bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) (03/11/89)
I'm looking for a hack. The newsgroup creation on the regular
hierarchies is more-or-less under control, at least there are no
rmgroup wars going on and I would expect flames galore if someone
were to start one.
HOWEVER, some *ssholes are in the business of creating alt groups as
a prank, or as a public statement, or what have you. Unfortunately,
there being no constraint on creating alt groups, I really don't have
any grounds for telling them to f*ck off. Though they should.
The hack I'm looking for is to let inews create newsgroups when the
newgroup comes in but only when it is not for an alt group. Before I
go into inews, has someone else already done this?
---
Bill
{ uunet | novavax } !twwells!bill
(BTW, I'm going to be looking for a new job sometime in the next
few months. If you know of a good one, do send me e-mail.)anand@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (Anand Iyengar) (03/12/89)
In article <763@twwells.uucp> bill@twwells.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes: >I'm looking for a hack. The newsgroup creation on the regular >hierarchies is more-or-less under control, at least there are no >rmgroup wars going on and I would expect flames galore if someone >were to start one. > >HOWEVER, some *ssholes are in the business of creating alt groups as >a prank, or as a public statement, or what have you. Unfortunately, >there being no constraint on creating alt groups, I really don't have >any grounds for telling them to f*ck off. Though they should. > >The hack I'm looking for is to let inews create newsgroups when the >newgroup comes in but only when it is not for an alt group. Before I >go into inews, has someone else already done this? A better hack would be to just not recieve the group at the local sight. Who cares if this guy creates a group, if you can't see it. I personnally just unsub the group and don't hear any more about it, as long as it isn't deleted/re-created. Anand. -- Disclaimer \-'kla-mer\ n [AF, fr disclaimer v.] 1a: a denial or disavowel of legal claim: relinquishment of or formal refusal to accept an interest of estate b: a writing that embodies a legal disclaimer 2a: denial, disavowel b: repudiation { Webster's New Coll. Dict.}
bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) (03/13/89)
In article <3073@udccvax1.acs.udel.EDU> anand@vax1.acs.udel.EDU (Anand Iyengar) writes:
: >The hack I'm looking for is to let inews create newsgroups when the
: >newgroup comes in but only when it is not for an alt group. Before I
: >go into inews, has someone else already done this?
: A better hack would be to just not recieve the group at the
: local sight.
That's fine for this one group. But I want to cut this out for the
whole hierarchy. The latest stupidity is alt.rmgroup!
: Who cares if this guy creates a group, if you can't see it.
: I personnally just unsub the group and don't hear any more about it, as
: long as it isn't deleted/re-created.
Except, of course, that they *are* being deleted/re-created.
Fortunately for me, the hack already exists. Apparently it is a
feature added in the new version of the news software. While I'm not
going to apply the patches wholesale, since they seem to be buggy, I
will go and try to fish out the relevant pieces for solving my
problem.
---
Bill
{ uunet | novavax } !twwells!bill
(BTW, I'm going to be looking for a new job sometime in the next
few months. If you know of a good one, do send me e-mail.)davidsen@steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr) (03/14/89)
In article <763@twwells.uucp> bill@twwells.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes: | HOWEVER, some *ssholes are in the business of creating alt groups as | a prank, or as a public statement, or what have you. Unfortunately, | there being no constraint on creating alt groups, I really don't have | any grounds for telling them to f*ck off. Though they should. I think you're looking for a solution to something which isn't a problem. The alt groups are only carried by those who want to carry them. Having one person create a newsgroup is not going to harm anything, if the volume or content is unsuitable people will do a manual rmgroup and stop feeding it. If this happens too often sites close to the source will stop carrying the offending site completely. The price of freedom of speech is that you might hear something which offends you, such as people offended by your language, or you being offended by this reply. If alt.rissa offends you, press the 'u' key gently but firmly. Don't carry it. Don't forward it. I haven't seen any signal to noise at all in it, but I really don't care. Maybe if we ignore the group it will go away (now I'm sure rissa is mad at me, too). -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
rjg@sialis.mn.org (Robert J. Granvin) (03/14/89)
