twb@hoqax.UUCP (T.W. Beattie) (06/10/88)
In article <2350@slvblc.UUCP>, dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) writes: > I have decided not to post > any games or picture files to comp.binaries.ibm.pc. This is the worst aspect of a moderated group. It is completely idiotic to restrict games and pictures from the binaries group. I hope those who wish to post such files find another newsgroup. Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Tombo.
simcha@humming.UUCP (Simcha Lerner) (06/12/88)
In article <1577@hoqax.UUCP> twb@hoqax.UUCP (T.W. Beattie) writes: > >Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics >and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d > >Tombo. Statements like this lead to anarchy on the net. If people start posting to c.b.i.p.d in order to bypass the moderator, we will end up having c.b.i.p.d killed. On the other hand, if enough people MAIL the moderator requesting that games (or graphics or whatever) be allowed on c.b.i.p, we will probably get the restriction lifted. (Please don't clog up c.b.i.p.d with 100 postings on this topic, just let the moderator know how you feel.) While I happen to disagree with the decision to kill off games, I do agree with the need to move graphic files to a new group. Since they are both large and (generally) one-shot, the high volume of traffic from such could get c.b.i.p killed, and then where would we be? (It's bad enough that there are ongoing discussions about killing all pc groups and/or all binary groups - let's not add fuel to the fire!) Simcha Lerner ...(harvard | talcott)!humming!simcha
heiby@falkor.UUCP (Ron Heiby) (06/13/88)
T.W. Beattie (twb@hoqax.UUCP) writes: > In article <2350@slvblc.UUCP>, dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) writes: > > I have decided not to post > > any games or picture files to comp.binaries.ibm.pc. > > This is the worst aspect of a moderated group. This is the best aspect of a moderated group. It's nice to have someone in a position to make intelligent desicions to help make a newsgroup more valuable. > It is completely idiotic to restrict games and pictures from the binaries > group. I hope those who wish to post such files find another newsgroup. It is completely idiotic to put games and pictures ahead of tools that can help people get their work done more efficiently or effectively. The fact that games and pictures can readily be obtained from BBS or Compuserve systems for those who really want them means that no one is being "deprived". I hope those who wish to post such files find Compuserve. (Starter kits are available through bookstores. I'm sure that calling them at (800) 848-8990 would find someone eager to get you all the information on the service that you would need.) > Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics Are you sure that this newsgroup is intended to be for posting of pictures? I have my doubts. I believe that it is for discussions of graphics HW, SW, and techniques, although I don't read it. Best to read a newsgroup for a few weeks before deciding to start posting massive binary files to it. > and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d Let's not. Let's leave the "discussion" group for discussion. -- Ron Heiby, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP Moderator: comp.newprod & comp.unix "Failure is one of the basic Freedoms!" The Doctor (in Robots of Death)
root@uisc1.UUCP (Super user) (06/13/88)
In article <1577@hoqax.UUCP>, twb@hoqax.UUCP (T.W. Beattie) writes: > In article <2350@slvblc.UUCP>, dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) writes: > > I have decided not to post > > any games or picture files to comp.binaries.ibm.pc. > > This is the worst aspect of a moderated group. Possibly. But them's the breaks. Maybe the real moderator comes back soon and then we'll have some intelligent decisions again, but for now...? > It is completely idiotic to restrict games and pictures from the binaries > group. I hope those who wish to post such files find another newsgroup. So do I. I'd like to see them again. Pix and games have about as much (or as little) purpose as 80% of the newsgroups. Unless we want to cut this net to "professional only" use, someone will have to recognize that this IS largely entertainment for many. > Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics > and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d But THAT is STUPID!!! Posting anything in a group for which it is not suited just to "get even" with moderators of another group is just plain dense. An alternative suggestion would be to find out just how many people would be interested in a newsgroup for games and pictures only. If the readers are there, we can do it. Otherwise maybe the need isn't there. Comments anyone?
