filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us (Bela Lubkin) (12/30/89)
In article <7049@nigel.udel.EDU> Eric Edwards writes: >The problem is that questions often generate discussions, hense there would be >a lot of cross posting. Perhaps a comp.sys.amiga.novices might be more >effective. This would limit the group to questions that could be answered >by one or two postings. In article <57b.02t179Uh01@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> Dave Lowrey writes: >This would be a big mistake! Who would subscribe to a "novice" group? >Novices, that's who. And who would answer their questions? Other novices? >The same goes to groups about hard disks, printers, etc. The general >attitude would be "I don't have much time, and my hard drive works >fine, so I won't subscribe to the hard drive group anymore..." >You have now lost another expert (well, at least another opinion). >The same even goes for games. I know several "serious" programmers who >own only one game "Sim City". Would they have found out about it if >it was posted to a "games only" group? Probably not. >So, my 2 cents, for what it's worth, says.... Keep it all in one group! >You may have to wade through several articles you aren't interested >in, but you may be suprised by finding something out you never would >have found if it had been stuck out in some special interest group. So what you're saying is, "keep everything I'm interested in in one group, and the heck with what anyone else is interested in". Don't you think the Macintosh and IBM PC and VMS groups should all be merged with comp.sys.amiga, as well? You may be surprised what you'll learn! It is much easier for you to read multiple groups that interest you than for someone who is not interested in all areas to eliminate the uninteresting areas from a single large group. If you're worried about quality/quantity of replies to a worthwhile question, well, think about this: an unanswered question is a lot more obvious in a small group. In a large group, messages get ignored in the sheer flow. I've asked 3 or 4 times now: where is Eric Haberfellner; what is the latest version of HandShake, and have never received a reply. This wouldn't happen in a smaller group. I do agree that a .novices group is a bad idea -- no better than .questions, .discussion, etc. that have been suggested. All of these would just painfully parallel the main group, generating lots of cross-posting. >Remember: there is always the 'k' key! Here is where you're the most wrong. Many people use rn, nn, etc., "modern" newsreaders. Some receive news as digests, some use old software, etc., and CANNOT easily ignore particular classes of articles. They must consciously dismiss every article they don't want to read. You might as well say "Let them eat cake!". Followups once again directed to news.groups... Bela Lubkin * * // filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us CI$: 73047,1112 (slow) @ * * // belal@sco.com ..ucbvax!ucscc!{gorn!filbo,sco!belal} R Pentomino * \X/ Filbo @ Pyrzqxgl +408-476-4633 and XBBS +408-476-4945
thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (12/31/89)
Re: all the hoopla re: splitting comp.sys.amiga, it seems at least one basic fact of human nature is being totally ignored: people are lazy. As any but the most casual perusal of most newsgroups will show, responses quickly branch off into other topics regardless of the "Subject:" line. A *.hardware group will quickly receive software-(un)related issues, and vice versa. Additionally, I can see less technical content to be posted in the future due to increasing plagiarism FOR MONEY of material posted to the Usenet. This is why I have stopped posting technical material to comp.sys.amiga; I'm getting weary and more than pissed off at stuff appearing in rags such as "Amazing Computing" and the "Transactor for the Amiga" without due credit being given. Re: Here is where you're the most wrong. Many people use rn, nn, etc., "modern" newsreaders. Some receive news as digests, some use old software, etc., and CANNOT easily ignore particular classes of articles. They must consciously dismiss every article they don't want to read. You might as well say "Let them eat cake!". Tough. A "modern" newsreader program doesn't have those problems. And if it's too difficult to flip through a digest at 19,200 (or higher) baud using the space bar (or other key), then you have other problems which are NOT relevant to the net in general. Re: I've asked 3 or 4 times now: where is Eric Haberfellner; what is the latest version of HandShake, and have never received a reply. This wouldn't happen in a smaller group. If you're using his (Eric's) program, then select the "About ..." in the "Project" menu and you'll see his phone number, his mailing address, and his network connectivity; he's on BIX (NOT on Usenet), he DOES answer his phone (as I've spoken with him several times over the years), and he DOES receive postal service mail delivered to his doorstep. From all the whining I'm hearing, it appears to ME that you have some personal problems that you're trying to get the "net" to fix for YOU. If you're reading news at 110 baud on a TTY ASR 33, then I can understand your frustrations! :-) The ONLY split of comp.sys.amiga I can see that would be reasonable at this time would be the addition of a "comp.unix.amix" in regards to CBM's soon to be released SVR4 port for the '020 and '030 Amigas. Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ]
filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us (Bela Lubkin) (01/01/90)
In article <25508@cup.portal.com> Thad Floryan writes: >Re: all the hoopla re: splitting comp.sys.amiga, it seems at least one basic >fact of human nature is being totally ignored: people are lazy. As any but >the most casual perusal of most newsgroups will show, responses quickly branch >off into other topics regardless of the "Subject:" line. This is true; this is true of all groups. That's why we have 50-message arguments named "Xerox Sues Apple!!!" (and >about< lots of subjects). Nevertheless, providing a group name does >tend< to guide the discussion in that group. >A *.hardware group will quickly receive software-(un)related issues, and >vice versa. Yes. The separation cannot be 100%. It >can< be 90% or better, if responders redirect (which they do often enough to help the problem), etc. Think of it as enriching an ore (or, in this case, several ores) by applying a process that separates the ore out from the other stuff -- even if it is only partially successful. >Additionally, I can see less technical content to be posted in the future due >to increasing plagiarism FOR MONEY of material posted to the Usenet. This is >why I have stopped posting technical material to comp.sys.amiga; I'm getting >weary and more than pissed off at stuff appearing in rags such as "Amazing >Computing" and the "Transactor for the Amiga" without due credit being given. This hasn't (to my knowledge) happened to me; I could see getting upset if it did. Did you attempt to contact the offending magazines, that they shouldn't do it again? >Re: > Here is where you're the most wrong. Many people use rn, nn, etc., > "modern" newsreaders. Some receive news as digests, some use old > software, etc., and CANNOT easily ignore particular classes of articles. > They must consciously dismiss every article they don't want to read. > You might as well say "Let them eat cake!". > >Tough. A "modern" newsreader program doesn't have those problems. And if >it's too difficult to flip through a digest at 19,200 (or higher) baud using >the space bar (or other key), then you have other problems which are NOT >relevant to the net in general. I use rn at 9600 and 2400bps, no problem. I do try to have empathy for those who might not have access to good tools; it doesn't hurt me to do so. >Re: > I've asked 3 or 4 times now: where is Eric Haberfellner; > what is the latest version of HandShake, and have never received a > reply. This wouldn't happen in a smaller group. > >If you're using his (Eric's) program, then select the "About ..." in the >"Project" menu and you'll see his phone number, his mailing address, and his >network connectivity; he's on BIX (NOT on Usenet), he DOES answer his phone >(as I've spoken with him several times over the years), and he DOES receive >postal service mail delivered to his doorstep. I've selected the "About" item. I've sent several messages to the email address given, and received no response (nor a bounce). The initial message was approximately "Please verify your postal address <Eric's address here> so that I can send a check for your fine program" -- a message I would certainly expect a reply to. The version of HandShake I have is old enough that I am not confident of any of the address information; I'd rather not send a check off into the ether. You say the address is good, so I'll send one off and hope for the best. As to the phone number -- I considered that an "emergency last resort"; perhaps the inconvenience of one person being called at home weighs less than the inconvenience and cost to the entire net. Of course it does; I just hadn't thought it through, so thank you for pointing this out. >From all the whining I'm hearing, it appears to ME that you have some >personal problems that you're trying to get the "net" to fix for YOU. If >you're reading news at 110 baud on a TTY ASR 33, then I can understand your >frustrations! :-) Excuse