laser-lovers@uw-beaver (laser-lovers) (12/07/83)
From Furuta@WASHINGTON.ARPA Tue Dec 6 19:38:33 1983 1) 6-Dec decvax!sun!gnu (John Posting to laser-lovers from Usenet 2) 6-Dec To: laser-lovers@WAS Re: Posting to laser-lovers from Usenet Message 1 -- ************************ Return-Path: <decvax!sun!gnu@uw-beaver> Received: from uw-beaver by WASHINGTON.ARPA with TCP; Tue 6 Dec 83 06:02:47-PST Date: 5 Dec 83 14:38:13 PST (Mon) From: decvax!sun!gnu (John Gilmore) Received: by decvax.UUCP (4.12/4.2) id AA01175; Mon, 5 Dec 83 23:58:27 est Received: by sun.uucp (3.346/3.14) id AA09776; 5 Dec 83 14:38:13 PST (Mon) Message-Id: <8312052238.AA09776@sun.uucp> Subject: Posting to laser-lovers from Usenet To: gnu To: decvax!uw-beaver!laser-lovers To: Shasta!Glacier!reid The problem seems to be that the laser-lovers gateway does not follow standard Usenet procedures. One way gateways used to be the rule, since there was no better way; now the rule is two-way gateways like unix-wizards, emacs, space, etc. However for some reason invisible to Usenet folks, laser-lovers decided to forego two-way action and instead treat Usenet as in information sink. This is confusing to us. (If you need pointers to the two-way gateway software, mail to me.) The other violated convention is that fa.* messages should have a return address which is the gateway, so that one can send to the newsgroup by simply replying to the message. Posting the right address once a week is not going to help -- put it in every message where the automatic reply programs can find it. "How to Read the Network News", the user's guide to netnews, specifically lays down the rules for "fa" newsgroups and one of them is that you "post" to it by replying to any message in it. Message 2 -- ************************ Mail-From: FURUTA created at 6-Dec-83 19:35:01 Date: Tue 6 Dec 83 19:35:01-PST From: Richard Furuta <Furuta@WASHINGTON.ARPA> Subject: Re: Posting to laser-lovers from Usenet To: laser-lovers@WASHINGTON.ARPA In-Reply-To: Message from "decvax!sun!gnu (John Gilmore)" of Mon 5 Dec 83 14:38:13-PST One way gateways used to be the rule, since there was no better way; now the rule is two-way gateways like unix-wizards, emacs, space, etc. However for some reason invisible to Usenet folks, laser-lovers decided to forego two-way action and instead treat Usenet as in information sink. This is confusing to us. We deliberately decided to make laser-lovers a fa. group on Usenet. Before gatewaying Laser-Lovers to Usenet, I polled the existing readership. The feeling on their part was overwhelmingly that laser-lovers should *not* be directly gatewayed into the Usenet because of the increase in message traffic this would probably generate. Since many of the people who receive laser-lovers directly are those whom one would like to read the group (like people at Xerox, Imagen, and, I believe, Symbolics), I decided it was best to avoid alienating them. At the same time, it seemed desirable to provide Usenet access to the group, hence the choice of fa. rather than net. The other violated convention is that fa.* messages should have a return address which is the gateway, so that one can send to the newsgroup by simply replying to the message. Thank you for pointing this out. Further discussion on this point should probably move off the list. Feel free to contact me at Furuta@Washington from the Arpanet or CSnet. From Usenet, my address is uw-beaver!furuta (uw-beaver talks to decvax and ihnp4, among others). --Rick ------- -------
laser-lovers@uw-beaver (05/15/85)
From: Richard Furuta <Furuta@WASHINGTON.ARPA> I am going to be out of town for much of the next two weeks. Consequently, I've temporarily made laser-lovers into a direct distribution list. Manual filtering will resume on my return, which will be on about June 1st. --Rick -------
laser-lovers@uw-beaver (06/12/85)
From: Richard Furuta <Furuta@WASHINGTON.arpa> We are currently having some system problems at Washington that mean that we are not properly loading the Internet host tables. The systems programmer is working on it. I have decided to hold incoming laser-lovers mail until the fix is completed since given our current situation, large parts of the list will fail to receive the messages. --Rick -------
laser-lovers@uw-beaver (09/20/85)
From: Richard Furuta <Furuta@WASHINGTON.arpa> The laser-lovers list is temporarily on direct redistribution. I'm driving across country. When I arrive in Maryland and get settled in, I'll go back to moderated distribution. Please use restraint in posting to the news group while it is being directly redistributed. --Rick -------