Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site aquila.UUCP
Path: utzoo!dciem!aquila!sanand
From: sanand@aquila.UUCP (Sanand Patel)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: I'm learning why nobody likes mod groups (NOT unreliable mail)
Message-ID: <71@aquila.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 9-Dec-85 12:35:24 EST
Article-I.D.: aquila.71
Posted: Mon Dec  9 12:35:24 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Dec-85 19:35:00 EST
References: <1862@glacier.ARPA> <197@sdcc7.UUCP> <1959@glacier.ARPA> <267@omen.UUCP>
Reply-To: sanand@aquila.UUCP (Sanand Patel)
Lines: 29
Summary: 

In article <267@omen.UUCP> caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes:
>Why not have all moderators post a DIRECT UUCP LOGIN such as the one included
>in the signature below?  Considering the unreliability of uucp mail, we should

Now there's an interesting idea.
(In regards to reducing costs, noise etc.) Have several "mod" sites (maybe
current backbone sites). Have all news posted directly to the mod site, payed
for by the poster. From the mod sites it would be distributed as normal.
*If* mod groups are the way of the future (I don't know for sure), then the
above would do several things:
	1) Make the poster pay some of the costs.
	2) Provide a minor barrier against net garbage.
	3) Give a "good" line to the net moderators.
	4) Not introduce too much bureaucracy (sp?).
	5) Superior mod groups ==> Superior information exchange.
	6) Good prosepects for "transitional" change". (I.E try a few
	   mod groups at a time).
Some disadvantages:
	1) Valuable "posters" would be penalized for contributing
	   positively to the net (maybe their company would'nt mind this).
	2) Mod sites would have their incoming modems ringing all day.
	3) (Some thing along the lines of ..) A shift of authority
	   to fewer centers  (away from the "anarchy"/"equalness" we now have).

-- 
Sanand
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsri!
					dciem!aquila!sanand
{allegra ,ihnp4 ,linus ,decvax}!utzoo!