me, Thad. I'm not whining. If you're reading in whining, perhaps you have some personal problems yourself. -- I don't think that's true, or at least have no particular evidence one way or the other; just turning it around so you can see how silly and baseless it is. I'm trying to accomplish what *I* see as a service to the Usenet Amiga community -- splitting off comp.sys.amiga.hardware. It is your right to disagree, to argue against it, to vote against it, etc. Go for it. There is no need to bring in personal invective. Ob. -> :-) <- >The ONLY split of comp.sys.amiga I can see that would be reasonable at this >time would be the addition of a "comp.unix.amix" in regards to CBM's soon to >be released SVR4 port for the '020 and '030 Amigas. I'd certainly like to see that (the group, AND the product... ;-) I'm not sure what the point would be until it ships -- those who have it are surely under nondisclosure, and discussion between those who don't have it are unlikely to be enlightening; in fact, are likely to generate more confusion than anything else. I wonder if a newsgroup could be voted into existence to be created at a later time (e.g. when Amix ships to the public). That would allow the ~6-week discussion+voting period to be "pipelined" so that when there's something to discuss, the group can be created immediately. Any thoughts from the Cabal? (Yes, alt would probably work -- for those that receive it). BTW, I intended to post the call-for-votes on c.s.a.hardware tomorrow, 1/1/90. Is there any reason not to do so? Some people object to the idea, but that's true of any proposal; the vote then reveals the will of the majority. If there is no compelling reason to postpone the vote, I will post it tomorrow. Please, no votes yet. They wouldn't be valid, and I'll be directing votes to a different account anyway. Bela Lubkin * * // filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us CI$: 73047,1112 (slow) @ * * // belal@sco.com ..ucbvax!ucscc!{gorn!filbo,sco!belal} R Pentomino * \X/ Filbo @ Pyrzqxgl +408-476-4633 and XBBS +408-476-4945
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (01/01/90)
In article <25508@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes: > Re: all the hoopla re: splitting comp.sys.amiga, it seems at least one basic > fact of human nature is being totally ignored: people are lazy. As any but > the most casual perusal of most newsgroups will show, responses quickly branch > off into other topics regardless of the "Subject:" line. And when they get too far off topic they get directed elsewhere. And, lo and behold, they often go there. But... > Additionally, I can see less technical content to be posted in the future due > to increasing plagiarism FOR MONEY of material posted to the Usenet. This is > why I have stopped posting technical material to comp.sys.amiga; I'm getting > weary and more than pissed off at stuff appearing in rags such as "Amazing > Computing" and the "Transactor for the Amiga" without due credit being given. Interesting. Care to cite cases? And I got a call from some nice guy in Europe who thought I was being taken advantage of. Some company was selling disks that contained (among other programs) "Browser". Doesn't bother me. Compute published Browser in a utility disk. They were nice enough to ask. Doesn't bother me. Did you put copyright notices on your messages? > Tough. A "modern" newsreader program doesn't have those problems. And if > it's too difficult to flip through a digest at 19,200 (or higher) baud using > the space bar (or other key), then you have other problems which are NOT > relevant to the net in general. Yep. Let them eat cake. Out here in the real world a 2400 baud connection is the best you can depend on for non-UNIX non-industry groups like comp.pc.*. I don't even get it here at Ferranti, and I'm the news admin. -- `-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>. 'U` Also <peter@ficc.lonestar.org> or <peter@sugar.lonestar.org>. "It was just dumb luck that Unix managed to break through the Stupidity Barrier and become popular in spite of its inherent elegance." -- gavin@krypton.sgi.com
bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton) (01/02/90)
In article <ATWASBny2@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >Out here in the real world a 2400 baud connection is the best you can depend >on for non-UNIX non-industry groups like comp.pc.*. I don't even get it here >at Ferranti, and I'm the news admin. Make that 1200 baud, Pete. You're on the beam, tho'. Noone can reasonably expect all of the net to read at the speed of their microwave links. --Blair "But it's got this little switch that will let it run at 300 baud if the net gets really crowded..."
thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (01/03/90)
In <126.filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us> filbo@gorn.santa-cruz.ca.us (Bela Lubkin) writes: >From all the whining I'm hearing, it appears to ME that you have some >personal problems that you're trying to get the "net" to fix for YOU. > If >you're reading news at 110 baud on a TTY ASR 33, then I can understand your >frustrations! :-) Excuse me, Thad. I'm not whining. If you're reading in whining, perhaps you have some personal problems yourself. -- I don't think that's true, or at least have no particular evidence one way or the other; just turning it around so you can see how silly and baseless it is. Gee, didn't ANYONE see the ":-)" ?? :-) And: BTW, I intended to post the call-for-votes on c.s.a.hardware tomorrow, 1/1/90. Is there any reason not to do so? Some people object to the idea, but that's true of any proposal; the vote then reveals the will of the majority. If there is no compelling reason to postpone the vote, I will post it tomorrow. Please, no votes yet. They wouldn't be valid, and I'll be directing votes to a different account anyway. One suggestion (if it's not too late already): Wait until Jan.8,1990 before posting the call to vote; this'll allow more people the opportunity to vote. It's my impression many people are out on vacation the week of Jan.1-5 and most people read news at "work." Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ]
thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (01/03/90)
In <ATWASBny2@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) asks: " But... > Additionally, I can see less technical content to be posted in the > future due to increasing plagiarism FOR MONEY of material posted to > the Usenet. This is why I have stopped posting technical material > to comp.sys.amiga; I'm getting weary and more than pissed off at > stuff appearing in rags such as "Amazing Computing" and the > "Transactor for the Amiga" without due credit being given. Interesting. Care to cite cases? ... Did you put copyright notices on your messages? " Copyright notices on Usenet messages? Sheesh! :-) The simple act of posting to Usenet effectively placed the information in the public domain, and I deliberately did that (in many cases) simply because I wanted to share the info and was not thinking of monetary compensation for my time to write the articles. This is sort of the "spirit" of Usenet: the willingness to SHARE information. I have NO intention of suing those magazines since they, per se, are not culpable (though I *DO* believe they should better referee articles they publish); the fault lies with several authors/contributors to those mags who were paid for "their" articles. As far as "cases": though there are many which come to mind (and I DO have archives of most material posted to several "favorite" newsgroups (including Amiga-related stuff back to the very first mention of the Amiga way back in the net.micro.*, mod.*, etc. groups), and I do have copies of most Amiga- related magazines ever since the respective "Vol.1,No.1"), the two most recent which "pissed me off" were the ones pertaining to hard disk stiction problems and to MC68010 usage. "...due credit being given" only meant to cite the SOURCE of the original work(s) plagiarized for the (magazine) articles. That's all. I consider the authors' failure to do so unethical. Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ]
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (01/04/90)
In article <25549@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes: >In <ATWASBny2@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) asks: >The simple act of posting to Usenet effectively placed the information in >the public domain, [...] Just for the record, and hoping this won't start a new flame war: the above statement is false. The simple act of posting to usenet is equivalent to "publication". Quite a number of articles on Usenet come with a clearly marked copyright notice. The "date" of publication has known legal implications (it gives you a limited time to file for copyright registration and claim statutory damages). Now that the US has joined the Berne convention, (which does not require copyright notice and registration to retain copyright), putting such a notice is still important (one can't have the benefit of the doubt and say: "Well, I thought it was PD", if a copyright notice was provided). Thad Florian's article on the "stiction" problems of the Seagate drives, could easily have been marked with a copyright, effectively increasing the possibilities of at least having the article properly credited. Of course, it would be stupid to put a copyright on a 20-line message, but the above mentioned article was original and long enough to make it worth protecting it with a copyright notice, IMHO. -- Marco Papa 'Doc' -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "Xerox sues somebody for copying?" -- David Letterman -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
ejkst@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Eric J. Kennedy) (01/04/90)
In article <22077@usc.edu> papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) writes:
[some interesting stuff on copyrights]
Which brings up an interesting point. What is the status of all these
programs (and there are *lots*) that come with a notice something like
this:
FooBar is copyright 1990 John Doe.
FooBar is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN!!!!!
or
FooBar is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN!!! It may not be sold!!!!
What, do we flip a coin and take our pick? Do we assume the copyright
is valid in #1 even though it expressly says 'public domain'? I could
see that. Do we assume that there is an implied copyright on #2 even
though it doesn't say 'copyright' and does say 'public domain'? That's
going a little far, in my opinion.
