Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84 chuqui version 1.7 9/23/84; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!garfield!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuqui Q. Koala)
Newsgroups: net.micro.mac,net.news.group
Subject: Re: {mod,net}.sources.mac
Message-ID: <2150@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-Jan-85 15:21:30 EST
Article-I.D.: nsc.2150
Posted: Fri Jan  4 15:21:30 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Jan-85 10:42:49 EST
References: <2138@nsc.UUCP> <2100@uw-june> <857@amdahl.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuqui Q. Koala)
Organization: The Warlocks Cave
Lines: 63
Summary: 


 
>> I think >>net<<.sources.mac is sufficient....

I don't. explanations later.

>Three points:
>
>[1]	Someone will complain that "net.sources is archived automatically
Most sites are (should) also be archiving mod.sources, so it is really a
non-issue regardless of the name.

>[2]	mod.sources.mac is a good idea but if mod.sources is an example,
>	the turnaround on this is slow and not many people seem to
>	use it to post sources.  Would Mac users be any different?

I can't speak on the turnaround of mod.sources because I don't watch that.
If there is a 24 or 48 hour delay, what is the big deal? Realistically
sources posted to mod.sources would get to ALL of the net faster because
the distribution tends to be wider (for mod.singles anything posted goes to
ihnp4, seismo, gatech, hplabs, fortune, and a number of other sites so it
gets spread very widely much quicker than it would with a normal posting).
Part of the reason mod.all isn't showing a lot of volume is simply that it
isn't being pushed while we work out some technical details (this is called
shaking out the bugs before we force ourselves to rely on it). From what I
have seen most of them are fixed at this point, although I'm probably going
to do another sendsys one of these days to see (ack).

I think there are some significant advantages to mod.sources.mac. One is
the moderator. If this person runs it right it can make life better for
everyone-- you have one person who's responsibility it is to make sure that
all those myriad requests for macput and macget are handled, someone you
KNOW is keeping an archive-- this means you don't have to, since you can
always get it later if you change your mind. Someone who keeps duplications
from happening (how many variations of SHAR did we see in net.sources
recently? 15? 20?) Someone who can help new users figure out how to deal
with the software, try to minimize the naive questions so that
mod.sources.mac and net.micro.mac can be maximally useful for all users,
rather than spending a lot of time rehashing old problems...

Some of this can also be done with net.source.mac, true, but if you don't
have someone who has been given the responsibility of doing them (and has
accepted it by becoming moderator) a lot of it falls through the cracks,
and you are back to listening to 35 versions of shar, 15 xlisps, and 25
postings of macput in response to a single request. Not terribly useful,
but it does wonders to the net volume and your long distance phone bill.

>[3]	What are you going to do when you start getting the
>	"Does anyone have a copy of MacWidgit?" articles in
>	net.sources.mac?  Will there be a net.wanted.sources.mac,
>	too?

net.wanted.mac might not be a bad idea-- perhaps we might even want to
consider (due to its popularity) net.mac, net.mac.wanted, etc... who knows?

chuq
-- 
From the ministry of silly talks:		Chuq Von Rospach
{allegra,cbosgd,decwrl,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui  nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

Deadbone erotica is the prickly panic of forgotten milleniums, it is the moldy 
billion year madness that creeps deep along the spinal behind of my mind.