicroTimes, May 1985.

Evans, Claire L. Broad Band: The Untold Story of the Women Who Made the Inter-
net. New York: Portfolio/Penguin, 2018.

Event Horizons. “Computer Images.” PC Magazine, December 1990.

———. “World’s Most Expensive BBS.” Boardwatch, September 1994.

Exec-PC. “Sorry Prodigy.” Boardwatch, May 1992.

Extremist, The. “Dead Alive.” March 12, 2000. Archived at http://www.textfiles

.com/history/dalive.

Facebook, Inc. “Annual Report, Form 10-K.” Washington, DC: US Securities and

Exchange Commission, December 31, 2012. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/
edgar/data/1326801/000132680113000003/fb-12312012x10k.htm.

Faden, Eric S. “The Cyberfilm: Hollywood and Computer Technology.” Strategies:

Journal of Theory, Culture & Politics 14, no. 1 (May 2001): 77–90. https://doi

.org/10.1080/10402130120042370.

Fano, R. M. “The MAC System: The Computer Utility Approach.” IEEE Spectrum 2,
no. 1 (January 1965): 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.1965.5531878.

Felsenstein, Lee. “Build ‘Pennywhistle’: The Hobbyist’s Modem.” Popular Elec-
tronics, March 1976.

Fernback, Jan. “Beyond the Diluted Community Concept: A Symbolic Inter-
actionist Perspective on Online Social Relations.” New Media & Society 9,
no. 1 (February 1, 2007): 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807072417.

Ferris, Melanie A. “Resisting Mainstream Media: Girls and the Act of Making

Zines.” Canadian Woman Studies 21, no. 1 (April 1, 2001). http://pi.library

.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/cws/article/view/6906.

Fidler, Bradley. “Eternal October and the End of Cyberspace.” IEEE Annals of the

History of Computing 39, no. 1 (January 2017): 6–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/

MAHC.2017.9.

S

N

277

278 biblio gr aphy

———. “The Evolution of Internet Routing: Technical Roots of the Network Soci-
ety.” Internet Histories 3, nos. 3–4 (October 2, 2019): 364–87. https://doi.org/

10.1080/24701475.2019.1661583.

“FidoCon 91—408 Attend Biggest BBS Bash Ever.” Boardwatch, October 1991.

FidoNet Net 282. March 28, 2004. http://web.archive.org/web/20160310164528/
http://www.rxn.com/~net282/.

———. “The FidoNet Nodelist Historical Analysis.” February 2, 2005. http://web

.archive.org/web/20170629084903/http://www.rxn.com/~net282/nodelist/.

FidoNet on the Internet. “FidoNet Nodelist.” October 16, 1987. http://www

.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/n1987/nodelist.289.

———. “FidoNet Nodelist.” December 25, 1992. http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet

-on-the-internet/n1992/nodediff.360.

———. “FidoNet Policy and Procedures Guide Version 2.” June 26, 1986. http://
www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/history/policy2.txt.

———. “FidoNet Policy and Procedures Guide Version 3.” October 24, 1986.

http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/history/policy3.doc.

———. “FOTIs FidoNet Nodelist/Nodediff Archive Page.” 2004. http://textfiles

.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/nodediff.htm.

———. “FOTIs FidoNet Timeline Page.” Accessed October 12, 2019. http://www

.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/tl.htm.

“FidoNet, Sidekick, Apple, Get Organized!, And Handle.” Byte, October 1984.

FidoNet Technical Standards Committee. “FTSC Documents.” Accessed August 5,

2020. http://ftsc.org/docs/.

“First FidoBaby, The.” FidoNews, June 10, 1985.

Fischer, Dave. “Longest USENET Thread Ever.” alt.folklore.computers, Janu-
ary 25, 1994. https://groups.google.com/g/alt.folklore.computers/c/
wF4CpYbWuuA/m/jS6ZOyJd10sJ.

Ford, Nelson. “The History of Shareware & PsL.” Association of Software Profes-
sionals, 2000. http://web.archive.org/web/20100522020415/http://www.asp

-software.org/users/history-of-shareware.asp.

Forester, Tom. “The Myth of the Electronic Cottage.” Futures 20, no. 3 (June 1,

1988): 227–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(88)90079-1.

Foster, Robert J. (WB7QWG/9). “Unlock the New Electronic Mailboxes.” 73, April

1983.

Fox, David. Love Bytes: The Online Dating Handbook. Corte Madera, CA: Waite

Group, 1995.

Fox, Susannah, and Lee Rainie. “The Web at 25 in the U.S.” Internet & Technol-
ogy, Pew Research Center, February 27, 2014. http://www.pewresearch.org/
internet/2014/02/27/the-web-at-25-in-the-u-s/.

Frauenfelder, Mark. “bOING bOING Advertisement in Factsheet Five #33 (1989).”

Boing Boing, August 7, 2009. http://boingboing.net/2009/08/19/boing

-boing-advertis.html.

S

Frey, Tony. “The UltraViolet Cafe’s Guide to Better Modeming Cuisine.” 1989.

Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/guide.txt.

N

278
biblio gr aphy 279

Fuchs, Michael G. “Echomail Conference List Report.” FidoNet on the Inter-
net, July 1, 1991. http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/e1991/
elist107.txt.

Galloway, Alexander R. Protocol: How Control Exists after Decentralization. Cam-
bridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004.

Gardner, Fran. “Entrepreneur Hits Bulletin Board Bull’s Eye.” Oregonian, Febru-
ary 10, 1994.

Gates, Bill. “An Open Letter to Hobbyists.” Computer Notes, February 1976.

“Gay Ballad Is Joined by ‘Savage.’” Billboard, November 13, 1976.

“Gay Liberation Front Meeting at Washington Square Methodist Church.” Digital

Collections, Manuscripts and Archives Division, New York Public Library.

Accessed June 17, 2021. https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e3

-57c4-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99.

Gazzard, Alison. Now the Chips Are Down: The BBC Micro. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press, 2016.

Gillespie, Tarleton. Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2018.

———. “The Politics of ‘Platforms.’” New Media & Society 12, no. 3 (May 1, 2010):

347–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809342738.

Gilmore, John. Uuslave. Version hoptoad-1.11. 1987.

Glover, Thomas J., and Millie M. Young. Pocket PCRef. 3rd ed. Littleton, CO:

Sequoia, 1993.

Goeller, Lee. “Insomniac Wizards Revisited.” IEEE Technology and Society Maga-
zine, 19, no. 2 (Summer 2000): 6–9.

Goldbloom, James C. “SysOp Suicide! (A Day in the Life of a System Operator).”

March 1988. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/sysopsui.txt.

Good, Travis. “Building the LATINO Net.” FidoNews, November 9, 1987.

Google, Inc. “Annual Report, Form 10-K.” Washington, DC: US Securities and

Exchange Commission, December 31, 2006. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/
edgar/data/0001652044/000165204421000010/goog-20201231.htm.

Gordon, Josh. “EchoMail and Host Routing: A Plea for Sanity.” FidoNews, June 9,

1986.

Gotkin, Kevin. “When Computers Were Amateur.” IEEE Annals of the History
of Computing 36, no. 2 (April 2014): 4–14. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC

.2014.32.

Grad, B. “The Creation and the Demise of VisiCalc.” IEEE Annals of the History of

Computing 29, no. 3 (July 2007): 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2007

.4338439.

Graeber, Laurel. “New & Noteworthy Paperbacks.” New York Times Book Review,

March 22, 1998.

Gray, Matthew. “Web Growth Summary.” MIT, 1996. https://www.mit.edu/

~mkgray/net/.

Green, Wayne (W2NSD/1). “Computers Are Here—Are You Ready?” 73, October

S

1975.

N

279

28 0 biblio gr aphy

Grey Mist. “Conference Report.” FidoNews, August 25, 1986.

Grimes, William. “Computer as a Cultural Tool: Chatter Mounts on Every Topic.”

New York Times, December 1, 1992, sec. The Arts.

Grossman, Wendy. “The Making of an Underclass: AOL.” Chapter 3 in Net.Wars.

New York: New York University Press, 1999. https://web.archive.org/web/

20110505003755/http://www.nyupress.org/netwars/pages/chapter03/ch03_

.html.

Grunin, Lori. “Something Lossed, Something Gained: Image Compression for

PC Graphics.” PC Magazine, April 28, 1992.

Hackers: Wizards of the Electronic Age. Directed by Fabrice Florin. 1984. DVD.

http://hackersvideo.com.

Hafner, Katie. “The Epic Saga of The WELL.” Wired, May 1997. http://www.wired

.com/wired/archive/5.05/ff_well_pr.html.

———. “Ghosts in the Machine.” Wired, July 1999. http://archive.wired.com/
wired/archive/4.07/ghosts.html.

———. The WELL: A Story of Love, Death, and Real Life in the Seminal Online

Community. New York: Carroll and Graf, 2001.

Hafner, Katie, and Matthew Lyon. ARPA Kadabra oder die Anfänge des Internet.

Heidelberg: Dpunkt-Verlag, 2008.

———. Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins of the Internet. New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1996.

Hakala, David. “Best BBS Contest Update.” Boardwatch, April 1992.

———. “Boardwatch 100 Readers’ Choice BBS Contest Update.” Boardwatch,

May 1992.

Hall, Dave (N3CVJ). “CB Repeater.” Spew Radio Inc., Accessed February 11, 2014.

http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj/repeater.htm.

Hall, Kira. “Cyberfeminism.” In Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic,

Social, and Cross-Cultural Perspectives, 147–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,

1996.

Halt, Roy. “Freight Car Tumbles off Viaduct.” Chicago Tribune, January 15, 1978.

Harding, Mitchell. “A Day in the Life of a Teenage Sysop.” FidoNews, February 24, 1992.

Hargadon, Michael A. “Like City Lights, Receding: ANSi Artwork and the Digital

Underground, 1985–2000.” MA thesis, Concordia University, 2011. http://
mhargadon.ca/media/mhargadon-thesis.pdf.

Haring, Kristen. “The ‘Freer Men’ of Ham Radio: How a Technical Hobby Pro-
vided Social and Spatial Distance.” Technology and Culture 44, no. 4 (2003):

734–61. https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2003.0164.

———. Ham Radio’s Technical Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2008.

Hartman, Bob. “Fido Re-write.” FidoNews, July 29, 1985.

———. “Fido <==> UNIX Mail.” FidoNews, August 19, 1985.

———. “FTS-0004 EchoMail Specification Version 3.31.” FidoNet Technical

S

Standards Committee, December 12, 1987. http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet

-on-the-internet/fs/fts_0004.txt.

N

280
biblio gr aphy 281

———. “Rover, Rovermsg, Renum, and the UN*X Gateway.” FidoNews, Decem-
ber 9, 1985.

———. “This is simply a request for information . . .” FidoNews, July 15, 1985.

———. “What Is the Story on 9600 Baud Modems.” FidoNews, March 9, 1987.

Hauben, Michael, and Ronda Hauben. Netizens: On the History and Impact of

Usenet and the Internet. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society, 1997.

http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/.

“Hayes Micromodem II, The.” Byte, December 1981.

“Hayes Stack.” Byte, June 1981.

Helmers, Carl. “Some Thoughts about Modems.” Byte, July 1978.

Helmond, Anne. “The Platformization of the Web: Making Web Data Plat-
form Ready.” Social Media + Society 1 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/

2056305115603080.

Hemmendinger, D. “Messaging in the Early SDC Time-Sharing System.” IEEE

Annals of the History of Computing 36, no. 1 (January 2014): 52–57. https://doi

.org/10.1109/MAHC.2013.44.

Henderson, Thom. “Any Day Now.” FidoNews, May 6, 1985.

———. “ARC? What’s an ARC?” FidoNews, October 14, 1985.

———. “Change of Command.” FidoNews, March 25, 1985.

———. “Editorial: Double Dawns.” FidoNews, November 10, 1986.

———. “Editorial: Future Directions.” FidoNews, November 11, 1985.

———. “Editorial: One Year Later.” FidoNews, March 31, 1986.

———. “Electronic Hate.” FidoNews, May 13, 1985.

———. “Fido 10i.” FidoNews, May 20, 1985.

———. “The New Kid on the Block.” FidoNews, April 1, 1985.

———. “Public Domain Fido.” FidoNews, April 14, 1985.

———. “Special Issue.” FidoNews, April 22, 1985.

———. “What a Weekend!” FidoNews, August 25, 1986.

Hicks, J. Brad. “Echomail, Host-Routing, and Topology.” FidoNews, June 23,

1986.

Hiltz, Starr Roxanne, and Murray Turoff. The Network Nation: Human Communi-
cation via Computer. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978.

Hobbs, Charles P. “The Modem World.” 2000. Archived at http://textfiles.com/
history/modemwld.txt.

Hof, Robert D. “Where Did the Net Come From, Daddy?” BusinessWeek, Septem-
ber 16, 1996.

Horn, Stacy. Cyberville: Clicks, Culture, and the Creation of an Online Town. New York: Warner Books, 1998.

“How and Why to Access the Internet.” Boardwatch, October 1992.

“How to Become an Unsuccessful, Burned-Out SysOp.” N.d. Archived at http://
www.textfiles.com/100/howtobbs.txt.

“HT-220 Page.” Michael Wright Page. Accessed February 9, 2014. http://
mfwright.com/HT220.html.

S

Hu, Tung-Hui. A Prehistory of the Cloud. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015.

N

281

282 biblio gr aphy

Hughes, Dave. “The Year of Internet at BBSCON ’94.” Cook Report on Internet –>

NREN, October 1994.

Hughes-Hinnen, Anne. “My Memories of Washington Square United Method-
ist Church, 1981–2005.” People of the Village (blog), April 8, 2014. http://
peopleblog.churchofthevillage.org/my-memories-of-washington-square

-united-methodist-church-1981-2005/.

humdog. “Pandora’s Vox: On Community in Cyberspace.” 1994. Alphaville

Herald, May 2004. http://alphavilleherald.com/2004/05/introducing_hum

.html.

Humphrey, John H., and Gary S. Smock. “High-Speed Modems.” Byte, June 1988.

———. “Whither the Modem?” Byte, January 1989.

Hunter, John J. “Three V.22bis Modems, One Clear Winner.” InfoWorld, Septem-
ber 1986.

“IBECC.” BBS Magazine, May 1992.

Ilacqua, Spike. “The First ISP.” USENIX, March 15, 1999. https://web.archive

.org/web/20100603211424/http://www.usenix.org/publications/login/1999

-2/isp.html.

“In Focus.” InfoWorld, June 27, 1983.

“International FidoNet—15,649 Bulletin Boards Worldwide with a Connection,

The.” Boardwatch, October 1992.

International Telecommunication Union. “ITU-T Recommendation V.22 Bis:

2400 Bits per Second Duplex Modem Using the Frequency Division Tech-
nique Standardized for Use on the General Switched Telephone Network
and on Point-to-Point 2-Wire Leased Telephone-Type Circuits.” 1988.

“Internet Access at $3 per Month—Delphi Makes the Global Connection.” Board-
watch, April 1993.

“Interrupt Stack, The.” FidoNews, April 28, 1986.

“In the Crowd: Tom Jennings.” Thrasher, November 1986.

James, David. “EchoMail Can Help You Find Your Roots.” FidoNews, July 28,

1986.

James, Michael L. “An Exploratory Study of the Perceived Benefits of Electronic

Bulletin Board Use and Their Impact on Other Communication Activities.”

PhD diss., Florida State University, 1992.

