mats@dual.UUCP (Mats Wichmann) (08/04/84)
I posted an article negative to the posting of announcements in general.
While I still feel *personally* that such postings are out of place
(and certainly don't belong in net.sources - sorry I didn't notice this
was in the newsgroups line when I followed up, so my comment went there too),
the overall sentiment seems to be a bit against me. The conclusions I
come to are that
a) Make it sound like an announcement, not a commercial
b) Don't send it to groups that get onto ARPA - it is a nono there
c) Keep it failry short
d) Pick the right newsgroup
I can't tell people how to pick the right newsgroup - perhaps the right
solution would be to have a set of guidlines agreed on by some reasonable
majority of the net (like, 3% or so), and checked with administrative
types who might conceivably have objections, and then have articles containing
product announcements submitted to a moderator who would check that the
content conformed to the guidlines (I know, it sounds like more censorship).
This is probably not practical, but....
Mats Wichmann
Dual Systems Corp.
...{ucbvax,amd,ihnp4,cbosgd,decwrl,fortune}!dual!matslee@unmvax.UUCP (08/05/84)
If we start allowing product announcements to the net we are going
to be in BIG trouble. Since product announcements are commercial I
cannot see where a vendor should or would draw the line to putting
commercial announcements on too. Most of us (who are interested)
read the trade magazines.
If product announcements are going to be allowed, I suggest that
a new newsgroup be created. That way only readers who are
interested would have to see them and a vendor whose management
gets upset that he is paying for another vendors advertisement
can just choose not to accept/forward that group anymore except
for the brief moments when he will want to post. Sound unrealistic?
You bet! We are asking for it though....
I vote NO. net.wanted is good enough.
--Lee
--
--Lee (Ward)
{ucbvax,convex,gatech,pur-ee}!unmvax!leedmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (08/07/84)
My two cents' worth: I think that "product announcements" are useful and should be encouraged, in general. But they should be written as a short technical review of a product. I would like to see a very concise description of what the product is, and what it does better than any existing systems, all in (say) 15-20 lines, and who I can contact for more information if I'm really interested. But keep it short - I am much less likely to read a 100-line article than a 20-line one. I do not want to read anything that is written like the typical advertising blurb, where the real technical content has to be extracted from all of the glowing words about the product. I want to know facts, I don't want to become excited about the product. (This is directed at product announcements in general - I didn't read more than a few lines of the particular article that spawned this discussion.)
g-rh@cca.UUCP (Richard Harter) (08/10/84)
[... Is this line needed? ...] This is principally in response to an article signed Art Z. and addressed as open letter to CCA. SMDS is a commercial customer of CCA; CCA is not responsible for any errors of judgement on the part of SMDS. If you wish to attach blame please address it to me, the guilty party. A wise person once said, "never apologize and never explain". I had resolved on a policy of accepting my lumps and letting the matter die. However, since I feel obliged to respond to the cited article I may as well cast wisdom to the winds. I have received several items of mail (not many, but some) which have been generally critical although on widely varying grounds. I have replied to these, although in some cases the mail did not get delivered. If you wrote me and didn't get a reply, my apologies. A majority of commentors seemed to feel that product announcements were OK, but that the one I put in was (a) too long and (b) the news groups were poorly chosen. The latter point is undoubtedly correct; in particular net.sources was a particularly bad choice. Evidently it was too long and read like advertising to a number of people. The intent was to present the equivalent of a product spec sheet. Some people clearly feel that product announcements are inappropriate for usenet; others feel that they are. The published guides to net.etiquette say that they are. The consensus seems to be that product announcements are useful, and informative, but don't do it. If it is agreed that product announcements are appropriate then it is desirable that the guidelines be very clear, e.g. less than thirty lines, post in net.wanted (?). PLEASE address all further comments (if any) to this article. It is posted to net.unix only. Please do not continue to post followups to net.sources. In fact, it would be appropriate to shift any further comments to net.followup. Finally, to repeat, CCA is not responsible for and presumably does not endorse anything I may have posted on the usenet. Richard Harter