spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) (05/10/88)
After some mailer difficulties and administrative problems, a new
moderator is now in place for the comp.binaries.ibm.pc group: Rahul
Dhesi. The last time a poll was taken in the group for a moderator,
Rahul came out the clear favorite. Plus, he has volunteered to do it.
Submissions to the group should be sent to
uunet!bsu-cs!ibmpc-binaries
Administrative queries should be directed to
uunet!bsu-cs!ibmpc-binaries-request
Before anybody flames about a moderator on the group, consider two points:
1) the group used to be moderated up until a few months ago, and no one
had any major complaints about it then; and
2) since the group became unmoderated, the volume (and noise-level) has
steadily increased to the point where sites, including some backbone sites,
were dropping the group. Without a moderator, the continued existence of
the group is very possibly in doubt.
Please welcome Mr. Dhesi on board, and update your mail aliases accordingly.
--
Gene Spafford
NSF/Purdue/U of Florida Software Engineering Research Center,
Dept. of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-2004
Internet: spaf@cs.purdue.edu uucp: ...!{decwrl,gatech,ucbvax}!purdue!spafben@idsnh.UUCP (Ben Smith) (05/10/88)
Well done!
webber@constance.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) (05/15/88)
[mailed as well as posted so that opportunity of reply to question about ibm.binaries.pc quota would exist.] In article <4050@medusa.cs.purdue.edu>, spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) writes: > .... > Before anybody flames about a moderator on the group, consider two points: No particular interest in flaming this particular bad move (after all, I don't have time to flame every mistake the backbone makes), but the two points raised are just totally off the wall. > 1) the group used to be moderated up until a few months ago, and no one > had any major complaints about it then; and Wrong. Major complaints about moderation, binaries, and ibm pc's have been steadily increasing since the creation of a group dedicated to all three. At the very least, you should have moved it to rec.* > 2) since the group became unmoderated, the volume (and noise-level) has > steadily increased to the point where sites, including some backbone sites, Considering the near-nil information content of the typical ibm-pc binary and considerating that more non-binary messages have appeared once moderation was removed, clearly the information per message rose considerably. Of course the binaries are so large that information per byte probably dropped, but as long as binaries are encouraged to be posted, I can see no way of avoiding that. > were dropping the group. Without a moderator, the continued existence of > the group is very possibly in doubt. Gee whiz. This certainly does not justify moderation. Zap away. By the way, is the moderator at least imposing a quota on the number of ibm-pc binaries bytes posted per month? --- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)