Subject: Re: Splitting this group

From: [email-masked] (Michael John Hide)
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 14:30:39 GMT

Tim Gillespie <[email-masked]> wrote:

;Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie wrote:

;>   Exactly, the only way to reduce traffic would be an intellegent
split,
;> and have the newsgroups set-up to not allow cross-posts, period.
;> 
;> Ralph

;Interesting concept. But is it even possible? 
;-- 
;My e-mail address contains a "*" to thwart automatic junk mailers.
;Please remove it before responding.
 
If you are having problems sanning the new posts after updating the
group ,try hitting the "N" key and only the new additions will be
displayed .
Again if the group was split ,how about ,"woodworking technique " and
"woodworking machinery /machining ."

---

From: [email-masked] (Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie)
Date: Sat, 08 Feb 1997 08:10:56 -0700

In article <[email-masked]>, Tim Gillespie
<[email-masked]> wrote:

>Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie wrote:
>
>>   Exactly, the only way to reduce traffic would be an intellegent split,
>> and have the newsgroups set-up to not allow cross-posts, period.
>
>Interesting concept. But is it even possible? 

  Yes, there are newsgroups setup this way. There has been a proposal to
issue an RFC to make all Usenet Big 8 newsgroups non-cross-postable.

-- 
Ralph Lindberg N7BSN         
RV and Camping FAQ <http://kendaco.telebyte.net/rlindber/rv/
They call it "Surfn' the Net" 'cause you can wipe out so easy

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: 9 Feb 1997 11:57:27 GMT

Maybe, just maybe we all could cut down on some of our postings.
I know that a awfull lot of the re: responses are just non-informative" me
toos"
I also think that each *new* member of this group should be directed to
the FAQs
before they are allowed to post( if thats possible)

I would really hate to see the group split, I find so many interesting
posts about so many different things that I'm afriad that if it was all 
split into 100 sub groups that I wouldn't read as many. One of the great
thinks about this group is its diverity(sp)
I would really miss it, as i miss the nuckle draggers, and the turnners.
Just MHO but thats all I have to offer...........Wooddon

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: 9 Feb 1997 21:40:59 GMT

Second the opinion expressed by Wooden.  Want to add if once a month or so
a summary of the "conventions" and where to go for FAQs were posted the
newbies could be aware of what others have agreed to.  Periodic posting of
the FAQs does take download time and unless you have a way to interrupt
you sit and wait.  comments?

---

From: "Randolph M. Jones" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 11:43:17 -0500

HK wrote:
> 
> Although it might increase internet traffic overall, I think the
> addition of more ww. groups will mean less messages for any one group
> and satisfy special interests.  If there is a news server that can
> reject messages that are cross-posted in the header, there will be much
> less cross-posting.  If someone felt a message really needed to be heard
> more than one group, he would have to send a copy to each group without
> cross-posting in the header.  This will also reduce the cross-posted
> replies.

Yuck.  The news readers I use will mark all instances of a cross-
posted message as read as soon as I read the first one, so I don't
see it multiple times.  If people started sending multiple copies
instead of cross-posting (many spammers already do this, but your
solution would force them to), I would have to look at every copy
they send out.

---

From: [email-masked] (Al Cheney)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 97 02:06:12 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] 
wrote:
<Snip> Periodic posting of the FAQs does take download time and unless you have a way to interrupt
>you sit and wait.  comments?

        Add "FAQ" to kill file list.

        Actually a good news reader and the use of a kill file pretty well 
gets around the problems of a large news group. I have eliminated the topics I 
absolutly do not want to read about, or have grown very tired of after the 
third or fourth trip around the block. I enjoy browsing the rest of the topics 
for items of intrest that can come up on any number of related topics.

        I think we would lose a lot of this if we split the group. I vote for 
the statis quo.

---

From: [email-masked] (Roger Wiegand)
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 21:10:35 -0600

>> Ralph

Robo-moderation to achieve this can be done. 

The experience of rec.crafts.woodturning is instructive, though. With a
well-defined subtopic of woodworking there has been virtually no
inappropriate crossposting

-- 
Thanks,
Roger

mailto:[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Jeff Gorman)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 11:46:43 GMT

Al Cheney wrote:

~          Add "FAQ" to kill file list.

My impression of a kill file is that it only kills files after they
have been received, unless you work the double log-on system of only 
downloading headers, selecting those you want and then re-logging-on
to receive the selected files.

Is this time-consuming routine the usual case, or have I got it wrong?

I'm assuming that one reads and responds to posting off-line.

Jeff
-- 
Jeff Gorman - West Yorkshire
[email-masked]