Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!ox.com!lokkur!scs From: scs@lokkur.dexter.mi.us (Steve Simmons) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: How to make a faster comp.sources.unix Message-ID: <1990Dec3.012504.6773@lokkur.dexter.mi.us> Date: 3 Dec 90 01:25:04 GMT References: <10770:Nov3009:18:4790@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <48555@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU> <1990Dec1.231725.28103@lokkur.dexter.mi.us> <11469:Dec222:21:4990@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Organization: Inland Sea Lines: 32 scs@lokkur.dexter.mi.us (That's Me!) writes: > Much as I respect Rich, I don't see where his input is required. Any > 'comp.sources.refereed' will be a new way of doing source examination, > and should be looked on as such. brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) responds: >I don't know about you, but I want somebody with experience moderating >the most useful group on the Internet. I also wouldn't mind beta-testing >packages that come through, so as to give Rich and the authors a bit >more assurance that the code is portable. If Rich likes the idea of >having testers, your proposal for comp.sources.refereed will fall flat. >Why are you so eager to institute major changes in a system that works? Paul Grahams original comment (which I quoted) was: it seems we should have a framework to operate in before we start planning the operation. at the very least rich should tell us if he thinks this is a good idea. I'd be most pleased to have Rich's comments. Please note I said his input is not *required*. For whatever reason he is not participating in this discussion. That lack of participation should not prevent us from going ahead with Pauls excellent idea. Note too, that a refereed newsgroup is going to be quite a different beast to manage. Richs experinces (and Brandons, and anybody else who's been moderating a source groups) will be most useful to the referees. Overseeing the referees is something few if any of us have experince with. -- "I was talking about what it takes to be a real critic, not a critic wannabe." -- Mike Godwin, rec.arts.comics critic