🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <scs.716126229@wotan.iti.org> scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes:

>As best I could determine all the sites replying were either direct
>recipients of the mi distribution, or did mutual "all" with their
>neighbors.  The control posting was made to a mi group, so sites which
>do not receive the mi heirarchy did not receive the message.

But the sendsys posting was made to a non-existant "mi" newsgroup, something
like "mi.ctl".  Several sites, like the ones I was running at the time,
refused the article with an "Unwanted newsgroup" error.  I think you'd get
at least a few more replies if you posted to "mi.misc" (or the somewhat
bogus "mi.misc.ctl").

"mi" will hit the Boston area if I can figure out how to get the load
avg. on the news & snmp machine here down below 20.