chip@ateng.UUCP (Chip Salzenberg) (06/14/88)
According to twb@hoqax.UUCP (T.W. Beattie): >In article <2350@slvblc.UUCP>, dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) writes: >> I have decided not to post >> any games or picture files to comp.binaries.ibm.pc. > >This is the worst aspect of a moderated group. Actually, Beattie is the worst aspect of any group he's posted in. >I hope those who wish to post such files find another newsgroup. I hope Beattie finds another network. To paraphrase Chuq Von Rospach, Usenet exists on good faith and a lot of handwaving. The load of shipping graphics images around may be enough to kill the connectivity of comp.binaries.all (if it's not already doomed). >Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics >and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d. Let's put Tombo Beattie in a box. And lock it. -- Chip Salzenberg <chip@ateng.uu.net> or <uunet!ateng!chip> A T Engineering My employer may or may not agree with me. You make me wanna break the laws of time and space You make me wanna eat pork
phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) (06/14/88)
In article <1577@hoqax.UUCP> twb@hoqax.UUCP (T.W. Beattie) writes: >In article <2350@slvblc.UUCP>, dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) writes: !! I have decided not to post !! any games or picture files to comp.binaries.ibm.pc. ! !This is the worst aspect of a moderated group. ! !It is completely idiotic to restrict games and pictures from the binaries !group. I hope those who wish to post such files find another newsgroup. ! !Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics !and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d I think this is a bad decision too, but would rather work around it by creating a "bin" top level distribution. Anyone else interested? -- I speak for myself, not the company. Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or phil@amd.com
w8sdz@brl-smoke.ARPA (Keith B. Petersen ) (06/14/88)
Let us not forget that Dick is kindly filling in for our regular
moderator while he is on vacation. I'm sure he has his hands full
with just the regular postings, let alone games and picture files.
Instead of flaming him I feel he deserves our thanks for making it
possible for the comp.binaries.ibm.pc postings to continue during our
regular moderator's vacation.
Please save your reactions until Rhaul returns. I'm sure he will review
the decision.
--
Keith Petersen
Arpa: W8SDZ@SIMTEL20.ARPA
Uucp: {bellcore,decwrl,harvard,lll-crg,ucbvax,uw-beaver}!simtel20.arpa!w8sdz
GEnie: W8SDZbrowning@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Craig Browning) (06/14/88)
In article <8083@brl-smoke.ARPA> w8sdz@brl.arpa (Keith B. Petersen (WSMR|towson) <w8sdz>) writes: >Please save your reactions until Rhaul returns. I'm sure he will review >the decision. >-- >Keith Petersen >Arpa: W8SDZ@SIMTEL20.ARPA >Uucp: {bellcore,decwrl,harvard,lll-crg,ucbvax,uw-beaver}!simtel20.arpa!w8sdz >GEnie: W8SDZ You're such a nice guy, Keith. But I think a better idea is: Let Rahul return and see the burned smoldering body of Dick Flanagan, and that will make up his mind. Now. :) Just think, if we had only killed Hitler before he got power... a hint of :) Craig P.S. To those who suggest Compuserve, YOU go to Compuserve... why should those of us who don't pay extra for our accounts have to got to the major expense of Compuserve? The truth is that BBS's have all of the utilities and few of the games and pictures, in my calling; all of the utiilities I've liked recently on the net recently I had earlier from BBS's, but none of the pictures and I'd like to see more games in bin; lots of requests for nethack etc. have been posted asking for posting for instance. More seriously, please don't be quick to demand taking away what someone else wants, because next time they might take your thing like binaries. To the issue of anarchy, I can only suggest there seems to be a history of anarchy by choice on the net. REMEMBER many of us opposed a moderator, and we ahould be as little inconvenienced as possible by censorship. I don't support posting to .d with files because civility rules it out, at least until things get too bad, but do try to postpone the takeover of all groups by moderators. I think most moderators are great helps, but there is the mechanism for bad things, and the benifit seems to fall with ineffecient anarchy over censorship... My answer is moderators who delete horribly abusive postings in discussion groups, text in binaries, etc. but let the members censor themselves on what is posted (i.e. If someone posted the same program every week that would be properly censored.) The porblems we had are solved now with the above moderator as he will censor commercial postings and text from bin, we didn't have any problems other than that. Remember, please respect other people's desires. Diversity is the important thing here, every program here is used by probably few people except arc of course. Craig SNAP 3.0 is out; if it's better than 2.2 GET IT. I haven't heard back from the author on posting, Keith have you talked to him? On the ladies archive that still seems to generate mail in this group: I believe the last word is that it is bad, just delete it.
sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) (06/15/88)
In article <22047@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <1577@hoqax.UUCP> twb@hoqax.UUCP (T.W. Beattie) writes: >>In article <2350@slvblc.UUCP>, dick@slvblc.UUCP (Dick Flanagan) writes: >!! I have decided not to post >!! any games or picture files to comp.binaries.ibm.pc. >! >!This is the worst aspect of a moderated group. >! >!It is completely idiotic to restrict games and pictures from the binaries >!group. I hope those who wish to post such files find another newsgroup. >! >!Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics >!and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d > >I think this is a bad decision too, but would rather work around it by >creating a "bin" top level distribution. Anyone else interested? I think that we need a separate bin distribution that is moderated. The chief reason for moderation being to keep the garbage out and to encourage sites like uunet to archive. With the excellent job that Rick is doing at uunet if I had to *pay* to down load a feed I probably wouldn't take *any* sources groups. I would simply grab the archive index on a periodic basis and download *what* I want. I got a copy of the uunet's index last week. Somewhere around 4000 files just waiting to be downloaded. I can grab virtually *any* comp.source.unix file that's *ever* been posted with patches, within the next ten minutes if I want to. And at fairly low cost using a Trailblazer. If people are looking for ways to reduce volume this works well. Just try and get your favourite news group archived at a site you can FTP from. Then just don't take it anymore. Just get an index to the archive and download directly as you need it. You don't even need to have a direct connection to uunet. As long you know someone who does who is willing to grab it for you if you pay for the call. Personally I think that sites like uunet will be the only thing that keeps the net from collasping. Support your local pay as you go site! -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532
heiby@falkor.UUCP (Ron Heiby) (06/15/88)
Craig Browning (browning@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP) writes: > P.S. To those who suggest Compuserve, YOU go to Compuserve... I have an account on Compuserve. Among other things, I found the new version of ZIP about two weeks before it showed up in comp.binaries.ibm.pc. Also, files "hang around" in the libraries on Compuserve until it's convenient for *me* to get them. They don't just go away in 1-2 weeks. > why should those of us who don't pay extra for our accounts have to > got to the major expense of Compuserve? The answer to this one's simple. The reason why people should be asked to pay their own way is so simple that this early in the morning I can't find words simpler than that to explain it. I use a *FREE* program written by Compuserve members to access the forums and download libraries. It is set up to automate things so that all of the human "think time" is done off-line. Since 1200 and 2400 bps cost the same, dumping everything I'm interested in takes a very short amount of time. The program I use is called AUTOSIG or ATO. Another exists that I know little about, called TAPCIS which seems to do about the same thing. > The truth is that BBS's have all of the utilities and few of the > games and pictures, in my calling; all of the utiilities I've liked recently > on the net recently I had earlier from BBS's, but none of the pictures and > I'd like to see more games in bin; lots of requests for nethack etc. have > been posted asking for posting for instance. Well, I've already mentioned an example of where I got the new ZIP sooner on Compuserve, so you may be right there. I understand that Compuserve has a *large* number of picture files, with a "forum" devoted to pictures. In the IBM New Users forum libraries, there are games. Since I don't have time to play the half dozen games I already have on my PC, I haven't bothered to even get a directory of the games available, but I've seen discussion of several of them. > More seriously, please don't be quick to demand taking away what someone else > wants, because next time they might take your thing like binaries. Several sites are already looking at whether to continue to carry binaries. By not carrying pictures and games, comp.binaries.ibm.pc will demonstrate that it is worth the communication costs to pass it around. These are costs that you obviously don't pay and are not responsible for. I have been specifically directed by my boss to do everything I can to reduce our phone bills. So far, I've resisted dropping newsgroups. Other sites are not as fortunate as I. > SNAP 3.0 is out; if it's better than 2.2 GET IT. I believe that I've already seen this announced as available on Compuserve. -- Ron Heiby, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP Moderator: comp.newprod & comp.unix "Failure is one of the basic Freedoms!" The Doctor (in Robots of Death)
