🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sources.atari.st
Article #291

RFD: What to do with comp.binaries.atari.st/comp.sources.atari.st?

#291
From: Steven Grimm
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:41
39 lines
2662 bytes
[Copied from comp.sys.atari.st, where followups are directed.]

I just posted "reverse" to comp.binaries.atari.st.  It's the only submission
I've received for either group in nearly a month, unless you count all the
"Why isn't there anything in this group?" messages.

It seems clear to me that neither group is going to pick up much steam under
my direction.  When I post the submission guidelines, I get a trickle of new
programs, but it dies off quickly.

Originally, this was going to be a simple call for a new moderator, someone
who has the time to be a little more proactive about seeking out software
to post, which is what I think would be necessary to get any decent volume.
But upon further reflection, I started wondering if maybe c.b.a.s (and to a
lesser extent c.s.a.s) was really all that useful in its present form.

With the steady increase in popularity of the ftp-based archive sites,
many of which can also be accessed directly via E-mail (or indirectly via
the various ftpmail servers on the net), does it really make sense any more
to broadcast uuencoded binaries to every site on the net?

Perhaps the group should be more along the lines of gnu.announce, where new
programs available for ftp (or mail-server access) are announced but not
actually posted.  This might cut down on what little net bandwidth the
group eats; on the other hand, it makes retrieving software on a UUCP-only
site slower, sometimes significantly so.

Not, mind you, that I'm opposed to the way the group works now, or to
continuing as moderator, but neither of these may be the most effective
way to serve the Atari ST user community, which is largely why I got into
this moderation thing in the first place.

So what do people think?  Should the group continue as is?  Should I step
down and let someone else take the helm?  Should binaries continue to be
posted, or should the group switch to a low-bandwidth "announce" format?
If it did the latter, would it still be an appropriate member of the
comp.binaries hierarchy?  And what about comp.sources.atari.st?

-Steve
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1ioctqINNnv0@spud.Hyperion.COM>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!spud.Hyperion.COM!spud.Hyperion.COM!not-for-mail

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!spud.Hyperion.COM!spud.Hyperion.COM!not-for-mail
From: koreth@spud.Hyperion.COM (Steven Grimm)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.atari.st,comp.binaries.atari.st
Subject: RFD: What to do with comp.binaries.atari.st/comp.sources.atari.st?
Followup-To: comp.sys.atari.st
Date: 9 Jan 1993 21:41:14 -0800
Organization: Hyperion, Mountain View, CA, USA
Lines: 39
Approved: koreth@spud.hyperion.com (Steven Grimm)
Message-ID: <1ioctqINNnv0@spud.Hyperion.COM>
NNTP-Posting-Host: spud.hyperion.com