daemon@rutgers.UUCP (02/23/87)
From: Revised List Processor (1.5h) <LISTSERV%CANADA01.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu> Dear networker, As of Sunday, February the 22nd of 1987, you have been added to the LISTSERV distribution list I-AMIGA (Info-Amiga List) by <INFO-AMIGA-REQUEST@RED.RUTGERS.EDU>. Please remember that this is a BITNET distribution of an ARPA list and you must send all contributions to the ARPAnet list ID, Info-Amiga@RED.RUTGERS.EDU. Virtually, The LISTSERV management
page@ulowell.UUCP (02/23/87)
About LISTSERV telling the world that somebody else on bitnet has just subscribed to INFO-AMIGA: When INFO-AMIGA@RUTGERS pointed at me, I filtered these out (as moderator of mod.amiga). Now that mod.amiga is kaput, I asked Eliot Lear @ rutgers (the info-amiga "moderator") to point the INFO-AMIGA submissions to him. Instead he pointed them at you, so now you get to read LISTSERV postings and people saying "please add me to the list" like you see on every other ARPA group gatewayed to Usenet. mod.amiga is no more, and comp.sys.amiga will remain unmoderated - until some group of sites can't stand the volume any longer. We must police ourselves, or others will do it for us. One way is to stop 'mail reflectors' like the one Rutgers has pointed at comp.sys.amiga, and have a someone (something?) filter out the duplicate postings and other drivel (Like BADGE telling the world about a meeting and not bothering to restrict the distribution to CA) that we see. Remember reading a zillion messages about MMUs? Macs? STs? The botched Juggler posting? The blatant Advertising that Perry does? That Manx just did? What am I saying? That comp.sys.amiga cannot continue like this, and will collapse under its own weight. And -will- become moderated. Maybe a year, maybe less, maybe even more. It will happen (and I won't moderate it). Unless this 'community' of readers and posters does something to nip it in the bud, that is. How do we do that? We go underground. We use MAIL for followups, and we use MAIL for flaming at people (and things) that don't behave socially. It works. ..Bob PS I am not blaming Eliot for this - since long before he was doing info-amiga, the INFO-AMIGA stuff was pointed at me, so he didn't even know I was getting/filtering the stuff. -- Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept. ulowell!page, page@ulowell.CSNET
page@ulowell.UUCP (02/26/87)
I (Bob Page) wrote in article <1082@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu>: >The blatant Advertising ... that Manx just did? Of course Jim Goodnow's posting was nowhere *near* an ad, it was factual, informative, and free of marketing hype. I read the whole thing, and was happy to see it. Sorry Jim, and comp.sys.amiga. I should also point out that Perry stopped posting advertisements quite some time ago. Although nobody publicly critized him for the ads, I think enough people send him E-mail that he realized what he was doing. I will reiterate my main point of the article: >use MAIL for flaming at people (and things) that don't behave socially. >It works. ..Bob -- Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept. ulowell!page, page@ulowell.CSNET
lear@aramis.UUCP (02/27/87)
Regarding the recent bitnet verbiage, until those messages started to
appear on comp.sys.amiga, I had no idea that that cruft was being sent
to INFO-AMIGA. I have investigated the matter to some extent and it
turns out to be a side effect of the LISTSERV software. Here is what
is going on:
People on the ARPANet/Bitnet send to INFO-AMIGA@rutgers.edu to get
their articles posted to the USENET. I, in turn, collect all the
USENET articles and digestify a small percentage of them. Each digest
takes about an hour to do, so depending on the week, I send out
somewhere between 1 and 4 digests.
Anyway, then there is this matter of the bitnet recipients. The
software used to distribute the digest to bitnet users requires that
it have a "owner" name to post to, from, and everywhere in between.
As an "owner", info-amiga receives all sorts of cruft. Because of
it's nature, I thought that this address was being spared all that
cruft. Well, I was wrong. I will contact the bitnet people and try
to clear the problem up asap.
Sorry about those messages, but in the meantime, let me restate my
opinion - that being that there is a lot of cruft on this list that
could be cut out by using (a) local distribution options or (b) mail
or (c) nothing. Please consider these options when posting.
...eliot
--
[lear@rutgers.rutgers.edu]
[{harvard|pyrnj|seismo|ihnp4}!rutgers!lear]