Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!cit-vax!mangler
From: mangler@cit-vax.UUCP
Newsgroups: news.stargate
Subject: Re: "try-out trials" (and some general opinions)
Message-ID: <2403@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: Sun, 19-Apr-87 01:01:15 EST
Article-I.D.: cit-vax.2403
Posted: Sun Apr 19 01:01:15 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 19-Apr-87 11:45:00 EST
References: <965@vortex.UUCP> <6582@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 18
Summary: delay of moderated groups

In article <6582@bu-cs.BU.EDU>, jsol@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Jon Solomon)
describes how ARPAnet moderated groups deal with repetitive submissions
by posting the best one, with a list of authors who said the same thing.

Of course, to do this, the moderator can't send out anything until
the definitive reply arrives.  He has to add *delay*.

Isn't timelyness one of the stated goals of Stargate?

If moderated groups are so great, then (as Brian Reid once asked)
why do they have poor readership?

Maybe the proper function of a moderator is to attach his recommendation
to the best articles, giving them priority in transmission and viewing,
rather than filtering out the worst articles.  We want to encourage
the best quality, instead of merely enforcing a minimum quality level.

Don Speck   speck@vlsi.caltech.edu  {seismo,rutgers,ames}!cit-vax!speck