RFD: reorganization of rec.radio.amateur
Julian Macassey
>
> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION
> REORGANIZATION OF REC.RADIO.AMATEUR
>
Oh dear. Here we go again. When will people leave this alone?
It wasn't broken the last time it was buggered with. Then we had the
wrecked.radio.info addition which instead of lightening the load, just
added another group.
Why is it people get this idea that life would be perfect if
they could just reorganise stuff so it suited them? Sorta reminds me
of the women who would feel much better about themselves if they could
just get plastic surgery on one more body part.
If you don't like a group. Either learn to use your newsreader
to customise what you read or unsubscribe. Don't put the rest of the
world through contortions to suit your abberations.
Should we all lisp because the king has a speech defect?
--
Julian Macassey, N6ARE jul...@bongo.tele.com Voice: (213) 653-4495
Paper Mail: 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue, Hollywood, California 90046-7142
Kurt Freiberger
|>
|> Should we all lisp because the king has a speech defect?
|>
Yeth thir, if the king decreeth it. Thertainly.
8-} kf
--
Kurt Freiberger, wb5bbw ku...@cs.tamu.edu 409/847-8607 fax:409/847-8578
Dept. of Computer Science, Texas A&M University DoD #264: BMW R80/7 pilot
"We preserve our freedom using three boxes: ballot, jury, and cartridge."
*** Not an official document of Texas A&M University ***
Gary Coffman
>
> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION
> REORGANIZATION OF REC.RADIO.AMATEUR
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>In determining a reorganization of rec.radio.amateur which frees some of the
>traffic from the single newsgroup rec.radio.amateur.misc, the members of the
>reorganization mail list considered the following guidelines which the
>participants in this discussion are also asked to consider:
>* More is not necessarily better. Several newsgroups were proposed and then
> dropped because the traffic levels on those subjects do not warrant their
> own newsgroup. (examples: video, repeaters, antennas)
>* We were not trying to use new newsgroups as a place to discard unwanted
> subjects. With as large an audience as rec.radio.amateur has, everyone
> would want to discard some subjects somewhere so WE DID NOT CONSIDER THAT
> A VALID REASON TO CREATE A NEWSGROUP. There is no rec.radio.amateur.cw in
> this proposal because the productive areas of that subject fit better within
> r.r.a.operating and r.r.a.instruction. Most of the heated arguments about
> morse code requirements will still belong in r.r.a.policy under this
> proposal. All newsgroups in this proposal were justified by sustained
> traffic volume in that topic. A borderline case (emergency services) was
> decided in its favor because it is part of the purpose of amateur radio,
> as much as experimentation is.
Here's the fallacy of this proposal. Despite protestations to the
contrary, the intent of this is to push unwanted topics into other
groups. As we've seen with the failed policy group, this doesn't
work. Policy is virtually unused while topics it was designed to
contain rage in misc. And there are still more posts about packet
in the misc group than the packet group. The recent rec.radio.info
group was intended to separate repetitive bulletin postings from
discussions, but has also failed due to crossposting.
Since the majority of users of these groups have voted *in practice*
for a single master group by continuing to post to misc, or including
it in crossposts, and because the mailing list users have no choice in
the matter, the proposed new groups are a waste of time. Better to educate
users on the uses of their newsreader selection mechanisms.
Nearly every *active* amateur has diverse interests in radio. There
are few who are so narrow that they specialize in only one subject.
This is why splintering the amateur groups is a lost cause. All it
does is dilute discussions by spreading them over several groups
instead of containing them in one.
The only way to enforce selection is to go to moderated groups.
Many people in the amateur ranks object to such censorship, and
there haven't been any volunteers stepping forward to moderate
the groups in any event. The only way I'll support creation of
new groups is if they *are* moderated, and if *no crossposting*
to unmoderated groups is allowed. This should be retroactive
to the info group.
--
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it, | gatech!wa4mei!ke4zv!gary
Destructive Testing Systems | we break it. | uunet!rsiatl!ke4zv!gary
534 Shannon Way | Guaranteed! | emory!kd4nc!ke4zv!gary
Lawrenceville, GA 30244 | |
Ian Kluft
>In article <4f2303S...@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> rra-...@amdahl.com (rec.radio.amateur reorganization mail list) writes:
>> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION
>> REORGANIZATION OF REC.RADIO.AMATEUR
>Here's the fallacy of this proposal. Despite protestations to the
>contrary, the intent of this is to push unwanted topics into other
>groups. [...]
***** Let me put this misconception to rest right away *****
Most or all of us on the mailing list went to great effort to make sure that
"pushing unwanted topics into other groups" was *NOT* a motive for any of the
proposed groups. We looked at specific topics which sustain themselves in
rec.radio.amateur.misc and evolved the proposal from there. Quite some time
went into making a proposal which should be able to succeed if/when
implemented.
If you have any doubts, feel free to download the transcript of the mailing
list discussion which led up to the RFD. You can FTP it from charon.amdahl.com
(129.212.11.1) in /pub/radio/amateur/rra-reorg.log.1.Z. The mail list was
formed by open invitation on the newsgroup. What the RFD says is what we
propose and the reasons stated are for real. There is no hidden agenda.
