Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rosevax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!mmm!rosevax!hogan
From: hogan@rosevax.UUCP (Andy Hogan)
Newsgroups: net.news,net.micro.mac,net.news.group
Subject: Re: Cleaning up net.sources.mac (mod.sources...)
Message-ID: <232@rosevax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 6-Nov-85 17:51:07 EST
Article-I.D.: rosevax.232
Posted: Wed Nov  6 17:51:07 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 10-Nov-85 09:53:36 EST
References: <10674@ucbvax.ARPA> <536@felix.UUCP> <2920@sun.uucp> <660@leadsv.UUCP> <1754@gatech.CSNET>
Organization: Rosemount Inc., Eden Prairie, MN
Lines: 50
Xref: watmath net.news:4309 net.micro.mac:3368 net.news.group:4409

> Postings suggesting and/or discussing the replacement of net.sources.mac
> by mod.sources.macintosh (my suggestion for the name) should go on in
> net.news.group. 

I would like to register one vote (if there can be such a thing in an
anarchic net :-) ) for keeping net.sources.mac.  My reasons:

    1.  There is a resonable amount of software useful to me and 
others at work.  I also use some at home, but that does not negate my
usage at work.
  
    2.  I don't think making the group a moderated one would decrease the
volume all that much.  The volume is high both because of interest and
because of the type of posting-- usually text files which can be decrypted
to produce a Mac-executable application.  These tend to be large.  Making 
the group moderated won't affect interest Unless the moderator is willing
to do an enormous amount of work, announcements that something is available
will not tell me enough about the software to know whether I want it or not.
So I'll ask for it, and so will others.  The moderator will see a lot of
requests and post it.  No net decrease in postings.  Of course, there is the
objection that such posts are not source code.  While there has been source
code posted to the group (and it is instructive if not actually useful), 
transportability and frequent lack of the actual source make an encoded
executable the most practicle thing to post in many cases.  Keep in mind
this group is for a one-lung micro, not a good-sized mini.

    3.  I don't buy the shareware concern.  I've never seen a posting or
a shareware program that said, in effect, "If I don't make money from this
I'll never make something shareware again!".  I don't think shareware is
intended to make money for the author, but is intended to (a) defray part
of the cost involved and/or (b) guage acceptance of the program by counting
how many people pay for it.  And, as has been pointed out, many (if not
most) of the posts to sources.mac are items gotten from CompuServe or some
other network/bulletin board, and passed on to USENET readers in the true
spirit of free- or share-ware (unlimited distribution to potential users).
These posters have nothing at all to gain by passing these items on to
the rest of us, and to deny all of us this method of sharing would be a
great loss.

Well, for what it's worth, I said my two bits.  If it must be, I could 
live with a mod group (heck, since I'm freeloading, I can LIVE with anything).
However, if someone (backbone admins?) makes this change, I suggest they
and the moderator of the group closely watch the before-and-after-moderation
traffic, and consider switching back to an unmoderated group if there is
not a significant decrease in traffic.

-- 
Andy Hogan   Rosemount, Inc.   Mpls MN
path: ...ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!mmm!rosevax!hogan
Working is not a synonym for Quality.