seifert@ihuxl.UUCP (D.A. Seifert) (06/22/84)
whatever happened to the concept of seperating the distribution
from the subject?
Many times one has the choice between bothering net.foo about
a local event, or bothering local.general with a subject that
has a 'net' group, but not a 'local' one. (I usually choose
to bother local.general since fewer people that don't want to
see it are bothered, and it keeps the costs down.)
--
_____
/_____\ Ever try to autocross a Sopwith Camel?
/_______\
|___| Snoopy
____|___|_____ ihnp4!ihuxl!seifertmark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) (06/24/84)
>Many times one has the choice between bothering net.foo about >a local event, or bothering local.general with a subject that >has a 'net' group, but not a 'local' one. (I usually choose >to bother local.general since fewer people that don't want to >see it are bothered, and it keeps the costs down.) This is exactly the situation that Distribution was created for. The correct thing to do is Subject: Anybody know of a place to get a foo in town? Newsgroups: net.foo Distribution: local This restricts the message to only go within "foo" but to appear in newgroup "net.foo" on the local machines.