browning@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Craig Browning) (06/17/88)
Preface: Ron, I feel your earlier posting was selfish, saying basically that programs you like should be posted and what many want, pictures or games, shouldn't. IF a good group is found for pics, you'll grudgingly allow it, but if not too bad, that group can just lose out and shut up. My posting mentioned that your utilities [disclaimer: they're my favorite also] are easily available faster on BBS's; so the person who said find them somewhere else should follow his own advice. The pictures especially, and games, are less available in my calling, and this is a wonderful forum for them. While I'm not offering a solution to high traffic, I don't feel the answer is selfishness, and if it were let the utilities people including me drop their postings, and go use BBS's; Compuserve is expensive, I used to use it [72747,1012 is still active] but while your suggestions on lowering costs are helpful to do that simple transfer time and [you didn't mention] getting current listings of all of the files costs a lot of money. Finally, please use e-mail for initial replies so people don't bang out arguments over the net but can correct each other's statements, then post summaries. In article <170@falkor.UUCP> heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby) writes: >Craig Browning (browning@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP) writes: >> P.S. To those who suggest Compuserve, YOU go to Compuserve... >I have an account on Compuserve. Among other things, I found the new version >of ZIP about two weeks before it showed up in comp.binaries.ibm.pc. Also, >files "hang around" in the libraries on Compuserve until it's convenient for >*me* to get them. They don't just go away in 1-2 weeks. We agree then! BBS's also get things first... >> why should those of us who don't pay extra for our accounts have to >> got to the major expense of Compuserve? >The answer to this one's simple. The reason why people should be asked >to pay their own way is so simple that this early in the morning I can't >find words simpler than that to explain it. Then why didn't you? You only explained how to minimize the disaster. >I use a *FREE* program written >by Compuserve members to access the forums and download libraries. It is >set up to automate things so that all of the human "think time" is done >off-line. Since 1200 and 2400 bps cost the same, dumping everything I'm >interested in takes a very short amount of time. The program I use is >called AUTOSIG or ATO. Another exists that I know little about, called >TAPCIS which seems to do about the same thing. > >> The truth is that BBS's have all of the utilities and few of the >> games and pictures, in my calling; all of the utiilities I've liked recently >> on the net recently I had earlier from BBS's, but none of the pictures and >> I'd like to see more games in bin; lots of requests for nethack etc. have >> been posted asking for posting for instance. >Well, I've already mentioned an example of where I got the new ZIP sooner >on Compuserve, so you may be right there. I understand that Compuserve ^I like this guy.:) >has a *large* number of picture files, with a "forum" devoted to pictures. >In the IBM New Users forum libraries, there are games. Since I don't have >time to play the half dozen games I already have on my PC, I haven't bothered >to even get a directory of the games available, but I've seen discussion of >several of them. The giveaway: 1) the selection is terrible unlike utilities (pictures are there though); 2) you don't answer the fact it would cost us a LOT to get the pictures on compuserve, and as I said they aren't very available on free BSS's. 3) You don't like or play games apparently! Surprise at your position then! 4) Sorry for this flaming but ON THIS ISSUE I feel you're not respecting other people's desires. >> More seriously, please don't be quick to demand taking away what someone else >> wants, because next time they might take your thing like binaries. >Several sites are already looking at whether to continue to carry binaries. >By not carrying pictures and games, comp.binaries.ibm.pc will demonstrate >that it is worth the communication costs to pass it around. These are costs >that you obviously don't pay and are not responsible for. Wrong! We are a major backbone, and pay through fees, taxes, or whatever for this stuff, and distibute it to many people. I don't think we'll be dropping UCBJADE like AT&T dropped theirs. In my posting I said we don't pay EXTRA which means we don't get a seperate net bill, we do pay though even though we wouldn't get a refund of anything if we didn't have the net; after all it's not dollars we're spending but machines. >I have been >specifically directed by my boss to do everything I can to reduce our phone >bills. So far, I've resisted dropping newsgroups. Other sites are not as >fortunate as I. Sounds Darwinian... should the net be limited to it's weakest link? Once again