Anyway, the wording here is a little on the strong side because it needs to
be stated strongly. It isn't a flame. I knew someone was going to say
something like this sooner or later so thanks for giving me the opportunity
to clear it up.
--- Ian KD6EUI
Gary Coffman
>ga...@ke4zv.uucp (Gary Coffman) writes:
>
>>In article <4f2303S...@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> rra-...@amdahl.com (rec.radio.amateur reorganization mail list) writes:
>>> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION
>>> REORGANIZATION OF REC.RADIO.AMATEUR
>
>>Here's the fallacy of this proposal. Despite protestations to the
>>contrary, the intent of this is to push unwanted topics into other
>>groups. [...]
>
>***** Let me put this misconception to rest right away *****
>
>Most or all of us on the mailing list went to great effort to make sure that
>"pushing unwanted topics into other groups" was *NOT* a motive for any of the
>proposed groups. We looked at specific topics which sustain themselves in
>rec.radio.amateur.misc and evolved the proposal from there. Quite some time
>went into making a proposal which should be able to succeed if/when
>implemented.
Ian, I believe you, but the effect is the same. By selecting only
topics you want in a particular group, the effect is to push unwanted
topics into other groups. I don't think you can make that work without
moderating the groups. Many hams are broadcasters at heart. At best a
number of groups will increase crossposts. At worst the minor groups
will go largely unused, like policy does now. I'd rather use a threaded
reader in one group. The only subgroup that really works is swap, and
in the last two days I've seen for sale items in misc and discussions
of vertical antenna effectiveness in swap.
Gary
Jeffrey D. Angus
> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION
> REORGANIZATION OF REC.RADIO.AMATEUR
Don't do it. The more groups you create, the more groups get cross-posted
because people are either a) afraid their message won't be read or b) they
don't understand how to use thier newsgroup software.
I can understand rec.radio.amateur.policy as a way of taking the "You're
wrong, I'm right" flamewars into an area people can avoid.
I can understand rec.radio.amateur.info as a way of putting the information
(such as the faqs) into an area where those that feel they already know
everything do not have to see them.
I can understand rec.radio.amateur.packet as a location devoid of the
morse/morris wars. And where the 'real hams' don't have to suscribe to no-
coder orientated things like machines rather than people talking to each
other.
But let us not sub-divide rec.radio.amateur.misc for the benefit of those
who want to further narrow thier view of the hobby.
Conclusion, it ain't broke so don't fix it.
netcom!bongo!jan...@skyld.tele.com "Als ik Kan", Gustav Stickley
US Mail: PO Box 4425 Carson, CA 90749-4425 1 (310) 324-6080
Bob Witte
>outlined in GUIDELINES FOR NEWSGROUP CREATION, which can be found in
>news.groups. Because of the high volume of traffic in rec.radio.amateur.misc,
>a mail list was created (with an open invitation posted to the newsgroup) to
>discuss the issue. This RFD is in response to two problems that were
>identified by the mail list.
>1) rec.radio.amateur.misc has a daily traffic volume which is too high for most
> people to follow on a regular basis.
I agree with this and thank the group for an attempt to make this a
better world.
>2) rec.radio.amateur.packet needs to be renamed due to the growth of other
> digital modes besides packet on amateur radio.
>
This is less obvious to me, but I don't follow r.r.a.packet very closely.
I just notice that this group does not 'overflow' on the big disk in the
sky very quickly.
The central question seems to be whether anyone will use these new groups
without lots of cross-posting to r.r.a.misc. [Stating the obvious...] Its
real helpful if the people who post on a particular topic are motivated
to get it posted to the right group. For example, one of the problems with
the endless "no-code sucks" discussion is that various people are motivated
to post in r.r.a.misc because its more fun that way. (Still, I think
r.r.a.policy was a good addition for people who REALLY want to discuss,not
just flame.)
A well-functioning news group in some sense represents a community that
shares common interests, experiences, etc. I would suggest that r.r.a.packet
tends to work fairly well (i.e. attracts most packet-related postings)
because of this.
>The proposed reorganization of rec.radio.amateur would result in the following
>groups: [all the following proposed groups are unmoderated]
>
>Newsgroup name description
>-------------- -------------------------------
>rec.radio.amateur.misc all Ham radio topics not covered below
> i.e. video, stories, humor, new topics
> [no modification to existing newsgroup]
Potpourri of r.r.a
>rec.radio.amateur.policy regulations & policy issues
> [no modification to existing newsgroup]
Previous comments apply.
>rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc packet radio & other digital modes
> [includes old rec.radio.amateur.packet]
>rec.radio.amateur.digital.tcp-ip TCP/IP via packet radio
Maybe if I was a tcp-ip enthusiest this would seem like a good idea.
>rec.radio.amateur.operating Operating procedures and questions: DX,
> CW, contests, propagation, repeaters
All of this stuff will tend to end up in r.r.a.misc without a moderator.
>rec.radio.amateur.products manufactured equipment, modifications
Ditto
>rec.radio.amateur.instruction Ham radio instruction & examination
Is this big enough to worry about?
>rec.radio.amateur.construction homebrewing & experimentation
This might work because the homebrew/technoid posters will be motivated
to leave the r.r.a.misc quagmire. Probably passes the "community" test.
Is this really r.r.a.technical ?
