Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucsfcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!garfield!dreacad!dalcs!dartvax!decvax!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!arnold
From: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: mod.all and net.fascism
Message-ID: <370@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Oct-84 13:01:34 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucsfcgl.370
Posted: Wed Oct 24 13:01:34 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Oct-84 21:42:29 EDT
References: <1612@nsc.UUCP> <379@amdahl.UUCP> <1614@nsc.UUCP> <4034@elsie.UUCP>
Organization: Computer Graphics Lab, San Francisco
Lines: 41

> With the wonders of modern electronics, USENET editors wouldn't have to send
> copies of original articles...just pointers to them...
> (or send to interested parties--"subscribers") an article of this ilk:
> 
> Those folks who chose to take my advise could then read the articles in the
> list for the relevant news group, skipping others.  Hooks could be put into
> news software to aid folks with lists of articles they wanted to see.
> 

Now THAT makes sense.  Isn't this a much nicer solution to the overload
problem?  This has the following advantages over the "mod.fred + net.fred"
system:
	1.  No reason for duplication of articles.  The discussion over
	    "mod." newsgroups has already shown an internal split over
	    whether these groups should include postings from the
	    "net." equivalent or not.  This solution, in effect, merges
	    the two, completely obviating the awkwardness of either
	    solution to the problem.

	2.  No possible cries of censorship.  The full discussion is
	    always available to anyone who wishes to look outside of
	    their list(s).

	3.  Multiple moderatores coexist without conflict.  No one has
	    to decide who is going to be THE Moderator for the group,
	    not to mention that no one has to decide who gets to decide
	    which person (or AI project :-}) is going to be the
	    moderator.  For example, in net.religion, people who don't
	    want to listen to the fundamentalists could subscribe to
	    one list, and and those who don't like the sceptics could
	    subscribe to another, and those who only want scholarly
	    discussions could subscribe to a third.

	4.  With list-merging capabilities, a user can listen to more
	    than one moderator.  In the above example, someone could
	    listen to both scholarly and fundamentalist discussions.

So let's go with it.  We have global article ID's -- let's put 'em to
work!

		Ken Arnold