tale@pawl.rpi.edu (David C Lawrence) (07/17/89)
In <1989Jul16.050248.16940@vicom.com> lmb@vicom.com (Larry Blair) writes:
LB> Creating newgroups and, particularly, changing the moderation status of
LB> existing groups automatically is insanity. The default behavior should
LB> not execute newgroup commands.
Insanity? It would make an interesting defence in a trial, that is
for certain. "You honour, my client clearly can not be held for his
actions. Why, he even lacks the mental faculties to have defined
NONEWGROUP in his B News configuration!"
Balderdash. We have NORMGROUP here because of its destructive
behaviour but newgroup messages are honoured. If the group is really
bogus, like talk.bizarre.nice, I'll rmgroup is soon enough. In the
meantime, junk gets a whole bunch of articles that my neighbours ship
me because they think the group is valid. If the status was changed
from unmoderated to moderated, it is mostly just an inconvenience for
a short while. If the status was made unmoderated when it had been
previously moderated, it is a pretty small window before someone sends
through a message correcting the error. For example when the fiasco
of a couple of months ago unmoderated a number of groups, two admins
(Gene and someone else whose name eludes me) sent out all the messages
necessary to correct the situation. All I had to do in all of that
was rmgroup rec.games.rpg.
Insanity indeed.
Dave
--
(setq mail '("tale@pawl.rpi.edu" "tale@itsgw.rpi.edu" "tale@rpitsmts.bitnet"))