[net.news] The politics of groups and the death of the news

avolio@decuac.UUCP (Frederick M. Avolio) (09/10/85)

In article <626@bu-cs.UUCP>, root@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein) writes:
> 
> First, I think Lauren was a little gloomy the day he announced the death
> of the USENET, it's certainly reached an annoying level in many ways,
> but, as the old expression goes, 'the reports of my death have been
> greatly exagerrated'.

I agree with a solution (of sorts) which has been suggested: that
heavily loaded sites turn off some news groups.  And new sites never
turn them on.  Let me briefly explain how we started dealing with news
on decuac a year ago.

When we "joined" USENET, our disk space was very limited.  Because of
that we started by only receiving "technical" groups, and then only
ones for which there was an interest.  We then added some non-
technical groups as people requested them.  Even now, after getting
loads more disk space, we operate the same way.  In addition, we
expire some groups much sooner than others (3 days for some).  While
we made it clear to our local "backbone" site (seismo) that we were
very willing to pass on news, a number of folks have lost interest
when then find out that we do not receive *everything*. (My goodness!!
No net.rec.nude?!?!?  Where do people get the time to read all this
stuff?)

I think if sites do turn off links and groups (by turn off groups, I
mean no one passes them said groups) for their own well-being, we will
see the net get healthier again.

friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) (09/13/85)

In article <610@decuac.UUCP> avolio@decuac.UUCP (Frederick M. Avolio) writes:
>
>I think if sites do turn off links and groups (by turn off groups, I
>mean no one passes them said groups) for their own well-being, we will
>see the net get healthier again.

	Well, I, for one, feel that telling another site what groups
it can and cannot recieve is completely out of line.  If the other
site has some alternative way of getting the groups you will not pass
on - all right, but I sincerely hope major feed sites will not start
cutting off groups like this!  Just passing a group through to your
feed sites uses little disk space, since the groups can be deleted
immediately after delivery! I would certainly hate to come some
morning and find my favorite groups cut off without a word!
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa

matt@oddjob.UUCP (Matt Crawford) (09/18/85)

In article <719@psivax.UUCP> friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) writes:
>	Well, I, for one, feel that telling another site what groups
>it can and cannot recieve is completely out of line.

But what about the opposite?  I would love to hold the only
news connection to site "prometheus" -- so I could unplug
its postings to net.physics!  No flames, please, I know it
is a reprehensible attitude, but I can't think what can be
done about that particular problem.
_____________________________________________________
Matt		University	crawford@anl-mcs.arpa
Crawford	of Chicago	ihnp4!oddjob!matt