davison@drivax.UUCP (Wayne Davison) (03/21/90)
Tad Guy (tadguy@abcfd01.larc.nasa.gov) wrote: } I would expect more lossage from a quick series of postings than a } slow series since the quick one is likely to overflow disks somewhere. I agree with you here. But what often happens in a slow series of postings is that people see 9 out of 10 parts and *panic*. You then see a bunch of "I'm missing part 10" messages, but no one seems to admit they jumped the gun when part 10 comes dribbling in the following day. So, when (if) you switch over to a "metered posting" method, be sure to let people know that they have to start being patient. -- Wayne Davison \ /| / /| \/ /| /(_) davison%drivax@uts.amdahl.com davison@drivax.UUCP (_)/ |/ /\| / / |/ \ ...!amdahl!drivax!davison
steve@digibd (Steve Wahl) (03/23/90)
In article <LRJGKNP@drivax.UUCP> davison@drivax.UUCP (Wayne Davison) writes: >Tad Guy (tadguy@abcfd01.larc.nasa.gov) wrote: >} I would expect more lossage from a quick series of postings than a >} slow series since the quick one is likely to overflow disks somewhere. > >I agree with you here. But what often happens in a slow series of postings >is that people see 9 out of 10 parts and *panic*. You then see a bunch >of "I'm missing part 10" messages, but no one seems to admit they jumped >the gun when part 10 comes dribbling in the following day. > >So, when (if) you switch over to a "metered posting" method, be sure to >let people know that they have to start being patient. >-- >Wayne Davison \ /| / /| \/ /| /(_) davison%drivax@uts.amdahl.com >davison@drivax.UUCP (_)/ |/ /\| / / |/ \ ...!amdahl!drivax!davison Small suggestion: try this for trickle posting of multiple part series: > Subject: Whizbang graphics generater part 9 of 99 > Date: Jan 8, 1995 > X-next-part-will-be-posted: Jan 10, 1995 Of course, not necessarily in this format. The point is, when a moderator has something to distribute, he has all the parts, and if something's going to be trickle-posted, he can probably schedule when each part is going to be posted BEFORE he posts the first part. If there was some indication of a) when this part is posted, and b) when to expect the next part to be posted, one could use a third piece of data, c) the date on the most recent posting from comp.(binaries|sources).amiga that I can find on my system, to decide if the next part is still comming (b >= c) or probably got lost (c > b). Certainly, even if such a process is implemented, I offer no guarantees whatsoever that people who panic now at 9 parts of 10 wouldn't ignore all this information anyway and continue to panic. But it might help some... --> Steve -- Steve Wahl uunet!digibd!steve DigiBoard Inc. St. Louis Park, MN (612) 922-8055
tadguy@abcfd01.larc.nasa.gov (Tad Guy) (03/23/90)
In article <1990Mar22.191314.10392@digibd> steve@digibd (Steve Wahl) writes: > The point is, when a moderator has something to distribute, he has all the > parts, and if something's going to be trickle-posted, he can probably > schedule when each part is going to be posted BEFORE he posts the first > part. This isn't true in my case, since the shipping of the articles depends on the amount of free disk space available on xanth, which could (and has) delayed postings unpredictably. > I offer no guarantees whatsoever that people who panic now at 9 parts of 10 > wouldn't ignore all this information anyway and continue to panic. And we'll taunt them to no ends... :-) ...tad