Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site genrad.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!john From: john@genrad.UUCP (John P. Nelson) Newsgroups: net.news.group Subject: Re: Net.sources.d and mods to software. Message-ID: <1006@genrad.UUCP> Date: Tue, 6-Aug-85 18:04:40 EDT Article-I.D.: genrad.1006 Posted: Tue Aug 6 18:04:40 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 9-Aug-85 02:28:06 EDT References: <366@timeinc.UUCP> <295@luke.UUCP> <1366@cbosgd.UUCP> Reply-To: john@genrad.UUCP (John P. Nelson) Organization: GenRad, Inc., Bolton, Mass. Lines: 24 In article <1366@cbosgd.UUCP> mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) writes: >While mod.sources is working well and seems like the solution here, >and John is doing an excellent job, he has indicated that he and his >machine would both be overloaded if they were to take on the task of >handling everything that goes into net.sources today. Well, the reason this is true is because the reliablility of USENET is so low, that I spend more time sending lost articles to people than any other moderation task. >However, this idea does merit further exploration. For example, if >there were 3 or 4 moderators for mod.sources, and a poster was urged >to contact their nearest moderator to arrange posting. Each poster >could keep their separate archives, but cooperate and maintain a >cross-listed index. I think perhaps this is unworkable. There needs to be a single point of origin to provide for a complete article index, if nothing else. However, it would make my job MUCH easier if there were multiple sites that kept the mod.sources archive, and would handle retrieval requests! >If we do decide to try it out, any volunteers to be one of the moderators? John P. Nelson (decvax!genrad!john) [moderator, mod.sources]