boyajian@akov68.DEC (Jerry Boyajian) (06/05/84)
Lauren posted a message to net.tv in response to my article on the planned MIDAS
VALLEY tv show. He questioned my posting it to net.general. I'd send him a reply
by mail, but I think that what I have to say might spark some discussion here.
Lauren seemed to have a point: after all, the article was about a tv show, so it
belongs in net.tv, right? Well, yeah, but I think he missed the point. I didn't
post the article because it was about a planned tv show, I did it because of the
connection with the computer industry. Everyone on the net is involved with com-
puters to one degree or another (obviously; anyone who wasn't wouldn't or could-
n't be here), and so I thought that the article was of general interest. And
since I'm sure that not everyone reads net.tv, I posted it to net.general to
reach those people who *don't* read net.tv. If anything, the question should've
been whether I should have *also* posted it to net.tv (of course, there may be
some people who read net.tv who don't read net.general).
This brings up a larger issue. Every now and then there is a message in net.gen-
eral saying that such and such a previous message doesn't belong there. And once
in a while, Chuq von Rospach submits an article explaining what net.general is
for and what should and shouldn't be posted to it. Has it occurred to anyone
that maybe the description of net.general in the newsgroup listing is too fuzzy?
Sure, it may be obvious to Chuq, or to Lauren, or to whomever what the group is
for, but that doesn't mean it's obvious to everyone. I feel that *I* understand
what net.general is for, and by *my* interpretation of the newsgroup description
my article was not inappropriate for it.
If I erred, please excuse me. I'm a human being; mistakes come with the job.
--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC Maynard, MA)
UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4|allegra|ucbvax|...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-akov68!boyajian
ARPA: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA
P.S.: No hard feelings, Lauren. Really.jdb@qubix.UUCP (Jeff Bulf) (06/07/84)
Yes, there sure havs been a flood of inappropriate articles to net.general
lately.
Most of them come from newcomers who do not know about the meaning of
"general" as used in this context.
As UN*X(tm,esq, PhD,etc) becomes still more widespread, we will be joined
by ever more people who don't already know ...
The problem could be solved by changing the non-obvious name "general"
to something self-explainatory. Eg: net.all, net.everybody, net.worldwide.
Even net.everyBodyInTheWorld would be more clear, if a tad unwieldy.
--
Dr Memory
...{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!qubix!jdbchip@t4test.UUCP (06/10/84)
=== REFERENCED ARTICLE =============================================
From: jdb@qubix.UUCP (Jeff Bulf)
The problem could be solved by changing the non-obvious name "general"
to something self-explainatory. Eg: net.all, net.everybody, net.worldwide.
Even net.everyBodyInTheWorld would be more clear, if a tad unwieldy.
====================================================================
I vote (sorry nsc!chuqui :-] ) for "net.everyBodyInTheWorld". It would
make posting to net.general a little more painful...
But seriously folks. I posted a one-night hack to Mark Horton's
postnews.c in net.sources a while back. Since then I've added some
stuff to it. One thing, in light of all this net.general discussion,
is to strongly attempting to persuade the person into changing the
newsgroup from net.general to something else. If you want this let me
know and I'd be glad to mail it. Seeing that I continue hacking away,
I would feel unconfortable about deluging net.sources with it again.
(By the way...is there some sort of group that "officially" works on
this sort of stuff? Is it frowned upon to be developing such
"nonstandard" software independantly?)
--
Chip Rosenthal, Intel/Santa Clara
{idi|intelca|icalqa|imcgpe|kremvax|qubix|ucscc}!t4test!{chip|news}