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)