🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1076@dutrun.UUCP> leo@duttnph.UUCP (Leo Breebaart) writes:
>David C. Kovar suggests a priority scheme for comp.binaries.mac:
>
>>Classifications:
>>  1) Latest virus software or items of similar nature.
>>  2) Original freeware that fits in one article.
>>  3) Original shareware that fits in one article.
>>  4) One article items that don't fit in above classifications.
>>  4) Multipart freeware. [Technotes included.]
>>  5) Multipart shareware.
>>  6) Demo/crippleware.
>>  Questions, comments, flames, etc most welcome.
>
>This is in my opinion a very reasonable classification, and besides saying so
>I also want to take the opportunity to add my voice to the growing grumbles 
>of those who are very unhappy with the way that comp.binaries.mac is 
>currently being run.
>
>Who *does* decide the order of posting in that group anyhow, and how come we 
>haven't heard from him/her yet? This discussion has been going on some time 
>now, and we might at least get an opinion or justification from the moderator.

Two years ago I complained over the net about the moderation
of comp.binaries.mac, and I was resoundingly shouted down by
the masses who overwhelming felt that it was fine the way it
was.  It turned out that the moderator, Roger Long, made no
decisions about posting software, but just passed everything
through.  In fact, Mr. Long seemed so insulted by my suggestion
that he was doing the wrong thing, he posted that he was too
busy and didn't want to be the moderator anymore, but, as far
as I know, no one step forward to take his place.

Now everyone is coming up with schemes, algorithms, and
philosophies for managing comp.binaries.mac, and I think Mr.
Long is already doing the job under duress.  If someone else
wants to do it, let him or her volunteer.  I don't think we
should impose our will on the current moderator.  

In the meantime, I vote for the establishment of
comp.binaries.mac.demo.  Incidentally, previously I was
complaining about the posting of (IMHO) silly little programs
that cost the net money, not the posting of demos.  Apparently
the latter issue has raised more ire.

David Fry				fry@huma1.harvard.EDU
Department of Mathematics		fry@huma1.bitnet
Harvard University			...!harvard!huma1!fry
Cambridge, MA  02138