I would say you're choosing a selfish solution; just because you only want utilities, you'd sooner see all picture and games people lose their files than see your one site lose all pc binaries. Perhaps we should seperate the types of pc binaries, or at least make comp.pics comp.binaries.pics, to let sites choose which groups they want; our site for instance will distribute all groups but smaller sites can get what they want, so you could refuse 'pics'. >> SNAP 3.0 is out; if it's better than 2.2 GET IT. >I believe that I've already seen this announced as available on Compuserve. Ha, case in point, I just got version 3.1from a bulletin board!! I'll post it probably, though a letter to the author got no response; but he gives permission in the docs. It's fantastic. I'm waiting to see what Keith Peterson does though; he seems to have contact with the author or some plans for posting. Keith, do you know what the 3.1 mods are? The docs only mention 3.0. >Ron Heiby, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP Moderator: comp.newprod & comp.unix >"Failure is one of the basic Freedoms!" The Doctor (in Robots of Death) You do good services to the net which are appreciated Ron... Craig
phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) (06/17/88)
In article <170@falkor.UUCP> heiby@mcdchg.UUCP (Ron Heiby) writes: >Craig Browning (browning@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP) writes: >> P.S. To those who suggest Compuserve, YOU go to Compuserve... >I have an account on Compuserve. Among other things, I found the new version >of ZIP about two weeks before it showed up in comp.binaries.ibm.pc. Also, >files "hang around" in the libraries on Compuserve until it's convenient for >*me* to get them. They don't just go away in 1-2 weeks. I think there is something being overlooked here. There are actually people who use PCs at work for work. Like me. We already use USENET for many other things. It is much more efficient of my time to get PC files off USENET than it would be to go to Compuserve. I don't have to worry about spending hours to download something to see if it is useful. I transfer it via 10 megabit per second Ethernet down to my PC and can use it immediately, without losing my train of thought or being interrupted. Also the billing is more convenient. We just pay the phone company and or UUNET one bill. The archiving is a lack of USENET but perhaps we should ask UUNET to perform this service. -- I speak for myself, not the company. Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or phil@amd.com
loci@csccat.UUCP (Chuck Brunow) (06/17/88)
In article <162@pigs.UUCP> haugj@pigs.UUCP (The Beach Bum) writes: >In article <179@usdtsg.Dayton.NCR.COM>, musson@usdtsg.Dayton.NCR.COM (Scott Musson) writes: >> I don't understand how a moderator can decide that utilities are good >> and games are bad!! If someone has taken the time and effort to write >> a game for our use and wants to share it with us, more power to him. > >i have extreme trouble with this entire discussion. it should be quite >obvious why games are less important than utilities. utilities are >productive, games aren't. Let me provide a productive use for games: my children, ages 6 and 7, have learned spelling, vocabulary, percentages, etc. by playing (Usenet) games like "hack". They have also learned to be better chess players from "chess" and have learned basic computer literacy because of the lure of games. > >i am the only programmer here, so i don't have other programmers i can >go ask for help or get tools off of. basically, if i don't have it > ... >had flex been displaced by spacewars or nudie-pix-part-5, i would >have been s.o.l, and it would have cost REAL money. if nudie-pix-part-5 >gets dumped, no big deal. [ unless i'm jim swagart or gary hart ;-) ] > >- john. > UUCP: ...!killer!rpp386!jfh jfh@rpp386.uucp :SMAILERS This whole argument is artificial, and I think you know it. "killer" has archives of EVERYTHING, and it's a local call. Besides, many of us have seen your postings describing "rpp386" as an archive site. If your point is that your option is to pay REAL money for the tools, why is that unreasonable? After all, you get paid REAL money to be the only programmer there, don't you? It is a commercial business that charges customers REAL money, isn't it? "killer" is a perfect example of what can be done to reduce repetitive postings. A recent posting describing the facilities was submitted by Bill Wisner (billw@killer) and there's no point in repeating it, but it represents a prototype for what can be done to handle Usenet in an intelligent way. Every major city could and should have a major archiving site. Now, who will volunteer? -- CLBrunow - KA5SOF Loci Products, POB 833846-131, Richardson, Texas 75083 clb@loci.uucp, loci@killer.uucp, loci@csccat.uucp
wcf@psuhcx.psu.edu (Bill Fenner) (06/17/88)
Look, I'm tired of hearing this garbage. You want pics? Call the Shadowland
BBS, (814) 238-4654, 3/12/2400 baud. They've got plenty. You want games?
