Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cca.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!cca!dee
From: dee@cca.UUCP (Donald Eastlake)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.news.notes
Subject: Re: Information Overload and What We Can Do About It
Message-ID: <4418@cca.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 5-Oct-85 22:43:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: cca.4418
Posted: Sat Oct  5 22:43:52 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 7-Oct-85 06:47:12 EDT
References: <10381@ucbvax.ARPA> <3274@nsc.UUCP> <698@tpvax.fluke.UUCP> <3166@nsc.UUCP> <>
Reply-To: dee@cca.UUCP (Donald Eastlake)
Organization: Computer Corp. of America, Cambridge
Lines: 20
Xref: linus net.news:3219 net.news.notes:33


I don't really see why or how your are going to "prohibit" postings of a
message to more than one newsgroup.  (If your really try to stop them
with the obvious software check people can always post multiple copies
to different groups, etc., so its really best, if they are going to post
multiply anyway, to get them to put all the groups on one copy.)

What you *do* want is some smarts to handle multiple newgroup postings
so a user don't have to read the same message more than once, can say
things like they don't want to see anything that *includes* net.flame or
whatever in its list, etc.  Possibly it would make sense to provide an
ordering so net.flame dominated net.misc which dominated net.general and
net.followup which dominated all others in terms of now a message is
handled.  Possibly also some subset logic might help.  You could do
something clever about something that was sent simultaneously to various
subsets of x.y, x.y.z, sub-set-of-x.y, and sub-set-of-x.y.z.
  
-- 
	+1 617-492-8860		Donald E. Eastlake, III
	ARPA:  dee@CCA-UNIX	usenet:	{decvax,linus}!cca!dee