Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!mailrus!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cadre!km From: km@cadre.dsl.PITTSBURGH.EDU (Ken Mitchum) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Comp.binaries.mac moderation (FLAME Message-ID: <1333@cadre.dsl.PITTSBURGH.EDU> Date: 15 Jul 88 18:40:11 GMT References: <4927@husc6.harvard.edu> <76000258@p.cs.uiuc.edu> Reply-To: km@cadre.dsl.pittsburgh.edu.UUCP (Ken Mitchum) Organization: Decision Systems Lab., Univ. of Pittsburgh, PA. Lines: 23 I think that some people are missing the point - it is not the job of the moderator to determine the relative popularity of various programs, or even their utility, only that the programs are what they claim to be, and are not posted illegally. I view comp.binaries.mac much as I view comp.sys.mac, and other newsgroups - only a small percentage of the traffic of the group actually interests me, but I realize that what else is there must interest other people, or it wouldn't be there. Articles are posted for their interest, not their popularity, and the same thing should be true for programs. When I submitted the binaries to "MacJove", I realized that it was a program that would be used by only a small fraction of Mac enthusiasts. However, I felt that it was important to make the program available to the few Mac users who prefer emacs-like editors. If popularity had been a consideration, I am sure the program would have been rejected. My only objection to the posting of software is where something should perhaps be updated before posting, such as the DA based on (only) Volumes 1 to 3 of Inside Macintosh. Ken Mitchum Decision Systems Labs University of Pittsburgh