🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3925@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
<In article <4343@vidiot.UUCP> brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) writes:
<>In article <3912@ecicrl.ocunix.on.ca> clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca (Chris Lewis) writes:
<><In article <4325@vidiot.UUCP> brown@vidiot.UUCP (Vidiot) writes:
<><>In article <1992Oct21.213414.13440@kosman.uucp> kevin@kosman.uucp (Kevin O'Gorman) writes:
<><><I have taken the venerable USA map source and mangled it a bit. I think
<><><the results are cleaner. There's also a perl utiltiy to make it easier
<><><if you want to do some mangling of your own.  Look in alt.sources.
<
<><>Another supposid great idea.  Post in alt.sources, making it NOT available
<><>to the general public.
<
<><>I don't like the alt groups.  They aren't available to everyone.  Posting
<><>in said groups means that it will be missed by lots of people.
<
<><Alt groups are available to everyone just like everything else.  If you're
<><not getting them, take it up with your SA, your feed, or obtain another
<><feed.  'Tis easy.
<
<>'Fraid that it isn't as easy as Chris implies.  In the Madison, WI, area,
<>the alt groups aren't readily available from the UW, which is the main source
<>of news for this area of the woods.  Can't get another feed locally, as they
<>are the only game in town.
<
<It's trivial.  More detail at the end.
<
<>BTW; I am, I have and I can't.
<
<You know Michael, I do consider you somewhat of a friend, with the email
<we've exchanged over the years.  But sometimes you come out with things
<that make me wonder whether you really understand the net, are shit disturbing
<for fun, or have a cog or two missing. :-)

Probably a cog or two :-)

<Alt groups are no less "available to the general public" than any
<of the regular "big seven" newsgroups.  All you need to get them is
<the appropriate software (which you already have) and someone willing
<to feed you what you want.  Groups are carried based on a decision
<made about perceived benefit versus cost.

I agree.

<It could just as easily been "comp.lang" instead of alt.sources that UW
<decided that they didn't want to import.  By your reasoning, then,
<"comp.lang.postscript" would "not be available to the general public", and
<you'd probably be asking that everybody post comp.lang.postscript articles
<to alt.sources.  This is no sillier than your original comments.

I have found out that all of the newsgroups are now available at the UW.

<Sites restrict their feeds for a reason.  There is a *hell* of a lot
<of news per day.  They decide on what to carry based on anticipated
<loads.  It isn't just on which heirarchy it's under.  And
<this implies some things that you may not realize...

Yep, exactly.  The reason that I can't get the alt groups through my normal
feed is because of the size of news.  And because the alt groups are not
always considered "real", be it imaginary or not, they tend to get dropped.
They aren't main stream in many sys admin's eyes.

<Let's say, for example, that Kevin's postings consisted of a megabyte
<posted weekly.  When a person decides to take alt.sources, they'll
<(if they're smart) realize that that sort of load is to be expected
<from alt.sources.  Comp.lang.postscript, on the other hand, can't
<be reasonably expected to be that much load.   So people may decide
<to take comp.lang.postscript but not alt.sources because of
<assumptions about loading, perceived benefit, bandwidth considerations
<etc.

While I'd love to get many of the alt groups, and it appears that I may have
found a feed.  Because I bitched, I was informed of a feed in town.  I have
to check to see if I can get connected.

To me, the problem with alt.sources is that it is too generic.  Maybe we
need a comp.lang.postscript.{programs|sources}.  That way it too could be
understood to have lots of data.  At least we could find PostScript code
in the PostScript group.

<If Kevin started posting his stuff to comp.lang.postscript (along
<with a couple of dozen people posting PostScript pictures from
<alt.binaries ;-), those assumptions go out the window.  People who're
<carrying comp.lang.postscript but not alt.sources abruptly find out
<that their assumptions are wrong.  They may even find out that it's
<breaking their budget, whether money, diskspace or communications bandwidth.

Possible, very possible.

<What happens in such situations?  Guess what?  UW stops carrying
<comp.lang.postscript.  Think about that.  Is that what you want?

Damn, I sure hope not.  I like the specialized sources group for PostScript
code.  Keeps in the family, as they say.

<This goes as well for a suggestion that you made earlier "they
<should just make 'em all rec groups".  A truly sill idea.
<What do you think that the response will be to that?  UW stops
<carrying rec...

I said that?  Obviously sources groups don't belong as rec groups.  But,
why not make alt groups that are rec in nature, rec groups?  Maybe my histor
of the alt groups has a few holes in it.  I understand that the alt groups
came about because net readers couldn't get certain groups created, so a
bunch of them got together and started alt groups as a way around the problem.
Many sites decided not to carry these "groups".  This kind-of made them the
black sheep of the family.  The black sheep title has still hung around to
this day.  This makes it tough to get the alt groups everywhere.

<Have you politely asked UW for just alt.sources?  (instead of
<all of alt).  I was in exactly the same situation as you -
<news in this city comes from an internet-connected University
<through a commercial site.  No alt groups.  Because, after all,
<>95% of it is trash.  So we discussed it, and now we have a few.
<Including alt.sources.

I don't have a direct connection tho the UW.  See above for more info.

<Postings should be made in the appropriate groups.  Large source
<postings[*] belong in the appropriate source groups.  PostScript
<discussions belong in c.l.p.  This is so that people can find things
<where they're supposed to be.  And so that people can manage
<resource utilitization by deciding what they'll carry.  Don't
<play games trying to get around their decisions.  Persuade
<UW to get alt.sources, get alt.sources from somewhere else,
<or ask some kind soul to mail it to you on floppy, or even 
<via email.

How about my suggestion to have a PostScript sources group?  Oh, I can hear
the screams and moans now...not another newsgroup.  But what could be more
natural than to have a PostScript sources group within the PostScript
newsgroups.

BTW.  Did you ever receive my e-mail about enhancments to the psxlate man
page?  I never heard back from you.
-- 
      harvard\                          spool.cs.wisc.edu!astroatc!vidiot!brown
Vidiot  ucbvax!uwvax..........!astroatc!vidiot!brown
      rutgers/            INTERNET:vidiot!brown%astroatc.UUCP@spool.cs.wisc.edu
                                   brown@wi.extrel.com