>rec.radio.amateur.space amateur radio in space: satellites,
> earth-moon-earth (EME), shuttle, MIR
This would work, definitely passes the community test.
>rec.radio.amateur.emerg-services emergency services: RACES, ARES, NTS
Is this big enough to bother with?
>
>An alternate proposal, aimed at having fewer newsgroups, found some support in
>the reorganization mail list. It is presented here as a potential alternative
>for use in the discussion, as a guage of which one the rec.radio.amateur
>community prefers. It amends the proposal as follows:
>
>Newsgroup name description
>-------------- -------------------------------
>rec.radio.amateur.tech Technical discussions about Ham Radio:
> construction, satellites, theory,
> examinations, video, repeaters
> [unmoderated]
>[this replaces r.r.a.instruction, r.r.a.construction, and r.r.a.space, plus
>taking all technical topics from r.r.a.misc]
>
This seems pretty good but r.r.a.space still deserves
a separate spot because it represents a different "community".
I am assuming that the space/keplerian/amsat bulletins show up
wherever r.r.a.space content is supposed to be.
Also, its not obvious to me that r.r.a.instruction fits in here.
Bob Witte / HP Colo Springs / bo...@col.hp.com / KB0CY
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
>Unfortunately, every time we split this thing up:
>
> 1) I get to see more copies of the same message as it is posted to
> multiple groups.
I'll second that. Now that misc forsale is split up we get the same post
to misc.forsale, m.f.computers. m.f.computers.pc, m.f.c.pc, m.f.c.workstation
ad nauseum. It would be better just to live with it instead of having
the same article cloned too many times.
> 2) Much of the traffic is trying to direct the people to the right
> group. The unwanted discussions don't stop anyway.
I agree here too. Look at all the wanted postings in misc.forsale.....
>My vote is to leave things alone...
Me too.
Geoff.
>Roy, AA4RE
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson Passed Technician test!
(215) 242-8712 (Ham Radio) 3/4/93
g...@mendelson.com or uunet!gsm001!gsm
Ian Kluft
>In article <59Bb03A...@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> ikl...@uts.amdahl.com (Ian Kluft) writes:
>>Most or all of us on the mailing list went to great effort to make sure that
>>"pushing unwanted topics into other groups" was *NOT* a motive for any of the
>>proposed groups. We looked at specific topics which sustain themselves in
>>rec.radio.amateur.misc and evolved the proposal from there. Quite some time
>>went into making a proposal which should be able to succeed if/when
>>implemented.
>Ian, I believe you, but the effect is the same. By selecting only
>topics you want in a particular group, the effect is to push unwanted
>topics into other groups. I don't think you can make that work without
>moderating the groups. Many hams are broadcasters at heart. At best a
>number of groups will increase crossposts. At worst the minor groups
>will go largely unused, like policy does now. I'd rather use a threaded
>reader in one group. The only subgroup that really works is swap, and
>in the last two days I've seen for sale items in misc and discussions
>of vertical antenna effectiveness in swap.
Admittedly, the failure of rec.radio.amateur.policy has made a bad example that
people will point to and say, "that didn't work, this won't either." It's
going to make a bit of an uphill battle for this RFD.
But, I don't believe we're talking about exactly the same problem.
r.r.a.policy's failure was probably in the fact that it was an attempt to
discard an unwanted topic. That was a mistake but no one at the time had an
example to warn them about it. Now we know that discarding unwanted topics
doesn't work as a reason to create a newsgroup.
All the proposed newsgroups in this RFD are based on topics which appear to
have a base of interested readers out there. So I would compare these with
r.r.a.packet rather than r.r.a.policy. And with r.r.a.packet I can point to
an example that has worked very well.
I realize this may not convince you. At least you'll now understand that we
have the same concern you do that the r.r.a.policy mistake should not be
repeated. (I'm pretty sure I can say that for the rra-reorg mail list based
on what I saw there.) Though, here's where you and I may differ, I think we
can be successful in creating new newsgroups if we make sure the subjects are
based on topics which sustain themselves on the newsgroup today.
73 de KD6EUI
Gary Coffman
>
>All the proposed newsgroups in this RFD are based on topics which appear to
>have a base of interested readers out there. So I would compare these with
>r.r.a.packet rather than r.r.a.policy. And with r.r.a.packet I can point to
>an example that has worked very well.
The packet group is better, but the number of packet related posts in
misc still outnumber the ones in the packet group. And many are crossposted
to both. Rec.radio.info is the prime offender in this case with virtually
everything crossposted to misc. Now I know a smart reader can deal with
this, but as Jay is fond of pointing out, not everyone has a smart reader.
Many people download the groups at their expense, and others receive them
as mail.
>I realize this may not convince you. At least you'll now understand that we
>have the same concern you do that the r.r.a.policy mistake should not be
>repeated. (I'm pretty sure I can say that for the rra-reorg mail list based
>on what I saw there.) Though, here's where you and I may differ, I think we
>can be successful in creating new newsgroups if we make sure the subjects are
>based on topics which sustain themselves on the newsgroup today.
More importantly, what about the mailing lists for bitnet and such? Has
Brian agreed to support separate lists, or is everything from the lists
going to wind up back in misc, and everything to the lists going to be
missing the new special interest groups? If that's the case, we'll be
looking at a dead horse very quickly.
