mark@cbosgd.UUCP (05/29/84)
In reading through net.general, I was not bowled over with postings rebuking articles that should not have been there. I was, however, amazed at the number of articles that should not have been there. I'd like to remind people that followups to net.general should go into net.followup, not net.general. readnews and vnews automatically do this for you, I don't know what's needed to make notesfiles do the right thing. The articles I saw did not appear to be generated by notesfiles. I'd also like to remind you that net.announce was created for very important announcements. Lately, a number of such announcements have been posted to net.general and there have been no requests to post to net.announce. If it's an announcement, you feel that it makes sense to have everyone on the net read it, and it doesn't invite followups, it's probably a good candicate for net.announce. Mail submissions to cbosgd!announce. Mark Horton
emjej@uokvax.UUCP (05/31/84)
#R:cbosgd:-138500:uokvax:18700004:000:530 uokvax!emjej May 31 11:47:00 1984 /***** uokvax:net.followup / cbosgd!mark / 3:36 pm May 29, 1984 */ I'd like to remind people that followups to net.general should go into net.followup, not net.general. readnews and vnews automatically do this for you, I don't know what's needed to make notesfiles do the right thing. /* ---------- */ Sigh. Why should notes be required to brain-damage itself to make up for the inadequacy of netnews? (Admittedly, the subject divisions in both programs could be argued to be rather artificial and rigid.) James Jones
dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (06/02/84)
Agree entirely RE puerile ravings over inappropriate postings. For goodness
sakes, people make mistakes. Send the offending party a polite letter
instead of further clogging the net with screams about the original arcticle's
being posted to the wrong group!
{decvax,etc}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary (Gary Grady)chip@t4test.UUCP (06/09/84)
=== REFERENCED ARTICLE =============================================
From: emjej@uokvax.UUCP
/***** uokvax:net.followup / cbosgd!mark / 3:36 pm May 29, 1984 */
I'd like to remind people that followups to net.general should go
into net.followup, not net.general. readnews and vnews automatically
do this for you, I don't know what's needed to make notesfiles do the
right thing.
/* ---------- */
Sigh. Why should notes be required to brain-damage itself to make up for
the inadequacy of netnews?
====================================================================
Please excuse me if I rant a little heavily, but I am getting somewhat
tired of this term "brain damaged" which gets thrown around the
network quite a bit. Yes, it is quite a vivid phrase. Unfortunately,
most of the time it is used it is used in lieu of substance for an
argument, i.e. I prefer X because Y is brain damaged. Somehow I find
it hard to justify transmitting such sophmoric statements all around
the world.
Ok, why should notes make up for the possibly unsatisfactory and
certainly arbitrary structure of the network. Because, folks, a
convention has been established. Your participation is an implicit
buy-in to this convention. When people start pulling in twenty
different directions, the very tenuous fabric of this network will fall
apart. I think we all have a responsibility to do two things: work
within the confines of the current network protocol, and improve this
protocol (and associated software) in an organized manner to meet
additional needs. (Jeez! I feel like a high school civics teacher.)
(I think I'll hack postnews to reject any article which contains
the phrase "brain damaged" within. Ooops! That would kill of
this one--wouldn't it...)
--
Chip Rosenthal, Intel/Santa Clara
{idi|intelca|icalqa|imcgpe|kremvax|qubix|ucscc}!t4test!{chip|news}jejones@ea.UUCP (06/16/84)
#R:cbosgd:-138500:ea:3400016:000:604 ea!jejones Jun 15 22:17:00 1984 I bow to better English usage. What I should have said is "Why should notes pervert itself...?" "Pervert" is the right word--the whole purpose of notes is to provide linkage between notes and responses to them. Intentionally breaking the link between a note and its response is a violation of this notion. Now, I have heard from folks that there is a hack for notes to conform to netnews usage. If this keeps the linkage for notes while keeping up appearances for netnews, then this is fine--I don't know enough about the subject to say whether it's possible. We'll see, I suppose. James Jones