Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site arizona.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!utah-cs!arizona!whm
From: whm@arizona.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Re: Net.general Is Getting Awfully Busy Again
Message-ID: <4019@arizona.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 14-Aug-83 06:18:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: arizona.4019
Posted: Sun Aug 14 06:18:33 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 14-Aug-83 16:55:53 EDT
References: <1919@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: CS Dept, U of Arizona, Tucson
Lines: 45

I think that the basic problem is: unless something changes, newcomers
to the net are always going to be posting inappropriate articles to
net.general.  A more general rule is: inappropriate articles are
going to be posted no matter what actions are taken.  It may be possible
to reduce the number of bogus articles, but there will always be some.
The ultimate solution is to moderate groups in which the number of
bogons becomes intolerable.

However, the specific offense which seems to get people up in arms is
an inappropriate posting to net.general.  Many people have demonstrated
an ability to point out inappropriate articles in net.general (and other
groups), but the question that sticks in my mind is: What is an
appropriate article for net.general?  I can't really think of an
article that *everybody* should read.  What I'm getting at is that the
idea of net.general being very special in some sense is ludicrous.
Most every article in net.general would be better off in some specific
group and lots of the articles would be better off not being posted in
the first place.

I think that this idea that net.general should be read by everyone is
at fault.  I don't think that there are many people out there who, of
their own free will, read just net.general.  You've got people that
read a handful of groups, and net.general is among them, but this idea
that net.general should be composed of articles that are "good" for
everyone, is simply untenable.

I suggest that net.announce be put into operation as soon as possible
and the current ideas about net.general be rethought.  The only purpose
that I've seen net.general serve of late is to provide grounds for
floggings of hapless souls who have posted an inappropriate article.

If you disagree with me and think that are many articles that would be
best posted to net.general (with the premise that everyone should read
net.general), let me know.  Send me a minimum of three (3) topics you
would consider suitable for a net.general article.  If possible, I'll
summarize and post any interesting findings to net.news. Also, if you
have any suggestions as to what net.general should be composed of
(defined as?), I'd be interested in that as well.

FYI-The active newsgroup list last posted in net.news.group says:
     "net.general  General queries, requests, announcements, etc."

					Bill Mitchell
					whm.arizona@rand-relay
					{ihnp4,kpno,mcnc,utah-cs}!arizona!whm