Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!mmdf
From: wjb%cogsci.COG.JHU.EDU@vm1.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: comp.os.minix splitup (possible mailing list conflicts)
Message-ID: <49473@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Date: 1 Apr 91 21:21:44 GMT
Sender: mmdf@ee.udel.edu
Lines: 62


Al Donaldson writes:
>
>>[I (Bill Bogstad) get sarcastic about the difficulty in dealing with two
>>minix newsgroups.]
>
>My main objection to a split, any split, is that it requires posters
>to make a decision:  which group do I post to?  The answer is often "both."
>And, all too often, instead of cross-posting, the user separately posts
>the message, once to group A and a second time to group B.  Two distinct
>messages with the same content.  The result is (a) that the net carries
>the message twice to all sites and (b) we have to read the message twice.
>Someone has to pay for (a), and each of us pays for (b).
>
>If anyone [in the US??] wants an example, check out the misc.forsale,
>misc.forsale.computers, and misc.wanted kludge.  Sometimes I see the
>same message *three* times over there.  Maybe we can handle this --
>maybe we're a lot smarter than those folks over there.. :-)
>
>It's not a problem with the additional group.  I'll edit my .newsrc
>so I can read both of them together, as I suspect everyone else will.
>The problem is that I have to read through probably a time and a half
>the traffic to get the same content.

	Sorry about the tone of my last message.  With your explanation, I
now understand your fears.  I assume you are concerned about people who post
seperate messages to each group.  (Most recent news software can avoid
showing you the same message twice if it is crossposted.)

	Your example of misc.forsale.* is certainly a situation that we
would want to avoid.  My personal problem with those groups is the number of
people who post computers to misc.forsale instead of/or without a
posting/crossposting to misc.forsale.computers.  I don't think that other
groups have the these problems to the same extent.  The comp.unix.* groups
seem to handle it o.k.  (With the possible exception of people/questions
which fit most appropriately in comp.unix.questions.)

	Education of readers and posters can help solve this problem.  The
misc.forsale groups are often used by people who are not familiar with them
or news in general.  They probably never read the groups themselves nor will
they ever post there again.  The readers and posters of the Minix newsgroups
have a much larger stake in making it an efficient forum for communication.
As a result, I think it can work.

	However, this does bring up a concern that I have mentioned in
passing twice now.  How will the two newsgroups interface with the currently
single mailing list?  Many people have no access to news and depend on the
mailing list for both discussion and sources.  The quick solution (leave
things as they are) results in mailing list people never seeing many source
codes.  They also end up sending their source codes to the discussion
newsgroup.  Sending everything from both groups to the mailing list means
they see everything.  But again what about their mailings.  Do they always
go into the discussion group/source group/both (crossposted of course)?  The
way I see it any solution which only has one address to which mail can be
sent doesn't even ALLOW people to correctly send their messages, let alone
encouraging them to do so.  Whether two seperate lists of recipients should
be maintained or just two different submission addresses would depend on
what the administator of the list wanted to do.  Does anybody know who the
current administrator of the mailing list at UDEL.EDU is?  I guess I'll have
to send a note to the request addresss...

				Bill Bogstad