From: dsroberts@beckman.com
Newsgroups: comp.org.decus
Subject: Re: How DECUS does business (was Re: EXECUTION of DECUS Standards)
Date: 18 Dec 92 09:48:51 PDT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Beckman Instruments

In article <18DEC199210275598@rover.uchicago.edu>, frank@rover.uchicago.edu 
(Frank - Hardware Hacker - Borger) 
makes some silly arguments and then an TOTALLY UNTRUE STATEMENT:
> 	You miss my point. With DCS, I as the sender make one decision on
> 	who should read the message. With NOTES, everybody who happens to
> 	read NOTES would have to access that conference and actively decide
> 	if they wanted to read that note.

Are you making a distinction between mail on DCS here and Notes on DCS, or
something else, Frank?  This is very confusing.

> 	But what if you read the same note/article in alt.decus.symposia, 
> 	alt.decus.store, alt.decus.DAARC, alt.decus.L&T, alt.decus.VAX,
> 	alt.decus. .... (well you get the idea.) DCS handles the equivalent
> 	of cross-posting to multiple groups much better. I 1 message, not N.

And this is no different than the NOTES paradigm.  The only differences are
chronology and expiration of old information from this perspective.

> 	Actually, NOTES is much better than Ness in one respect. Instead of
> 	Subject lines and "In response to... types. when you have an entirely
> 	new topic, you start a new stream of notes with note nn.0 Subsequent
> 	RESPONSES to the seed note are entered as nn.1, nn.2, etc.

THis is perceived better, not actual better.  The organizations of subjects on
news are really no different than notes.  You must have a really braindead
newsreader available to you if you can't see this.

> 	Show me a well tuned newsgroup on the net, and I will agree with you.

Show me a well tuned notes conference.  As long as there are several different
people participating on ANY forum, there will be differences of organization
that make NO sense to some of those people.

> 	Well, my favorite sig works that way. The steering committee makes
> 	the decisions. They are closed in the sense that everbody and their
> 	uncle on the Net doesn't get to vote, however the decisions are (by
> 	my definition,) still open if the RESULTS are posted to an open
> 	NOTES conference.

What's open about results only?  Great, we know what happened.  We don't know
why, how or have an opportunity to provide relevant input.

> 	Although DCS and DECUServe are on different processors, both are
> 	accessible from the DECUServe end. To preclude giving everyone with
> 	a DCS account free DECUServe access, (with no connect costs,) those
> 	with DCS accounts can only access the limited DCS notes conference.
> 	However anyone on DECUServe can access any of the DCS conferences,
> 	provided that they are not closed.

This is utterly, categorically and literally UNTRUE.  Frank, why don't you
subscribe to DECUServe and then try to read the NON-PRIVATE conference called
DCS that is on DCS.  What we have is a set of mutually shared conferences such
as board_public that were intentionally made that way.

> 	I use both. IMHO Notes does a much better job because it does a better
> 	job of sorting various conversation threads, mainly because I can start
> 	a new thread, (equivalent to creating vms.xxx.pdp11.IAS) without having
> 	to go to the gods of the net and beseach them to start it for me.

And you say you can't do this in NEWS?  What DO you use for news reading?
-- 
   Don Roberts                   Internet:  dsroberts@beckman.com
   Beckman Instruments, Inc.     Phone:     714/961-3029
   2500 Harbor Bl. Mailstop X-12 FAX:       714/961-3351
   Fullerton, CA  92634          Disclaimer:  Blame me, not Beckman.
   "Abortion isn't a 'choice', it's the slaughter of the innocent"
Newsgroups: comp.org.decus