Re: comp.databases.postgresql.* groups and RFD

On 26 Nov 2004 22:09:41 GMT, Woodchuck Bill <bwr607@hotmail.com>
wrote:

Woodchuck Bill <bwr607@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns95AD8C1262850bswr607h4@130.133.1.4:

"Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.chinet.com> wrote in
news:pIOdndYMRqGJ7DrcRVn- 2w@newedgenetworks.com:

Are these meant to be worldwide Usenet groups
or newsgroups local to your server?

Supernews is already carrying all 29 of the new groups in the pgsql.*
hierarchy. That alone makes them "worldwide groups", as SN is a major
peer to other severs.

I just realized what a bad name pgsql.* is for a hierarchy. If someone
wants to look for a newgroup for PostgreSQL, he will type that word/string
into his newsreader and it will not bring up any of these newsgroups.

Newbies would, yeah. but pgsql is a common reference to it.

I just tried it on a server that carries the new groups, and the only
newsgroup that comes up when I search for "PostgreSQL" is
alt.comp.databases.postgresql. The name of the hierarchy should have been
postgresql.* instead. Even with the rogue comp.* groups, the word
PostgreSQL appeared in each of the bogus group names.

--
gburnore@databasix dot com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | �۳�ݳ޳�ݳ��ۺݳ޳�ݳݳ޳�ݳ��۳
| �۳�ݳ޳�ݳ��ۺݳ޳�ݳݳ޳�ݳ��۳
DataBasix | �۳�ݳ޳�ݳ��ۺݳ޳�ݳݳ޳�ݳ��۳
| �۳ 3 4 1 4 2 ݳ޳ 6 9 0 6 9 �۳
Black Helicopter Repair Svcs Division | Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================
Want one? GET one! http://signup.databasix.com
===========================================================================

Gary L. Burnore <gburnore@databasix.com> wrote in
news:co8fbk$70o$3@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:

I just realized what a bad name pgsql.* is for a hierarchy. If someone
wants to look for a newgroup for PostgreSQL, he will type that
word/string into his newsreader and it will not bring up any of these
newsgroups.

Newbies would, yeah. but pgsql is a common reference to it.

Newbies looking for an entry level group might pass novice or general and
find a dead alt.* group as the only newsgroup with "postgresql" in the
name. Something to consider.

--
Bill

Marc G. Fournier From: <scrappy@hub.org> wrote in
news:coah52$2j9c$2@news.hub.org:

Robert McClenon <robert.mcclenon@verizon.net> writes:

Another thread on the topic of this RFD was cross-posted to
pgsql.general. I didn't notice that it was cross-posted, and so
cross-posted a reply to news.groups and pgsql.general. I then got a
message from the list gateway saying that my post was stalled awaiting
moderator approval because I was not on the list of list subscribers.

As I made mention in another thread, the lists are not moderated past
the fact that you need to be subscribed in order to post directly
through to the list ... and subscribed does not mean 'receiving email',
as that would defeat the point ... if you send a quick:

subscribe-set <listname> <email> nomail

to majordomo@postgresql.org to get yourself subscribed in a 'do not send
me email' way, then that would eliminate the requirement for me to
approve your posting ...

This applies to anyone either reading through usenet, or trying to post
directly to the lists through email ...

You're missing the point. You are still looking at things from the point of
view of a list subscriber. The RFD is to focus on the experience of a
Usenet poster.

Take your average Usenet poster..he finds one of the PostGreSQL groups, and
sees that they are listed as unmoderated groups. He posts a question. He
gets an e-mail from a moderator's robot. This creates major confusion. He
is not aware that 99 percent of the NG volume comes from e-mails to mailing
lists.

--
Bill