hans@log-hb.UUCP (Hans Albertsson) (05/25/84)
[]
No, NO! Let's start REDUCING the number of groups instead.
First, let's ban multiple postings, install software that removes
all groups after the first mentioned.
Then, let's restrict news usage to technically meaningful groups,
THIS IS EXPENSIVE!
--
{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!log-hb!hans
Hans Albertsson,
TeleLOGIC AB
Box 1001,
S-14901 Nynashamn,
SWEDENkoksvik@kvvax4.UUCP (Rolf M. Koksvik) (05/28/84)
>First, let's ban multiple postings, install software >that removes all groups after the first mentioned. >Then, let's restrict news usage to technically >meaningful groups, THIS IS EXPENSIVE! I wholeheartedly agree. Let us use the net as a professional tool only. I see no way we can justify spending our employers money on discussions about video, religion, politics, jokes, cars, tv, soaps, music and other endless, senseless discussions about what other unnecessary groups to establish. Rolf M. Koksvik ({decvax,philabs}!mcvax!kvport!kvvax4!koksvik) A/S Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, Kongsberg
mitzi@erix.UUCP (Mitzi Morris) (05/30/84)
[] I think net.world-politics is an okay idea, but that a much better idea is GETTING NET.POLITICS TO EUROPE! This whole discussion about killing newsgroups is getting very stupid. The majority of articles I have seen have been against any cuts, and in favor of MORE newsgroups. These articles have been met with a few vague rebuttals talking about "high costs" and unnamed sites who have requested reductions. WHERES THE BEEF??? Give me facts, figures, and the ways in which you derived them. Who says democracy doesn't work Tues, have you tried it? I think that getting net.politics is preferable to starting net.world-politics for the following reasons: 1) It is very hard to define what is of domestic interest and what is of world interest. I think that the American presidential race is of world interest, and I want to hear what people in the US are doing and saying about it. But would this be posted to net.world-politics? Probably not. 2) The larger the readership a newsgroup has the more active it is likely to be. Would everybody who already subscribes to net.politics also subscribe to net.world-politics? 3) In the past few weeks there has been some interest stateside in having more international discussions in net.politics, a topic was offered, and there were plenty of responses from Europe. This is what I call evidence that Europe's participation in net.politics is welcome and will be active. More news is good news, Mitzi Morris mitzi@erix.UUCP
rf@wu1.UUCP (05/30/84)
Please found net.world-politics. From the asbestos mailbox of: Randolph Fritz UUCPnet: decvax!philabs!wu1!rf
hans@log-hb.UUCP (Hans Albertsson) (05/31/84)
[]
To some extent my earlier posting was a joke, or ironic at least.
Only Per@erix, who has met me, realized that. Sorry for not being clear
enough.
The only serious thing in it might be the ban on multiple posting,
I'd like, locally , to be able to have only a single copy accepted of a
multiply posted article.
Other groups would just have a link, not a copy, and a user who has already
seen an article shouldn't have to "n" past it. Also, news we've already seen
needn't pass our way a second time. My concern in this matter is disk space
vs my desire to keep interesting articles around for long enough to come to
calm and sensible decisions regarding their use or disposal.
With prices what they are, this is really not so expensive, and provided you
take an open attitude towards your employer, he oughtn't be overly concerned
about the actual cost.
This USENET has cost us roughly USD 200 / month so far, my latest bill says,
and on top of that there's the time lost per employee.
The latter is ( unless your totally undisciplined ) part recoverable, as far
as it concerns getting useful information in ( such as bug fixes necessary
), and the rest, while not recoverable in the strictest sense, is on par
with time lost on coffee breaks, heated debates on pseudo-subjects and such
refreshing things.
Sorry for going on and on.....
--
{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!log-hb!hans
Hans Albertsson,
TeleLOGIC AB
Box 1001,
S-14901 Nynashamn,
SWEDENrobert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding) (06/03/84)
> I wholeheartedly agree. Let us use the net as a professional > tool only. > > I see no way we can justify spending our employers money on > discussions about video, religion, politics, jokes, cars, tv, > soaps, music and other endless, senseless discussions about what > other unnecessary groups to establish. I hope you are joking? If not, do you carry your argument to its logical conclusion? What I mean is, if you feel we can't justify spending some time and very little money on reading news I hope you also have cut out ALL coffee breaks during working hours, talking to your co-workers on subjects not neccessary for the job, going to the toilet, etc. You may feel that this is going to far, but where is the difference? All the mentioned activities, plus many more we take for granted, cost our employers money without giving any direct returns. So I ask again, why the distinction? Or perhaps you do none of these things during office hours? Robert Virding @ L M Ericsson, Stockholm. P.S. Where is net.flames or eunet.flames so I can really get going?
piet@mcvax.UUCP (Piet Beertema) (06/05/84)
>The only serious thing in it might be the ban on multiple posting... >Other groups would just have a link, not a copy.... Have a close look at the news spooldirectories. You'll note there's only one real copy of a multiple-group article. The others are links. -- Piet Beertema, CWI, Amsterdam ...{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!piet
hans@log-hb.UUCP (Hans Albertsson) (06/09/84)
[]
About the question of whether multiply posted articles caused links or
copies,
I did check the /u0/SPOOL/news/...... for link counts, and
found NO instances of link counts over 1, but...
