Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!rosevax!kksys!gk From: gk@kksys.UUCP (0000-Greg Kemnitz) Newsgroups: news.admin,comp.sources.d Subject: Re: these sites have not filed an arbitron report Message-ID: <425@kksys.UUCP> Date: Mon, 26-Oct-87 05:31:13 EST Article-I.D.: kksys.425 Posted: Mon Oct 26 05:31:13 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 30-Oct-87 05:50:03 EST References: <11960@decwrl.DEC.COM> Reply-To: gk@kksys.UUCP (Greg Kemnitz) Followup-To: news.admin Distribution: na Organization: K and K Systems, Minneapolis, MN Lines: 128 Xref: mnetor news.admin:1275 comp.sources.d:1466 In article <11960@decwrl.DEC.COM> reid@decwrl.dec.com (Brian Reid) writes: >Various people have flamed at me for periodic repostings of the arbitron >program sources. I have absolutely no intention of stopping this practice >just because a few malcontents don't like it. How about stopping because it is needlessly wasteful of network resources? >Here is the list of sites that have posted an article to USENET in the last >30 days but have not filed an arbitron report. I note with satisfaction that >about 60% of the complainers come from sites on this list. O.K., the list would be appropriately posted in news.admin, along with a note regarding where one could obtain the latest arbitron sources. It really has no place in comp.sources.d, since the system admin is the one who should use it, not the average reader. 60% of the complainers are on the list? Hmmm... that means that 40% are from sites who -do- file reports. A rather significant percentage itself. >Please don't flood me with mail explaining why you don't file an arbitron >report if the reason falls into one of these categories: > > 1) You run an obscure version of Unix that for some reason bombs > out on the software, and you are unable to debug it yourself. Hmmm... Implying the software is perfect? Couldn't it be your software bombs out on some unix-es? > It works on every machine to which I have access myself, for debugging. These are? I might be more inclined to install it if I had some reasonable expectation it would work. Perhaps you have tested under the Unix I run... > Usually people tell me it blows up in awk. What can I say? There > are a lot of very buggy versions of awk out there. Hmmm... this would suggest more work might be needed in how it uses awk. I would think you would -want- reports concerning environments it does not work in. Or is this a good way to assure your code stays bug-free? (If one doesn't hear about a problem, it must not be there....) > 2) You run nntp/rrn. The design of the nntp protocols is deficient; > they don't permit any kind of readership determination. Until the > nntp protocols get revised to permit readership measurement, we > just aren't going to hear from your site. Sorry. What percentage of the non-responding sites fall into this category? > 3) You are a VMS site or a TOPS-20 site or an IBM site or something like > that. Again, what can I say. mod.newprod, or whatever it is called > these days since the "reorganization", regularly carries announcements > of $5000 Unix boxes :-) This is a good idea.... if a site cannot run arbitron, they should get a new system. After all, what is $5000 per site ...... :-) > 4) You are an AT&T site, and therefore have no site administrator and > no control over your news software and in fact you're busy chasing > down articles about dinettes for sale in New Jersey that got posted to > Australia and Japan. I'll concede this point... :-) >Otherwise I'd like to hear from you, especially if the reason is that >you're a lazy person who has never quite gotten around to doing it. What about those of us who do not like to install software when we know another version will be posted in a few weeks? Or those of us who have so little volume as to be statistically insignificant? Or how about sites who expire so quickly that the data is not valid? Or the folks who originally intended to set up arbitron, but who now feel like they are being pushed into doing so, rather than being allowed to do so voluntarily. Or those who simply have more important things to do? BTW, I think the arbitron reports are useful... And I appreciate the many good things you have done for the net. Perhaps you could take a slightly different approach to getting a better response on this effort. Perhaps you could log responses from folks who do not provide arbitron data, and drop sites from your list who -cannot- forward arbitron data, or whose data would be statistically invalid. You could then appeal to the more focused list of non-responding sites, and hopefully knock a few more off when they start posting. As for the rest, a message to the news administrators mailbox might gain a few more respondents. The remainder will have to stay on the list of 'silent' news readers. With all this data, you would be able to post some additional network statistics, and perhaps could start catching 'new' news users and sending their sites requests to post arbitron stats. What you are doing now is akin to 'bulk mailing', which more often than not gets pitched in the trash. Perhaps first class mail to a more targeted audience would get a better response. As to why our site does not post arbitron data, we originally intended to, but now understand that the data would be invalid due to the way we expire news (two day expire for many well-read groups). Even were this not the case, I would likely refuse simply in protest of the way you are attempting to coerce people into posting the info. Of course, I am posting this after a long string of days with less than three hours of sleep a night. Perhaps I would feel differently when I was awake. Then again, perhaps not. Let's move this discussion out of comp.sources.d and solely into news.admin where it is more appropriate. -- Greg Kemnitz | amdahl \ K and K Systems | ihnp4 !meccts!kksys!gk P.O. Box 41804 | rutgers/ Plymouth, MN 55441-0804 | AT&T and clones: (612)475-1527