Brian Kantor
>More importantly, what about the mailing lists for bitnet and such? Has
Brian hasn't decided what he's going to do. In the words of Senator
Ted, we'll drive off that bridge when we come to it.
Since the 1500+ people who are on the mailing lists can't vote anyway
(no way to post to news.groups from the mailing list), we'll just have
to wait and see.
- Brian
Jay Maynard
>Since the 1500+ people who are on the mailing lists can't vote anyway
>(no way to post to news.groups from the mailing list), we'll just have
>to wait and see.
They can vote, since all that's required is to send email to the vote-taker;
they can't (easily) participate in the dicsussion here in news.groups (where
I'm reading this message). I'm not sure what to do about that, either.
I would ask that you come to a conclusion one way or another, though, as
uncertainty over the effect on the mailing lists is going to be a serious
issue until then.
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmay...@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity.
"I can understand if it just won't work but I think locking up my system
to tell me this is a little excessive." -- Steve Luzynski
Warren E. Lewis
the hundreds of us poor souls that only have mail access to rec.radio
via the mail server info-hams?
What would the reorganization buy us???
- Warren (KD4YRN)
--
Warren E. Lewis sas...@unx.sas.com
Graphics Division (919) 677-8001 x6542
SAS Institute Inc. PP-ASEL
Cary, NC KD4YRN DOD#0021
Jerry Gardner x323
#-------------- -------------------------------
#rec.radio.amateur.misc all Ham radio topics not covered below
# i.e. video, stories, humor, new topics
# [no modification to existing newsgroup]
#potpourri of r.r.a
#rec.radio.amateur.policy regulations & policy issues
# [no modification to existing newsgroup]
#previous comments apply.
#rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc packet radio & other digital modes
# [includes old rec.radio.amateur.packet]
#rec.radio.amateur.digital.tcp-ip TCP/IP via packet radio
#maybe if I was a tcp-ip enthusiest this would seem like a good idea.
#rec.radio.amateur.operating Operating procedures and questions: DX,
# CW, contests, propagation, repeaters
#all of this stuff will tend to end up in r.r.a.misc without a moderator.
#rec.radio.amateur.products manufactured equipment, modifications
#ditto
#rec.radio.amateur.instruction Ham radio instruction & examination
#Is this big enough to worry about?
#
#rec.radio.amateur.construction homebrewing & experimentation
#this might work because the homebrew/technoid posters will be motivated
#to leave the r.r.a.misc quagmire. Probably passes the "community" test.
#Is this really r.r.a.technical ?
#rec.radio.amateur.space amateur radio in space: satellites,
# earth-moon-earth (EME), shuttle, MIR
#This would work, definitely passes the community test.
#rec.radio.amateur.emerg-services emergency services: RACES, ARES, NTS
#Is this big enough to bother with?
#
Let's not forget rec.radio.amateur.aquaria...
--
Jerry Gardner (je...@isi.com) | The Raw Deal -- Day 66
Integrated Systems, Inc. |
Mark G. Salyzyn
>>2) rec.radio.amateur.packet needs to be renamed due to the growth of other
>> digital modes besides packet on amateur radio.
> This is less obvious to me, but I don't follow r.r.a.packet very closely.
> I just notice that this group does not 'overflow' on the big disk in the
> sky very quickly.
True, but the motive is to swoon the several mailing lists that deal in
tcp/ip and other related information ... we have yet to hear anything from
anyone on these lists (namely the listserver heads) to indicate one way
or the other. rec.radio.amateur.digital.tcp-ip will *die* if non of the
lists feel like migrating ...
>For example, one of the problems with
>the endless "no-code sucks" discussion is that various people are motivated
>to post in r.r.a.misc because its more fun that way. (Still, I think
>r.r.a.policy was a good addition for people who REALLY want to discuss,not
>just flame.)
Well, someone else that believes that rec.radio.amateur.policy is working ...
One the reorg list, we all agreed that we could never `move' the cw wars
to a dumping ground. But we are seeing the effects of those wars pushing
people away from the hobby (a posting, twice a month, stating Amateurs
suck) because we are showing our ugly sides. Frankly, the best way of
making the cw (or no-code) wars disappear for me is to have them use a
Distribution: usa ...
However, my sentiments are, that if you split the group up, that what we
will be left with is r.r.a.misc being the cw war dumping ground and the
rest of the groups providing useful coverage.
>A well-functioning news group in some sense represents a community that
>shares common interests, experiences, etc. I would suggest that r.r.a.packet
>tends to work fairly well (i.e. attracts most packet-related postings)
>because of this.
Good point! and that is what was hoped would come out of the reorg list.
>>rec.radio.amateur.construction homebrewing & experimentation
> This might work because the homebrew/technoid posters will be motivated
> to leave the r.r.a.misc quagmire. Probably passes the "community" test.
> Is this really r.r.a.technical ?
Agreed! and I thought I was the only one that wanted *.tech ... :-)
>>rec.radio.amateur.emerg-services emergency services: RACES, ARES, NTS
> Is this big enough to bother with?
Nope! but we all seemed to think it would pass a `community' test. This
one realy is a wish list hoping that if the group is created, traffic will
follow. We have no idea, but a gut feeling from the reorg list said this
could be so ... Look at misc.emerg-services ...
