Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!gatech!ukma!brian
From: brian@ms.uky.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.groups
Subject: A rehash (but yet important) of an old issue.
Message-ID: <7130@e.ms.uky.edu>
Date: Wed, 19-Aug-87 17:48:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: e.7130
Posted: Wed Aug 19 17:48:44 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 22-Aug-87 04:29:49 EDT
Organization: U of Ky, Math. Sciences, Lexington KY
Lines: 59
Xref: mnetor news.admin:864 news.groups:1371

I am having a problem getting responses to queries about the
availability of programs to meet need X. I have posted to
net.sources.wanted twice, and have received all of one reply.  As this
was a request for leads to a general file manager for use by our
graduate school, a presumably commonly available package, I am
convienced that there is a severe problem with the way that source
groups are handled.  In the "old" days of net.sources it is true that
there was alot of "noise", but one could post a request there, and after
throwing out the various flames, get a sizable number of responses to
question about program availability. Now the only time I get response is
if it falls in to a category which makes it appropriate for some
specific active newsgroup (comp.text, comp.unix.wizards, comp.windows.x).
Further, I have had problems with getting sources posted, I sent in
a nice set of mods to the recently posted "screen" program about a week
ago, it has still not made to the "public". "(Its available via anonymous
ftp to e.ms.uky.edu, though)"

I understand why people do not want "noise" in the source group... but
legitimate requests, and even replies about program availability are
at least as important as public-domain sources.

Which brings me to comp.sources.wanted, et. al.  Do YOU read this?
I doubt it... I "do", but I read it with my finger very close to the space
bar... I might have responded to a total of 2 requests... It is not that
I am not a good sport, and don't want to help people, it is just that
I (like many) am busy, and thus having advance knowledge that
comp.sources.wanted does not contain "goodies" for me, I skip through.
Basically I feel that the whole concept does not work. The reason
that a group like comp.unix.wizards works is that most people reading,
have to read most messages in order to get benefit from the group,
and thus having understood the message, a fair percentage will help
when they can, as they too would want done for their postings.
In comp.sources.wanted there is no such compulsion, it is too easy
to "half-read" the subject, and hit space before it even dawns on
you what the person wants.

Proposed solution:
I don't necessarily mind having the comp.sources.unix group moderated,
but I do feel that requests and (if there is lots of interest),
replies about the availability of programs should be included.
A change in the Subject line when it is not a source should be
enough to keep those "archivers of all sources" happy. I also feel
that something should be done to speed up postings to a moderated group.
I have sympathy for the moderator, but part of it is that I feel he (or she)
does too much. I would hope that all that is done by a moderator is:
1) Check to see that the posting belongs in this group.
2) Classify it (the Subject line).
3) Post it.
Alas, I don't believe it is the case though.

(Sigh, now I wait for the flames)

Brian

------------------
           Brian Sturgill          System Manager
   University of Kentucky Departments of Mathematical Sciences
        brian@ms.uky.edu                brian@ms.uky.csnet
        {uunet,cbosgd}!ukma!brian       brian@UKMA.BITNET