Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site teddy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!teddy!jpn
From: jpn@teddy.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.sources
Subject: Re: As long as we are taliking about rmgrouping ...
Message-ID: <1572@teddy.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Nov-85 09:56:27 EST
Article-I.D.: teddy.1572
Posted: Sun Nov  3 09:56:27 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 4-Nov-85 03:22:57 EST
References: <687@ucsfcgl.UUCP> <5647@amdcad.UUCP> <5666@amdcad.UUCP>
Reply-To: jpn@teddy.UUCP (John P. Nelson)
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.news.group:4241 net.sources:3801

>>The problem with mod.anything has always been that the moderator
>>'evaluates' the posting. 
>
>That's not a problem, that's a feature.
>
>>What happened to 'the free interchange of ideas'. 
>
>Free interchange of garbage and flames is more like it. We're trying to
>increase the ratio of ideas to garbage. I *love* mod.sources. Net.sources
>is much less useful.

Just to clarify the issue, as moderator of mod.sources, I have tried NOT
to do a whole lot of 'evaluating' postings.   My policy has been that
just about any posting that belongs in a "sources" newsgroup would be
passed through (meaning I will reject any article that is not source code).
Actually, I have criticized for being too "easy" - but my feeling is that
a moderator is not necessarily the same as an editor - especially for a
group like mod.sources.

Mod.sources was intended to filter out the "garbage and flames" and to
prevent repeated postings of the same program.  I don't particularly
like "censorship", either.  But let's face it, the noise level of
net.sources is getting pretty high!

John P. Nelson, Moderator, mod.sources
    (please submit sources to: panda!sources)
(decvax!genrad!panda!jpn  seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!jpn)