Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 18:14:55 -0500
Message-Id: <199703072314.SAA09953@delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: gfoot AT mc31 DOT merton DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <5fpqve$pc3@news.ox.ac.uk> (gfoot@mc31.merton.ox.ac.uk)
Subject: Re: c.o.m.djgpp retro-moderated?


My opinion on what a good split would be, although I really prefer
keeping it as a single group for now (for simplicity):

c.o.m.d.help		Where you can ask questions about djgpp
	programmer	Q's about programming, other programming discussions
	worker		Those who modify djgpp itself
	announce	announcements (new stuff, etc) (moderated)
	gems		standalone postings about a single topic (moderated)
			(or .articles, .papers, .topics, I don't know)
	misc		anything that doesn't fit

From: gfoot AT mc31 DOT merton DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk (George Foot)
> Dave Cigna (cigna AT helios DOT phy DOT OhioU DOT Edu) wrote:
> [...]
> : Having said that, I propose a small hierarchy of groups:
> 
> I'm not sure whether I am for or against the splitting of the group, but
> if it is decided that this is the right thing to do then I'd like to make
> a few points...

Me too! (sorry, I couldn't resist :-)

> : c.o.m.djgpp                 what doesn't fit in the other groups
> 
> AFAIK the general preference is not to have groups part-way down a tree;
> if c.o.m.djgpp.* exist then c.o.m.djgpp shouldn't. Maybe it should be
> renamed to c.o.m.djgpp.misc?

Not always.  There are a lot of ".d" groups off usable groups.  If it
*makes sense* you leave it.  Perhaps we could leave the c.o.m.d group
as a fully moderated group, and only post the mini-faq and newsgroup
info to it?

> : c.o.m.djgpp.newbie          (there must be a better name for this!)
> 
> comp.os.msdos.djgpp.tech-support perhaps? Or would this lead people to
> treat it as a paid-for service (i.e. demanding support rather than politely
> asking for it)?

Perhaps just "comp.os.msdos.djgpp.help" or ".faq".

> : c.o.m.djgpp.graphics 
> 
> I'm not sure why exactly you chose graphics; I don't think there are that
> many graphics-related posts to the newsgroup/mailing list at present.

c.o.m.d.programmer ?

> : c.o.m.djgpp.announce        mirror of the mailing list
> 
> : Note the the announce group could be fully moderated without much 
> : effort.
> 
> Indeed, the mailing list already is. There aren't very many announcements,
> though.

No, the mailing list is not moderated.  It's just not popular.  Most
people just post to djgpp instead.

> This would require a lot of time from the moderator(s), and would slow
> down the response speed (which is usually less than a day).

True.  I don't think full moderation will ever be a good solution for
c.o.m.djgpp because of the high traffic.  We'd lost the good (ha!)
response time.

> Perhaps a better system (which I suggested about a week ago) would be
> for someone (if anyone has enough time) who reads the group/list 
> religiously to extract the most relevant points, summarize long articles
> where appropriate, etc, to provide a cut-down digest for people who just
> want the bare facts, with no discussion. AFAIK the current digest mailing
> lists are not treated in this way; they are just amalgamations of the 
> day/week's mail.

c.o.m.djgpp.gems (moderated) ?

(A newsgroup for standalone technical "white papers" about djgpp topics)