🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <BILLMS.92Nov3121143@dip.eecs.umich.edu> billms@eecs.umich.edu  
(William Mangione-Smith) writes:
>>[I said:]
>>Please share it (exact quotations please, no interpretations) with us!
>  you suspect he would be decietful and modify it
>  to serve his own intentions.  

I don't mind candid flames but please don't misrepresent what I said.  I simply  
asked for the exact text without interpretation.  Note well: I cast no  
character aspersions.  Please stick to the facts (except when flaming :-).

>  	Bill Mangione-Smith
>  	billms@eecs.umich.edu

Anyway, I think you're missing the point of the original discussion which was:   
let's make csn.announce an eminently productive, useful, informative and  
collaborative newsgroup.  In my opinion, moderator selection by fiat doesn't  
promote such qualities.  I think consensus is important in choosing a moderator  
for our SIG's announce newsgroup, csn.announce.  Otherwise, in all likelihood,  
announcements will continue to span the csn groups (rather than simply appear  
in csn.announce).  This phenomenon wastes Usenet bandwidth and csn'ers' time.

I think one significant improvement in that direction would be for the  
csn.announce moderator to include pricing information in announcements.  This  
change would increase the signal-to-noise ratio of the announcments (and, I  
hope, avoid the censuring of price flame wars).  This change would not only  
save Usenet bandwidth and csn'ers' time, but also make the csn.announce  
announcements increasingly self-contained and genuinely informative.

I think a consensus approach to moderator selection could help ensure the  
cross-posting and flame-wars problems are not perpetuated.

Cheers,

= Joe =
-- 
Joe Grace <JGrace@TetraSoft.com> (NeXTMail preferred.)
TetraSoft International   Business and Personal Productivity Tools for NeXTSTEP