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]