[net.news] The net.general problem

z (11/05/82)

I agree that we don't want to be too heavy-handed about enforcing guidelines.
It seems that the vast majority of errors in posting to net.general are
due to ignorance of existing policies.  I think that if the news software
simply printed a big warning whenever anyone tried to post to net.general,
and maybe even required an extra confirmation, this would eliminate the
majority of the problem.

	Steve Zimmerman
	decvax!cca!z
	z@cca

sjb (11/06/82)

I wouldn't want the software printing out any long warnings.
This would be especially bad for people who have to read the
stuff at 300 baud.

furuta (11/07/82)

Concerning "inappropriate" material being posted to net.general:

I think it is much easier to modify one's own's reactions to particular
kinds of material on the net than it it to convince every reader to figure
out what they're doing so that they do it right.  Perhaps the following tale
will bear out my point:

On the Arpanet, there is no concept of centralized newsgroups receiving
single copies of articles as is found here.  Instead, individual copies of
articles are mailed to everyone who's interested in receiving them.  Someone
wanting to send out a message to everyone on a mailing list posts it to a
particular mailbox at some network site.  If someone wants to be added to
the list, they send mail to the list's coordinator.  There's a pretty
commonly followed convention that if there is a list whose mailbox is, say,
Info-Graphics@UTexas-20, then the address for the coordinator will be the
list's address with "-Request" appended to it,
Info-Graphics-Request@UTexas-20.

Despite this convention and despite frequent messages sent out by list
coordinators, one regularly sees administrative messages being directed to
the list as a whole rather than to the list's administrator.  Indeed, in the
latest example of this which I received, someone sent the entire list a
request for addition which included, in the text of the request message, a
previous message announcing the list and asking in large letters that
requests for addition be sent to a given -Request address rather than to the
list as a whole.  Occasionally, these rogue request for addition or removal
messages make it onto Usenet, causing mass confusion for the Usenet readers.

The point of this message is that there is probably no way in which any kind
of administrative regulation or cajolling is going to be able to prevent
this kind of misuse of the Arpanet mailing lists.  Similarly, I find it
quite improbable that administrative action (even when carried out by
computer program) will keep garbage from making its way to net.general.  I
suggest that the proper way to handle this kind of situation is to first
send a mail message to the originator of the offending article, preferably
constructively suggesting a better newsgroup to which the article should
have been directed in the first place.  Receiving several dozen messages in
response to a misplaced article will probably cause the sender to be more
cautious the next time.  Following that, I suggest that the next best thing
to do about these inappropriate articles is to just ignore them.

			--Rick