Jankowski, Nicholas W. “Creating Community with Media: History, Theories
and Scientific Investigations.” In Handbook of New Media, edited by Leah A.

Lievrouw and Sonia M. Livingstone, 39–49. Social Shaping and Conse-
quences of ICTs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002. https://hdl.handle.net/

2027/uc1.32106011430425.

Jennings, Tom. “Are All Sysops Criminals?” FidoNews, November 26, 1990.

———. “As you all probably know by now . . .” FidoNews, March 18, 1985.

———. “Editorial.” FidoNews, December 16, 1985.

———. “Editorial.” FidoNews, September 2, 1991.

S

———. “Editorial.” FidoNews, May 11, 1992.

N

282
biblio gr aphy 283

———. “Editorial: (I’m about to) Snooze . . .” FidoNews, August 17, 1992.

———. “European Fido.” FidoNews, December 24, 1984.

———. “FidoNet Electronic Mail Protocol.” October 20, 1984. Archived at http://
www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/STANDARDS/fidomail.doc

.txt.

———. “FidoNet History and Operation.” February 8, 1985. Archived at http://
www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/HISTORY/fidohist.1.txt.

———. “Fido #1 in Net # . . .” FidoNews, April 22, 1985.

———. “Fido’s Operating Manual.” November 1, 1984. Archived at http://www

.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/PROGRAMS/FIDO-10/.

———. “Fido’s Operating Manual, Fourth Edition.” August 1985. Archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/PROGRAMS/FIDO-10/.

———. “The First FidoNet Newsletter.” FidoNews, December 1, 1984.

———. “FOSSIL Drivers’ Ancient History.” FidoNews, February 3, 1992.

———. “The History of FidoNet: An Interview with Tom Jennings.” Interview
by Marge Robbins. October 1993. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/

FIDONET/JENNINGS/HISTORY/tomj_mrobbins.txt.

———. “HOMOCORE Issues 1 through 7.” Sensitive Research. Accessed June 15,

2021. https://web.archive.org/web/20210618022530/https://www.sr-ix.com/

Etc/HOMOCORE/index.html.

———. “Hot News.” FidoNews, January 16, 1985.

———. Q&A with Tom Jennings. ROFLcon II. May 1, 2010.

———. “Shred of Dignity Skaters Union, ca. 1989.” Sensitive Research. Accessed

June 15, 2021. https://web.archive.org/web/20210618022646/https://www.sr

-ix.com/Etc/myQueerSF/Shipley/index.html

———. “Some Preliminary Ideas for the FidoNet.” April 30, 1984. Archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/STANDARDS/fidonet

.doc.txt.

Jennings, Tom, and Tim Požar. “Editorial.” FidoNews, June 3, 1991.

Jennings, Tom, and others. “FidoNet History.” August 20, 1985. Archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/HISTORY/fidohist

.2.txt.

Johnson, Debbi Hood. “I Wear a Red Ribbon.” Computerized AIDS Ministries,

1994. http://web.archive.org/web/19980425032633/http://gbgm-umc.org/
cam/i-wear.html.

Jones, Nick. “Jim Maxey Interview.” Boston Sun, July 19, 2003. http://www

.bostonsun.com/archives/story_a1933_part1.htm.

Jones, Steve, and Guillaume Latzko-Toth. “Out from the PLATO Cave: Uncov-
ering the Pre-Internet History of Social Computing.” Internet Histories 1,
nos. 1–2 (January 2, 2017): 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2017

.1307544.

Jones, Steven. CyberSociety: Computer-Mediated Communication and Community.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1996.

S

N

283

28 4 biblio gr aphy

———. Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety. London: Sage,

1997.

Kahin, Brian. Building Information Infrastructure: Issues in the Development of the

National Research and Education Network. New York: McGraw-Hill Primis,

1996.

———. “RFC 1192 Commercialization of the Internet Summary Report.” Network

Working Working Group, November 1990. http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/
rfc1192.

Kahin, Brian, James Keller, and Harvard Information Infrastructure Project. Pub-
lic Access to the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995.

Kahin, Brian, Ernest J. Wilson, and Global Information Infrastructure Commis-
sion. National Information Infrastructure Initiatives Vision and Policy Design.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997.

Kaplan, Ken. “Editorial: Happy Birthday FidoNet.” FidoNews, June 11, 1990.

———. “Obtaining a Fido Net Number.” FidoNews, June 3, 1985.

Kasser, Joe. “The Sky’s the Limit.” Byte, November 1978.

Katz, Eric, and Rony Daher. Oblivion/2 Bulletin Board System. Version 2.40. Darkflame Enterprises, 1995.

Kay, Jim. “I wish to register a loud complaint . . .” FidoNews, September 15, 1986.

Kelly, Paul, and Jim Lynn. “A Few Ideas about the Rewrite of Fido.” FidoNews,

July 22, 1985.

Kelty, Christopher M. Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2008.

Kendall, Lori. “Community and the Internet.” In The Handbook of Internet Studies, 309–25. New York: Wiley, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444314861.ch14.

———. “Virtual Community.” In Encyclopedia of New Media, edited by Steve

Jones, 467–70. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003.

Kenny, Thomas. “The First Echomail Conference List.” FidoNet on the Internet,

January 13, 1987. http://www.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/e1987/
elist701.txt

———. “The First Echomail Conference List.” FidoNews, March 9, 1987.

———. “I’m very interested in Echomail networking . . .” FidoNews, May 12, 1986.

Kessler, Mitch, and Gerrie Blum. “Adult but Not X-Rated.” FidoNews, August 18,

1986.

Kimes, Mark. “FSC-0068 A Proposed Replacement For FTS-0004.” FidoNet

Technical Standards Committee, December 13, 1992. http://www.textfiles

.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/fs/fsc_0068.txt.

Kleinman, Pablo. “FidoNet en Sudamerica.” FidoNews, November 23, 1987.

Kliewer, Bradley Dyck. “VGA to the Max,” Byte, December 1990.

Kline, Ronald R. “The Modem That Still Connects Us.” In Historical Studies in

Computing, Information, and Society: Insights from the Flatiron Lectures, edited by William Aspray. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2019.

S

Knight, Tim. “Establishing Your Own Bulletin Board Service.” SoftSide, November

1983.

N

284
biblio gr aphy 285

Knopf, Jim. “The Origin of Shareware.” Association of Software Professionals,

1995. http://web.archive.org/web/0/http://www.asp-software.org/users/
history-of-shareware.asp.

Kobetich, Randall. “I.P.R Echomail (Interpersonal Relationships).” FidoNews,

September 22, 1986.

Kolozaridi, Polina, and Dmitry Muravyov. “The Narratives We Inherit: The Local
and Global in Tomsk’s Internet History.” Internet Histories 4, no. 1 (January 2,

2020): 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475.2020.1723980.

Krantz, Michael. “The Great Manhattan Geek Rush of 1995.” New York, Novem-
ber 13, 1995.

Krol, Ed. The Whole Internet: User’s Guide & Catalog. Sebastopol CA: O’Reilly, 1992.

Kushner, David. “It’s a Mod, Mod World.” IEEE Spectrum 40, no. 2 (February

2003): 56–57. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSPEC.2003.1176517.

———. Masters of Doom: How Two Guys Created an Empire and Transformed Pop

Culture. New York: Random House, 2003.

Kwasnik, John. “RIP Graphics.” John Kwasnik’s website, July 2015. http://www

.kwasstuff.altervista.org/RIP/index.html.

Laliberte, Stephen. “A Tale of Two Cities: Impressions of FidoCon91 and the VIA

Convention.” Boardwatch, October 1991.

Lansing, Kenneth. “FidoNet: A Study of Computer Networking.” Master’s thesis,

Texas Tech University, 1991.

Lawrie, Mike. “History of the Internet in South Africa.” Uninet Home Page, 1997.

Accessed June 15, 2021. http://web.archive.org/web/20041205093635/http://
www2.frd.ac.za/uninet/history/.

“Letters.” Boardwatch, October 1991.

“Letters to the Editor.” Boardwatch, April 1993.

“Letters to the Editor.” Boardwatch, June 1993.

Levy, Stanley P. (WB6SQU). “A Morse to RTTY Converter—Using a Micro-
processor.” In Hobby Computers Are Here! , edited by Wayne Green

(W2NSD/1), 78–81. Peterborough, NH: 73 Publications, 1976.

Lewis, Kris. “Abuse.BBS.” 1987. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/abuse.txt.

Lewis, Peter. “Low-Cost, High-Feature PCs.” PC Magazine, February 23, 1993.

Lewis, Peter H. “America Online Buys 2 Internet Companies: A Company Warms

Up to the World Wide Web.” New York Times, November 10, 1994, sec. Busi-
ness Day.

Lewis, Shawn D. “10-4, Bro.” Ebony, October 1976.

Lohr, Steve. “Steve Case at a Crossroad: America Online Is a Leader, but He’s

Watching the Rear-View Mirror.” New York Times, August 14, 1995, sec. Busi-
ness Day.

Londner, Virginia Peschke. “Letter from the Publisher.” Byte, February 1978.

Looney, Todd. “Vietnam Veterans Bulletin Board.” FidoNews, August 11, 1986.

Looney, Todd, and Nancy Looney. “A Cry for Support! Dedicated to Vietnam Veter-

S
ans.” FidoNews, September 8, 1986.

N

285

286 biblio gr aphy

Mack, D. Thomas, Ken Goosens, and Doug Azzarito. “Remote Bulletin Board

System for the Personal Computer Version 17.4: Technical Reference Guide.”

BBS Software Directory, June 21, 1992. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/

IBM/DOS/RBBS/.

Mack, D. Thomas, and Jon Martin. “Remote Bulletin Board System for the IBM

Personal Computer Version CPC12.1.” BBS Software Directory, January 29,

1984. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/IBM/DOS/RBBS/rbbs121.txt.

MacKinnon, Richard Clark. “Searching for the Leviathan in Usenet.” Master’s
thesis, San Jose State University, 1992. https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.vzvh

-hkn4.

Madill, John. “FidoNet History.” July 30, 1993. Archived by Metro Olografix at
http://www.olografix.org/gubi/estate/archivio/fido/fido.htm.

Maher, Jimmy. The Future Was Here: The Commodore Amiga. Cambridge, MA:

MIT Press, 2012.

Mailland, Julien, and Kevin Driscoll. Minitel: Welcome to the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017.

Maille, Joseph Charles. “Virtually Gutenberg: Computer Bulletin Boards and the

First Amendment through United States v. Riggs and Neidorf.” Master’s
thesis, San Jose State University, 1993.

Manes, Stephen. “The Info Footpath: How the Internet Got Its Start in the Early

Days.” New York Times, September 8, 1996.

Mark, Richard Scott. “Guide to Select BBS’s on the Internet (SBI List).” August

1995. Archived at http://cd.textfiles.com/group42/FAQS/AINTBBS.TXT.

———. Internet BBSs: A Guided Tour. Greenwich, CT: Manning, 1996.

Markham, Annette N. Life Online: Researching Real Experience in Virtual Space.

Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira, 1998.

Markoff, John. “In Focus: Personal Computers Communicate.” InfoWorld, No-
vember 1, 1982.

———. “Freeware Hunt with IBM PC Shoots Numerous Prey.” InfoWorld,

June 27, 1983.

———. “Word-Processing Package Costs $10 under New Marketing Scheme.”

InfoWorld, September 19, 1983.

Marwick, Alice E. “To Catch a Predator? The MySpace Moral Panic.” First Monday

13, no. 6 (May 19, 2008). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v13i6.2152.

“Matrix Maps Quarterly.” Matrix.net, January 24, 2001. https://web.archive.org/
web/20010124082100/http://www.matrix.net/publications/mmq/index

.html.

Maxey, Jim. “README.TXT.” Universe. Event Horizons, 1988. http://cd.textfiles

.com/multimediamania/GAMES/UNIVERS/README.TXT.

Maxwell, Jim (W6CF). “Amateur Radio: 100 Years of Discovery.” QST, January

2000. http://www.arrl.org/files/file/About%20ARRL/Ham_Radio_100

_Years.pdf.

S

Maxwell, Kim. “High-Speed Dial-Up Modems.” Byte, December 1984.

N

286
biblio gr aphy 287

Mazlish, Bruce. “A Highway or a Trap?” New York Times, October 31, 1993, sec.

Books. https://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/31/books/a-highway-or-a-trap

.html.

McCormick, Rich. “Andy Warhol’s Amiga Computer Art Found 30 Years Later.”

The Verge, April 24, 2014. http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/24/5646554/
andy-warhols-lost-amiga-computer-art-photo-essay.

McCullough, Brian. “She Gave the World a Billion AOL CDs—An Interview
with Marketing Legend Jan Brandt.” Internet History (podcast), August 2014.

http://www.internethistorypodcast.com/2014/08/she-gave-the-world-a

-billion-aol-cds-an-interview-with-marketing-legend-jan-brandt/.

McIlwain, Charlton D. Black Software: The Internet and Racial Justice, from the

AfroNet to Black Lives Matter. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.

McKelvey, Fenwick. Internet Daemons: Digital Communications Possessed. Min-
neapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.5749/

9781452961743.

McKelvey, Fenwick, and Kevin Driscoll. “ARPANET and Its Boundary Devices:

Modems, IMPs, and the Inter-structuralism of Infrastructures.” Internet

Histories 3, no. 1 (January 2, 2019): 31–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701475

.2018.1548138.

McKinney, Cait. Information Activism: A Queer History of Lesbian Media Technolo-
gies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2020.

———. “Printing the Network: AIDS Activism and Online Access in the 1980s.”

Continuum 32, no. 1 (January 2, 2018): 7–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312

.2018.1404670.

McLellan, Vin. “Out of the Doghouse.” Digital Review, August 1985. fido0231.nws.

McPherson, Tara. “U.S. Operating Systems at Mid-century: The Intertwining of

Race and UNIX.” In Race after the Internet, edited by Lisa Nakamura and

Peter Chow-White, 21–37. New York: Routledge, 2012.

Memory Alpha. “TRW Space and Defense Park.” Accessed June 15, 2021. https://
memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/TRW_Space_and_Defense_Park.

Menn, Joseph. Cult of the Dead Cow: How the Original Hacking Supergroup Might

Just Save the World. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019.

Merritt, Ralph. “A Listing of Known Othernets.” FidoNews, November 25, 1991.

Metcalfe, Bob. “How Many Sysops Will Show Up for BBSCon—and Just What Is
a Sysop?” InfoWorld 17, no. 5 (January 30, 1995): 49.

———. “Internet Dwellers Beware: BBS Movement Is Planning an Invasion.”

InfoWorld 16, no. 37 (September 12, 1994): 50.

———. “On the Wild Side of Computer Networking.” InfoWorld, March 29, 1993.

———. “Shareware Should Not Be Shunned at All.” InfoWorld, March 15, 1993.

———. “Sysops Are Reaping the Benefits in the Wake of a BBS Explosion.” Info-

World 16, no. 36 (September 5, 1994): 52.

Meyer, Emily. “Press Release: The Andy Warhol Museum Announces Newly

Discovered Amiga Experiments.” Andy Warhol Museum, April 24, 2014.

S

N

287

28 8 biblio gr aphy
http://www.warhol.org/uploadedFiles/Warhol_Site/Warhol/Content/The

_Museum/Press_room/documents/The_Warhol_Amiga_Project_Release_4

-24-14.pdf.

Miastkowski, Stan. “Information Unlimited: The Dialog Information Retrieval

Service.” Byte, June 1981.

