Re: RFD: uk.media.tv.big-brother
Chris Croughton
here without uk.news.net.announce because that's where he seemed to expect it
to go and he has used an invalid address and no Reply-To:
> Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 14:34:25 GMT
> Subject: Re: uk.media.tv.big-brother
> From: "WTF" <w...@wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.wtf.invalid>
>
> In news:rfd1-uk.media.tv.big-brother-20040609104335$13...@gradwell.net,
> Paul Smith wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >
> > REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
> >
> > This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the following
> > changes in the uk.* Usenet hierarchy:
> >
> > create unmoderated newsgroup uk.media.tv.big-brother
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1) Since the group was created on 17th June 2002, shouldn't this message
> also be posted there?
No, the group was created by the "Quick Creation" process without a vote,
as provided for by the Guidelines, on 2002-06-17. A notice was sent on
2003-01-07 saying that, again as by the Guidelines, it would be removed unless
an RFD was received to make it permanent. No such RFD was received
within the time limit, so it was removed on 2003-02-13. Subsequent RFDs
were issued on 2003-05-22 and 2003-11-07, neither was taken to a vote or
quick creation.
The state is therefore that the group does not exist on any properly
managed news server.
> 2) Isn't it customary to advise when followups are set?
Not for posts sent to uk.net.news.announce, no, since no one can post
there apart from Control for announcements (not discussion), so it is
obvious that followups must be to somewhere else. Anyone with a
reasonable mailer will see that folowups are to another group...
> FU's set to uk.net.news.config
They are that, and I have removed uk.net.news.announce from the
Newsgroups line since discussion is not permitted there.
Chris C, writing as Control