Xref: utzoo news.admin:14983 news.software.b:8145
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken!uunet!mcsun!ukc!slxsys!ibmpcug!mantis!mathew
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (Giving C News a *HUG*)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.software.b
Subject: Re: Really funny jokes being missed
Message-ID: <F4q3327w164w@mantis.co.uk>
Date: 5 Jun 91 15:19:38 GMT
References: <1991Jun05.051219.27329@looking.on.ca>
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.
Lines: 38

brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes:
> Strictly, nobody is "responsible" for losing articles, since nobody has
> a responsibility to propagate articles.  You start thinking that other people
> have a duty to send your articles (particularly your illegal-format articles)
> around the world and you're getting some very wrong ideas.
[...]
> It would be nice if you were told, but as the implementors did not see an
> easy way to do this at the time, the only answer is tough titty.

The problem is that this answer detracts from the usefulness of Usenet.

OK, you say. One of the conditions of using Usenet is that it is possible
that everything you type will be thrown away by some piece of software
somewhere, which will make no attempt whatsoever to inform you that anything
is wrong.

Now, how many people would really use such a system?  How many people would
take the time to sit and correct mistakes, to research sources, to carefully
edit considered responses, if all that work could end up being thrown away
through no fault of the user, and without the user being told?

I know I wouldn't.  And before some smart-arse comments that I don't anyway,
I shall remark that in certain other newsgroups I *do* spend a lot of time on
postings, I *do* carefully edit considered responses, and I *do* research
sources. If you think my postings in news.software.b are worthless, that's
your opinion; my impression is that my postings in some other newsgroups are
not considered worthless.

Do we *want* Usenet to be a system where users are *discouraged* from
spending time on their postings?  If not, then we must try to make sure that
posting an article carries a reasonably high probability that either the
article will be propogated as expected or that the user will get to hear about
it (perhaps via *his* system administrator).


mathew