Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!motcsd!xdos!doug
From: doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: comp.binaries.amiga ---> too much coming?
Message-ID: <688@xdos.UUCP>
Date: 19 Mar 90 02:00:17 GMT
References: <02362.AA02362@sosaria.imp.com> <132974@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: doug@xdos.UUCP (Doug Merritt)
Organization: Hunter Systems, Mountain View CA (Silicon Valley)
Lines: 45

In article <132974@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes:
>I presume you are complaining because you archive this stuff and are
>running out of space. That isn't any excuse for cutting off the rest
>the world now is it? 

Wholeheartedly agree. I archive, and often have space problems. But
I regard it as *my* problem, not the net's.

>Suggestion 1: Keep the "rate" of binaries at some fixed limit of 
>megabytes per week. That way you will always know what the maximum
>space is to reserve per week for the binaries and you can trim your
>archive once a week.

And in fact Tad *does* limit the size/rate of binaries per week,
as did Bob before him. So this suggestion is already implemented.

Also note that 99% of the time when these criticisms occur (as they
regularly do in *all* of the .binaries groups, among others), the
original complainer does not offer any figures to substantiate "too big"
or "too much". Typically if the flames go on for too long, somebody
does a little legwork, and posts figures that demonstrate that the
flaming has taken up e.g. 10 times as much network Kbyte traffic as
the original stuff claimed subjectively to be "too big".

>Note : comp.binaries.amiga are run for the benefit of the comp.sys.amiga*
>readership and not for the archivists. If a policy decision has to be made
>always hold in favor of the readership as they are your real customers.

Right. Also note that the net is an anarchy, not a democracy (other than
the nominally democratic new group creation process, which in fact tends
to be as anarchistic as it is democratic; see comp.periphs.scsi). And
moderated newsgroups are dictatorships. Thank god for that...if we had to
vote on what got posted (as was previously suggested), we'd generate
hundreds of megs of junk arguments, and would never reach agreement,
and everyone would *still* bitch. Probably even more than now, in fact.

Or even worse, we'd create what is aptly called "the tyranny of the majority".
I.e. there's a lot to be said for a process which at times only benefits a
small minority. Over a sufficient period of time, different minorities
add up to equal everyone, a point which is almost universally overlooked
in our nation's politics.
	Doug
-- 
Doug Merritt		{pyramid,apple}!xdos!doug
Member, Crusaders for a Better Tomorrow		Professional Wildeyed Visionary