Michlin, Adam. “A Listing of Known Othernets.” NETLAND, January 1, 1995.

http://www.nfbnet.org/files/magazine/NETL0195.ZIP.

Mickley, Tracy. “Planet Connect Satellite System—FidoNet/USENET Mail Fire-
hose from the Sky.” Boardwatch, January 1994.

“MicroNET.” Byte, January 1980.

Miller, Allen. “International Fido Conference, August 14–17, 1986.” FidoNews,

September 8, 1986.

Miller, Leedell J. “The Gay & Lesbian BBS List.” soc.motss, November 2, 1992.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/soc.motss/mdXaPe3cw2k/

NWGHeaoz0KkJ.

Milner, Ryan M. The World Made Meme: Public Conversations and Participatory

Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2016.

Mims, Forrest M., III. “About Forrest M. Mims III.” Forrest Mims’s webpage. Ac-
cessed February 18, 2014. http://www.forrestmims.org/biography.html.

Mindcrime. ANSI Gallery. Version 1.00. ACiDic, a division of ACiD Produc-
tions, 1994. ARTSCENE: The Textfiles.com Computer Art Collection. http://
artscene.textfiles.com/acid/BBSMODS/.

Mirowski, Alexander. “At the Electronic Crossroads Once Again: The Myth of the

Modern Computer Utility in the United States.” IEEE Annals of the History of

Computing 39, no. 2 (2017): 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2017.12.

MobyGames. “Scout Search for Apple II (1984).” Accessed April 25, 2014. http://
www.mobygames.com/game/scout-search.

Moe, Hallvard, and Hilde Van den Bulck, eds. Teletext in Europe: From the Analog
to the Digital Era. Göteborg: Nordicom, 2016.

Montfort, Nick, Patsy Baudoin, John Bell, Ian Bogost, Jeremy Douglass, Mark C.

Marino, Michael Mateas, Casey Reas, Mark Sample, and Noah Vawter. 10

PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1));:GOTO 10. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013.

Morris, Sue. “WADs, Bots and Mods: Multiplayer FPS Games as Co-creative Me-
dia.” In Level Up Conference Proceedings, University of Utrecht, 2003.

Mueller, Gavin. “Piracy as Labour Struggle.” TripleC: Communication, Capitalism

& Critique: Open Access Journal for a Global Sustainable Information Society 14, no. 1 (May 15, 2016): 333–45.

Mulvin, Dylan. “Distributing Liability: The Legal and Political Battles of Y2K.”

IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 42, no. 3 (July 2020): 26-37.

doi:10.1109/MAHC.2020.2973630.

Myers, David Martin, Jr. “Putting It on the Line: The Evolution of Home Com-
puter Networks.” PhD diss., University of Texas at Austin, 1984.

S

Myers, Lary L. How to Create Your Own Computer Bulletin Board. Blue Ridge Sum-
mit, PA: TAB Books, 1983.

N

288
biblio gr aphy 289

Nakamura, Lisa. Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet. New York: Routledge, 2002.

“NAPLPS Graphics Gains Legs.” Boardwatch, December 1992.

“National List of Electronic Bulletin Board Systems and On-Line Information

Services,” Boardwatch, May 1992.

“Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 1 of 5).” Telephony 130 (January 12, 1946): 13–26.

“Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 2 of 5).” Telephony 130 (January 19, 1946): 28–30, 46.

“Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 3 of 5).” Telephony 130 (January 26, 1946): 16–18, 35.

“Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 4 of 5).” Telephony 130 (February 2, 1946): 18–19.

“Nationwide Operator Toll Dialing (Part 5 of 5).” Telephony 130 (February 2, 1946): 20–26.

NBC. “Espionage / New Orleans, Louisiana / Computer Spy Ring.” NBC Evening

News, March 4, 1989. https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/567753.

———. “Focus (Cyberspace Pornography).” NBC Evening News, July 30, 1994.

https://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/broadcasts/600970.

Nelson, Robin. “The Spirit of Cyberflight.” Popular Science, April 1995.

Newkirk, Rod. “How’s DX.” QST, March 1971.

Nickell, Joe Ashbrook. “Return of the Living BBS.” Wired, March 1, 1999. https://
www.wired.com/1999/03/return-of-the-living-bbs/.

“1991 International BBSing and Electronic Communications Conference, The.”

FidoNews, August 12, 1991.

Nomad, The. “The Modem Life. Is It Really Worth It?” May 26, 1985. Archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/100/modemlif.hac.

Nooney, Laine, Kevin Driscoll, and Kera Allen. “From Programming to Products:

Softalk Magazine and the Rise of the Personal Computer User.” Information

& Culture 55, no. 2 (June 18, 2020): 105–29.

Norberg, Arthur L., Judy E. O’Neill, and Kerry J. Freedman. Transforming Com-
puter Technology: Information Processing for the Pentagon, 1962–1986. Balti-
more: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996.

“Notices.” FidoNews, August 25, 1986.

Nutter, David, dir. “2Shy.” The X-Files. Fox. November 3, 1995. https://web.archive

.org/web/20010331101254/http://www.thexfiles.com/episodes/season3/3x06

.html.

O’Dell, Sally (KB1O). “Clubs and Computers: A Simple Interface (Club Corner).”

QST, July 1983.

Ogan, Christine. “Listserver Communication during the Gulf War: What Kind
of Medium Is the Electronic Bulletin Board?” Journal of Broadcasting &

Electronic Media 37, no. 2 (March 1, 1993): 177–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/

08838159309364214.

S

O’Hara, Rob. Commodork: Sordid Tales from a BBS Junkie. Self-published, 2006.

N

289

29 0 biblio gr aphy

Olmstead, Van. “Sauntering Sysops Batman.” FidoNews, July 22, 1985.

Olson, John. “How to Avoid Sysop Burnout.” FidoNews, April 14, 1986.

Omega, Lord Vision, and Rock ’n Roll Doctor. “Getting AE/CATFUR to Work
with Apple-Net.” July 9, 1986. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/apple/
applenet.txt.

O’Nan, Thomas. Email to jason@textfiles.com. “Love Your Site.” November 17,

2006. Archived at http://textfiles.com/history/onan.txt.

“ONE BBSCON.” Boardwatch, November 1992.

“ONE BBSCON—Getting It All Together.” Boardwatch, July 1992.

“$109 2400 Baud Modem.” Byte, June 1988.

“One Sysops Opinion.” N.d. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/opinion

.txt.

“Online Graphics—The Next Frontier.” Boardwatch, October 1992.

Opincar, Abe. “Holy Megabytes: In Her Crusade against AIDS, a Social Justice

Nun Goes Online to the World.” Reader, October 8, 1992.

Paloque-Berges, Camille. “Mapping a French Internet Experience: A Decade of

Unix Networks Cooperation (1983–1993).” In Routledge Companion to Global

Internet Histories, edited by Gerard Goggin and Mark McLelland, 153–70. New

York: Routledge, 2017.

Pargman, Daniel, and Jacob Palme. “ASCII Imperialism.” In Standards and Their

Stories: How Quantifying, Classifying, and Formalizing Practices Shape Everyday

Life, edited by Martha Lampland and Susan Leigh Star, 177–206. Ithaca, NY:

Cornell University Press, 2008.

Parsons, Patrick. Blue Skies: A History of Cable Television. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2008.

Partridge, C. “The Technical Development of Internet Email.” IEEE Annals of the

History of Computing 30, no. 2 (April 2008): 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/

MAHC.2008.32.

Pasco, Jean O. “A Life of Service: Sister Mary, Whose Past Has Seen Many Painful

Twists and Turns, Now Brings Comfort to Others with the World’s Most

Comprehensive Web Site on AIDS and HIV.” Los Angeles Times, December 1,

1997.

Pazuzu. “Tips on Starting Your Own BBS.” November 11, 1993. Archived at http://
www.textfiles.com/bbs/startbbs.txt.

Pearce, Gary. “VHF/UHF-FM, Repeaters, Digital Voice and Data.” In The ARRL

Operating Manual For Radio Amateurs, 9th ed., 2-1–2-29. Newington, CT:

Amateur Radio Relay League, 2010.

Penner, Jerry. “Running Your Own BBS!” GEnieLamp, August 1, 1992. http://
software.bbsdocumentary.com/APPLE/II/PRIME/primebbs.genie.txt.

Perkins, Drew D. “RFC 1134: The Point-to-Point Protocol: A Proposal for Multi-
protocol Transmission of Datagrams over Point-to-Point Links.” Network

Working Group, November 1989. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1134.

S

Pernick, Ron. “WELL Historical Timeline—the Good, Great Place.” Well.com,

1995. http://www.well.com/conf/welltales/timeline.html.

N

290
biblio gr aphy 291

Petrik, Paula. “The Youngest Fourth Estate: The Novelty Toy Printing Press
and Adolescence, 1870–1886.” In Small Worlds: Children and Adolescents in

America, 1850–1950, edited by Elliott West and Paula Petrik, 125–42. Law-
rence: University Press of Kansas, 1992.

Petrick, E. “Imagining the Personal Computer: Conceptualizations of the Home-
brew Computer Club 1975–1977.” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 39,
no. 4 (October 2017): 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAHC.2018.1221045.

Petzold, Charles. Code: The Hidden Language of Computer Hardware and Software.

Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press, 1999.

Pew Research Center. “Broadband vs. Dial-Up Adoption over Time.” Internet &

Technology. Accessed October 21, 2015. http://www.pewinternet.org/data

-trend/internet-use/connection-type/.

———. “Demographics of Internet and Home Broadband Usage in the United

States.” Internet & Technology, June 12, 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/
internet/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/.

“Phone Link Acoustic Modem, The.” Byte, December 1980.

Piepmeier, Alison. Girl Zines: Making Media, Doing Feminism. New York: New

York University Press, 2009.

“Playboy Magazine Sues Event Horizons BBS for Copyright Infringement.”

Boardwatch, May 1992.

Plocher, John. “More Fido Rewrite Ideas.” FidoNews, December 30, 1985.

Plutopia News Network. “Tom Jennings Interview (1993).” Plutopia Blog, April 9,

2018. https://plutopia.io/tom-jennings-interview-1993/.

Polunsky, Richard. “Fido Catalog Author Seeks Heko.” FidoNews, April 14, 1986.

———. “Fido Utility Catalog.” FidoNews, May 5, 1986.

Pope, James A. “Apple-CAT II: A Communications System from Novation.” Byte,

January 1983.

Pope, Markus W. Que’s BBS Directory. Indianapolis, IN: Que, 1994.

Postigo, Hector. “America Online Volunteers: Lessons from an Early Co-
production Community.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 12, no. 5

(September 1, 2009): 451–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877909337858.

———. “Emerging Sources of Labor on the Internet: The Case of America On-
line Volunteers.” International Review of Social History 48, no. S11 (December

2003): 205–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859003001329.

———. “Of Mods and Modders Chasing Down the Value of Fan-Based Digital

Game Modifications.” Games and Culture 2, no. 4 (October 1, 2007): 300–313,
doi:10.1177/1555412007307955.

Požar, Tim. “Late Night Software Is Proud to Announce UFGATE.” FidoNews,

January 30, 1989.

———. “UFGATE—FidoNet/UUCP Gateway.” Late Night Software. Accessed

October 1, 2020. https://www.lns.com/papers/ufgate/.

“Prime Bulletin Board System: Zippety-Doo-Dah! Zippety-Day!” BBS Software

Directory, [1992?]. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/APPLE/II/PRIME/

S
primebbs.txt.

N

291

292 biblio gr aphy

Prodigy. “Prodigy Interactive Personal Service Start-Up Kit.” 1991. The Henry

Ford Museum, Dearborn, MI. Accessed June 15, 2021. https://www

.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digital-collections/artifact/

361296.

“Prodigy Numbers.” Boardwatch, June 1992.

Quarterman, John S. “About Matrix News (MN).” Matrix Information and Direc-
tory Services, January 21, 1998. https://web.archive.org/web/19980121022331/
http://www.mids.org/mn/about.html.

———. The Matrix: Computer Networks and Conferencing Systems Worldwide. Bed-
ford, MA: Digital, 1990.

Quarterman, John S., and Josiah C. Hoskins. “Notable Computer Networks.”

Communications of the ACM 29, no. 10 (October 1, 1986): 932–71. https://doi

.org/10.1145/6617.6618.

Queer Digital History Project. “The Backroom.” Accessed February 3, 2021.

http://queerdigital.com/items/show/42.

———. “Gay and Lesbian Information Bureau (GLIB).” Accessed February 16,

2021. https://queerdigital.com/items/show/55.

———. “Multicom-4.” Accessed February 16, 2021. https://queerdigital.com/
items/show/72.

Quittner, Joshua, and Tom Curry. “Ho, Ho, Ho, Crash!” Time 145, no. 1 (January 9, 1995): 61.

Radio Shack. Radio Shack Catalog. 1965.

———. Radio Shack Catalog. 1975.

Radway, Janice. “Zines, Half-Lives, and Afterlives: On the Temporalities of Social
and Political Change.” PMLA 126, no. 1 (January 1, 2011): 140–50. doi:10.1632/
pmla.2011.126.1.140.

Rafaeli, Sheizaf. “The Electronic Bulletin Board: A Computer-Driven Mass Me-
dium.” Computers and the Social Sciences 2 (1986): 123–36. https://doi.org/10

.1177/089443938600200302.

Rankin, Joy Lisi. “From the Mainframes to the Masses: A Participatory Comput-
ing Movement in Minnesota Education.” Information & Culture 50, no. 2

(May 1, 2015): 197–216. https://doi.org/10.7560/IC50204.

———. A People’s History of Computing in the United States. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press, 2018.

———. “Toward a History of Social Computing: Children, Classrooms, Cam-
puses, and Communities.” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 36, no. 2

(2014): 86–88.

Raymond, Eric S. “September That Never Ended.” Jargon File. Version 4.4.7. De-
cember 29, 2003. http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/September-that-never

-ended.html.

Rehn, Alf. “The Politics of Contraband: The Honor Economies of the Warez

Scene.” Journal of Socio-Economics 33, no. 3 (July 1, 2004): 359–74. https://doi

S

.org/10.1016/j.socec.2003.12.027.

N

292
biblio gr aphy 293

Reid, Elizabeth M. “Electropolis: Communication and Community on Inter-
net Relay Chat.” University of Melbourne, 1991. http://www.aluluei.com/
electropolis.htm.

Renaud, Josh. “Break Into Chat.” Break Into Chat—BBS Wiki. Accessed May 13,

2014. http://breakintochat.com/wiki/Break_Into_Chat.

Retro Gamer. “John Romero.” January 17, 2014. http://www.retrogamer.net/
profiles/developer/john-romero/.

Reunanen, Markku. “How Those Crackers Became Us Demosceners.” Wider-

Screen 17, nos. 1–2 (April 15, 2014). http://widerscreen.fi/numerot/2014-1-2/
crackers-became-us-demosceners/.

———. “Times of Change in the Demoscene: A Creative Community and Its

Relationship with Technology.” University of Turku, 2017. http://doria32-kk

.lib.helsinki.fi/handle/10024/130915.

Rheingold, Howard. Introduction to the electronic version of The Virtual Commu-
nity. Accessed February 4, 2021. https://www.rheingold.com/vc/book/intro

.html.

———. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Reading,

MA: Addison-Wesley, 1993.

Rickard, Jack. “The BBS to Internet Connection.” Boardwatch, February 1992.

