Thread View: bit.admin
3 messages
3 total messages
Started by Sean P. Maguire
Mon, 20 Jun 1994 19:45
Re: Gateway for ECONOMY under discussion
Author: Sean P. Maguire
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 19:45
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 1994 19:45
35 lines
2184 bytes
2184 bytes
Quite frankly, I agree with you Jim. I am only going by what was suggested to me by my Postmaster. As you know, if my Postmaster disagrees, then NO gateway is formed. By proposing this unidirectional gateway, and monitoring the Usenet group for activity, I hope to show him that his fears are groundless, and that a bidirectional gateway would not be a major problem. As for a problem being caused for Usenet readers, I do undertake to post regularly to the newsgroup to inform them of the situation of their posts not getting to the mailing list. Another point: If unidirectional gateways are such a problem, why do they continue to be offered as an alternative? Lastly, there is no way that I will undertake to manually look at articles. If the Listserv software allows me some flexibility, then I might consider it. But at the moment, some of the best information on the discussion list comes from cross-post from other lists (eg. Devel-L), so just limiting posting to members of the discussion list would probably not be the answer. For the record, there has been no negative comments on this proposal in the Discussion List. (and about four people posting to express their support) Really lastly, ( :) ) the unidirectional gateway is seen (by me anyway) as a temporary measure, with it become bidirectional in a few (maximum six) months. -- Sean Maguire List Owner, ECONOMY (Economic Issues in Developing Nations) Ph.D. Student Member, Board of Governors, University of Ottawa
Re: Gateway for ECONOMY under discussion
Author: Una Smith
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 16:39
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 16:39
9 lines
1099 bytes
1099 bytes
I'm with Jim Macintosh on this one: Usenet readers should be able to have their articles seen on the mailing list. A uni-directional gateway really isn't appropriate for discussion forums (as opposed to announcment lists etc.). -- Una Smith smith-una@yale.edu Department of Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8104 USA
Re: Gateway for ECONOMY under discussion
Author: Jim McIntosh
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 19:18
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 1994 19:18
23 lines
1738 bytes
1738 bytes
In article <Crpo83.8CI@freenet.carleton.ca>, af706@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Sean P. Maguire) says: >Another point: If unidirectional gateways are such a problem, why >do they continue to be offered as an alternative? Because they are a technical possibility. They do exist out on the net, and so they do need to be mentioned. I have been trying to block out some time to rewrite the policy on gateways. I will post a copy here to see what people think of it. Basically I think it needs have more about gateways to non-bit.* groups, and add a lot of disclaimer stuff about a uni-directional gateway. Frankly, I do not understand the need for a uni-directional gateway to a discussion group. What do you expect to gain from letting the Usenet people read your discussions if they cannot participate in them? Why should thousands of Usenet sites around the world foot the bill to transmit and store your posts if their users gain nothing from them? Jim McIntosh (jim@american.edu) The American University Washington DC 20016-8019 USA
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads