2FHDDOWEL@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (John A. Thywissen) (12/09/89)
In article <89120318304879@masnet.uucp>, john.russell@canremote.uucp writes: > Lately comp.sys.amiga.tech has been flooded with postings [that are of the 'Help, It's broke' vareity.] * * * * * * > May I suggest that although these may have been appropriate for > comp.sys.amiga.tech back when you were expected to build your own HD or > memory expansion, and there was a very select group of people who could > help with questions like this, that these are now very general subjects > that should be reserved for comp.sys.amiga? * * * * * * > I can remember when .tech > contained mostly articles with hardware and software discussions on > topics that most Amiga people *didn't* know. Perhaps it is time for cmp.sys.amiga.REALLYTECH. :-) Actually, it may be a side effect of comp.sys.amiga.tech being a "sub-group" of comp.sys.amiga. If it were instead comp.sys.tech.amiga, perhaps things wouldn't be so bad. It is getting to the point were I throw out 90% of THIS group based on the subject line. (comp.sys.amiga is WORSE) Every time I am ready to DEREGISTER, a small glimmer of hope (like some godd hardware stuff from daveh) keeps me from doing it. Perhaps we need to set more concete guidelines (not directives cast in stone, just guidelines) about what is ".tech". I think most of the people who post the "Help, it's broke" messages just don't know the difference. So: Issue: >> WHAT IS .TECH? << Any thoughts? Now, there are some people who needlessly cross-post to the world. In these cases, we need to get more defensive of our time and explain to the perpetrators how that is unacceptable behavior, and point them to news.announce.newusers (Emily Postnews's guide to nettiqute). Lets see if we can get some dicussion about what is appropos to this group. --John A. Thywissen, +1 913 864 2646, bix: thywiss, thywiss@csvax.cs.ukans.edu
jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu (Jim Wright) (12/11/89)
2FHDDOWEL@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (John A. Thywissen) writes: | | So: Issue: >> WHAT IS .TECH? << Any thoughts? Flames are not tech. Meta-discussions about "what is tech" is not tech. If there is ANY doubt, post to comp.sys.amiga. If the replies evolve into a technical discussion, followups will directed to tech by someone. -- Jim Wright jwright@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu
ifarqhar@mqccsunc.mqcc.mq.OZ (Ian Farquhar) (12/11/89)
In article <19481@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> 2FHDDOWEL@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (John A. Thywissen) writes: > >Perhaps we need to set more concete guidelines (not directives cast in stone, >just guidelines) about what is ".tech". I think most of the people who post >the "Help, it's broke" messages just don't know the difference. > >So: Issue: >> WHAT IS .TECH? << Any thoughts? > >Now, there are some people who needlessly cross-post to the world. In these >cases, we need to get more defensive of our time and explain to the >perpetrators how that is unacceptable behavior, and point them to >news.announce.newusers (Emily Postnews's guide to nettiqute). I would tend to define .tech as what DOES NOT belong in this newsgroup. Things that fall into this "exclusion" list are: 1. Games. They do not really belong in comp.sys.amiga either but it is in a much worse state than this one. 2. "My computer is broken..." problems, UNLESS they indicate an interesting technical problem. 3. "Where can I buy...", "How much is this...", "Has anybody had any experience with product XYZ...", "Where can I get this fixed...", and other such commercial questions. 4. "My computer is better than your computer" matches. 5. Whinging about CBM. It never gets any response anyway (am I breaking my own rule here?) 6. Late orders. 7. People trying to contact others. 8. Cross posting. It is a pity that the multitude of differing news systems in use about the world does not allow the net community to jump on those obnixious cross posters! I estimate a newsgroup's worth by its S-N ratio. Comp.sys.amiga.tech is about 5% (ie. I feel that 1 in 20 articles are worthwhile), and comp.sys.amiga is about 1%. By comparison, Comp.lang.postscript is 20% and aus.general is 50%. This makes both amiga newsgroups look rather doubtful. If they were not amiga newsgroups they would have been unsubscribed months ago. My main fear is that is guidelines are laid down defining EXACTLY what should go in this newsgroup, it will degenerate into flames about inappropriate postings, a situation much worse than the problem we are trying to solve. Standard Disclaimer: I have no idea what my employers opinions are, My employers have no idea what my opinions are, We both seem happy by this present arrangement, And thus all opinions must be my own. D