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