———. “Editor’s Notes.” Boardwatch, June 1991.

———. “Editor’s Notes.” Boardwatch, October 1991.

———. “Editor’s Notes.” Boardwatch, February 1992.

———. “Editor’s Notes.” Boardwatch, January 1995.

———. “Editor’s Notes.” Boardwatch, December 1995.

———. “Editor’s Notes: Webulism and the Cable Fable.” Boardwatch, December

1994.

———. “FidoCon91, Commercialization, and The ONE BBSCON.” FidoNews,

September 9, 1991.

———. “Home-Grown BB$.” Wired, October 1993. http://www.wired.com/wired/
archive/1.04/bbs.html.

———. “Internet News.” Boardwatch, May 1991.

———. “Mosaic and the World Wide Web.” Boardwatch, January 1994.

———. “The New BBS on the Web—Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link.” Boardwatch,

October 1995.

———. “Rumors & Factoids.” Boardwatch, January 1994.

Rimm, Marty. “Marketing Pornography on the Information Superhighway: A Survey
of 917,410 Images, Descriptions, Short Stories, and Animations Downloaded

8.5 Million Times by Consumers in over 2000 Cities in Forty Countries,

Provinces, and Territories.” Georgetown Law Journal 83 (1994–95): 1849–1934.

Roberts, H. Edward, and William Yates. “Altair 8800 Minicomputer, Part 1.” Popu-
lar Electronics, January 1975.

Roberts, Steven K. “Online Information Retrieval: Promise and Problems.” Byte,

December 1981.

S

N

293

29 4 biblio gr aphy

Robinson, Phil, and Nancy Tamosaitis. The Joy of Cybersex: The Underground

Guide to Electronic Erotica. New York: Brady, 1993.

Rochester Public Library. “Guide to the Gay Alliance of the Genesee Valley

Ephemera Collection 2017.023.” 2017. https://roccitylibrary.org/special

-collections/.

Romkey, John L. “RFC 1055: Nonstandard for Transmission of IP Datagrams over

Serial Lines: SLIP.” Network Working Group, June 1988. http://tools.ietf

.org/html/rfc1055.

Rose, Lance. “Playboy’s New Playmate—Event Horizons BBS.” Boardwatch, June

1992.

Rosen, Benjamin M. “VisiCalc: Breaking the Personal Computer Bottleneck.”

Morgan Stanley Electronics Letter, July 11, 1979. http://www.bricklin.com/
history/rosenletter.htm.

Rosenthal, Robert. “Busing Foe: South Boston Ready to Defend Itself.” Boston

Globe, April 21, 1976.

Rosenzweig, Roy. “Wizards, Bureaucrats, Warriors, and Hackers: Writing the

History of the Internet.” American Historical Review 103, no. 5 (December 1,

1998): 1530–52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2649970.

Rowe, Eddie. “A New Call to Arms—Event Horizons vs. Joe Sysop?” FidoNews,

October 28, 1991. http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/FIDONEWS/
fido0843.nws.

Roy, Jonathan. “SupraFAXModem.” freenet.sci.comp.atari.news, February 1, 1992.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030109030157/http://www.atariarchives.org/
cfn/12/03/0028.php.

Rucker, Rudy von Bitter, R. U. Sirius, and Queen Mu. Mondo 2000: A User’s Guide
to the New Edge. New York: HarperPerennial, 1992.

Rumelt, Richard P., and Julia Watt. “VisiCorp 1978–1984 (Revised).” Los Ange-
les, CA: Anderson School at UCLA, 1985, rev. 2003. Archived at http://web

.archive.org/web/20031101141127/http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty/dick

.rumelt/Docs/Cases/Visicorp.pdf.

Russell, Andrew L. Open Standards and the Digital Age: History, Ideology, and Net-
works. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

———. “OSI: The Internet That Wasn’t.” IEEE Spectrum, July 30, 2013. http://
spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/osi-the-internet-that-wasnt.

———. “‘Rough Consensus and Running Code’ and the Internet-OSI Standards

War.” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 28, no. 3 (2006): 48–61.

Rusty. “Testimony and Thank You.” Computerized AIDS Ministries, June 14,

1995. http://web.archive.org/web/19980425034516/http://gbgm-umc.org/

CAM/rusty.html.

Rutter, Dorian James. “From Diversity to Convergence: British Computer Net-
works and the Internet, 1970–1995.” PhD diss., University of Warwick, 2005.

Ryan, Hugh, Brian Joseph Ferree, and Jennifer Livingston. “You Can Buy Gaydar

S
at the Apple Store.” Details, February 16, 2010. http://www.details.com/sex

-relationships/dating-and-cheating/201003/gay-fool-proof-hookups-tech-savy.

N

294
biblio gr aphy 295
safe crackers. “The Art of Warez.” 2019. Video. https://safecrackers.com/.

Saltzer, J., D. Clark, J. Romkey, and W. Gramlich. “The Desktop Computer as a

Network Participant.” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 3,
no. 3 (1985): 468–78. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.1985.1146219.

Sandberg, Jared. “America Online, Capital Cities/ABC Plan New Service.” Wall

Street Journal, July 7, 1994, sec. Technology and Telecommunications.

Sandvig, Christian. “Disorderly Infrastructure and the Role of Government.”

Government Information Quarterly 23, nos. 3–4 (2006): 503–6. doi:10.1016/j.

giq.2006.07.008.

Sash. “Adventures in BBSing: BBSing Nostalgia in the Twin Cities or ‘Internet

Killed the BBS Star.’” 2000. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/history/
minn.txt.

Schafer, Valérie, and Benjamin G. Thierry. Le Minitel: L’enfance numérique de la

France. Paris: Nuvis, 2012.

Schinnell, Rich. “Rich’s Ramblings January 2004.” Rich Schinnell’s website, Jan-
uary 2004. https://web.archive.org/web/20040211225245/http://schinnell

.org:80/ramb/ramb0401.html.

Schulte, Stephanie Ricker. Cached: Decoding the Internet in Global Popular Culture.

New York: New York University Press, 2013.

Schuyler, Michael. “Big Dummy’s Guide to FidoNet.” FidoNet.us, 1992. http://
www.fidonet.us/dummyguide.html.

Scott, Jason. “BBS: A Documentary: The Pitch.” BBS: The Documentary. Ac-
cessed February 2, 2014. http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/longpitch.html.

———. “BBS Documentaries.” Internet Archive. Accessed February 2, 2014.

https://archive.org/details/bbs_documentary.

———. BBS Software Directory. Accessed August 4, 2020. http://software

.bbsdocumentary.com/.

———. “BBS Textfiles: CBBS: The Dead CBBS Scrolls.” textfiles.com. Accessed July 2, 2020. http://www.textfiles.com/bbs/CBBS/SCROLLS/.

———. “Commented BBS List.” The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List. Accessed May 10, 2014. http://bbslist.textfiles.com/comments.html.

———. “Concepts: Services: Satellites.” BBS Documentary Library. Accessed

February 4, 2021. http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/library/CONCEPTS/

SERVICES/SATELLITES/.

———. “Controversy: BBSes of Evil and Fear: Racist BBSes.” BBS Documentary

Library, 1985. http://bbsdocumentary.com/library/CONTROVERSY/EVIL/

RACISTBBSES/.

———. “Customized: S-100 Kit Computer: CBBS.” BBS Software Directory. Ac-
cessed February 17, 2021. http://software.bbsdocumentary.com/AAA/AAA/

CBBS/.

———. “Does the BBS Guy Run a BBS?” ASCII by Jason Scott (blog), October 21,

2003. http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/753.

———. “Electronic Magazines.” textfiles.com. Accessed April 30, 2014. http://

S
textfiles.com/magazines/.

N

295

29 6 biblio gr aphy

———. “518 Area Code BBSes through History.” The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List. Accessed April 28, 2014. http://bbslist.textfiles.com/518/.

———. “Groups: Octothorpe Productions.” Accessed April 29, 2014. Archived at
http://www.textfiles.com/groups/OCTOTHORPE/.

———. “Groups: The Cult of the Dead Cow.” textfiles.com. Accessed February 4,

2021. http://textfiles.com/groups/CDC/.

———. “914 Area Code BBSes through History.” The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List. Accessed April 29, 2014. http://bbslist.textfiles.com/914/.

———. “Overview of The Works.” July 16, 1986. Archived at http://textfiles.com/
groups/OCTOTHORPE/allworks.bbs.

———. “The Passion of the Scanner.” ASCII by Jason Scott (blog), March 11,

2006. http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/950.

———. “A Story of RBBS (and PC-Talk, and Andrew Fluegelman).” ASCII by Jason

Scott (blog), September 2, 2008. http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/1440.

———. “TEXTFILES.COM File Statistics.” textfiles.com, July 1, 2005. http://www

.textfiles.com/filestats.html.

———. The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List. Accessed June 15, 2021.

http://bbslist.textfiles.com/.

———. “Textfile Writing Groups.” textfiles.com. Accessed February 5, 2021.

http://www.textfiles.com/groups/.

———. “317 BBS List.” The TEXTFILES.COM Historical BBS List. Accessed March 21, 2014. http://bbslist.textfiles.com/317/.

———. “Why I Prefer Textfiles.” February 27, 1987. Archived at http://www

.textfiles.com/groups/OCTOTHORPE/whytext.oct.

———. The Works BBS. cache cow. Accessed April 29, 2014. http://web.archive

.org/web/20011115192625/http://cache.cow.net/works/.

Scott, Jason, and The Cruiser. “The Guide to Real Works Users.” February 26,

1987. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/groups/OCTOTHORPE/works2

.oct.

Seger, Katie. “From One Program to Another.” PC Magazine, January 1983.

Selig, John R. “Sit Down, Shut-Up and Row: Wynn Wagner Helps Build the HIV/

AIDS Information Superhighway.” John Selig’s website, March 2001. http://
www.johnselig.com/commentary/row/.

Shackelford, Ken. “Fido BBS Christmas Wish List (Early).” FidoNews, October 14,

1985.

Shaw, David F. “Gay Men and Computer Communication: A Discourse of Sex
and Identity in Cyberspace.” In Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication
in Cybersociety, edited by Steven Jones, 123–32. London: Sage, 1997.

Shea, Tom. “Free Software.” InfoWorld, June 27, 1983.

Shefski, William J. Free Electronic Networks. Rocklin, CA: Prima, 1994.

Sherin, Ed, dir. “Rebels.” Law & Order. NBC. September 27, 1995.

Shields, Rob. Cultures of Internet: Virtual Spaces, Real Histories, Living Bodies.

S

London: Sage, 1996.

N

296
biblio gr aphy 297

Shifrin, Jerry. “So You Want to Start a BBS?” May 23, 1987. Archived at http://
www.textfiles.com/bbs/start-bb.txt.

Shiman, Philip. “Credits for the Information Highway.” Science 274, no. 5293

(December 6, 1996): 1627–28. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.274.5293

.1627.

Siegel, Alan. “How alt.tv.simpsons Embiggened a Generation of Obsessive Fans.”

Slate, September 26, 2013. https://slate.com/culture/2013/09/the-history-of

-simpsons-message-board-alt-tv-simpsons.html.

Silver, David. “Looking Backwards, Looking Forward: Cyberculture Studies 1990–

2000.” In Web.Studies: Rewiring Media Studies for the Digital Age, edited by

David Gauntlett, 19–30. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. http://rccs

.usfca.edu/intro.asp.html.

16colo.Rs—ANSI/ASCII Archive. Accessed July 31, 2019. https://16colo.rs/.

“Small Firm Offers Home Computer Owners Range of Data Features.” Wall Street

Journal, January 30, 1980.

Smith, Roger. “Record Collectors EchoMail Conference.” FidoNews, October 20,

1986.

“Snowfall a Nuisance Here, Deadly in East.” Chicago Tribune, January 15, 1978.

Southerland, Daniel. “America Online’s Rapid Rise: It’s the Hottest Player in

Dial-Up Computer Services, but Stiff Competition Looms.” Washington Post,

November 8, 1993.

Souvestre, John, George Peace, Jim Bodger, and John Johnson. “FidoNet Echo-
mail Backbone.” ONE BBSCON 1994, 1994. http://www.textfiles.com/
fidonet-on-the-internet/zips/index.htm.

Star, Susan Leigh, and Martha Lampland. “Reckoning with Standards.” In

Standards and Their Stories: How Quantifying, Classifying, and Formalizing

Practices Shape Everyday Life, edited by Martha Lampland and Susan Leigh

Star, 3–34. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009.

Sterling, Bruce. “‘Internet’ [aka ‘A Short History of the Internet’].” Magazine of

Fantasy and Science Fiction, February 1993. http://w2.eff.org/Net_culture/
internet_sterling.history.txt.

Sterne, Jonathan. The Audible Past: Cultural Origins of Sound Reproduction. Dur-
ham, NC: Duke University Press, 2003.

Stozek, Jan. “FidoNet in Poland.” Pigulki, June 5, 1991. https://ftp.icm.edu.pl/
packages/pigulki/pigulki6.pub.

Streeter, Thomas. “Internet.” In Digital Keywords, edited by Benjamin Peters,

184–96. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016.

———. The Net Effect: Romanticism, Capitalism, and the Internet. New York: New

York University Press, 2011.

“Subscribe to Boardwatch Magazine.” Boardwatch, May 1992.

Sugawara, Sandra. “Coaxing GEnie Out of Its Bottle: GE Has at Least 3 Wishes
for On-Line Service: Profits, Growth and a Beefed-Up Product.” Washington

Post, June 15, 1994.

S

N

297

29 8 biblio gr aphy

———. “Washington Business: On-Line and on the Move Vienna’s Computer

Service Attracts the Attention of Consumers, Competitors.” Washington Post,

August 8, 1994.

Surratt, Carla G. Netlife: Internet Citizens and Their Communities. Commack, NY: Nova Science, 1998.

Swamp Rat. “The Infamous . . . Gerbil Feed Bomb.” Cult of the Dead Cow, 1985.

http://textfiles.com/groups/CDC/cDc-0001.txt.

Swindell, Rob. “The Digital Manifesto: ‘The Internet Killed the BBS Star.’” Syn-
chronet Wiki, August 1996. http://wiki.synchro.net/history:manifesto.

Swisher, Kara. AOL.com: How Steve C ase Beat Bill Gates, Nailed the Netheads, and Made Millions in the War for the Web. New York: Times Business, 1998.

Szelozynski, Jacek. “Something Exotic—Polish Traffic in Net/Echo Mail.”

FidoNews, June 5, 1989. fido0623.nws.

Szerencse, Tom (WB9VTZ). “The History of ECRA Repeaters in Elkhart County.”

Elkhart County Radio Association. Accessed February 9, 2014. http://web

.archive.org/web/20090926025125/http://www.ecra.us/history.html.

Telephone World. “Telephone Sounds & Recordings.” Accessed June 15, 2021.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190701182135/http://www.phworld.org/sounds/.

Thomas, David. “Online Pioneer’s Web Site Chronicles Phenomenon’s Begin-
ning.” Denver Post, August 1, 1999. Archived at http://www.textfiles.com/
thoughts/denver.art.

Thomas, Douglas. “Representing Hacker Culture: Reading Phrack.” In Hacker

Culture, 115–40. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002.

Thomas, Jim, and Gordon Meyer. “Statement of Intent.” Computer Underground

Digest, March 28, 1990. http://www.textfiles.com/digest/CUD/cud0100.txt.

Timberman, Roy. “FidoNet Basics.” ONE BBSCON 1994, 1994. http://www

.textfiles.com/fidonet-on-the-internet/zips/index.htm.

