🚀 go-pugleaf

We still have the same problem: rec.models.scale doesn't seem
to get to all the sites it should:

        +-- Estimated total number of people who read the group, worldwide.
        |     +-- Actual number of readers in sampled population
        |     |     +-- Propagation: how many sites receive this group at all
        |     |     |      +-- Recent traffic (messages per month)
        |     |     |      |      +-- Recent traffic (kilobytes per month)
        |     |     |      |      |      +-- Crossposting percentage
        |     |     |      |      |      |    +-- Cost ratio: $US/month/rdr
        |     |     |      |      |      |    |      +-- Share: % of newsrders
        |     |     |      |      |      |    |      |   who read this group.
        V     V     V      V      V      V    V      V
 514  22000   623   78%   251   635.5     2%  0.04   1.3%  rec.models.rc 
 867  15000   423   73%   166   445.7     2%  0.04   0.9%  rec.models.rockets 
 984  13000   365   65%   117   285.0     5%  0.03   0.8%  rec.models.railroad 
1317   7900   219   51%     -       -      -     -   0.5%  rec.models.scale 
 738  18000   496   63%    22    39.1    24%  0.00   1.1%  alt.models 

And looking further down in the list, we get a clue as to why. These two
groups have been superceded by others, and are therefore no longer "valid".
They have the same annoying dashes in the statistics, could it be that
something went wrong when the "newgroup" message for r.m.scale was sent, and
it was thus not created everywhere? I don't know.

 671  19000   535   50%     -       -      -     -   1.1%  rec.arts.sf-lovers 
1551   5100   143   34%     -       -      -     -   0.3%  rec.arts.sf-reviews 
--
 Urban Fredriksson  urf@icl.se