Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!labrea!jade!ucbvax!unisoft!jef
From: jef@unisoft.uucp (Jef Poskanzer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf-lovers,alt.config,news.groups,rec.arts.startrek,rec.arts.drwho,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: A Modest Proposal
Message-ID: <552@unisoft.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Sep-87 18:41:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: unisoft.552
Posted: Mon Sep 14 18:41:41 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 16-Sep-87 01:11:57 EDT
References: <669@elbereth.rutgers.edu>
Sender: news@unisoft.UUCP
Reply-To: jef@unisoft.UUCP (Jef Poskanzer)
Organization: Paratheo-Anametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric, Ada Lovelace Cabal
Lines: 51
Xref: mnetor rec.arts.sf-lovers:7018 alt.config:14 news.groups:1536 rec.arts.startrek:4774 rec.arts.drwho:1860 rec.arts.books:1317

In the referenced message, jaffe@elbereth.rutgers.edu (Saul) wrote:
>	My understanding of the history of things is that along
>around about 1975 the digest was created on the ARPAnet.

Try 1980.  I wish I knew where this story about 1975 came from.  Charles
McGrew had the same date for HUMAN-NETS, which was also started in 1980.


Anyway, I'd like to express my strong opposition to Saul's proposal.  I've
already mailed him my NO vote.  Here are my objections:

  -- Saul mostly talks about what would happen once the messages get to
  him.  He is less clear about what would happen on the Usenet side.
  The un-moderated rec.arts.sf-lovers would remain, but what about .startrek
  and .drwho?  (Not that I read them, but some people do.)

  -- Saul's proposal doesn't fix anything on the Usenet side.  For those
  of us who don't care to read moderated groups when un-moderated are
  available, things will be exactly as before.  Assuming .startrek and
  .drwho stick around, there will still be Trek and Who stuff from the
  Internet showing up in the wrong newsgroup.  There will still be people
  like Laura Creighton, who don't want to wade through junk about films and
  TV shows to get to the messages about SF books.  There will still be
  perennial calls to split r.a.sf-l into sub-groups.

  -- On the other hand, if the plan is for some or all of the un-moderated
  groups to eventually go away, we will be left without timely access to SF
  news.  We will have to rely on a moderator who apparently neither knows
  nor cares very much about Usenet.

In summary, Saul's proposal is not completely thought out, and is likely
to be either useless or harmful.

A counter proposal: create the same sub-groups that Saul suggests, but
leave them un-moderated.  This will let Usenetters make optimum use of
the medium.  On Saul's end, he can construct his digests as usual, with
the slight advantage of having some topic segregation done for him.
Cross-posted messages would be no problem under this scheme.

If anyone cares to vote on this idea, I'll be glad to count and report.
DO NOT POST YOUR VOTES.
---
Jef

    Jef Poskanzer  unisoft!jef@ucbvax.Berkeley.Edu  ...ucbvax!unisoft!jef
 "A pen is certainly an excellent instrument to fix a man's attention and to
                     inflame his ambition." -- John Adams

                     ...and now, a word from our sponsor:
    "The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily
       represent those of UniSoft Corp, its staff, or its management."