Re: c.i.w3 instead of mailing list
Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@cs.indiana.edu>
X-Delivered: at request of secret on dxcern.cern.ch
From: Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@cs.indiana.edu>
To: kevin@scic.intel.com (Kevin Altis)
Subject: Re: c.i.w3 instead of mailing list
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 07 Oct 1993 11:31:20 PST."
<9310071834.AA15568@rs042.scic.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1993 14:53:20 -0500
Message-id: <7484.750023600@prickly.cs.indiana.edu>
Sender: mvanheyn@cs.indiana.edu
Resent-To: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Resent-Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1993 14:53:51 -0500
Resent-Message-Id: <7497.750023631@prickly.cs.indiana.edu>
Resent-From: Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@cs.indiana.edu>
Thus wrote:
>Marc and a few others have expressed the desire to move to USENET
>completely so we don't carry on the technical conversations on www-talk,
>which doesn't have a high reliability level. I would like to move to
>USENET, but c.i.w3 has a high noise level, so if we make a complete switch
>I think a proposal needs to go forth for comp.infosystems.www.programmers
>or some such list. I don't remember the voting rules offhand, so besides
>having to wait a few weeks or more for getting a new USENET group started
>we also need enough votes and 2/3 of those YES to get started. Do we have
>critical mass? What do you think?
Are you kidding? The mailing list has about as much noise as the
newsgroup and significantly higher volume, even if you don't count the
duplicate mailings or "Please unsubscribe me" messages. I've
seriously considered unsubscribing several times. At least noise in a
newsgroup can easily be removed with the "k" key and other mechanisms;
I really don't want to have to add that kind of filtering to my mail
when there's a good alternative.
- Marc
--
Marc VanHeyningen mvanheyn@cs.indiana.edu MIME, RIPEM & HTTP spoken here