Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsri!utcs!ryesone!lsuc!dave From: dave@lsuc.UUCP Newsgroups: tor.news Subject: Re: lsuc UUCP & news report Message-ID: <1456@lsuc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 16-Dec-86 07:38:43 EST Article-I.D.: lsuc.1456 Posted: Tue Dec 16 07:38:43 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 17-Dec-86 06:54:21 EST References: <1441@lsuc.UUCP> <7410@utzoo.UUCP> Reply-To: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto Lines: 24 Summary: tor.news.admin and tor.news.stats? In article <7410@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes: >I see a potential problem with this newsgroup. It already has two distinct >types of content: human discussions on local news problems, and voluminous >automated status reports. If more sites start posting the latter, it's >going to be increasingly tempting not to read the group because of the sheer >volume of clutter. The status reports are potentially valuable for trouble- >shooting, but in the absence of trouble I am unlikely to carefully read and >ponder a dozen or more 50-line reports a day. It may be worth considering >two separate newsgroups. Henry's right. And we've already seen that the name tor.news can be misconstrued. Anyone object to two news groups: tor.news.admin and tor.news.stats? tor.news would become a directory only, and actually should be rmgroup'ed (if your rmgroup is smart enough to not rm -r the directory). tor.news.stats would normally not be read by humans except for the casually curious. tor.news.admin should be read by news administrators and others concerned with how the news is flowing. David Sherman -- { ihnp4!utzoo seismo!mnetor utai watmath decvax!utcsri } !lsuc!dave