[news.admin] Arbitron reports, sources, and so on...

taylor@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM (Dave Taylor) (10/30/87)

I'm disturbed by the recent postings by Brian Reid, and have been bothered
for quite a while by the assumptions of the Arbitron program (and the
distribution method).

To wit:  I would like to request that the Arbitron source be posted *ONCE*
within the framework of comp.sources.unix and then people who are interested
in retrieving a copy then use the same mechanism used for obtaining any of
the other software in the archives.

I just find it difficult to understand why it is perceived that the 
arbitron program sources are so much more important than all the other
sources floating around (like news 2.11, or pathalias, or ... ) that it
can be acceptably reposted every month or two.  This should stop.

And also, as Evelyn Leeper pointed out quite astutely, if the arbitron
program truly *is* useful then a relatively small percentage of the 
sites on the net reporting should be sufficient for the numbers that
the program generates anyway.  In any case, there is no point in the
public browbeating for those sites that do not keep up-to-date in their
information... [of course this isn't to say that the more up-to-date
informaiton received the better the results will be, just that a
sample of 100% isn't a sample any more, is it??]

To summarize, then:

  1. The arbitron sources should become part of the larger comp.sources.unix
     archive and pointers to it there should be posted rather than the
     source each month.

  2. The postings about sites that are not currently able to report their
     netnews readership numbers should be considerably toned down to
     acknowledge that for the most part the people in charge of those
     machines are professionals doing their job, and simply not finding that
     reporting netnews stats is important enough to get around to.

Let's be a bit more professional about the whole thing, please.  There is
no need to slur AT&T administrators, for example - I know a number of them
and they are all good people who know their jobs.  They certainly don't
need or deserve the slander...

					From another facet of the net,

							-- Dave Taylor

ps: Snoopy: Right On!!