A new strategy (Was Re: unix-pc.* newsgroups)

[Lyndon Nerenberg]

In article <213 at teletron.UUCP>, andrew at teletron.UUCP (Andrew Scott) writes:
> 
> Actually, I was quite awake.  I got suspicious when I noticed that *every*
> file in /usr/spool/news/unix-pc/* had multiple links.  Taking a look at the
> headers revealed that they were all cross-posted to some other USENET group
> which we *did* receive - thus the links.  We haven't seen any unix-pc.* only
> traffic, hence the motivation for the cross-posting proposal.

It still sounds like a problem between alberta and teletron. I checked
the Newsgroups: line on all the articles in unix-pc on alberta with
the following results:

   4 comp.sys.att
   1 comp.sys.att,news.groups,unix-pc.general
  12 comp.sys.att,unix-pc.general
   3 comp.sys.att,unix-pc.general,news.groups
   1 comp.sys.att,unix-pc.sources
  16 unix-pc.general
   9 unix-pc.general,comp.sys.att
   2 unix-pc.sources
   2 unix-pc.sources,comp.sys.att
   2 unix-pc.test

I think the first line is the most interesting - someone is posting
to comp.sys.att with a distribution of unix-pc :-)  These numbers
also indicate articles are being posted to unix-pc.* that are *not*
cross-posted to other groups.

The next major problem we will run into with the bnews software is
how to integrate the non-mainstream top level distributions with
the "group of seven" top level categories. The alt groups seem to be
doing reasonably well. I think this is due to the uniqueness of the
alt groups themselves. You just can't find an unmoderated sources
group under comp (that works properly, anyway), and nowhere else
are flames "sanctioned" by the "network."

If unix-pc is to survive, it too must provide something unique when
compared to the mainstream groups covering the same subject areas
(comp.sys.att, comp.sources.unix, comp.unix.questions, etc.)
In the early days of unix-pc I think (no, I wasn't there) this
was achieved by carrying material that fell within very *specific*
guidlines (i.e.  *One* architecture, *One* OS). The unix-pc groups
were an attempt at maintaining an ever growing mailing list by using
the bnews distribution system (an experiment that's been on my mind
for several months). What appears to be happening is the "mailing
list" is now going through an even greater (and more painful) period
of growth as comp.sys.att readers scramble onto the unix-pc bandwagon.

Most readers of these groups are discussing band-aid solutions to the
symptoms they are seeing (massive cross-posting, missing out on 
material in the "other" groups). It's true that the distribution
problem could be "fixed" by ensuring that > 90% of usenet receives
and forwards unix-pc, but what is the real result of this? All that's
been accomplished is the duplication of existing newsgroups.

The underlying problem is that the unix-pc groups are suffering from
an identity crisis. If unix-pc simply duplicates the status quo it is
doomed to failure. It will survive only if it offers something unique
and different.

--lyndon   alberta!ncc!lyndon