Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!brandx.rutgers.edu!webber
From: webber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.bugs
Subject: Re: Official newsgroup proposal: comp.sources.games.bugs
Message-ID: <697@brandx.rutgers.edu>
Date: 4 Jan 88 10:27:23 GMT
References: <10933@brl-adm.ARPA> <919@polyslo.UUCP>
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 24

In article <919@polyslo.UUCP>, khearn@polyslo.UUCP (keith hearn) writes:
>  The reason for a separate newsgroup for games bugs is simply volume. Lately,
> there has been almost as many articles on bugs in games (one or two in 
> particular) posted as there have been articles for everything else combined! 
> people who aren't interested in games have to wade through the game bugs, and
> those of us who are interested in games have to wade through the non-game bugs.

Last month there was less than 4 articles a day (118 for the month --
see Arbitron stats) .  You can't even get your toes wet wading in
that!  There is no volume problem here.  There are groups that
processed over a thousand messages this past month.

> ...
> each source group can't have it's own .bug and .d group, i don't know exactly
> why, but the net.gods prefer to keep the number of group down as much as
> possible (It's a good reason, i just can't recall it right now).

The reason is because of a bug in the news software which makes it difficult
to support a very large name set (someone using arrays when they
shouldn't have -- sigh).  Any way, 20 groups more or less isn't going
to break anyone, there is just the general notion that if we aren't careful,
someday someone is going to have to patch their software.

----- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)