>>rec.radio.amateur.tech Technical discussions about Ham Radio:
>> construction, satellites, theory,
>> examinations, video, repeaters
>> [unmoderated]
>>[this replaces r.r.a.instruction, r.r.a.construction, and r.r.a.space, plus
>>taking all technical topics from r.r.a.misc]
>>
> This seems pretty good but r.r.a.space still deserves
> a separate spot because it represents a different "community".
perhaps ... but are you sure amsat details won't pop into this group?
> I am assuming that the space/keplerian/amsat bulletins show up
> wherever r.r.a.space content is supposed to be.
But, keep in mind that there is rec.radio.info, and with a r.r.a.tech group,
one could argue (Hi Gary) that these space bulletins will find a home there
instead. Time will tell on this one, but I pity the space enthusiasts that
will need to look at .tech, .misc and r.r.info.
> Also, its not obvious to me that r.r.a.instruction fits in here.
I feel that it will fall in there because the people with the answers about
technical issues will be there. Remember, if we see a split, the nocode
debate will continue in .misc and scare all the newbies away :-) :-)
Ciao, 73 de VE6MGS/Mark -sk-
Mark G. Salyzyn
>In article <19930324....@almaden.ibm.com> en...@almaden.ibm.com writes:
>>Unfortunately, every time we split this thing up:
>>
>> 1) I get to see more copies of the same message as it is posted to
>> multiple groups.
>I'll second that. Now that misc forsale is split up we get the same post
>to misc.forsale, m.f.computers. m.f.computers.pc, m.f.c.pc, m.f.c.workstation
>ad nauseum. It would be better just to live with it instead of having
>the same article cloned too many times.
We have rec.radio.swap and it WORKS (with about 5/month being mis-posted to
rec.radio.amateur.misc). Of course, there is a historical reason for this,
many gateways and transports refused to provide a service to ham-radio.misc
until a ham-radio.swap group was created. I am not sure if they will pull
their services today if too many swap items ended up in .misc, but there is
that `fear' ...
>> 2) Much of the traffic is trying to direct the people to the right
>> group. The unwanted discussions don't stop anyway.
>I agree here too. Look at all the wanted postings in misc.forsale.....
Look at all the for-profit postings in rec.radio.amateur.misc .... can you
not believe that a co-operative anarchy can work?
I'l lay odds that .space, .tech, .swap, .digital.misc and .digital.tcp-ip
will have little overlap ... and what is bad about overlap! it's certainly
not worse than sitting down once every couple of days to weed through >250
articles in one group with more than 2000 different individuals posting (see
Hams on USENET List). Sort of like when my kid comes to me telling me all
this cool stuff he learned today only to watch my head explode!
Ian Kluft
>Not everyone has direct access to the news groups. What happens to
>the hundreds of us poor souls that only have mail access to rec.radio
>via the mail server info-hams?
>What would the reorganization buy us???
Any input from the mail list would be helpful. We've been dismayed by the
lack of response from users of Info-Hams.
A reorganization of the newsgroup is badly needed. Some input on how to
handle the mailing lists would be very useful. We're still in the discussion
phase so send in your ideas.
There are lots of possibilities. As was done in the RFD, our discussion
needs to have some caution about making recommendations - we can't commit
the mailing list administrators to anything. We can come up with ideas but,
ultimately, those who do the work will have the final say in it.
With that cleared up (hopefully), I can think of several options. Everyone
is welcome to brainstorm and add to the list.
1) make new mail lists for each newsgroup (or most of them.)
Advantages: this would give full access to the newsgroups for all the
mail list users
Disadvantages: 1) This is the most work for the mail list admins and
2) the software might not handle that many lists, depending on how many
they already have at their site
2) leave it how it is.
Advantages: This amounts to no work for the mail list admins
Disadvantages: 1) This would not give mail list users full access to
the discussions and 2) it would detract from the effectiveness of the split
because everything posted form the Info-Hams mail list would still go to
rec.radio.amateur.misc.
Any input at all would be helpful. It would be nice to know what will happen
with the mail lists before we change the newsgroups.
--
Ian Kluft KD6EUI PP-ASEL Amdahl Corporation, Open Systems Development
ikl...@uts.amdahl.com Santa Clara, CA
[disclaimer: any opinions expressed are mine only... not those of my employer]
Bob Witte
> rec.radio.amateur.misc). Of course, there is a historical reason for this,
> many gateways and transports refused to provide a service to ham-radio.misc
> until a ham-radio.swap group was created. I am not sure if they will pull
> their services today if too many swap items ended up in .misc, but there is
> that `fear' ...
>
1. Its pretty clear what belongs in r.r.swap and what doesn't
2. Its hard to start a flamefest in r.r.swap (except maybe
over the sale of a linear amplifier equipped for 27 MHz.)
Andrew Scott Beals -- KC6SSS
number of groups leads to better segregation of topics, thus I support the
reorganization.
My past experience with this was my creation of rec.autos.tech back
in '85 or '86. Rec.autos was slowly being dissolved by the flamewars
about radar detectors and 55MPH pushing out the discussion of
clutches and alternators. The new group subsequently left all of
the flame wars behind while the rest of us talked cars.