Toffler, Alvin. “The Electronic Cottage.” Creative Computing, December 1980.

Torello, Jeff. “Accessing the Internet.” Major News, Spring 1994.

Townson, Patrick. TELECOM Digest Archives. Accessed February 4, 2021. http://
massis.lcs.mit.edu/.

Tumulty, Karen, and Paul Gray. “Inside the Minds of Gingrich’s Gurus.” Time 145, no. 3 (January 23, 1995): 20.

Turner, Fred. From Counterculture to Cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth

Network, and the Rise of Digital Utopianism. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, 2006.

———. “Where the Counterculture Met the New Economy: The WELL and the

Origins of Virtual Community.” Technology and Culture 46, no. 3 (2005):

485–512. https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2005.0154.

Turoff, Murray, and Starr Roxanne Hiltz. “An Overview of Research Activities
in Computer Mediated Communications from 1976 to 1991 Conducted by
the Computerized Conferencing and Communications Center.” New Jersey

S

Institute of Technology, 1992. https://web.njit.edu/~turoff/Administrative/
ccc.htm.

N

298
biblio gr aphy 299

United Methodist News Service. “Computer AIDS Network Offers Support without

Judgment.” Computerized AIDS Ministries, August 1995. http://web.archive

.org/web/19980425034431/http://gbgm-umc.org/CAM/camnews.html.

Upstill, Steve. “Graphics Go 3-D.” Byte, December 1990.

US Census Bureau. “Appendix Table A. Households with a Computer and Inter-
net Use: 1984 to 2009.” In Computer and Internet Use in the United States:

1984 to 2009. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau, February 2010. https://
www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/computer-internet/computer

-use-1984-2009.html.

———. General Social and Economic Characteristics: California. Washington, DC:

US Census Bureau, 1983.

———. General Social and Economic Characteristics: Indiana. Washington, DC: US

Census Bureau, 1983.

Uys, Niel. “FidoCon 1990—Zone 5.” FidoNews, October 8, 1990.

Vann Cave, The. “Telegraph Road; Social Media before the Internet.” YouTube,

March 20, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYY821nv4rc.

Van Vleck, T. “Electronic Mail and Text Messaging in CTSS, 1965–1973.” IEEE An-
nals of the History of Computing 34, no. 1 (January 2012): 4–6. https://doi.org/

10.1109/MAHC.2012.6.

Vaughan, Craig W. “Bulletin-Board Evolution Enhances Communication.” Info-

World, May 25, 1981.

“Videotex.” Byte, July 1983.

“Voters Favor Online Communities.” Boardwatch, May 1992.

Wade, Ian. NOSintro: TCP/IP over Packet Radio: An Introduction to the KA9Q

Network Operating System. Dunstable, UK: Dowermain, 1992.

Wade, Keith. The Anarchist’s Guide to the BBS. Port Townsend, WA: Loompanics

Unlimited, 1990.

Wagner, Wynn. “History of Echomail.” Opus CBCS. July 7, 1997. http://web

.archive.org/web/19970707073957/http://www.global.org/opus/history/
echomail.html.

———. “History of Echomail.” The Documentary Photo Album and Interview

Page. Accessed June 4, 2021. http://www.bbsdocumentary.com/photos/

140wynn/FILES/echomail.txt.

———. “History of Opus-CBCS.” Opus CBCS. July 7, 1997. http://web.archive

.org/web/19970707073934/http://www.global.org/opus/history/opushist

.html.

———. “HIV+: Day One.” AEGIS, 1996. http://web.archive.org/web/

20000818090555/http://www.aegis.com/topics/dayone/.

———. “OPUS Computer-Based Conversation System Version 1.0.” Edited by

John Miller. June 14, 1987. Archived at http://cd.textfiles.com/masterdisc/SS/

CMM/0004/OPUSDOC.TXT.

Wakeford, Nina. “New Technologies and ‘Cyber-Queer’ Research.” In Handbook
of Lesbian and Gay Studies, edited by Diane Richardson and Steven Seidman,

S

115–45. London: Sage, 2002.

N

299

30 0 biblio gr aphy

Waldrop, M. Mitchell. The Dream Machine: J. C. R. Licklider and the Revolution

That Made Computing Personal. New York: Penguin Books, 2001.

Walker, Butch. “Echomail Coordinators.” FidoNews, October 6, 1986.

Wallin, Sven Andréas. “Naming Convention.” SAW (blog), February 1,

2014. http://web.archive.org/web/20160903205902/http://www

.svenandreaswallin.com/tag/wynn-wagner/.

Walter, Russ. The Secret Guide to Computers. Somerville, MA: Self-published, 1995.

Wasiak, Patryk. “Playing and Copying: Social Practices of Home Computer Users
in Poland during the 1980s.” In Hacking Europe: From Computer Cultures to

Demoscenes, edited by Gerard Alberts and Ruth Oldenziel, 129–50. London:

Springer, 2014.

———. “Telephone Networks, BBSes, and the Emergence of the Transnational

‘Warez Scene.’” History and Technology 35, no. 2 (April 3, 2019): 177–94.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07341512.2019.1652432.

Weizenbaum, Joseph. “ELIZA: A Computer Program for the Study of Natural

Language Communication between Man and Machine.” Communications of
the ACM 9, no. 1 (January 1966): 36–45. doi:10.1145/365153.365168.

Welch, John J. “Item 20: To Ward & Randy: History of CBBS???” November 9,

1986. Archived at http://textfiles.com/bbs/CBBS/history.cbbs.

“WELL Now Available via Internet, The.” Boardwatch, May 1992.

Wells, H. G. World Brain. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, 1938.

“What Happened to ISDN?” Boardwatch, December 1992.

“What Might Be Called CACHE’s On Line Graffitti (COG).” Byte, June 1978.

Wildcat! Version 5.0. Mustang Software, Inc., 1996.

Wildhack, Billy. Erotic Connections. Corte Madera, CA: Waite Group, 1994.

Wilkes, Richard P. “FidoNet: Response.” May 24, 1984. Archived at http://www

.textfiles.com/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/STANDARDS/fidonet.rpw.txt.

Williams, Gail Ann. “Grateful for Jerry, the Dead, the Deadheads.” Gail Williams’s
pages, August 10, 1995. http://web.archive.org/web/19961220053904/http://
www.well.com/user/gail/grateful-dead.html.

Williams, John Evans (W2BFD). “The Story of Amateur Radio Teletype.” QST,

October 1948.

Williams, Raymond. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. New York:

Oxford University Press, 1976.

Wolf, Gary, and Michael Stein. Aether Madness: An Offbeat Guide to the Online

World. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit, 1995.

Wood, Lamont, and Dana Blankenhorn. “State of the BBS Nation.” Byte, January

1990.

Woody, Jerry. ProMatch. Version 3.0. Cullman, AL: WoodyWare, 1995.

W6TRW Swap Meet. Accessed February 18, 2014. http://www.w6trw.com/
swapmeet/index.htm.

Zone 1 Region Coordinators and Zone 1 Zone Coordinator. “FidoCon 1991—The

S

New Beginning.” FidoNews, July 30, 1990.

N

300
inde x

10% Connection BBS, 23, 162

Aether Madness, 158

73 (publication), 39, 52
affordances, 54, 106, 112, 131, 162

300 bps (baud) modem, 62, 90, 93,

Africa, 78, 88. See also South Africa

95–96, 99, 105–10, 107, 120, 130

Afrofuturism, 192

2001: A Space Odyssey, 12

AfroNet, 23, 175, 259n36

2400 bps modem, 107–10

AIDS Education General Information

2600 (zine), 103

System (AEGIS), 164–65, 256n161

9600 bps modem, 110, 120–22

Allen, David P. (W1UKZ), 55

Altair 8800. See Micro Instrumentation

Abbate, Janet: Inventing the Internet, 10
and Telemetry Systems (MITS):

ABC, 105

Altair 8800

Abels, Paul, 255n152
alt.culture.internet, 9

Aboba, Bernard, 178, 182

Alternet, 6, 86, 231n138

Access Nevada, 190
alt.folklore.computers, 9, 262n78

ACiD, 19
amateur computing, 39, 51–57, 114. See

ACT UP, 163
also hobby computing

Adams, Rick, 261n67. See also UUNET
amateur radio clubs, 38, 41–45, 49, 55–56,
advertising, 7, 26, 27, 65, 111–12, 137,

211n65. See also Amateur Radio Re-

243n140; and adult GIFs, 125–29;
lay League (ARRL); Rooster Channel
for BBSs, 99, 102, 107, 157, 159,

Jumpers; W6TRW Amateur Radio

163, 179, 187; Google Adwords, 197;

Club
for ISPs, 261n67; for microcom-
amateur radio operators, 13, 18, 36–57, 71,
puters, 52, 56, 111; for modems, 31,

98, 148, 172, 218n44; BBSs for, 84;

95, 97, 109, 215n9; personal ads,
right-wing, 104

155; and radio, 41, 46; role in BBSs,

Amateur Radio Relay League (ARRL),

S

180, 189

42–44, 55, 211n65, 218n40, 231n137

N

301

301

302 inde x
amateurs, 20, 95, 140; amateur astron-

Argentina, 88
omy, 18, 126; amateur networks, 67,

ARPANET, 5–6, 77, 96, 211n68, 216n17,

74, 78, 85, 257n8; amateur pornog-

220n72, 226n78; role in internet
raphy, 123, 130, 158; amateur sysops,
history, 8–11, 194–96; store-and-for-

140, 173; definition, 41; role in BBSs,
ward technique, 18; TCP/IP transi-

2–3, 14, 18, 27; role in telecommu-
tion, 71; use of leased lines, 60, 178
nications history, 40, 154, 194, 201,

ASCII, 55, 75, 77, 98–99, 105, 149; ASCII

219n56. See also amateur comput-
art, 66, 81–82, 103, 106, 131; ASCII
ing; amateur radio clubs; amateur

Express II “The Professional” (AE
radio operators; DIY (do-it-yourself)

Pro), 106–7
culture; hobby computing; hobby

Asia, 78; Southeast, 89. See also indi-radio
vidual countries

America Online (AOL), 8, 27, 105, 137, 187, Association of Shareware Professionals

196–97, 238n72; BBSs as alternative

(ASP), 115–16, 240n103
to, 22, 175; CompuServe acquisition,

Atari, 54, 56, 148; Atari ST, 122, 243n139,

23; disk mailing, 7, 169, 257n10;

260n50
email, 207n22; Internet Center,

Atkin, Denny, 119

207n22; USENET access, 183–84,

AT&T, 6, 61, 96, 131; AT&T Interchange,

262n78; users, 174, 184, 192–93

7; Bell 103 protocol, 31, 95, 108; Bell

AmFAR, 227n89

System (Ma Bell), 38–40, 56–57,

Amtype Corporation, 239n86

60, 91, 95, 98, 191, 223n14, 245n175;

The Anarchist Cookbook, 103

Data-Phone system, 95

Ankerson, Megan Sapnar, 183

Australia, 72, 78, 82
anonymity, 3, 26, 47, 155, 163–64

ANS, 207n22

Backdraft BBS, 135

ANSI, 19, 75–76, 100, 106, 176, 191,

Backroom BBS, 19, 162–63

212n72

Baker, Ben, 59, 63, 67–69, 71–72, 77, 81,
anti-Semitism, 19, 104. See also Dietz,

83

George; Metzger, Tom; neo-Nazis

Barlow, John Perry, 172, 175

Antonelli, Chaz, 159, 161. See also

Barry, Rey, 116; Guide to Free Shareware,

Multicom-4

113, 243n145

Apogee Software, 117–18

BASIC, 30, 54, 107, 243n143; Altair/

Apple, 12, 37, 55; Apple Bulletin Board

Microsoft BASIC, 92, 112; Uplifts

System (ABBS), 34, 98, 238n77; Ap-

BASIC, 150; and microcomputers,
ple II, 34, 54, 96, 103, 109, 147, 147–

13, 98–99

50, 238n77; BBSs, 107; Macintosh,

Batboard BBS, 135

122, 242n138, 260n50. See also

Baudot code, 55

Novation: Apple-CAT II

BBS Callers Digest, 26

Applesoft BASIC, 150

BBS Expo, 180

Aquila BBS, 123, 187–89

BBS Magazine, 179–80, 190

Aquila Internet Services, 188

Becker, Phil, 141, 172–73, 176. See also TBBS
area codes, 20, 83, 101, 135, 139, 182, 191;

Bell System. See AT&T
role in BBSs, 17, 59–71, 101, 118, 133,

Berlet, Chip, 237n67

148, 152–58, 252n96. See also long-

Beschizza, Rob, 236n51

S
distance dialing; North American

BIBLE, 83–84, 230n124

N

Numbering Plan (NANP)

The Big Easy BBS, 190

302
inde x 303

Big-Internet listserv, 207n24

89, 98, 130, 133; San Francisco, 14,

Binkley-Term, 79

58–59, 68, 73, 80, 91, 152, 227n89;

BITNET, 5–6, 101, 104

San Francisco Bay Area, 18–19,

BitTorrent, 2

69, 145, 152–54, 216n17, 252n96,

Blake, Art M., 49

262n70; San Jose, 91, 135; San Juan

Blue, Bill, 106, 238n77. See also Apple, Ap-Capistrano, 164; Sausalito, 144, 152;
ple Bulletin Board System (ABBS);

Southern, 56; Tiburon, 113; Torrance,

ASCIIL: ASCII Express II “The

243n143

Professional” (AE Pro); People’s

Callahan, Michael, 114, 241n106. See also

Message System (PMS)

QEdit

Boardwatch, 26, 121, 131, 135, 145–46,

Campbell-Kelly, Martin, 239n88

169–70, 176, 245n163; BBS adver-

Canada, 20, 42, 105, 235n28; Montréal,
tisements, 187–89; circulation, 141;

159; Ontario, 65, 133
coverage of adult GIFs, 127–29, 186;

Canada Remote Systems, 133–34
coverage of digital ISDN, 264n101;

Capital PC User’s Group (CPCUG), 90;
coverage of FidoCon, 172–74; cover-

Communications SIG, 233n3
age of internet service providers,

Carey, James W., 246n15

178; coverage of sysops, 143, 179;

Carr, Robert, 250n56. See also Private
coverage of the World Wide Web,

Idaho BBS

180; Readers Choice Awards, 117,
catenet, 5

132–34, 152, 159, 161, 245n3

Caulkins, Dave, 34. See also People’s

Boing Boing, 101, 236n51

Computer Company, networking

Brand, Stewart, 116–17, 144. See also The
committee (PCNET)

WELL (Whole Earth ’Lectronic

CBS, 105, 238n71

Link); Whole Earth Catalog

CCITT: V.22bis protocol, 108–9

Brinker, Scott J., 187

CD-ROMs, 27, 92, 101, 116, 122, 242n138,

Brito, Laura, 158. See also Laura’s Lair

243n143

BBS

C_ECHO, 84, 88
broadband, 8, 93, 194, 207n25

Centers for Disease Control and Preven-

Burn This Flag BBS, 135
tion: National AIDS Clearinghouse,

Burrell, Berkeley G., 49

164

Bush, Randy, 77–78, 88, 177, 214n91,

Ceruzzi, Paul, 92

228n102, 260n47, 260n49
channel capacity, 130

Byte, 26, 52, 65, 96, 215n10, 222n97,
chat rooms, 13, 44, 105, 129, 137, 156,

243n145; advertisements, 31, 97, 128,

157–58, 196

215n9; coverage of CACHE, 217n31;

Chicago, IL, 48, 95, 104; BBSs in, 23, 159,
coverage of CBBS, 15, 32–37, 56,

162, 187, 189, 253n101; Boystown, 83;

216n20; coverage of FidoNet, 68;
and CBBS, 14–15, 29–32, 35, 98
coverage of modems, 96–97, 108,

Chicago Area Computer Hobbyist’s Ex-

120; coverage of UNIX, 263n83;
change (CACHE), 14, 29, 32, 217n31;
coverage of videotex, 235n28

The CACHE Register, 35

China, 89

C+, 243n143

Christensen, Ward, 14–15, 29–40, 56,

C++, 243n143

216n13, 216n17, 216n20, 217n31,

California, 105; Orange County, 65;

217n34

S

Redondo Beach, 221n94; San Diego,

Christianity, 44, 84, 135, 166

N

303

304 inde x

Citizens Band (CB) radio, 16, 38–41,

Simulator, 16, 57; forums, 80, 101,

45–57, 134, 219n71. See also amateur

185; Graphics Interchange Format
radio clubs; amateur radio opera-

(GIF), 124–31, 157, 161, 186, 191;
tors; Amateur Radio Relay League

MicroNET, 15–16; subscribers, 7, 25,

(ARRL); Chicago Area Computer

196; as walled garden, 175

Hobbyist’s Exchange (CACHE);

CompuShow, 124
radio; Radio Amateur Satellite Cor-

Compute!, 119
poration (AMSAT); Rooster Channel

Computer Chronicles, 26

Jumpers; W6TRW Amateur Radio
computer geek, figure of, 22–23, 174,

Club

193

Clark, Mary Elizabeth, 164–65, 256n161.

