Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!dave
From: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Re: spell(1) as a pre-posting safety valve
Message-ID: <1081@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 29-Jan-86 09:59:18 EST
Article-I.D.: lsuc.1081
Posted: Wed Jan 29 09:59:18 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 29-Jan-86 15:31:13 EST
References: <1048@lsuc.UUCP> <1175@osu-eddie.UUCP> <2645@amdahl.UUCP>
Reply-To: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 44
Summary: y

In article <2645@amdahl.UUCP> gam@amdahl.UUCP (G A Moffett) writes:
>
>Oh dear!  Well as I see this proposal becoming popular (force spell(1)
>to be applied to articles before posted), let me raise an
>opposing point of view:
>
>				NO!
>
>I agree that good spelling is an important thing, and it would be
>nice if every article contained no misspelled words, but let
>the *poster* do it!  Why make article posting more cumbersome
>for those of us with perfect spelling?  And besides, we aren't
>even talking about solving a *technical* problem with news, but
>to appease the pedantists who cannot tolerate seeing misspelled
>words posted to the network.  Perhaps some spell-like filter
>should be provided for *them*, so that they will never see a
>misspelled word again!

Gordon, you're missing the point. Correct spelling is merely
a beneficial side-effect of what I've proposed. The main point is to
make the process of posting somewhat less instantaneous and less
automatic.

Pnews has the right idea, in requesting confirmation that you indeed
want to post the article. But once you get used to that, you just
factor that in and type the 'p' to post it without even thinking.
Using spell(1) would be very different, because the response you
would get, and the thought processes you would have to invoke (i.e.,
check through the list to make sure you haven't misspelled anything)
would be different each time.

Another possibility, which would only reduce the speed of information
flow slightly, would be for any articles you post to be stored and
mailed back to you for confirmation an hour later. You would then have
to reply to your local "posting automaton", confirming that you do
indeed want to post the article, and it would go out. This kind of
enforced "cooling-off" period might be very valuable. Of course, it
would also be a bit harder to implement.

Dave Sherman
The Law Society of Upper Canada
Toronto
-- 
{ ihnp4!utzoo  pesnta  utcs  hcr  decvax!utcsri  } !lsuc!dave