Article View: aus.net.policy
Article #656Re: aus.politics cancelled
From: Phil Herring
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 00:00
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 00:00
44 lines
2947 bytes
2947 bytes
In article <4akrkb$9gl@hades.omen.com.au> Dave Nagle, dnagle@hades.omen.com.au writes: >Why on earth would a reader of a group called general expect to >find any sort of tightly focused subject matter? As you say, it >attracts posts that are about anything and everything. Probably >crossposted from their real home. So what? Dave, I am beginning to suspect that you don't have even the vaguest clue. It works like this: aus.general is there for what's left over. It's for what doesn't go anywhere else. Whether people misinterpret the group name or not is irrelevant; as there is a FAQ posted every other week that explains the group's purpose, they have no excuse. In addition to this, the traditional purpose of ".misc" and ".general" groups has been around since the 1980s. It's not like it's a big secret, and it's consistent across hierarchies. That's why you'll find a .general just about everywhere. >There is also the technical problem that you cannot remove the >article from aus.general without also removing it from >aus.politics, aus.org.efa and the other groups it was posted to. I can now remove articles from just aus.general. (No great technological breakthough - I just found a useful part of NNTP that allows this.) I prefer to do this, rather than cancel articles, but even in the latter case, I don't see a problem with cancelling excessive or inappropriate crossposts. If it's in the wrong place, it's in the wrong place. It's too bad if it's also in the right place. Think of it this way: your neighbours are having a loud party at 3 am. Yeah, it's their property and they can do what they want, but the noise isn't just in their backyard, it's in yours, as well. You have the right to call the police and have them shut up. Incidentally, what's your view on spam? If I post an ad to 15,000 newsgroups, including aus.ads.commercial, would you support cancelling it? I would assume from your arguments that you would not. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil Herring revdoc@uow.edu.au (c)1995 Phil Herring. This article may not be reproduced for profit. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4alisp$861@wabbit.cc.uow.edu.au>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<4aghg9$s1n@hades.omen.com.au>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10df0c,9ada9a64126c7089 X-Google-Attributes: gid10df0c,public X-Google-Thread: f4bcb,9ada9a64126c7089 X-Google-Attributes: gidf4bcb,public X-Google-Thread: fa7f6,9ada9a64126c7089 X-Google-Attributes: gidfa7f6,public From: Phil Herring <revdoc@uow.edu.au> Subject: Re: aus.politics cancelled Date: 1995/12/13 Message-ID: <4alisp$861@wabbit.cc.uow.edu.au> X-Deja-AN: 121543600 distribution: world references: <4aghg9$s1n@hades.omen.com.au> x-xxmessage-id: <ACF495E106024466@bastardo.cc.uow.edu.au> organization: University of Wollongong newsgroups: aus.net.policy,aus.politics,aus.org.efa