🚀 go-pugleaf

Rebecca and Rowland <real-address-in-sig@rhu.barb.foobar> wrote:

> Paul Womar <{$PW$}@pwomar.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > I think it is right as it is, there is a statement about who the uk.*
> > groups are for, it's probably in the docs you have downloaded and I
> > think you stated what the uk.* is about pretty well.
> 
> Righto - a point of dissention.  Well, *I* don't know what's best.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------
> version 1:
> Contributions are welcome from people who:
> use Macs; and live, work, or study in, or mean to visit, the UK.
> ---------------------------------------------
> 
> I'm inclined to the first version myself, because it's more explicit.
> Given the point just made about the uk hierarchy already having a
> defined audience, I reckon version 1 does the job.
> 
> Any comments?

If you can find it, just copy the text straight from the uk.* guideline
that contains it (I get the feeling this is the text you are using
anyway), afterall you are asking for a new group not trying to define
what the uk.* groups are about, the latter has already been done.

> > After having seen people with 150 line sigs in the comp.sys.mac groups I
> > think at least encouraging people to stick to basic netiquette like
> > putting trimmed quotes before fresh text and keeping sigs under 4 lines
> > should be mentioned and encouraged within the charter.
> 
> Hmm...  But that's already done by the rfcs and guides on Usenet
> behaviour anyway, so I don't think it's necessary to put it into the
> group's charter.  The other argument against adding paragraphs about
> that sort of thing is that hardly anyone reads these charters once the
> group's been created.
> 
> Any thoughts?

I half agree, it's getting to a pretty sorry state where basic things
need to be stated in each charter but it's already started, a few years
ago nobody would have even considered that binaries or adverts would be
tolerated unless the charter specifically stated it, now each charter
needs to exclude them specifically, I can only see things getting worse.
You certainly shouldn't be adding reams of netiquette to it but maybe
"Normal netiquette guidelines such as placing trimmed quotes before
fresh text and signatures 4 lines or less are strongly encouraged".  In
the end it's entirely up to you, I don't think it's a point that will
hinder the creation process either way, UK groups don't seem to suffer
as badly as most, and without all those PC users using Outlook then
wonky quoting shouldn't even be an issue.

[snip about binaries]
> Any thoughts?

Fine.
-- 
-> The email address in this message *IS* Valid <-