Brian Kantor
>tcp/ip and other related information ... we have yet to hear anything from
>anyone on these lists (namely the listserver heads) to indicate one way
>or the other. rec.radio.amateur.digital.tcp-ip will *die* if non of the
>lists feel like migrating ...
About six months ago, there was a discussion of whether the tcp-group
mailing list should migrate to a Usenet newsgroup. The consensus was
that it should NOT; had it been the other way, I'd have created a inet
newsgroup then and there.
- Brian
Derrick C. Cole
>In article <1993Mar25.2...@gsm001.mendelson.com> gsm...@gsm001.mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) writes:
>>In article <19930324....@almaden.ibm.com> en...@almaden.ibm.com writes:
>>>Unfortunately, every time we split this thing up:
>>>
>>> 1) I get to see more copies of the same message as it is posted to
>>> multiple groups.
>>
>>I'll second that. Now that misc forsale is split up we get the same post
>>to misc.forsale, m.f.computers. m.f.computers.pc, m.f.c.pc, m.f.c.workstation
>>ad nauseum. It would be better just to live with it instead of having
>>the same article cloned too many times.
>>
>but unless history doesn't repeat itself (and I see no evidence
>of this), we'll just see multiple postings and discussions
>breaking out in "...misc" because it'll have a potentially
>larger audience and, as KE4ZV says, hams are broadcasters at
>heart.
>>
>>> 2) Much of the traffic is trying to direct the people to the right
>>> group. The unwanted discussions don't stop anyway.
>>
>>I agree here too. Look at all the wanted postings in misc.forsale.....
>>
>eccentrics on here that would post in "...misc" *because*
>custom said they should post somewhere else {grin}.
>>
>>>My vote is to leave things alone...
>>
>>Me too.
>>
>>
>>Geoff.
>>
>>>Roy, AA4RE
>>
>Mike K7UIJ
Me four. What's the point?
73 de KC4WEJ,
Derrick
P.S. If people used a threaded newreader (like trn), topics of interest could
be followed easily, whilst others discarded, all by using the topic id and
Shift-D.
--
"Four Greenpeace activists climbed the Sears Tower to mark the 50th anniversary
of the first controlled nuclear chain reaction."
-- Yup, sounds like the thing to do on such an occasion
-----
Derrick C. Cole
>
>I'l lay odds that .space, .tech, .swap, .digital.misc and .digital.tcp-ip
>will have little overlap ... and what is bad about overlap! it's certainly
>not worse than sitting down once every couple of days to weed through >250
>articles in one group with more than 2000 different individuals posting (see
>Hams on USENET List). Sort of like when my kid comes to me telling me all
>this cool stuff he learned today only to watch my head explode!
>
>Ciao, 73 de VE6MGS/Mark -sk-
Get a threaded newsreader. It takes me 5 minutes to "weed through" >250
articles and choose the threads/topics that interest me.
73 de KC4WEJ,
Derrick
Mark G. Salyzyn
>In article <1p39rr$i...@network.ucsd.edu> br...@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor) writes:
>>Since the 1500+ people who are on the mailing lists can't vote anyway
>>(no way to post to news.groups from the mailing list), we'll just have
>>to wait and see.
>uncertainty over the effect on the mailing lists is going to be a serious
>issue until then.
The problem is that we have a classic example of two worlds clashing here:
Itsa Flat, no, itsa round! :-)
I may hazard a guess that the listserver has more of an effect on the
outcome of this discussion than any other group split (since, for
example, rec.aviation didn't have a massive listserver (Duno ?)).
I think the solution is to create a multitude of lists, one for each
group, and only allow the *first* group in the list to select which
listserver (except, rec.radio.info, which I have tried to ensure that
it is the last group in the list ...) the article is sent to. There
may be a need for a mailing address like:
rec.radio.amateur.digital.m...@ucsd.edu
(UGGHHH, rrsdm...@ucsd.edu? to allow a discussion about the Microsats ...)
for the listserver applicants. How many of the listserver applicants
are running a local email2news gateway, and how many of them are human?
Brian's Serve ...
Ciao -- Mark
Mark G. Salyzyn
>ma...@ve6mgs.ampr.org (Mark G. Salyzyn) writes:
>>or the other. rec.radio.amateur.digital.tcp-ip will *die* if non of the
>>lists feel like migrating ...
>About six months ago, there was a discussion of whether the tcp-group
>mailing list should migrate to a Usenet newsgroup. The consensus was
>that it should NOT;
:-(
Let me rephrase that (my bluff was called :-} ) maybe I should have asked
do people think that a r.r.a.d.tcp-ip group would die *if* the tcp-ip
mailing lists (I count 3 different ones, there may be more) fail to
move over? Perhaps I was a bit too dramatic :-)
Ciao -- Mark
Mark G. Salyzyn
>In <paulf.7...@abercrombie.Stanford.EDU> pa...@abercrombie.Stanford.EDU (Paul Flaherty) writes:
>>The last time I did this (about a week ago), 90 postings
>>fit into one group alone, and the remaining ten were crossposted to two
>>groups. NONE of the subjects required .misc. Try it.
>Great! Three groups; exactly what we have now. Well said Paul!
This can be kin to `baiting' Ed! I'l bite! We have three groups now, *.policy
and *.packet are on their own. *.misc had discussion about 3 *other* topics,
so that makes a total of five (six if you *keep* *.misc to take unwanted
discussions away from *.policy :-). What makes what Paul said similar to
the three current groups?