Computerized AIDS Ministries Network

See also AIDS Education General

(CAM), 165–67, 255n152, 256n161

Information System (AEGIS)

Computerized Bulletin Board System

Clark, Tony, 63

(CBBS), 45, 98, 107, 211n57, 211n68,

Clements, Brad, 176

215n5, 223n23; creation of, 14–15,

Clinton, Bill, 7, 138, 256n5

18, 29–40, 56–57, 98, 122, 217n34;
the cloud, 24
media coverage of, 215n9, 216n14;

Cold War, 9–10, 16, 88, 192, 194. See also
selling of, 34, 216n20

Iron Curtain

ComputerLand, 58
collaboration, 96, 137, 195, 260n47;

Computer Underground Digest (CuD),

BBSs providing, 32, 57, 142, 158, 176,

103–4

250n49; and FidoNet, 59–60, 66;

Convoy (film), 47
and textfiles, 19, 100, 103, 106
copper cabling, 3, 91, 93, 108, 120, 131

Colorado, 6, 23, 78, 132, 179; Boulder, 171;
copyright, 34, 114, 127–28, 186, 194,

Colorado Springs, 77; Denver, 162,

250n60. See also piracy; shareware

259n34
counterculture, 13, 47, 73, 99, 146–47

Colorado SuperNet, 6, 179

Courier, 121

Colossus (Collie), 74
cracking, 93

COMDEX, 258n22

Crawford, Vern, 63

Commander Keen, 118–19, 124

Crocker, David, 8
commercialization, 2, 4, 11, 40, 109, 138,

Crossfire, 104

185, 245n3; tensions over, 173–74

Crown International, 44

Commodore, 54, 148; Amiga, 122,

Cult of the Dead Cow (cDc), 103

243n139, 260n50; PET, 13

CyberNet, 190
community moderation, 2, 4, 104, 140,
cyberutopianism, 88, 138, 172, 174

143, 190; and FidoNet, 250n49; and

CYCLADES, 5, 226n78

Laura’s Lair BBS, 158; need for, 106,

136, 198; and Prodigy, 185, 238n72;

Dame-Griff, Avery, 214n91
and TARDIS BBS, 151. See also

Damon, Lee, 260n47
sysops (system operators)

Daniels, Don, 88

Compaq, 121

Daniels, Harvey A., 48

Compu Com Corporation, 109

Daniels, Jessie, 238n72

Compu-Erotica, 158, 253n101

Dartmouth University, 13

CompuServe, 5–6, 15–16, 22, 96, 116, 137,
databases, 14, 31, 95, 96, 113, 134, 137,

S

173, 184; acquisition by AT&T, 23; CB

235n28; backing up, 142; database

N

304
inde x 30 5
management systems, 54; of Echo-

Easy File. See PC-File (Easy File)

net conferences, 83; HIV/AIDS,
eBay, 25

164–65; matchmaker, 156; repeater,

Ebony, 49

43; user, 161

Ebony Shack BBS, 130
data processing, 51

ECHO BBS, 2, 23, 175

DataShack BBS, 129

EcoNet, 6, 19

Davila, Juan, 89, 232n151

The Economist, 8, 155

Dayton Hamfest, 172
education, 13, 48, 51, 111, 137–38, 198,

D. C. Hayes Associates. See Hayes Micro-

259n34; AIDS education, 163–65.

computer Products

See also Minnesota Educational

Defense Advanced Research Projects

Computing Consortium

Agency (DARPA), 5, 10, 35. See also
electronic cottage, 168, 256n5

ARPANET

Electronic Frontier Foundation, 172, 185,

Delphi, 6–7, 196

208n32
democracy, 28, 41, 86, 101, 138, 147, 184,

Electronic Information Exchange System,

198

137

Democratic Party, 168, 256n5

ELIZA, 148, 252n77
demoscene programming, 93

Elkhart County Radio Association

Desk Set, 12

(ECRA), 44

Dialog, 6, 96
email, 6, 9, 24, 188, 195–96, 260n47;

Dickinson, Ernest, 47
and AOL, 207n22; and BBSs, 85,

Dietz, George, 104. See also Liberty Bell

198; facilitating community, 93,

Digital Equipment Computer Users’

96, 172; and FidoNet, 73, 79, 88;

Society, 68
and racialized gender, 21; store-

Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC):

and-forward technique, 18; and

PDP-11, 53, 221n84; Rainbow, 58–59,

UFGATE, 177; and The WELL, 179.

72

See also ARPANET; SEAdog
digitization, 122–30, 243n139, 243n143

England, 65. See also United Kingdom
disability, 81, 84, 149, 252n78
entrepreneurship, 3, 114, 117, 141, 182, 185,

Dissociation Network BBS, 135

188

DIY (do-it-yourself) culture, 13, 19, 30, 39,
ephemerality, 24–25, 35, 100, 131, 134

52, 95, 111, 163

Epic Megagames, 118

Doctor Who, 147–48, 251n72. See also

Eternal September, 183–84, 262n78

TARDIS BBS

Europe, 32, 108, 215n10; BBSs in, 15, 65,

Dodell, David, 260n47

86, 164; FidoNet in, 72, 78, 88–89,

Doom, 93, 118–20, 122, 124, 242nn126–27

231n145; Opus in, 227n89. See also
dot-com boom, 2, 4, 9, 27–28, 169–71,
individual countries

182–83, 190

Event Horizons BBS, 124–29, 185,

Dow Jones, 6, 96

244n153, 245n163

Downing, Lisa, 173–75

Exec-PC BBS, 2, 116, 123, 159

Dragon Keep International, 1–2, 179
experimentation, 3–4, 40, 104, 193–94; in

Dr. Dobbs Journal of Computer Calisthenics

BBSs, 14, 28, 91, 197, 199; in CBBS,

& Orthodontia, 32

34, 37–38, 56; in FidoNet, 18, 62, 73,

Dutchie, 79

85; gendered, 151; in internet history,

Dvorak, John, 185

5, 7, 10; in microcomputing, 13, 39,

S

N

305

30 6 inde x
experimentation ( continued)

FidoNet Standards Committee/

51; in radio, 38, 41–42, 44, 219n52;

FidoNet Technical Standards
and shareware, 107, 113–14, 118; and

Committee (FTSC); International
sysops, 140, 178; in The WELL,

FidoNet Association (INFA)

145–46

FidoNet Standards Committee/FidoNet
e-zines, 19, 103–5, 192, 237n62

Technical Standards Committee

(FTSC), 77; “A Basic FIDONet(tm)

Facebook, 2, 23, 143, 167, 192, 196–99

Technical Standard” (FSC001),

Factsheet Five (zine), 101

78–79

Factsheet Five BBS, 101
file sharing, 93, 107, 163–64, 194; and

Farmer’s Daughter BBS, 129
floppy disks, 91–92; and gaming,

Federal Communications Commission

94, 106; and microcomputing,

(FCC), 41, 43, 46, 49

91–92, 105–6, 113–14, 117, 119; and

Feinsmith, Danny, 63
modems, 93–112, 120–31; and share-

Felsenstein, Lee, 95
ware, 112–20; and sysops (system op-
femininity, 162
erators), 115–18, 121, 123–24, 127–29.

feminism, 84, 105; cyberfeminism, 162,

See also shareware; textfiles

192. See also riot grrl

Fischer, Dave, 262n78
fiber optic cable, 3, 131
flame wars, 16, 151, 198

FidoCon, 141, 171–76, 258n22, 259n34,
floppy disks, 109, 118, 130, 134, 236n49;

260n49
and BBSs, 90, 147; and CBBS, 34,

FIDO-DEC.EXE, 73

215n5; and file sharing, 91–92; and

FIDO-IBM.EXE, 73

GIFs, 126–27; and microcomputing,

FidoNet, 6, 24, 101, 137, 164, 182, 191, 197,

53, 91; and textfiles, 99, 101, 105–6

223n23, 228n104; and collaboration,

Florida, 83; Gainesville, 1, 179; Key Largo,

59–60, 66; Continuous mail, 79;

135; Tallahassee, 34
decline of, 169; Echomail, 79–88,

Fluegelman, Andrew, 113–15, 240nn103–4.

171–72, 177–78, 230n129, 231n134,

See also PC-TALK

232n146, 232n151, 250n49; and

Ford, Nelson, 115. See also Public (Soft-
email, 73, 79, 88; in Europe, 72, 78,
ware) Library (PsL)

88–89, 231n145; and experimenta-

FORUM-80, 34
tion, 18, 62, 73, 85; FidoNews, 65–72,

Fox, David: Love Bytes, 135, 155–56, 159

77, 86, 89, 143, 173–74, 225n56,

France, 5, 10, 23, 129, 235n28

228n106, 238n71; and hobby

Frauenfelder, Mark, 101. See also Boing
computing, 70, 72–74, 85–88; in

Boing

Latin America, 232n151; nodelist,

Free Software Foundation, 233n6

60, 62–67, 69–70, 73, 78–79, 85,
freeware, 114, 125–26, 243n145. See also

214n91, 225n64, 228n105, 228n107;
shareware; user-supported software
origin of, 18, 58–59; packets, 78–79,

Friel, John, 115, 117. See also Qmodem

83, 226n78; sysops, 18, 58–89, 121,

FrontDoor, 79, 228n106

171–73, 212n69, 224n30, 238n71,

FTP, 10, 119, 185

259n34; and USENET, 229n108,

Fuchs, Michael G., 230n130

262n78, 263n79; and virtual com-
munity, 138, 167. See also FidoCon;

Galacticomm, 182

S

FIDO-DEC.EXE; FIDO-IBM.EXE;

Galvin, John, 260n47

N

306
inde x 307
gaming, 1, 8, 107, 121, 129, 135, 153, 168; for

Gore, Al, 21, 138
the Apple II, 103; and BBSs, 15, 90,

Grateful Dead, 19, 144, 146–47, 166, 172,

111, 124, 132–33; console, 183; door

251n65, 251n68
games, 19; erotic, 155, 158; fan-

Green, Wayne, 52
tasy, 27; and file sharing, 94, 106;

GreenNet, 6, 19
graphics, 122; modding, 120, 130;

Gronke, Lisa, 260n47
multiplayer, 31, 137–39; and PLATO,
group dialogue, 138

13; and shareware, 113, 117–20, 167;

Gunderloy, Mike, 101. See also Factsheet
and sysops, 142; turn-based, 93; in

Five (zine); Factsheet Five BBS

WarGames, 16. See also Commander
gURL BBS, 167

Keen; Doom

Garcia, Jerry, 251n65
habitus, 145

Gates, Bill, 7, 9, 92, 221n85
hackers, 30, 35, 59, 85, 102–4, 184,

Gateway, 121

217n28

Gay and Lesbian Information Bureau

Hackers (film), 168

(GLIB) BBS, 133, 159, 161–63, 175,

Hafner, Katie, 144; Where Wizards Stay

182

Up Late, 10

GayCom, 19

Hakala, David, 133

The Gay & Lesbian BBS, 159, 162

Hall, Dave (N3CVJ), 219n71

Gay Liberation Front, 255n152

Hall, Kira, 162

GAYNET, 83, 230n124

Hamilton, Michele, 172
geekiness, 22, 47, 85, 156, 174, 193
ham radio, 13, 25, 38–47, 50–56, 76, 81,
gender, 23, 57, 104, 130, 150–51, 193; and

84, 117, 217n28. See also amateur
adult BBSs, 154–59; at FidoCon,
radio clubs; amateur radio opera-

173–74; and HIV/AIDS BBSs, 166;
tors; Amateur Radio Relay League
and internet use, 21–23; and queer

(ARRL); Chicago Area Computer

BBSs, 159–63; and radio, 46–50;

Hobbyist’s Exchange (CACHE);
and textfile production, 105–6;

Dayton Hamfest; radio; Radio Ama-
women-only BBSs, 105, 158, 162–63,
teur Satellite Corporation (AMSAT);

175. See also femininity; feminism;

Rooster Channel Jumpers; W6TRW
masculinity

Amateur Radio Club

General BBS, 130
handles, 16, 48, 57

General Electric: GEnie, 6–7, 149, 196,

Haring, Kristen, 45, 49, 220n72

250n58

Hart, Rod: “CB Savage,” 47–48

Georgia: Atlanta, 14, 22, 95, 104, 175, 180

Hartman, Bob, 74, 77, 260n46. See also
g-files, 100, 235n42. See also textfiles

ROVER

Giffy Girls, 130

Harvard Information Infrastructure

GIFs (Graphics Interchange Format),

Project, 213n83

124–31, 157, 161, 186, 191

Hawaii, 65

Gilmore, John, 260n47. See also UFGATE

Hayes, Dennis, 34. See also Hayes Micro-

Gingrich, Newt, 256n5
computer Products

GNU Project, 233n6, 263n84

Hayes Microcomputer Products, 14, 30,

Good, Travis, 89

32, 34, 95, 101, 109, 215n9; 80-103A

Google, 24, 196; Adwords, 197
modem, 31; Micromodem II, 96;

Gopher, 177, 181, 207n22

Smartmodem, 121

S

N

307

30 8 inde x

Haynes, Daniel, 149–50. See also Prime

Hong Kong, 72, 82

BBS

Horn, Stacy, 23

Helmers, Carl, 32, 216n14. See also Byte

HostComm, 233n3

Henderson, Thom, 67–68, 70–71, 77, 79,

HT-220 Preservation Society, 219n51

81, 86, 228n104, 238n71. See also

HTML, 180, 191

SEAdog

Hughes, Dave, 135, 172, 180
historiography, 9–11

HIV/AIDS, 75, 163–66, 192–93, 227n89,

IBM, 19, 58, 73, 92, 114; compatibility,

255n152

13, 76, 115, 121, 149, 177, 233n3,

HIVNET, 164

260n50; mainframes, 12; PC,

Hobbycomputerclub (HCC), 72, 88

13–14, 54, 75, 80, 90, 101, 108,
hobby computing, 12–14, 40, 92, 124, 137,

113, 151

172, 215n4; and BBSs, 60, 63, 134,
iCE, 19

144–47, 159, 179, 197, 211n68; and
id Software, 117; Commander Keen, 118–19,

FidoNet, 70, 72–74, 85–88; and file

124; Doom, 93, 118–20, 122, 124,
sharing, 106, 113–14, 117, 119; media

242nn126–27
for, 26, 32, 111, 215n10; and modems,

Ilink, 173

95, 98; relation to radio, 51–57, 59;

