Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ames!sdcsvax!nosc!humu!uhmanoa!aloha1!islenet!richard
From: richard@islenet.UUCP (Richard Foulk)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: Allbery's Second Farewell.
Message-ID: <3414@islenet.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 11-Aug-87 14:35:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: islenet.3414
Posted: Tue Aug 11 14:35:28 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Aug-87 03:41:49 EDT
References: <267@brandx.UUCP> <289@brandx.rutgers.edu> <320@brandx.rutgers.edu> <244@madhat.UUCP>
Reply-To: richard@islenet.UUCP (Richard Foulk)
Organization: Islenet Inc.,  Honolulu
Lines: 44

In article <244@madhat.UUCP> alvitar@madhat.UUCP (Phil Harbison) writes:
> [...]
> Brandon may have exaggerated the percentage, but it is true that the old
> net.sources was mostly non-source.  Of the last 556 articles received at
> madhat,  only  248  (45%)  were source, so 55% of the articles were non-
> source.   This covers a period of 5 months, so it should average out any
> "episodes".   I archive most source groups at madhat and I usually glean
> the  articles in groups of 100.  It was not unusual to throw away 70 out
> of 100 articles in net.sources. 
> 
> > ... clearly the old set-up was producing more sources than the new.
> 
> Brandon  is  sending  out plenty of source; however, quantity is not the
> main  benefit of a moderated source group.  The main benefit is that the
> non-source articles now go to another group, so I can choose not to read
> them  or pay to get them.  I can archive everything in comp.sources.misc
> (without gleaning) because it is almost 100% source. 
> 


But the question seems to be, how many "software packages" where posted
then and now?  A simple count with no quality measurements would be
a great starting point.

Are we really getting fewer sources than we used to?

I guess that might want to be corrected for increased net traffic too,
I dunno.

-- 
Richard Foulk		...{dual,vortex,ihnp4}!islenet!richard
Honolulu, Hawaii