Call the Entity, (814) 234-2971, 3/12/2400 baud. Plenty of games. Have you
got internet access? FTP to grape.ecs.clarkson.edu. Look in directory
graphics, and readmac. grape is also a BBS, but I don't remember the number
right now. If you're on Fidonet, you can request all these files from 263/41
(the Shadowland), grape is also on Fido, in 260/, but I don't remember what
node...
Anyway... in my experience, there are PLENTY of graphics and games on BBS's.
So there's no reason at all for the net to carry the burden of them.
I HAVE noticed, however, that the net is a great supply area for BBS's.
Sysops who have net access get the best utilities quickly. Users who have
net access upload the utilities they find. I'm sure people would be glad
to complain about this: "Hey, they're not even paying for a feed! Someone
else is paying for them!"
Oh well, time to stop babbling.
--
Bitnet: wcf@psuhcx.bitnet Bill Fenner | "How can we dance
Internet: wcf@hcx.psu.edu | When the beds are burning"
UUCP: {gatech,cmcl2,rutgers}!psuvax1!psuhcx!wcf |
Fido: Sysop at 263/42 | Now wait a second . . .heiby@falkor.UUCP (Ron Heiby) (06/17/88)
Craig Browning (browning@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP) writes: > Preface: Ron, I feel your earlier posting was selfish, saying basically that > programs you like should be posted and what many want, pictures or games, > shouldn't. IF a good group is found for pics, you'll grudgingly allow it, but > if not too bad, that group can just lose out and shut up. I didn't mean to appear selfish about it. Although I find many of the executables posted to the net useful, I wouldn't be heartbroken if the backbone decided that it just wasn't worth the effort. You may have noticed that AT&T has decided not to import pc binaries into the AT&T domain, due to fears of trojan horses and such. Many others have been questioning the cost/benefit ratio for some time. I don't really think a good group can be found for pics and don't recall having brought up the subject of a new group for them, although some have. I think it's a dumb idea. I think it would *have* to go under "rec". My site would not accept it or pass it. I think many other sites would do the same. > and [you didn't mention] getting current listings of all of the files costs a > lot of money. I dispute this statement. Many of the libraries on Cserve are small. They tend to have related files in libraries together. For example, one library will have files related to MS-DOS communication software. From what I've seen, the really big libraries (at least in the well-run fora) have a file in .ARC format that contains the full description directory for the library. Often, update files exist, so by downloading a few K, you can find out about all the files that are new within the last 4 weeks (or so). > >The reason why people should be asked > >to pay their own way is so simple that this early in the morning I can't > >find words simpler than that to explain it. > > Then why didn't you? You only explained how to minimize the disaster. Oh, ok. People should pay their own way because if they don't, then the people who *are* paying will get sick of it and take more drastic action than they otherwise might have. A possible scenario is the cutting of *all* binary groups because of the expense of transporting games. Most businesses on the net have no problem helping people get tools to help them get their job done. Many *do* object to paying a lot of money in phone bills, etc. to help people be entertained. > 2) you don't answer the fact it would cost us a LOT to get the > pictures on compuserve, See above on paying your own way. > 3) You don't like or play games apparently! Surprise at your position then! I like to just fine. I've bought a few in my time. I think the net as a whole is prepared to see an end to game postings and an increase in postings that say something like: "Send me $5 and I'll send you a floppy with the latest version of Nethack." > 4) Sorry for this flaming but ON THIS ISSUE I feel you're not respecting other > people's desires. I guess I'm not respecting their desires as much as I'm respecting those of the people paying the bills. > >that you obviously don't pay and are not responsible for. > Wrong! We are a major backbone, and pay through fees, taxes, or whatever for > this stuff, and distibute it to many people. I don't think we'll be dropping > UCBJADE like AT&T dropped theirs. In my posting I said we don't pay EXTRA > which means we don't get a seperate net bill, we do pay though even though we > wouldn't get a refund of anything if we didn't have the net; after all it's > not dollars we're