Illinois: Aurora, 187–88; River Forest, 48.

retrocomputing, 25. See also ama-

See also Chicago, IL
teur computing; Hobbycomputer-

IMSAI 8080, 31
club (HCC)

inCider, 242n126
hobbyists, 94, 109, 136, 140, 178; and

Indiana, 147; Elkhart, 44; Indianapolis,

BBSs, 16, 22, 26, 27; and CBBS,

148, 153; Roachdale, 251n68; Terre

14–15, 30–39; role in telecommuni-

Haute, 148
cations history, 3. See also amateur

Indonesia, 18, 65, 72
radio clubs; amateur radio opera-

Infinite Data Source, 116
tors; amateurs; hobby computing;
information age, 168, 256n5
hobby radio
information retrieval, 96
hobby radio, 18, 29, 36–37, 48–49, 71,
information superhighway, 1, 22, 132, 136,

98, 104, 148; Citizens Band (CB)

155, 168, 183, 185; and Al Gore, 21;
radio, 16, 38–41, 45–57, 134, 219n71;
and Bill Clinton, 7, 170, 256n5; and
ham, 13, 25, 38–47, 50–56, 76, 81,
textfiles, 100, 131; and The Virtual

84, 117, 217n28. See also amateur Community, 138
radio clubs; amateur radio opera-

InfoWorld, 22, 26, 75, 90–91, 98, 175, 177,
tors; Amateur Radio Relay League

241n107

(ARRL); Chicago Area Computer

Instagram, 196

Hobbyist’s Exchange (CACHE);
integrated circuits (microchips), 38, 43,

Dayton Hamfest; Radio Amateur

51–52, 121, 219n52

Satellite Corporation (AMSAT);

Integrated Services Digital Network

Rooster Channel Jumpers; W6TRW

(ISDN), 131, 264n101

Amateur Radio Club

Intel, 51; 8080 microprocessor, 53

HOMOCORE, 101, 236n49
intellectual property, 92
homosexuality, 163, 174, 255n152. See also

Intelligent Match Maker, 156
queerness

International BBSing and Electronic

S

Homrighausen, Joaquim, 228n106. See

Communication Conference

N
also FrontDoor

(IBECC), 259n34

308
inde x 30 9

International FidoNet Association

Lamplighter BBS, 118

(INFA), 84, 86, 88, 231n137

Lane, Jim: “The Antenna Farm,” 76

Internet Archive, 26; Wayback Machine,

Lane, Russ, 233n3. See also RBBS-PC

24, 190

Larimore, Jon, 161

Internet Engineering Task Force,

Latin America, 89, 232n151. See also

228n102, 261n67

South America; individual countries
internet service providers (ISPs), 1, 4–5, 22, LATINO, 89

178, 187–88, 190–91, 261n67, 264n95

Laura’s Lair BBS, 158
internet studies, 138

Law & Order, 168
internetworks, 5, 10, 18, 69, 74, 77, 153,

Lawson, Chuck, 80

194

Legend of the Red Dragon (LoRD), 20, 193
intimacy, 3, 50, 153, 187, 198, 245n3

Legion of Doom (LoD), 104

IP addresses, 177, 182

Lentz, Arjen, 88

IP gateways, 5

Leo’s Graphics, 243n143

IRC (Internet Relay Chat), 139, 177

Liberty Bell, 104

Iron Curtain, 88

Lifestyle Online BBS, 157, 159

ITU Telecommunication Standardization

Linux, 263n84

Sector: V.32 standard, 108

Lodding, Ken, 36
long-distance dialing, 15, 18, 59, 80, 83,

Jennings, Tom, 178, 222n3, 223n23,

165, 252n94; costs, 61–62, 116, 118,

227n91, 260n45; and Echomail, 83,

139, 142, 145, 152, 182, 211n64; role

85, 229n114; and FidoCon, 172–74,
in BBSs, 58–65, 69, 79, 85, 92, 98,

259n34; and FidoNet, 18, 58–60,

139, 142; role in FidoNet, 121; role in

63–75, 77, 80, 86, 171–72; and

TARDIS, 152; role in The WELL, 145

HOMOCORE, 101, 236n49. See also

Loompanics Unlimited, 101

FidoNet; HOMOCORE

Louisiana: Ruston, 127

Johnny Mnemonic, 168

Lucas, Jay, 241n107

Johnson, Debbi Hood, 166, 256n161

Lyon, Matthew: Where Wizards Stay Up

Late, 10

Kaplan, Ken, 63, 67–68, 70, 77, 225n56,

230n131

Ma Bell. See AT&T

Kapor, Mitch, 172

Madill, John, 18, 58–60, 63, 66, 69, 85.

Katz, Bruce, 262n70. See also The WELL

See also FidoNet

(Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link)

The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction,

KEEN1.ZIP, 118

10

Kendall, Lori, 138
mailer software, 79, 82

Kenny, Thomas, 83
mailing lists, 2, 89, 104–5, 157, 162,
killer apps, 96, 196, 239n88

220n72, 254n128

Kleinman, Pablo, 88–89, 232n151. See also
mainframes, 12–15, 177

TangoNET

The Major BBS, 187

Knopf, Jim, 113–14. See also PC-File (Easy

The Male Box BBS, 162

File)

The Male Room BBS, 162

Kohn, Arthur, 19, 163. See also Backroom

The Male Stop, 162

BBS

Mark, Richard Scott, 1–2, 179, 183, 188,

Komputer, 88

190–91. See also Dragon Keep

S

Krol, Ed: The Whole Internet, 9

International

N

309

310 inde x

Markoff, John, 91
prejudice against, 85; and radio, 13,

The Mars Hotel BBS, 251n68

40, 43, 50–56, 148; representations

Martin, Paul, 1. See also Dragon Keep
of, 36; and software, 109, 111–12,

International

114–16; in WarGames, 16. See also Mi-Maryland: Baltimore, 18, 58–59; Rock-
cro Instrumentation and Telemetry
ville, 90

Systems (MITS): Altair 8800
masculinity, 47, 50, 162

Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry

Mason, Larry, 166–67

Systems (MITS), 220n83; Altair

Massachusetts: Boston, 49, 55, 58, 83,

8800, 13, 31, 39, 53–56, 215n4, 215n7,

237n59; Clinton, 117; Lexington,

215n9, 215nn86–87, 221n84, 221n87;

237n59; Provincetown, 83; Route

Altair/Microsoft BASIC, 92, 112

128 corridor, 27, 65; Scituate, 55
microprocessors, 45, 51, 53–54, 58

MasterCard, 129

Microsoft, 11–12, 37, 114, 221n85, 240n105;

Match Maker, 156

Altair/Microsoft BASIC, 92, 112;
matchmaking, 156

Microsoft Network, 169; MS-DOS,
material history, 24–26

58, 73, 75, 124, 177, 184, 260n47;

Matrix Information and Directory Ser-

Multiplan, 112; Network, 7, 169;
vices (MIDS), 206n17

Windows 95, 168–70

Maxey, Jim, 124–29, 244n157, 245n163,

Miller, Allen, 77

245n166

Mims, Forest M., III, 220n83

Maxim, Hiram Percy, 42, 218n47

Minitel, 5–6, 23, 25, 138–39, 183, 195,

MaxiPic, 126–27, 244n157

222n3, 235n28; adult chat rooms,

Maxwell, Kim, 108. See also Racal-Vadic

129; interface, 75

Mazlish, Bruce, 138

Minnesota Educational Computing Con-

McCall, C. W.: “Convoy,” 47, 50
sortium, 51, 137

McDonnell Douglas, 59, 68

Missouri, 71, 165; Ava, 158; Columbia, 135;

MCI, 85; MCI Mail, 6, 196

St. Louis, 18, 59, 63, 65–66, 68–69,

McKay, Byron, 91

86

Mellinger, Mike, 63

Mitchell, Sammy, 241n106
messagerie roses, 129
mobile phones, 5

Metal Shop BBS, 104
modding, 120, 130
metanetworks, 6–8, 120
modem, definition, 12

Metcalfe, Bob, 22, 143
modem kits, 95, 121, 169, 174
methodology of book, 24–27
modem world, definition, 12

Metzger, Tom, 105

Mondo 2000, 250n56; User’s Guide, 144

Meyer, Gorden, 104. See also Computer

Moore, Clarence, 44. See also Crown

Underground Digest (CuD)

International

Microcom, 85

Morse code, 41, 54–55
microcomputing, 85, 97, 153, 184,

Mosaic, 1, 183, 262n68, 264n100

221n86, 260n45, 263nn83–84;

Motorola, 43; 68000 microprocessor, 58;
clubs, 13–14, 29, 34–35, 59, 68–69,

HT-220 radio, 219n51

92, 98–99, 142; and FidoNet, 18, 72;

MS-DOS, 58, 73, 75, 124, 177, 184, 260n47
and file sharing, 91–92, 105–6; kits,

Multicom-4, 159–61

13, 39, 45, 52–53, 56, 215n4, 215n7,
multinet, 69–71, 225n56

S

215n9, 221n87; and modems, 31, 91,

Mustang Software, 182

N

96, 152; and packet-switching, 177;

Myers, Lary, 98–99, 107

310
inde x 311

NASA, 127

O’Hara, Rob, 106, 170

National Library of Medicine: AIDSLINE,

Ohio, 133; Toledo, 130

164

Olson, John, 143

National Negro Business League, 49

O’Nan, Thomas, 148–53. See also TARDIS

National Science Foundation (NSF), 35;

BBS

Acceptable Use Policy, 140

ONE BBSCON, 132–33, 141, 173, 175–76,

Nebraska: North Loup, 166–67

180, 259n34

Neghila, Harv, 80

Onwere, Ken, 175. See also AfroNet
neo-Nazis, 20, 65, 104–5, 184, 238n71. See

Open Systems Interconnection (OSI), 74
also anti-Semitism; Dietz, George;

Opus BBS, 75–77, 80–81, 84, 164,

Liberty Bell; Metzger, Tom; white

227n89
supremacy

Oregon, 126; Lake Oswego, 124; Portland,

The Net, 168

69, 177

Netherlands, 72, 88, 172

Oregonian, 127

NETI, 250n58
netmail, 18
packet switching, 85, 88, 103, 164, 178,

Netscape, 168–70, 182, 264n100

187, 192, 252n94; and ARPANET,

New Hampshire, 77–78; Petersborough,

9–10; and BBSs, 27, 153, 171; and

65

NSFNET, 22; and TCP/IP, 5, 8, 177,

New Jersey: Tom’s River, 83

226n78

New Mexico: Albuquerque, 51, 118, 133,

The Paradise Play Line BBS, 158

220n83; Hobbs, 118
participatory culture, 28, 50–51, 57, 67,
newsgroups, 9–10, 80, 92, 100, 168, 177,

98, 105, 119, 238n72

184–85, 231n134; moderation, 2

Parton, Dolly: “10-4 Over and Out,”

New York City, 23, 42, 135, 162, 165

46–47

New York magazine, 168

Pascal, 243n143

New York State: Albany, 135; Chappaqua,

Paxinos, Garry, 260n47

101; East Greenbush, 101; Long

PCBoard: DISPLAY, 100

Island, 157; Rochester, 159

PC-File (Easy File), 113–14

New York Times, 47, 138

PC Magazine, 128, 185, 243n140

Nichols, Mike, 118

PC-TALK, 113–15, 240n104

Nielsen, 187

PC-Write, 113–14

Nitelog BBS, 129

Peace, George, 86

Nixon, Richard, 49

PeaceNet, 6, 19

NODELIST.BBS, 60, 62

Penner, Jerry, 149

North American Numbering Plan

Pennywhistle, 96

(NANP), 17, 61, 65, 69, 71, 103,

Penthouse, 129

223n14. See also area codes

People’s Computer Company, 95; net-

Novation: Apple-CAT II, 108; CAT, 96–97
working committee (PCNET), 34,

NSFNET, 6, 8, 22, 25

211n68, 216n17

People’s Message System (PMS), 238n77

Oak Tree BBS, 23, 162

Perot, Ross, 135, 161, 254n128

Oblivion/2: ANSI Gallery, 100

Phillips, Emo, 104

Octothorpe, 102

Phoenix Technologies, 58

O’Dell, Sally (KB1O): “Clubs and Com-

Phrack, 103–4

S
puters: A Simple Interface,” 55

PicoNet, 91

N

311

312 inde x

PicoSpan, 180

129, 133, 156–63, 175, 182, 193; queer
piracy, 27, 140, 185; software, 18, 25, 93,
neighborhoods, 76, 83; queer

111, 114, 128
politics, 66; queer punk culture,

Planet Connect, 85, 178

73; queer zines, 101; and radio,

Plantation Records, 48

47–48. See also HOMOCORE;

PLATO, 6, 13
homosexuality

Playboy, 102, 127–29, 245nn163–64

QWERTY keyboard, 53

The Pleasure Dome BBS, 133, 157–58
point-and-click interface, 8, 176, 180–82,

Racal-Vadic, 108

191, 242n138
race, 166; in BBSs, 57, 104–5, 129–30, 193;

Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP), 261n67
at FidoCon, 173–74; and internet

Poland, 88, 119, 215n10
use, 21–23; in radio, 48–50, 57

Polaroid, 130
racism, 19, 104–5, 163, 174–75, 193,

Polunsky, Richard, 73

237n67, 238n72; apartheid, 88. See

Popular Electronics, 39, 52–53, 221n87
also anti-Semitism; Dietz, George;

Popular Mechanics, 183

Liberty Bell; Metzger, Tom; white
pornography, 123, 128–30, 140, 155,
supremacy

245n166; moral panic over, 22, 168,
radio, 18, 36–37, 71, 86, 154, 211n65,

184–85, 264n92

218n44, 219n51, 222n97; Citizens

Pouzin, Louis, 5, 7

Band (CB) radio, 16, 38–41, 45–57,

Požar, Tim, 172, 177, 260n47. See also

134, 219n71; ham, 13, 25, 38–47,

UFGATE

50–56, 76, 81, 84, 117, 217n28; and

Prime BBS, 149–50, 152
participatory culture, 98; right-wing,

Pritchett, Bob, 77

104, 174; and TARDIS, 148. See
privacy, 3, 28, 163, 194
also amateur radio clubs; amateur

Private Idaho BBS, 250n56
radio operators; Amateur Radio

“The Private Oak Lawn Exchange,” 76

Relay League (ARRL); Chicago Area
privatization, 2, 22, 171, 173–74, 176, 178,

Computer Hobbyist’s Exchange

190, 213n83

(CACHE); Dayton Hamfest;

