[comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d] This is not funny, folks

jkg@gatech.edu (Jim Greenlee) (05/08/89)

The message enclosed at the end of this article was originally posted to 
news.admin - I thought it was important enough to be posted here. I'm sure
that there is a reasonable explanation for this, but the timing with this 
recent spate of "let's un-moderate" postings makes me a little suspicious 
(I do not mean to imply in any way that Jeff Boeing or any of the people 
who have posted in support of his proposal are responsible for this).

If it was done maliciously, then whoever did it needs some serious attitude 
adjustment. Needless to say, shenanigans like this should not be condoned 
by anybody. The binaries groups are in a tenuous enough position as it is 
without this kind of thing happening. I'm sure it would take more than a 
bogus control message to do any real damage to c.b.i.p., but this is just 
the sort of thing that makes the bean counters sit up and take notice. Let's 
not try to shoot ourselves in the foot, OK?

						Jim Greenlee

---------------------------------- cut here -----------------------------
Path: prism!gatech!purdue!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!shelby!polya!weening
From: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (Joe Weening)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: comp.binaries.ibm.pc moderated status
Message-ID: <WEENING.89May6161308@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 6 May 89 23:13:09 GMT
Sender: USENET News System <news@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Distribution: na
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Lines: 17

We recently received a "newgroup comp.binaries.ibm.pc" control message
that tried to change its status from moderated to unmoderated.  I
assumed this was spurious and ignored it; another novice news admin
let one get loose, presumably.

Then today a message posted to the group resulted in bounced mail; it
had no "Approved" line and had the following "Path" line:

   Path: labrea!decwrl!ucbvax!agate!bionet!ames!purdue!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!teknowledge-vaxc!0rrodrig

Does this mean that all of the above sites (except labrea, which was
the one that tried to mail it to the moderator) now treat the group as
unmoderated (since they passed on the unapproved message)?  I'm
somewhat surprised at this.
--
Joe Weening                                Computer Science Dept.
weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU          Stanford University


-- 
Jim Greenlee - Instructor, School of ICS, Georgia Tech     jkg@gatech.edu

Jryy, abj lbh'ir tbar naq qbar vg! Whfg unq gb xrrc svqqyvat jvgu vg
hagvy lbh oebxr vg, qvqa'g lbh?!