Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!alberta!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!cornell!mailrus!uflorida!novavax!proxftl!twwells!bill
From: bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: comp.sources.unix
Message-ID: <216@twwells.uucp>
Date: 27 Nov 88 08:46:14 GMT
References: <13092@ncoast.UUCP> <7670@well.UUCP> <184@twwells.uucp> <13172@ncoast.UUCP>
Reply-To: bill@twwells.UUCP (T. William Wells)
Organization: None, Ft. Lauderdale
Lines: 44
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Keywords:

In article <13172@ncoast.UUCP> allbery@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
: As quoted from <184@twwells.uucp> by bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells):
: +---------------
: | : 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.)

Well, he's certainly not as bad as Webber (very little, other than
Weemba the Mouth, is as bad as Webber!), but his habit of badmouthing
the people he is making suggestions to is just plain STUPID!

: 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.

This I'll agree with. Each newsgroup is likely to need its own
special way of handling the problem. However, I view this discussion
as a way of getting out ideas; the individual moderators can then use
whatever ideas suite them.

: 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.

Yes, that is somethings else that has to be considered, especially
for groups that get archived or otherwise processed: any change is
going to make *lots* of people unhappy; unless they are also
convinced that the change is much for the better, the change ought
not be made.

---
Bill
{uunet|novavax}!proxftl!twwells!bill