Procomm, 115

Radio Amateur Satellite Corpora-

Prodigy, 7, 22, 105, 121, 169, 173–76,
tion (AMSAT); Rooster Channel

184–85, 238n72; NAPLPS, 242n138

Jumpers; W6TRW Amateur Radio

ProMatch, 156

Club

Prometheus Products: Pro-Modem 1200,

Radio Act (1912), 42

108

Radio Amateur Satellite Corporation

Public (Software) Library (PsL), 115

(AMSAT), 36

Puerto Rico, 20, 71, 89

Radio-Electronics, 52

Radio Shack, 46, 108–9, 120, 122,

QEdit, 241n106

169, 220n83; catalog, 45, 54, 110;

Qmodem, 115, 117, 172

TRS-80, 13, 34, 54

QST, 39, 52
radio teletype (RTTY), 52, 55

Quarterman, John S.: The Matrix, 5–8,

RAND Corporation, 10

206n17

Rankin, Joy Lisi, 13, 199
queerness, 75, 84, 136, 167, 192–93,

RBBS-PC, 233n3

S

214n91, 255n152; queer activism,

README files, 25, 107, 131

N

27, 166, 192; queer BBSs, 19, 23,

Reddit, 167, 198

312
inde x 313
regulation, 28, 40–41, 61, 87, 138, 140;

S-100 microcomputer, 14, 30–31. See
breakup of Ma Bell, 38, 60, 191;
also Micro Instrumentation and
of hate speech, 105; of radio, 43,

Telemetry Systems (MITS): Altair

46; of users, 197, 206n13. See

8800
also community moderation; Radio

Sabol, Jon, 80

Act (1912); sysops (system opera-

Sappho BBS, 162
tors); Telecommunications Act

SAPPHO mailing list, 162

(1996)

Savetz, Kevin, 239n86

RelayNet, 173

Schinnell, Rich, 90, 94, 99, 233n3. See

Republican Party, 168, 256n5
also Software Exchange/Software
retrocomputing, 25, 252n96

Library

Rheingold, Howard, 137, 144–46, 252n95;

Scott, Jason, 101–3, 214n94, 216n13,

The Virtual Community, 138. See also

237n62, 252n96; BBS: The Docu-

Whole Earth Review
mentary, 25–26, 226n79, 237n59,

Rick, 83

237n67. See also textfiles.com; The

Rickard, Jack, 131–32, 180, 183, 188,

Works BBS

257n14, 264n95; and FidoCon, 172–

SEAdog, 74, 78–79, 228n104, 228n106

74, 176, 258n22; and The WELL,

Serial Line Internet Protocol (SLIP),

145–46. See also Boardwatch

180
right-wing extremists, 104, 174. See also

SF-LOVERS, 220n72
anti-Semitism; neo-Nazis; racism;

Shannon, Claude, 130
white supremacy

Shanti Project, 227n89
riot grrl, 105

Shapiro, Ezra, 68

Robbins, Marge, 223n23
shareware, 27, 93, 126, 193, 240n100,

Robbins, Mark, 106. See also ASCII:

241nn106–7, 241nn110–11, 242n125,

ASCII Express II “The Professional”

243n145; and BBSs, 106–7, 112–21,

(AE Pro)

124, 153; and FidoNet, 73; and GIFs,

Roberts, Ed, 220n83

125, 127–31, 186. See also Association Robinson, Seth Able, 20. See also Legend
of Shareware Professionals (ASP);
of the Red Dragon (LoRD)

freeware; user-supported software

Rockwell, 121

Shifrin, Jerry, 142–43

Roman Empire BBS, 129

Shiman, Philip, 208n33

Romero, John, 242n126. See also Doom

Silicon Valley, 20, 37, 91, 152–53, 154, 167,

Rooster Channel Jumpers, 49

185; and internet history, 9, 11, 27,

Rosary College, 48

194, 199; and social media, 3, 196

Rose, Lance, 127

The Simpsons, 168

Rosen, Ben, 109

Sinclair, Carla, 101. See also Boing Boing

Ross Perot for President BBS, 135

Singapore, 72

Route 128 corridor (Massachusetts), 27,

Slashdot, 26, 167

65

Smith, Thomas, 115. See also Procomm

ROVER, 74

Smokey and the Bandit, 47

Rowe, Eddie, 127
sneakernet, 91

Rush, Jeff, 80–81
social computing, 2, 40, 145, 147

Rusty, 166
social media, 2, 141, 174; failures of, 24,

Rusty n Edie’s BBS, 185–86

195–97; future after, 28, 198–99;

S

Ryan, Jim, 63
histories of, 3–4, 11, 21, 27, 167, 192,

N

313

314 inde x
social media ( continued)

19; of ECHO, 23; and FidoNet, 18,

195–96, 198. See also terms of ser-

58–89, 121, 171–73, 212n69, 224n30,
vice agreements; individual platforms

238n71, 259n34; and file sharing,
social networking, 106, 146, 159, 194

115–18, 121, 123–24, 127–29; and

Softalk for the IBM Personal Computer, 115
the internet, 175–93; and Legend of

Softdisk, 109
the Red Dragon, 20; media for, 26;

Software Creations, 117–18, 120, 159
of PicoNet, 91; of Private Idaho,

Software Exchange/Software Library,

250n56; and privatization, 22; role

90–91, 94, 99
of, 140–44, 167; specialization of, 16;

The Source, 6, 15–16, 25, 96, 196
of TARDIS, 147–51, 251n70; of The

South Africa, 82, 260n48; Johannesburg,

WELL, 146; of WinPlus, 135; of The

88; Makhanda, 260n49

Works, 237n59

South America, 86. See also Latin

Szelozynski, Jacek, 88

America; individual countries

Soviet Communist Party, 172

TangoNET, 88–89

Soviet Union, 78, 172, 231n145

TARDIS BBS, 147–54, 162, 167, 251nn69–
spreadsheet software, 13, 109, 117, 122, 125

70, 252n90

Sprint, 85

TBBS, 141, 172

Stein, Michael, 161

TCP/IP, 5, 8, 10–11, 71, 74, 177, 192,

S-Tek BBS, 159

226n78

Sterling, Bruce: “A Short History of the

TCSoft, 156. See also Match Maker

Internet,” 10

Telebit, 85

Stewart, Peter, 172

TELECOM, 104
store-and-forward technique, 18, 42, 44,

Telecommunications Act (1996), 170

63, 177–78, 226n78

TeleGrafix Communications, Inc.: RIP-

Strange Days, 168
scrip, 242n138

Streeter, Tom, 11
télématique systems, 183

Suck, 101

Telenet: PC Pursuit, 85, 252n94

Suess, Randy, 14–15, 29–30, 32–40, 56,
telephone lines, 27, 75, 102, 104, 131,

215n5, 216n17, 216n20

141, 171, 176; Bell System (Ma Bell),

Super-Ratt, 148

38–40, 56–57, 60, 91, 95, 98, 191,

Super VGA, 243n145, 244n157

223n14, 245n175; and CBBS, 14–15,

Supra, Inc.: SupraFAXModem, 121, 130;

30, 36–40; and FidoNet, 59–71, 78,

SupraModem, 121

85, 89, 121; and Gay and Lesbian
swap meets, 25, 37, 55–56, 221n94

Information Bureau, 161; leased

Sweden, 65, 228n106
lines, 60, 178; and modems, 8, 31,

Swindell, Rob, 170

91, 93–98, 107–8, 120–21, 223n16,
swinging, 157

245n175; replacement for, 182, 191;

Synchronet, 170
role in BBSs, 2–4, 17, 20, 59–71, 101,

Sysop News . . . and CyberWorld Report, 26

118, 133, 135, 139, 148, 152–58, 252n96;
sysops (system operators), 101, 197–99,
and TARDIS, 148–49. See also area

227n89, 231n137, 249n38, 250n49,
codes; long-distance dialing; North

260n48; and archiving BBSs, 24;

American Numbering Plan (NANP)

and BBS decline, 169–70, 182–90;
teleprinters, 15, 19, 30, 33, 75, 215n4

S
creating community, 154–62;

Teletype Model ASR-33, 30

N
definition, 4; and door games,

Telidon, 5, 235n28

314
inde x 315
terminal emulation software, 15, 58

US Department of Defense: Advanced
terms of service agreements, 3, 143, 197

Research Projects Agency (ARPA),

Terrapin Station BBS, 251n68

35. See also ARPANET

Texas, 238n71; Dallas, 75–76, 80–81, 83,

USENET, 5–6, 8, 77, 80, 85, 105, 129,

118; Ft. Worth, 80, 118; Houston, 65,

188, 190; and AOL, 183–84, 207n22,

73, 115, 158; Lubbock, 103

262n78; and commercial satel-
textfiles, 122, 129, 131, 134, 142, 177, 198;
lite services, 178; and cyberspace,
definition, 19; and modems, 93, 99,

195; decline of, 138; and FidoNet,

102, 107; role in BBSs, 99–107. See

229n108, 231n134, 263n79; “Great
also g-files

Renaming,” 71–72; newsgroups,
textfiles.com, 25–26

9–10, 92, 101, 168, 177, 185; and

TGnet, 23
virtual communities, 139, 143; and

Thomas, Jim, 104. See also Computer

Women’s Wire, 179

Underground Digest (CuD)

user-supported software, 114. See also

Thornton, Ben (NI5B, WD5WLS), 76
freeware; shareware

Tieman, Dave, 1. See also Dragon Keep

US Independent Telephone Association

International

(USITA), 223n14

Timberman, Roy, 85

US National Guard, 47

Time magazine, 8, 168, 183, 185

US Robotics, 85, 109, 121, 230n131; Phone
time-sharing, 12–15, 31–32, 51, 95–96, 137,

Link Acoustic Modem, 95

183, 192, 215n4; and microcomput-

US Secret Service, 185
ing, 53, 98

US Securities and Exchange Commis-

Toffler, Alvin, 256n5
sion, 23
trademarks, 103, 114, 127–28. See also

UUNET, 6, 261n67
piracy; shareware
trolling, 16

Vaughan, Craig, 98, 238n77. See also

Trumpet Winsock, 262n68

Apple: Apple Bulletin Board System

Turbo Pascal, 20

(ABBS); People’s Message System

Turner, Fred, 144

(PMS)

Twitter, 196, 231n145

VAX-11/750, 147

Tymnet, 5
very high frequency (VHF), 38, 43–45,

218n40

UFGATE, 177, 260nn47–48
videotex systems, 5, 7, 75, 222n3, 235n28.

United Kingdom, 10, 19. See also England

See also Minitel; Telidon

United Methodist Church, 165–66,
violence, 3, 49, 103, 151, 162, 175, 193,

255n152. See also Computerized

238n71. See also anti-Semitism;

AIDS Ministries Network (CAM)

flame wars; neo-Nazis; trolling;

Universe, 126
white supremacy

University of Illinois, 13

Virginia, 15, 65, 166; Alexandria, 116; Ar-

University of Wisconsin, 119
lington, 133, 159; Northern, 20, 65,

UNIX, 176, 183–84, 233n6, 261n67,

142, 180; Virginia Beach, 157

263n83
virtual communities, study of, 137–39

Unix-to-Unix Copy (UUCP), 6, 18, 177,

Virtuosity, 168

179, 260n45, 260n47

Visa, 129

USA Today, 188

VisiCalc, 13, 109, 111, 239n88, 240n92

S

US Census Bureau, 21–22, 25, 169
voice verification, 143, 150, 159

N

315

316 inde x

W6TRW Amateur Radio Club, 56,
white supremacy, 19, 105, 193. See also

221n94

Dietz, George; Liberty Bell; Metzger,

Wade, Keith, 135

Tom; neo-Nazis

Wagner, Wynn, III, 75, 80, 83, 227n84,

Whole Earth Catalog, 144

227n89; “HIV: Day One,” 164–65.

Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link. See The

See also GAYNET; Opus BBS

WELL (Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link)

Wagoner, Porter: “10-4 Over and Out,”

Whole Earth Review, 114, 138

46–47

Wichman, Jon, 63

WAIS, 207n22

Wildhack, Billy, 62, 156, 158

Wallace, Bob, 113–14, 240n105, 241n107.

Wilkes, Richard P., 260n45

See also PC-Write

Williams, Gail Ann, 251n65. See also The
walled gardens, 175, 196

WELL (Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link)

Wallin, Sven Andreás. See Wagner,

Williams, Raymond, 136–37

Wynn, III

WinLink, 219n56

Walter, Russ: The Secret Guide to Comput-

WinPlus BBS, 135
ers, 112–13

Wired, 144
warez subculture, 93

Wisconsin, 119; Elm Grove, 116

WarGames, 16, 223nn16

Withrow, Don, 233n3. See also

Warhol, Andy, 243n139

HostComm

Warren, Jim, 173. See also West Coast

Wolf, Gary, 161

Computer Faire

The Women on The WELL (WOW), 105

Washington: Bellevue, 113; Kent, 135;

Women’s Wire, 179

Seattle, 69, 113

Wong, Gee, 77

Washington, DC, 161–62, 180

WoodyWare, 156. See also ProMatch

Washington Square United Methodist
word of disk, 112

Church, 255n152
word processing software, 54, 113

Wasiak, Patryk, 215n10

The Works BBS, 101–3, 105, 237n59
watermarking, 123, 126, 131, 244n162

World Altair Computer Convention, 51

Weber, Dale, 260n47

Worldgroup, 187

Weizenbaum, Joseph, 148. See also ELIZA

World Wide Web, 1–2, 9, 161, 164, 170,

The WELL (Whole Earth ’Lectronic

187, 194; and BBSs, 4, 138, 155, 169,

Link), 2, 7, 105, 138, 144–47, 151–54,

180–82, 190–91, 251n69; as primary

175, 252n95; decline of, 138; and
internet interface, 8; and textfiles,
the Grateful Dead, 19, 251, 251n65;

101; and white supremacy, 105
reinvention, 262n70; software

Wozniak, Steve “Woz,” 51
infrastructure, 250n58; The Women

WWIV, 100
on The WELL (WOW), 105; and

Women’s Wire, 179; WWW inter-

Xerox, 5, 5–6, 105, 111
face, 180–81, 251n68; You Own Your The X-Files, 168

Own Words (YOYOW), 145, 250n60

XMODEM, 172

West Coast Computer Faire, 173, 216n17

Western Electric Model 500 telephone,

YouTube, 24, 197

97

Wheeler, Ken “Swamp Rat”: “Gerbil Feed

ZMODEM, 88, 172

S

Bomb,” 103

Zoo BBS, 159

N

316

Document Outline

- Cover
- Half Title
- Title
- Copyright
- Dedication
- Contents
- 1 Recalling the Modem World
- 2 Computerizing Hobby Radio
- 3 Building an Internet for Everyone
- 4 Sharing Files with Strangers
- 5 Cultivating Community
- 6 Becoming the Net

- 7 Imagining a Better Future for the Internet

- Acknowledgments
- Notes
- Bibliography

- Index

- A
- B
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- H
- I
- J
- K
- L
- M
- N
- O
- P
- Q
- R
- S
- T
- U
- V
- W
- X
- Y
- Z

Table of Contents

- Cover
- Half Title
- Title
- Copyright
- Dedication
- Contents
- 1 Recalling the Modem World
- 2 Computerizing Hobby Radio
- 3 Building an Internet for Everyone
- 4 Sharing Files with Strangers
- 5 Cultivating Community
- 6 Becoming the Net

- 7 Imagining a Better Future for the Internet

- Acknowledgments
- Notes
- Bibliography

- Index

- A
- B
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- H
- I
- J
- K
- L
- M
- N
- O
- P
- Q
- R
- S
- T
- U
- V
- W
- X
- Y
- Z