spending but machines. As I said in the article to which you followed up, my boss has asked me to cut costs. This makes me personally responsible for the amount of money that comes out of *HIS* budget for telecommunications and disk drives. RIGHT NOW, we need to buy a news 390Meg ESDI disk drive. If I weren't using something like 150Meg for current news and sources archives (for the convenience of others), we could buy a much cheaper drive. If we don't pay money for other people to be entertained, there's more money in the budget to buy a new cpu board to better enable me to support my customers and generate additional business for my company. It's not just the costs. It's the *opportunity* costs. > Sounds Darwinian... should the net be limited to it's weakest link? Once again > I would say you're choosing a selfish solution; just because you only want > utilities, you'd sooner see all picture and games people lose their files than > see your one site lose all pc binaries. I didn't mean to imply that it was just my site. I meant to imply that it was *many* sites. > Perhaps we should seperate the types > of pc binaries, or at least make comp.pics comp.binaries.pics, to let sites > choose which groups they want; That would have to be something more like rec.pics. Likewise, maybe we should have rec.games.msdos, rec.games.mac, etc. It seems to fit better. > You do good services to the net which are appreciated Ron... Thanks. -- Ron Heiby, heiby@mcdchg.UUCP Moderator: comp.newprod & comp.unix "Failure is one of the basic Freedoms!" The Doctor (in Robots of Death)
dan@maccs.UUCP (Dan Trottier) (06/19/88)
In article <1796@van-bc.UUCP> sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) writes: >In article <22047@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: >>In article <1577@hoqax.UUCP> twb@hoqax.UUCP (T.W. Beattie) writes: >>! >>!Let's put the pictures in comp.graphics >>!and any other "contraband" in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d >> >>I think this is a bad decision too, but would rather work around it by >>creating a "bin" top level distribution. Anyone else interested? > >I think that we need a separate bin distribution that is moderated. The >chief reason for moderation being to keep the garbage out and to encourage >sites like uunet to archive. Perhaps what is needed is a seperate network of archiver sites both for sources and binaries. If you wanted to distribute software you would have to submit it to a moderator on the archive network. If accepted the software would then be circulated to the other archiver sites. People wanting the software would have to FTP or UUCP it to their machines. Of course there would have to be a newsgroup on the regular network where the moderators would post information about new software available on the archive servers. For those people who complain about needing to try the software before they decide if it any good I suggest that word of mouth is generally sufficient. If not how about a newsgroup comp.software.opinions or something like that. Personally I feel that binary and source groups for non Unix machines - are there any? - should be circulated on a seperate network - where's my asbestos suit! - I'm thinking about the Amigas, Ataris, MS DOS and other single user non Unix based machines. If we - The USENET - are going to support electronic mail messaging for anyone who can buy a PC (Personal computer of any kind) and plug into the system then we had better start thinking of ways to recover costs. I don't think the mandate of USENET was to provide electronic mail to every household in the known world! A time will come when these services are widely available from companies specializing in this area. To some extent it already has with COMPUSERVE, Envoy and others. Maybe it's time for USENET to go back to its original mandate which was to foster a community feeling amongst Unix users and help share ideas and solutions. Actually I don't think there was an original mandate but I believe this comes close to the intention of its creators. > >With the excellent job that Rick is doing at uunet if I had to *pay* to down >load a feed I probably wouldn't take *any* sources groups. I would simply >grab the archive index on a periodic basis and download *what* I want. Yes I agree. > >Personally I think that sites like uunet will be the only thing that keeps >the net from collasping. Support your local pay as you go site! Well I'm not so sure about this but they do make things so much smoother. dan -- A.I. - is a three toed sloth! | ...!uunet!mnetor!maccs!dan -- Official scrabble players dictionary -- | dan@mcmaster.BITNET