Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wyse!vsi1!apple!rutgers!ukma!cwjcc!hal!ncoast!allbery From: allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: comp.sources.unix Message-ID: <13172@ncoast.UUCP> Date: 24 Nov 88 19:46:22 GMT References: <13092@ncoast.UUCP> <7670@well.UUCP> <184@twwells.uucp> Reply-To: allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) Organization: Cleveland Public Access UN*X, Cleveland, Oh Lines: 69 As quoted from <184@twwells.uucp> by bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells): +--------------- | In article <7670@well.UUCP> Jef Poskanzer writes: | : Gee, you're right, a centralized mechanism doesn't work in a distributed | : environment. How CLEVER you are to figure this out! Nevertheless, | : sci.med.aids seems to do just fine with its multiplicity of *real* | : moderators. I wonder, how can they possibly avoid this "mess" you are | : worried about? +--------------- Again, they aren't using a centralized sequence-number mechanism. Such things may work over a fast network, but over slow UUCP links that can take well over a week to move articles around? Wishing doesn't change the real world. +--------------- | : Anyway, I was thinking more along the lines of a primary moderator and | : a backup moderator. Both would receive the postings, but the backup would | : normally throw them out. However, if the primary disappears for a while, | : or perhaps even goes on a real vacation, the backup would be able to take | : over with minimal fuss. +--------------- How long is "awhile"? And how do you deal with: (a) propagation delay is long enough between the two machines that it *looks* like the primary moderator disappeared for a time, to the backup moderator? (b) Single articles that for some reason don't reach the backup moderator's system, but *do* reach everywhere else? (It happens all the time. We have yet to receive a complete multipart submission from comp.sources.unix here on ncoast.) +--------------- | : Maybe if you had been thinking about solving the problem instead of about | : protecting your position, you would have come up with this idea yourself. | | Shut your yap. We moderate newsgroups out of generosity, spending | time and money to so, because we believe that what we are doing is a | good thing. You have no business badmouthing one of us because he | isn't doing it just the way you'd like. +--------------- It has been "come up with"; it has been discussed; it was rejected for the above reasons and others, for sources groups. (Bill, you don't have to be *quite* so strong about it, Jef isn't talking about rogue moderatorship a' la Bob Webber or anything like that.) Admitted, there *is* a problem, and it needs to be solved. But there are no solutions that work well enough to warrant being used on a net-wide basis. And no, redefining the way sources newsgroups work isn't an option; if you will recall, I changed the way comp.sources.misc works to fit the standard because the majority of sources users and archivers on the Usenet wanted me to. You have to get an alternative scheme past *them*, or the newsgroup won't be read, or (possibly) propagated, or etc. And as far as comp.sources.misc goes -- I do this as a service to the net, and it takes up valuable time that could be used far more profitably in other ways. If Jef is so certain that he can do it better, he's welcome to move over to news.groups and start a vote to become moderator. ++Brandon -- Brandon S. Allbery, comp.sources.misc moderator and one admin of ncoast PA UN*X uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu allberyb@skybridge.sdi.cwru.edu allbery@uunet.uu.net comp.sources.misc is moving off ncoast -- please do NOT send submissions direct Send comp.sources.misc submissions to comp-sources-misc@.