laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (07/14/84)
I have been getting mail back on my flame about ``stop putting the I want a foo for my bar'' stuff in net.sources. There are a lot of people who say ``but a lot of people don't read net.wanted, so to reach them I have to post to net.sources''. Some other people are saying the same thing about net.bugs. You people miss the point. Nobody is forced to read any newsgroup that they don't want to. If somebody is not reading net.wanted, it is presumably because they don't want to see ``I want a foo'' notices. No matter how much you need them to help you, they have every right to not help you at all. If you keep posting to net.sources they will only unsubscribe from that as well. I think that bug fixes can go to net.sources. Bug *reports* however, are another story. Sned them to the author of the program. Also, it would be very nice if somebody fixed 42 bugs in some net.sources offerning and then posted the fixed version, rather than posting the 42 fixes one at a time. Laura Creighton utzoo!laura
dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (07/15/84)
Re Laura's complaints about requests for help posted to net.sources: I still read net.wanted. I don't have the time or energy to respond to all of the requests for help that I might be able to assist with, but I do respond to some, particularly if I think that the information requested is little-known. I also look at net.sources for the sometimes-useful software posted there. I am much less likely to repond to any request for help I find in this group. Someone who posts an article to a clearly-inappropriate group just to make themselves heard causes me to be approximately as fond of said person as I am of the average vacuum-cleaner salesman.