adeboer@gjetor.geac.COM (Anthony DeBoer) (02/25/91)
In article <2590@root44.co.uk> gwc@root.co.uk (Geoff Clare) writes: >I was curious that the group had apparently not been re-created and checked >in the active file on our system, only to find that it was there after all. >A little investigation revealed that my newsreader (nn) had ignored it >because my .newsrc still had a line left over from the last incarnation of >comp.unix.wizards showing articles 1-19898 as read. As the re-created >group started again from article number 1, nn has been treating all >articles as already read. Other newsreaders may be doing the same. Now, isn't this the sort of thing that would only be caught by a wizard? This deletion-and-recreation fiasco in comp.unix.wizards might ultimately have had the benefit of keeping a lot of non-wizards out of the group... :-) Sort of like the forgeries-only setup in alt.hackers, but in the read direction instead of the write direction. -- Anthony DeBoer NAUI#Z8800 | adeboer@gjetor.geac.com | Programmer (n): One who Geac J&E Systems Ltd. | uunet!geac!gjetor!adeboer | makes the lies the Toronto, Ontario, Canada | #include <disclaimer.h> | salesman told come true.
cdash@margaux.colorado.edu (Charles Shub) (02/27/91)
In article <whatever> adeboer@gjetor.geac.COM (Anthony DeBoer) writes: => In article <2590@root44.co.uk> gwc@root.co.uk (Geoff Clare) writes: => >I was curious that the group had apparently not been re-created and checked => >in the active file on our system, only to find that it was there after all. => >A little investigation revealed that my newsreader (nn) had ignored it => >because my .newsrc still had a line left over from the last incarnation of => >comp.unix.wizards showing articles 1-19898 as read. As the re-created => >group started again from article number 1, nn has been treating all => >articles as already read. Other newsreaders may be doing the same. => => Now, isn't this the sort of thing that would only be caught by a wizard? This OBVIOUSLY NOT. Just look at the drivel that has appeared here since the recreattion. -- charlie shub cdash@boulder.Colorado.EDU -or- ..!{ucar|nbires}!boulder!cdash or even cdash@colospgs (BITNET) -or- (719) 593-3492
chrisn@cs.arizona.edu (Christopher E. Niswander) (03/01/91)
In article <1991Feb27.014901.5228@csn.org>, cdash@margaux.colorado.edu (Charles Shub) writes: > In article <whatever> adeboer@gjetor.geac.COM (Anthony DeBoer) writes: > => In article <2590@root44.co.uk> gwc@root.co.uk (Geoff Clare) writes: > => >A little investigation revealed that my newsreader (nn) had ignored it > => >because my .newsrc still had a line left over from the last incarnation of > => >comp.unix.wizards showing articles 1-19898 as read. As the re-created > => >group started again from article number 1, nn has been treating all > => >articles as already read. Other newsreaders may be doing the same. > => > => Now, isn't this the sort of thing that would only be caught by a wizard? This > > OBVIOUSLY NOT. Just look at the drivel that has appeared here since the > recreattion. You don't have to catch that glitch to read comp.unix.wizards; you only need to have a .newsrc that was created since the last incarnation. So we drivelling newcomers with new accounts (or who just happened to completely re-initialize our .newsrc for some reason) can read comp.unix.wizards without even having to think. Only old-timers with old accounts must catch the problem to read the newsgroup. So maybe the restart glitch _does_ have an influence on the recent drivel quotient of comp.unix.wizards, but an effect _opposite_ to what Geoff Clare might have expected. ;^) chrisn@cs.arizona.edu (Chris Niswander / PO Box 857 / Oracle AZ 85623) Disclaimer: I didn't write this. Someone else is using my account. I am in a small village in Baja California 80 miles from the nearest telephone, getting ready for the eclipse. Disclaimer': I don't believe my opinions; why should you?