Harumph! Caio, 73 de VE6MGS/Mark
Mark G. Salyzyn
>>>>My vote is to leave things alone...
>>>Me too.
>>Me three.
>Me four. What's the point?
Hmmm, this is a war (somewhat harsh, I know) between the people that use
threaded news-readers, the people that don't, the people that want to see all
things in one pot and the people that can't control what they get in the pot
(listserv). Currently, *.misc is too big for some people and they are
cancelling from the listserver (I get 2 requests a week from people that
want to know how to cancel their subscription to the info-hams list because
of too much volume, price I pay for being the r.r.info moderator, they
*think* I have the answers :-) or complaining about it in the group. See
the warning signs!
>P.S. If people used a threaded newreader (like trn), topics of interest could
>be followed easily, whilst others discarded, all by using the topic id and
>Shift-D.
The proposal hurts non of these groups of people (except the admin of the
listserver itself ...), and helps most of them.
For *your* threaded news reader, Derrick, you will not be bombarded with
new discussions in topics you have no interest in to decide if that is
a thread you are interested in reading. Your argument is for a flat
news system such as in A-news, been there, done it, never again!
Ciao -- Mark
Mark G. Salyzyn
>Get a threaded newsreader. It takes me 5 minutes to "weed through" >250
>articles and choose the threads/topics that interest me.
Get nn, takes 6 taps of the space bar and you have read *.misc :-) Ok, how
many of you use a threaded news reader? How many like `other' news readers?
how many of you are stuck on a listserver with everything in one pot! How
many of you long for the good old days of A-news? How many of you *with*
threaded news readers are getting tired of spending 5 minutes to decide
which topics in *.misc to read?
I can be condescending too :-), Ciao -- Mark
Mark G. Salyzyn
>Not everyone has direct access to the news groups. What happens to
>the hundreds of us poor souls that only have mail access to rec.radio
>via the mail server info-hams?
>What would the reorganization buy us???
You will probably be presented with a choice of listserver groups, allowing
you to customize the articles stuffed into your mailbox a bit finer
than the *glob* in rec.radio.amateur.misc ... In fact, one could argue,
that a listserver user would want MORE division of the groups!
As far as posting to news.groups (I know, you can not see the postings ...)
there are several machines on the net that will take
news.groups@<machine name>
and post the article to that group for you! Almost any Internet machine
worth it's salt (is that a challenge I hear :-) will do this!
Talking for Admins everywhere, but not representing them :-) Ciao -- Mark
Mark G. Salyzyn
>It certainly wasn't sold that way. It was presented as a way to remove
>the clutter of bulletins from the discussion group. This was the impression
>given to people who receive the groups via Email.
I was the only person doing the selling, at no point did my hands leave
the table :-) I am sorry that you did not read my postings, as I was very
clear all along that articles would be cross posted and that the group
would follow the news.answers paradigm (at least in my world I thought so).
The listserver, as indicated, would need some updating to filter out
the articles cross posted to rec.radio.info (see below) for the users that
wanted to reduction in volume.
>I don't like crossposts because they multiply the volume to people
>participating by Email.
No, multiple posting does, the listserver is supposed to do:
!rec.radio.info,rec.radio.amateur.misc
If an article is multiposted, it shows up in both places, and *nothing* can
be done about it. If an article is cross-posted, then there IS something that
can be done (as above). Removing a Ham-Radio FAQ from rec.radio.amateur.misc
is not wise (where are the new users going to be?) so cross-posting becomes
necessary.
>You call it a mandate, I call it a minor fraud.
I am sorry you feel that way, the problem comes in that you, and
others, associated the previous failed attempt for a bulletin only group with
this one. I use the word mandate *only* because it shows that my hands are
tied at the moment. Feel free to propose a new mandate, my feelings won't
be hurt!
Certainly, I was cognisant of the fact that rec.radio.amateur.misc was
getting too crowded. The `too many bulletin' postings of a couple of
months ago showed a need for the bulletins to be taken out of
rec.radio.amateur.misc, so I can not lie about that initial intent of many
and the feeling of killing a couple of birds with one stone, but the
realities of the many requests we saw, especially the MAD ones from
the listserv'd people quickly solidified the role of rec.radio.info.
When the cross-posting paradigm moved in, the administrators on the lot all
could see the possibility for the bulletins to be there, and yet not be
there (put your news presentation order on any popular news reader
so that you read rec.radio.info first, then unsubscribe to it, poof, the
bulletins are gone from r.r.a.misc!). This side effect, requiring some
education, solved the problem with the listserver people complaining about
the bulletins disappearing and allowed the news reader people the filter.
Now, volunteer work that is needed aside to set up such a listserver, one
could initially subscribe to a listserver carrying rec.radio.amateur.misc.
After time, one could ask to be moved to !rec.radio.info,rec.radio.amateur.misc,
or !rec.radio.shortwave,rec.radio.info to their liking ... if you build it,
they will come? (urrckk) email dynafeed!
However, with this system, one can see that the onus now falls on the
listservers to provide finer tuning of the available groups. A Madhouse
that may or may not succede in time. But before any listserver feels
comfortable with this, they have to see rec.radio.info as being
substantially cross-posted, or `mono-posted', which it isn't yet. Education
comes slow!
