Tabakal@UB.CC.UMICH.EDU (01/25/91)
Well, not really, but I figured that the people who ignore these
messages through a newsreader won't care, and the people whose blood
starts to boil when they see a "For Sale" subject header will. :-)
There's been a lot of "For Sale" bashing lately, and it's wrong.
Just because half of this list reads it through comp.sys.apple2,
and has adequate access to usenet and the "For Sale" groups, it
doesn't address the needs of the other half of us (myself included)
who read it as info-apple. Remember, this group is supported by
Apple.Com, which does the message forwarding between usenet and
the Internet.
I have nothing for sale at the current time, and don't need to
advertise anything to the members of this group. But, if I did,
I would have no reluctance to posting a message through Info-Apple.
If by chance, some usenet people don't want to read it, then they
can delete it just by the subject header. But, don't harp on the
rest of us who are using this resource in the best way that we can.
Remember: It's the Internet that forms the backbone of "Netland".
Proline and GNH-sites would have far more limited communications
links without ties into the 300,000 internet sites and gateways
to commercial systems like Applelink, MCI-Mail, Compuserve, et. al.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd A. Bakal Coming soon:
U of M Apple User's Group a new, improved
Ann Arbor, Michigan tested, UN*X archive
Internet: Tabakal@ub.cc.umich.edu FTP: ummts.cc.umich.edu
BITnet: UserTBKL@UMICHUB 35.1.1.43
UUCP: ...!uunet!ub.cc.umich.edu!tabakal CD PC5:scotth@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Henderson) (01/25/91)
In article <7355297@ub.cc.umich.edu> Tabakal@UB.CC.UMICH.EDU writes: >Well, not really, but I figured that the people who ignore these >messages through a newsreader won't care, and the people whose blood >starts to boil when they see a "For Sale" subject header will. :-) > >There's been a lot of "For Sale" bashing lately, and it's wrong. >Just because half of this list reads it through comp.sys.apple2, >and has adequate access to usenet and the "For Sale" groups, it >doesn't address the needs of the other half of us (myself included) >who read it as info-apple. Remember, this group is supported by >Apple.Com, which does the message forwarding between usenet and >the Internet. I agree. If it weren't for far sale messages on comp.sys.apple2, I wouldn't have an Apple ][GS right now. I enjoy reading the for sale messages in this group. I feel that their is a broad range of discussion in this group. Those I don't care for can be killed. I'm glad I wasn't the only one bothered about the anti-For Sale on comp.sys.apple2 messages. -- = R. Scott Henderson = "Some people claim that there's a = = University of Illinois = woman to blame, but I know it's = = scotth@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu = my own damned fault. = = Apple II Forever! = -Jimmy Buffet =
stuckey@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Anthony J. Stuckey) (01/25/91)
scotth@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Henderson) writes: >I agree. If it weren't for far sale messages on comp.sys.apple2, I >wouldn't have an Apple ][GS right now. I enjoy reading the for sale >messages in this group. I feel that their is a broad range of >discussion in this group. Those I don't care for can be killed. I'm >glad I wasn't the only one bothered about the anti-For Sale on >comp.sys.apple2 messages. ////////// The way I see it, there is Comp.sys.apple2 for relevant apple2 discussions and misc.forsale.computers for relevant forsale discussions. I personally would not post a forsale note to this group. In my case, it's uncalled for. As was noted a couple of posts back, some people do not have access to the misc.* groups, or use various odd methods of reading comp.sys.apple2 which make it a logical (only ?) choice for such postings. They don't bother me. Anthony J. Stuckey stuckey@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
ART100@psuvm.psu.edu (Andy Tefft) (01/25/91)
I personally like seeing for sale ads here, since I don't really read the forsale groups since I am not particularly looking to buy, however once in a while something will come up that I am interested in that I might have missed were it not posted. As long as it fits the group (no mac stuff, for example), I have no complaint. Whether or not ads are against a charter of any group or the policy of any particular site, I don't see how anyone can complain about non-commercial posts along the lines of "I have xxx that I am wanting to sell. Please send me e-mail for more info." Well, I guess you can complain if you say that strictly speaking it is an ad, but if there is no profit involved, what's the big deal? Please, nothing about the ENORMOUS cost of transmitting one person's one-line ad all over the world, since it is a TINY percentage of even just this group's traffic... let's see, 100 bytes at 300 baud (worst case)... takes 2.6 seconds to transmit, at about 25 cents per minute that's... 1.08 cents max for one site to transmit it to another, and assuming 100 people per site I'd say that on average each person who ever pays a cent toward usenet traffic pays .01 cents. hmm, a small portion of the total message traffic costs (I'm ignoring overhead like electricity, storage, hardware costs because these are just that, overhead, and will be paid regardless of whether or not that one message is sent). And consider, this little discussion has cost more than your average for sale message and is worth a small fraction of what the average for sale message is worth. Go figure.
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (01/26/91)
In article <7355297@ub.cc.umich.edu> Tabakal@UB.CC.UMICH.EDU writes: >Remember: It's the Internet that forms the backbone of "Netland". Yes, remember that. Also remember that most of the Internet is provided at public expense as a technical resource. Commercial abuse can result in the plug being pulled. Even if that were not a concern, it is utterly unethical to exploit a technical newsgroup for personal profit. When you consider that distribution of a "for sale" notice in this group has an aggregate cost that in some cases exceeds the total value of the items being sold, it should be clear that it is not a proper use of this resource. Only poor citizens who don't care about the effects of their actions on others would do such a thing.