Do we confiscate the keyboard of the offending programmer until he
attends law school? :-)
--
Eric Kennedy
ejkst@cis.unix.pitt.edumonty@sagpd1.UUCP (Monty Saine) (01/05/90)
In article <25508@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes: > >Tough. A "modern" newsreader program doesn't have those problems. And if >it's too difficult to flip through a digest at 19,200 (or higher) baud using ^^^^^^ Thad, I don't know what you read news on but there are a lot of people out here that read news at 1200 baud and "flipping through" 200 plus messages at 1200 baud is not the most pleasant thing in thew world. Even here at work we are limited to 9600 baud, so if you live in a 19,200 baud or better world good for you, just remember you are a minority! To the writers of news software in general: is there a reader out there that allows a function like the "=" function but starting at the current article? When there are 200 plus articles it is a pain to have to go back to the beginning each time you want to view the subject line summary. To all a Happy New Year and to CBM, a prosperous one. Monty Saine >the space bar (or other key), then you have other problems which are NOT >relevant to the net in general. > >Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ]
dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) (01/05/90)
In article <21379@unix.cis.pitt.edu> ejkst@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Eric J. Kennedy) writes: >Which brings up an interesting point. What is the status of all these >programs (and there are *lots*) that come with a notice something like >this: > FooBar is copyright 1990 John Doe. > FooBar is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN!!!!! >or > FooBar is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN!!! It may not be sold!!!! >What, do we flip a coin and take our pick? Do we assume the copyright >is valid in #1 even though it expressly says 'public domain'? I could In the absence of other documentation, both are copyrighted--neither is in the Public Domain. When you place something in the Public Domain, you abandon a great many rights in that thing. When there is confusion, when there is ambiguity, when there is conflicting information, the courts will hold that your rights were improperly abandoned and, therefore, the abandonment is void. Obviously, placing something in the Public Domain is to abandon all rights you might have in it. What these folks are trying to do is abandon *some* rights, while retaining others. This is a perfectly legal, legitimate thing to do, they just don't know how, so they copy what they have seen others do and end up doing it wrong. -- Dick Flanagan, W6OLD, CFII, CFIG Cherokee 235 N9212W UUCP: ...!uunet!slvblc!dick GEnie: FLANAGAN Internet: slvblc!dick@uunet.UU.NET POB 155, Ben Lomond, CA 95005
jim@syteke.be (Jim Sanchez) (01/05/90)
RE: Eric Haberfellner - Funny but on MY version of Handshake (V2.12a)
the about screen says ..!utgpo!mentor!becker!haberfellner!eric as well
as BIX. I have sent him TWO shareware contributions and several emails
and never heard ZIP. Bad form on his part to say the least.
--
Jim Sanchez {sun,hplabs}!sytek!syteke!jim OR
Hughes LAN Systems, Brussels uunet!prlb2!sunbim!syteke!jimthad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) (01/07/90)
monty@sagpd1.UUCP (Monty Saine) in <574@sagpd1.UUCP> writes:
Thad, I don't know what you read news on but there are a lot of people
out here that read news at 1200 baud and "flipping through" 200 plus
messages at 1200 baud is not the most pleasant thing in thew world.
Even here at work we are limited to 9600 baud, so if you live in a
19,200 baud or better world good for you, just remember you are a minority!
If you ARE in fact calling a online service at 1200 baud to read newsgroups,
then there IS a problem. I agree with you, reading real-time at 1200 baud
is excruciatingly painful, esp. with large amounts of duplicated and/or
previously-posted material included. The problem became so severe for me
(subscribing to some 55 newsgroups), that I implemented the following:
My (home) system(s) collect the stuff during the day and then I can read it
nightly at high-speed locally (either directly on my host's screen at
whatever "baud" it displays, or via a terminal (or another host) connected at
19200). Several people I know receive stuff this way on their Amigas; I use
UNIX boxes for this purpose.
Thad Floryan [ thad@cup.portal.com (OR) ..!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!thad ]bdb@becker.UUCP (Bruce Becker) (01/07/90)
In article <685@syteke.be> jim@syteke.be (Jim Sanchez) writes: |RE: Eric Haberfellner - Funny but on MY version of Handshake (V2.12a) |the about screen says ..!utgpo!mentor!becker!haberfellner!eric as well |as BIX. I have sent him TWO shareware contributions and several emails |and never heard ZIP. Bad form on his part to say the least. Jim, I've tried to email you more than once but mail bounced each time. If I can't get to you then Eric certainly can't either, since all his mail goes thru here as far as I know... Grunt, -- \\\\ Bruce Becker Toronto, Ont. w \66/ Internet: bdb@becker.UUCP, bruce@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu `/v/-e BitNet: BECKER@HUMBER.BITNET _< \_ "Head-slam me, Jesus, on the turnbuckle of life" - Godzibo
jim@syteke.be (Jim Sanchez) (01/12/90)
Actually, I did receive a recent email but if eric is on the net why did
he not post anything himself. He has had SEVERAL opportunities to
respond - if he cares
--
Jim Sanchez {sun,hplabs}!sytek!syteke!jim OR
Hughes LAN Systems, Brussels uunet!prlb2!sunbim!syteke!jim