chongo@nsc.UUCP (Landon C. Noll) (10/18/84)
I have found that mod groups are of higher quality than non-mod groups. For one thing, the reduction in volume makes reading them less of a pain. (yes, net.general was a waste of time with all the 'n'-ed articles) Since you find less repeat articles, your less likely to get into the "n-trigger-happy" mode. You tend to read a higher % of the articles there. This makes writting more worthwhile beucase you have a better % of the people who use the group reading your article. As mod.foo becomes more common, this will also translate into more people in general. Oh by the way, could we remove this discussion from net.flame. I dont want to have to subscribe to that group just to hear other comments about this subject? Mod groups also solve a big problem of people posting to multiple groups. Take this discussion where the start article was also posted to net.flame and replies kept repeating the problem. Do people remember how long the net.lang.celts,net.physics,net.singles,net.foo... article kept being replied to over and over again? With mod groups, you dont have this problem of multiple group posting. I hope many many more groups come under the mod.foo type of format, and that the net.foo group dies away. Perhaps the later wish might not come true, but the former wish is moving along. chongo <*smYle*> /\--/\ -- ~ Imagine UN*X source, being in the public domain... ~ J. Alton 84'