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (01/26/91)
This is to support the posting of Apple // specific 'for sale' postings on this newsgroup. Frankly, I am sick of 'net nazis' although I agree with their message. Everyone has been very civil about reminding us that the usenet does have an intended organization and that violating this organization can have effects which none of us want. However, the only for sale postings I am interested in are apple equipment, and there's so much other stuff on the for sale groups that I unsubscribed to them. If these people only posted to the for sale groups, I would not see them and would never have the opportunity to purchase their stuff (as I just bought Keith Frederick's copy of Genesys because I saw it here). I believe that I am not alone in this. I agree that the newsgroup hierarchy should be respected. I quite agree that binaries and source code belong in their own groups, because their traffic, volume, and interest warrants it. However, under the circumstances the net (and more importantly, the people who use it) is far better served by moving apple specific for sale postings to the apple specific discussion group (i.e. comp.sys.apple2). Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (01/27/91)
In article <1991Jan26.050014.7102@nntp-server.caltech.edu> toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes: >apple specific for sale postings to the apple specific discussion group >(i.e. comp.sys.apple2). No! The only reason the "for sale" volume has been at all tolerable is that such posters tend to get jumped on, and most readers of the group understand and honor the prohibition. What you SHOULD suggest is that a separate newsgroup be set up specifically for Apple II merchandising. Then those who want to see such postings could add that group to their reading, assuming that their site and network permits such traffic (if not, the separation would help in enforcing the management policies).
philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) (01/30/91)
In article <1991Jan24.191417.10278@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> scotth@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Henderson) writes:
[support for "for sale" messages...]
I agree that there doesn't seem to be anything terribly wrong with
these occasional postings at first glance. The problem, though, is
that many of us could have comp.sys.apple2 deleted from our
newsgroups because of them. You can't imagine what I had to go
through to convince people to bring it into our system. I would
not want to defend the group again in the face of lot's of AppleII
for sale signs.
Philip McDunnough
University of Toronto
philip@utstat.toronto.edu
[not the opinions of my employer, necessarily]lhaider@pro-beagle.cts.com (Laer Haider) (01/30/91)
In-Reply-To: message from gwyn@smoke.brl.mil >In article <1991Jan26.050014.7102@nntp-server.caltech.edu> >toddpw@nntp-server.ca >ltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) writes: >>apple specific for sale postings to the apple specific discussion group >>(i.e. comp.sys.apple2). > >No! The only reason the "for sale" volume has been at all tolerable is >that such posters tend to get jumped on, and most readers of the group >understand and honor the prohibition. What you SHOULD suggest is that >a separate newsgroup be set up specifically for Apple II merchandising. >Then those who want to see such postings could add that group to their >reading, assuming that their site and network permits such traffic (if >not, the separation would help in enforcing the management policies). That's not a practical solution either, IMHO. There really isn't enough traffic of that sort to support its own discussion group; and such a group would miss a lot of readers of comp.sys.apple2 that don't receive other news feeds. Your main gripe is about bandwidth. How is a new newsgroup going to reduce the bandwidth used in UseNet? It'll receive the same postings you get here! I like to see the for sale items. If you don't, why don't you skip them! I recognize your point. I just don't agree with it. And, quit ATTACKING people for such simple posts. Simply informing them will suffice. [donning flame retardant suit] Send flames to lhaider@pro-beagle.cts.com See, I don't get all the newsgroups at this ProLine site, and there are many others like me. / _______________________________________________ \ / / ProLine: pro-beagle!lhaider \\\' , / // INET: lhaider@pro-beagle.cts.com \\\//, _/ //, UUCP: crash!pro-beagle!lhaider \_-//' / //<, ARPA: crash!pro-beagle!lhaider@nosc.mil \ /// <//` / >> \\\`__/_ The opinions expressed here belong to nobody! /,)-^>>_\`, \\\ (Anybody see nobody lately?) (/ \\ /\\\ ----------------------------------------------- // _//\\\\ ((` ((
scotth@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Henderson) (01/30/91)
In article <1991Jan29.235150.16185@utstat.uucp> philip@utstat.uucp (Philip McDunnough) writes: >In article <1991Jan24.191417.10278@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> scotth@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott Henderson) writes: > >[support for "for sale" messages...] > >I agree that there doesn't seem to be anything terribly wrong with >these occasional postings at first glance. The problem, though, is >that many of us could have comp.sys.apple2 deleted from our >newsgroups because of them. You can't imagine what I had to go >through to convince people to bring it into our system. I would >not want to defend the group again in the face of lot's of AppleII >for sale signs. > >Philip McDunnough >University of Toronto >philip@utstat.toronto.edu >[not the opinions of my employer, necessarily] Here's my suggestion for a reasonable compromise. As a method of convention, people who post for sale messages should have "FOR SALE" in the subject heading. You can then use the "K" command from read news and not have to see the for sale post. Your argument about comp.sys.apple2 being a research newsgroup is a valid one, however the same argument can be made about people who ask questions about video games on this group (does the question about Dragon Wars ring a bell? :-) ). There's a rec.games.video newsgroup for that purpose as well. -- = R. Scott Henderson = "Some people claim that there's a = = University of Illinois = woman to blame, but I know it's = = scotth@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu = my own damned fault. = = Apple II Forever! = -Jimmy Buffet =