Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site looking.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton)
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: New news software authors take note, get rid of Re: feature
Message-ID: <161@looking.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 22-Jun-84 00:00:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: looking.161
Posted: Fri Jun 22 00:00:00 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 23-Jun-84 04:26:32 EDT
Organization: Looking Glass Software, Waterloo, Ont
Lines: 28

I have noted recently some people talking about actual work on writing
new news software.  I've been too busy to get the names, but would those
involved with the work please get in touch with me.

If you're just going to redo the existing system, instead of designing
a new one (I have the design for a new one based on a keyword system which
I would like to interest you in) I strongly suggest you eliminate the
"Re:" feature in followup.

The subject line is the most important line in the article, and it should
never be machine generated.  As far as many people on the net are concerned,
an article with a bad subject is a waste of net time.  I NEVER read an
"orphaned response" or much beyond the first few "Re:" articles, and I know
others are like this too.

The Subject:  header should in fact be deleted and changed to "Synopsis".
In either case, it should be multi-lined as often as possible.  I
would even suggest that the software check, and not allow a subject which
is shorter than 30 chars or is the same as the subject of the article
being followed up.   If you have something worth saying, it is worth
summarizing.

Some may object that the software should not impinge so on the freedom
of netters to write what subject they want.  I say the reverse.  An article
is posted once, and possibly read thousands of times.  Any extra effort
at the time of posting that helps the reader is worth enforcing.
-- 
	Brad Templeton - Waterloo, Ontario (519) 886-7304