Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!munnari.oz.au!goanna!giaea!doug
From: doug@giaea.gi.oz (doug thomson)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: TR3-6.ZIP - Operate PC from a remote location, or monitor
Summary: some articles are not actually posted by the claimed author
Message-ID: <743@giaea.gi.oz>
Date: 28 Dec 90 03:21:41 GMT
References: <1637.w8sdz@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL>
Organization: Monash University College Gippsland, Churchill 3842, Victoria, AUSTRALIA.
Lines: 42

I recently made TeleReplica version 3.6 available for FTP from chyde.uwasa.fi
and SIMTEL20. I also sent Timo an announcement that included both a summary
of the changes since the previous version, and a full overview of what the
package did (I also sent a copy of this announcement to Keith, so that he
would have the full announcement regardless of the selection that Timo
decided to post). I was not sure that it was appropriate to use net
bandwidth on the full overview, so I asked the archive site moderators to
use their own judgement about what (if anything) should be posted here.
Timo subsequently posted an announcement including just the summary of
changes. At about that stage I went off on leave.

When I came back, I was most surprised to find a posting claiming to be
from me, including the full overview of TeleReplica! A closer inspection
of the headers revealed the message id to be:
    <1637.w8sdz@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL>
which seems to suggest it was actually posted by Keith.

Now naturally, as a shareware author, I am grateful for any publicity,
but I wonder if it is common knowledge that not all the postings in this
group are actually made by the person indicated in the "From:" line? I
subsequently checked the message id field of other messages of the form,
"my program is now available from SIMTEL20," and found several, from
various different authors, all originating from w8sdz@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL.

I can see some advantages in doing things this way: anyone who replies to
the posting sends mail to me rather than Keith; and indeed, the bulk of the
message did originate from me, even though I did not post it. Nevertheless,
I feel a little uncomfortable that I appear to be using the net to
advertise my own product - I would feel better about it if it was clear
that the posting was being made by an archive site moderator who had
independently decided that my product warranted such an announcement (I
guess this is why I am posting this message...).

If this is a common practice that everyone else was aware of, then please
excuse my ignorance and ignore this posting. In any case, this posting is
not really relevant to this group, except in so far as the original posting
was in this group, so I ask anyone posting a follow-up to consider carefully
which group would be most appropriate.

Doug.
(doug@giaea.oz.au)
...!munnari.oz.au!goanna!giaea!doug