>Creating more splinter groups is unlikely to have any better effect
>if everything continues to be crossposted between groups.
Ahhh, back on topic! the reorg will not create groups with mandates to
cross-post. There are very few articles cross-posted from r.r.a.packet
into r.r.a.misc, or r.r.a.policy into r.r.a.misc. This model should
convince you that it won't occur with the split. In fact, if you look
carefully, r.r.a.policy failed because it became a noise free discussion
about Amateur Policy issues rather than a dumping ground for unwanted
discussions in rec.radio.amateur.misc. This proves that even a `bad'
selection of noise ... er ... news groups will settle out in the end!
Mark G. Salyzyn
>Can we also have a rec.radio.amateur.jamming to discuss jammers, jamming
>techniques, catching jammers, RDF, T-hunts, etc. Or maybe we should call
>it rec.radio.amateur.games?
I have seen little or no RDF discussions in the rec.radio.amateur.* heirarchy
(except for some associated with the 14.313 and FCC policing). In fact, I
have seen little or no RDFing in my area, bunny hunts almost are a thing of the
past ...
With the advent of packet radio, RDFing a signal has become excedingly
difficult without the best of equipment (TX signature analysis and high
speed direction) beyond the means of most Hams. But I wax poetic ...
I don't think there is enough discussion volume to justify, take it
to r.r.a.tech!
Ciao -- Mark
Mike Freeman
>
>As far as posting to news.groups (I know, you can not see the postings ...)
>there are several machines on the net that will take
> news.groups@<machine name>
>and post the article to that group for you! Almost any Internet machine
>worth it's salt (is that a challenge I hear :-) will do this!
>
It hasn't been mentioned, so far as I am aware, in the ham radio
faq, for some time.
--
Mike Freeman <K7UIJ> | Internet: mi...@pacifier.rain.com
301 N.E. 107th Street | UUCP: uunet!m2xenix!nipple!pacifier!mikef
Vancouver, WA 98685 USA | GEnie: M.FREEMAN11
TElephone (206)574-8221 | Pushing 40 is exercise enough!
John Brewer
In article <1993Apr5.1...@ve6mgs.ampr.org>, ma...@ve6mgs.ampr.org (Mark G. Salyzyn) writes...
>>>>Me too.
>>>Me three.
>>Me four. What's the point?
Me Five
/john
-------------------------------------------------------
| John Brewer | Internet: bre...@anarky.enet.dec.com |
| wb5oau | Packet | wb5oau@wb2ars |
-------------------------------------------------------
Ian Kluft
>Does ucbvax.berkeley.edu still exist (haven't tried to finger it)?
>It hasn't been mentioned, so far as I am aware, in the ham radio
>faq, for some time.
UC Berkeley asked us to remove their news-posting mail target from the FAQ.
It is only for use from within the UCB campus.
Mark G. Salyzyn
>This is the correct interpretation. The implication is that the .misc group
>is not needed, as it thus only serves as a large soap box for flame baiting.
Beware, sounds like we are creating a new newsgroup called r.r.a.misc to
be used as a dumping ground for flame wars! :-)
>I still think that we may be better off if we can find a way to improve
>posting quality. Perhaps with a little peer pressure, and some posting
>guidelines, we might be able to achieve better results.
This sounds like we should start using our self policing native to Amateur
Radio. If the current FAQs associated with the news group(s) are not doing
the job, we may need more (and smaller) FAQs, posting quidelines and
welcome articles. I think this is in the works in the rra-reorg mail
list as we speak, so rest assured this is being addressed.
Peer pressure requires some commited individuals to periodically send
private email guiding the poster when he strays. I think we do have a
couple of people that do this, perhaps some co-ordination is in order ...
Ciao -- Mark
Mark G. Salyzyn
>*If* we are to break up into little groups, something I don't support,
>then an RDF group has merit. As several of us have posted, DFing is a
>rapidly growing sport in the US, and has been a vigorous sport in Europe
>for years. You may have missed the discussions on GPS and Loran C equipment
>in vehicles, that was about automating DF bearing resolution.
You are right Gary, there is some volume there! I saw the discussions of
Loran C out of my pocket book range so I ignored them ...
>aside from packet which *still*
>has more posts in misc than packet as witness the latest PK232 vs KAM
>postings.
I am sure some of that problem is due to the fact that we may also be a
victim of the ListServer mentality (or should I call it A-news mentality).
Sure, anyone on the end of a listserver, or has been used to the List will
create some resistance to compartmentalizing the discussion. It is hoped that
posting (or xposting <jab> <jab>) a set of short FAQs every two weeks, with
some dedicated individuals providing email nudges will keep this to a
minimum.
Besides, PK232 vs KAM discussions *belong* in the *.misc Quagmuire :-) along
with my dad is bigger than your dad ;-)
I am disturbed that we have had *little* input from the Listserver users. To
that end, if a listserver user doesn't know where to turn to, in order to post
their opinions to news.groups, I have set up news....@ve6mgs.ampr.ab.ca to
cross post to: news.groups,rec.radio.amateur.misc,rec.radio.amateur.packet for
the RFD and CFV period.
-- 73 de VE6MGS/Mark