I did not remember that I had recently, ( while installing a new
version of news ) moved the entire tree from a small disk on to an
RA81... and of course I SHOULD have used tar or something, but of
COURSE I used cp -r.
Red faced, I stand corrected. Sorry for any confusion I may have caused.
--
{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!log-hb!hans
Hans Albertsson,
TeleLOGIC AB
Box 1001,
S-14901 Nynashamn,
SWEDENkoksvik@kvvax4.UUCP (Rolf M. Koksvik) (06/12/84)
>I think that the American presidential race is of world >interest, and I want to hear what people in the US are >doing and saying about it. So why don't you subscribe to Newsweek or Washington Post or something? >Compared to what employers can pay for other senseless >activities and projects the cost of a connection to >Usenet is neglible. And the time involved in reading >news is probably not greater than that involved in >internal company bureaucracy, much of which is >unneccessary. Sounds like company morale leaves a little to be desired. I doubt if you are paid to discuss politics in working hours, be it on USENET or in drawn out coffee breaks. >If you get a bad conscience then either read your news at >home or don't read it at all. I will make my own >decisions on that issue! And don't go running to mummy when your company decides to shut you off from the net. Rolf M. Koksvik ({decvax,philabs}!mcvax!kvport!kvvax4!koksvik) A/S Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, Kongsberg
koksvik@kvvax4.UUCP (Rolf M. Koksvik) (06/12/84)
>I hope you are joking? I certainly am not! >If not, do you carry your argument to its logical >conclusion? Yes I do! >What I mean is, if you feel we can't justify spending >some time A relative term to be sure. Reading only a fraction of all the bullshit on the net takes too much time. >and very little money on reading news I doubt you would do it if YOU had to pay for it? >I hope you also have cut out ALL coffee breaks during >working hours, I drink my coffee at the terminal, thank you. >talking to your co-workers on subjects not neccessary for >the job, Only in the lunch break. >going to the toilet, etc. Aaaah, caught me out. It seems I am human after all. >You may feel that this is going to far, but where is the >difference? No difference. You could be sacked in either case. >All the mentioned activities, plus many more we take for >granted, You shouldn't take things for granted, you have your employment conditions! >cost our employers money without giving any direct >returns. EXACTLY. >So I ask again, why the distinction? Really!! >Or perhaps you do none of these things during office >hours? Right first time! >P.S. Where is net.flames or eunet.flames so I can really >get going? If you feel you have to call me names, you can always mail me. I am pretty tough skinned. Rolf M. Koksvik ({decvax,philabs}!mcvax!kvport!kvvax4!koksvik) A/S Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk, Kongsberg
robert@erix.UUCP (Robert Virding) (06/19/84)
> >A good way to have a break is to read the news, both > >technical and otherwise. >I agree. What I think is wrong is to spend large amounts of time >arguing bullshit back and forth on the net. If I were just to read the technical information then it would hardly be a break, would it? > >Many of us do a lot of work (for which we don't get paid > >extra) from terminals at home and this more than > >compensates for the work lost by reading and posting to > >the net. >If that is the case, then why don't you work in your working hours >and post to the net in your spare time? I don't know what you are employed to do, but my main job is to think. Also to write code based on those thoughts, but mainly to think. As yet I have found no way to restrict my job-related thoughts ONLY to working hours and all others to the rest of the day. If you have then then maybe you should tell us how. >I don't claim to be God or you to be the devil, but I am entitled >to my own opinions, just like you are entitled to yours. >In football it is a golden rule to go for the ball, not the player. >That rule could also be applied to discussions on the net. But in many cases it is more effective to go for the player! :-) Robert Virding @ L M Ericsson, Stockholm
hans@log-hb.UUCP (Hans Albertsson) (06/30/84)
Rolf probably has earplugs as well.
So people chatting would present no problem...
--
{decvax,philabs}!mcvax!enea!log-hb!hans
Hans Albertsson,
TeleLOGIC AB
Box 1001,
S-14901 Nynashamn,
SWEDEN