Xref: utzoo news.admin:14711 news.software.b:7999 Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!ukc!slxsys!ibmpcug!mantis!mathew From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (CNEWS MUST DIE!) Newsgroups: news.admin,news.software.b Subject: Re: Really funny jokes being missed Message-ID: Date: 28 May 91 16:48:07 GMT References: <1991May27.212911.13922@kithrup.COM> Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK. Lines: 32 sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes: > In article mathew@mantis.co.uk (CNEWS MUST DIE!) > >Yes. The problem is that this "guarantee", along with the other "guarantees" > >implemented by C News, has the side effect that ordinary people can have > >their postings silently dropped because they made trivial typos. > > If ordinary people are giving the Date: line to a posting, something is > broken with their software, anyway. C News will also, I gather, complain about Keywords:foo,bar > anyone not following the RFC deserves, > as several people (nearly everyone but you, it seems) have pointed out, to > have their postings dropped on the floor. Right. But the users who happen to be using the software written by the person who didn't follow the RFC are innocent bystanders; and innocent bystanders should not be punished. > >Which is more valuable -- the "guarantee" that no old news will reappear, or > >the "guarantee" that people's postings will get out to the net? I'd say the > >latter. > > I'd say the former. Then you presumably have a rather strange idea of what the purpose of Usenet is. mathew