> I think you're looking for a solution to something which isn't a >problem. The alt groups are only carried by those who want to carry >them. This is not entirely true. This argument has been around forever, and it's rare that someone steps up and counters it. Many sites carry a full news distribution and then redistributes it to a number of downstream sites, who in turn do the same. These upper tier sites feel that they have a responsibility to their sites to maintain a complete and reasonable news feed. Therefore, alt is carried, even though it is not wanted. It can always be argued that the upper tier site(s) can just cease to carry alt and let it impact their fed sites in any way it does. The sites below them are perfectly able (theoretically) to locate another source for their alt distribution should they choose to receive it. But that's almost considered "anti-social", and just doesn't fit in with the "spirit of Usenet" we hear about so often (Whatever that is :-) Every argument has a counter-argument, and the solutions to individuals are easy, but it's no longer a global situation that "whoever doesn't want to carry alt, doesn't." Unfortunately, no matter what its value is, if it gets to be unreasonable and/or unmanageable, people will be tempted into turning it off. -- Robert J. Granvin "Mueslix: A natural blend of oats, barley, National Information Services octopi, Toyotas, cement and small furry rjg@sialis.mn.org animals too slow to escape our field {amdahl,hpda}!bungia!sialis!rjg agents." --'corsair'
bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) (03/14/89)
In article <13356@steinmetz.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes: : In article <763@twwells.uucp> bill@twwells.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes: : : | HOWEVER, some *ssholes are in the business of creating alt groups as : | a prank, or as a public statement, or what have you. Unfortunately, : | there being no constraint on creating alt groups, I really don't have : | any grounds for telling them to f*ck off. Though they should. : : I think you're looking for a solution to something which isn't a : problem. The alt groups are only carried by those who want to carry : them. Having one person create a newsgroup is not going to harm : anything, if the volume or content is unsuitable people will do a manual : rmgroup and stop feeding it. No, No, NO, NO!!! You don't understand. I perfectly well understand that the alt groups are an anarchy. And that anyone getting them has to put up with that. BUT, the current software was two options: one which requires no action on my part to create a newsgroup, and is appropriate for all the hierarchies where there is a semblance of control, and another with which I have to do manual newgroups, and is appropriate for dealing with an anarchy. What I'm looking for, and have found (part of B news patchlevel 17), is an option that lets me do both. That makes it easier for me to have both kinds of hierarchies on my system. The point of what the above paragraph was to express my displeasure with those inevitable louses which will inhabit an anarchy while recognizing that accepting the alt groups as anarchy means that I may not say that they are *wrong*. : If this happens too often sites close to the source will stop carrying : the offending site completely. The price of freedom of speech is that : you might hear something which offends you, such as people offended by : your language, or you being offended by this reply. Oh, true. I'm not about to try to stop the alt.idiots. I just don't want to be a part of their rmgroup war. : If alt.rissa offends you, press the 'u' key gently but firmly. Don't : carry it. Don't forward it. I haven't seen any signal to noise at all in : it, but I really don't care. Maybe if we ignore the group it will go : away (now I'm sure rissa is mad at me, too). It's not that easy. With my current setup, I get constant messages bugging me to create/rmgroup this thing. It's not the newsgroup itself that bothers me, I could cheerfully ignore it along with the other almost 400 groups I don't read, it is the irritation of dealing with the messages. --- Bill { uunet | novavax } !twwells!bill (BTW, I'm going to be looking for a new job sometime in the next few months. If you know of a good one, do send me e-mail.)
jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (John F. Haugh II) (03/15/89)
In article <780@twwells.uucp> bill@twwells.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes: >It's not that easy. With my current setup, I get constant messages >bugging me to create/rmgroup this thing. It's not the newsgroup >itself that bothers me, I could cheerfully ignore it along with the >other almost 400 groups I don't read, it is the irritation of dealing >with the messages. I subscribe to control and have NONEWGROUPS defined [ or whatever that option is called ... ]. I have NO trouble skimming pass 100+ messages a day in control, and several hundred more a week in the usenet mailbox. How? Simple. I have a KILL file in control and I delete more mail messages than I read. Truly a revolutionary idea. -- John F. Haugh II +-Cause of the Week:------------------- VoiceNet: (214) 250-3311 Data: -6272 | St. Patricks Day: Wear white for InterNet: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US | peace. End the bloodshed in Ireland. UucpNet : <backbone>!killer!rpp386!jfh +--------------------------------------
david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) (03/16/89)
I'd say to have the AUTONEWG definition take a newsgroup-pattern.
But I think I'd configure it for "all" ... the people on alt can
have a silly playground if they want. I don't really care.
--
<-- David Herron; an MMDF guy <david@ms.uky.edu>
<-- ska: David le casse\*' {rutgers,uunet}!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET
<--
<-- The problem with mnemonics is they mean different things to different people.