Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!aipdc
From: aipdc@castle.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Proposal for comp.graphics.research newsgroup
Message-ID: <9940@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 30 Apr 91 10:43:10 GMT
References: <9104270206.AA17499@nomis.csd.uwo.ca> <14581@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU> <bcorrie.672942840@csr>
Organization: Put your analyst on danger money, baby!
Lines: 23

In article <bcorrie.672942840@csr> bcorrie@csr (Brian  Corrie) writes:
|If we choose moderation, it should be of the type that filters out the
|``request for A'' and ``How do I get machine B to run Ray Tracer C''
|type messages.  The moderator should not decide whether a given article
|is ``good research'' or not.  If it is of a research nature, then it
|shold be allowed. 

I agree completely.  Well said that man.

|On that note, I'll say that I don't think moderation is necessary. 

You wouldn't know it, but I believe that 110,000 people sub to
comp.graphics, making it one of the biggest groups on the net.  Those
people are mostly there because they want to produce pretty pictures
without much effort.  No harm in that, but the trouble is that a lot of
those people will automatically cross-post to any group that seems
applicable, and comp.graphics.research will be one of them.  110,000
people is a lot of people to warn off with private email.  That's why I
suspect that without moderation we will still be deluged with "How do I
send Postscript to a daisywheel printer?" questions.
                                         ____
\/ o\ Paul Crowley aipdc@castle.ed.ac.uk \  /
/\__/ Part straight. Part gay. All queer. \/