From: gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...)
Subject: Re: 3rd RFD: comp.binaries.apple2 moderated
Organization: Ursa Minor Beta, 402-476-8047 @ 2400
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 02:16:50 GMT

payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...) writes:

::Amended charter:
::
>>|Appropriate files shall mean virus-free Freeware, Shareware, or
>>|otherwise freely-distributable programs which run on any one or more
>>|Apple II or Apple III computers or their compatibles, their [programs']
>>|documentation, and their data files, excluding those files which are
>>|already covered by existing newsgroups' charters.

>Two points, where do graphics fit in (they are not programs),
>and what about things not specifically mentioned. Hypercard stacks for
>example are not programs in the traditional sense. How abut a line that
>any item not listed as inappropriate be allowed. There may yet be new
>things ported to/written for the Apple2.

Well, "their data files" I thought would cover such things as Hypercard
stacks, SoundSmith songs, 3201 images and the like.  But the "more
appropriate group" clause will redirect things like GIFs and sound
samples, which would have a more widespread appeal than just Apple II
users.

>>|Submissions will
>>|include a description of a reasonable length; when posted it will be
>>|be presented at the beginning of the first part of the archive, and
>>|seperated from the archive body by a Control-L.  The description will
>>|include what machine(s) it will properly run on.
>>|
>>|Appropriate postings do not include articles that are not approved by
>>|one of the moderators nor the idle-moderator script.  Such approval
>>|does not insure an article is appropriate, especially in the case of
>>|the latter.
>>|
>>|Subjects will be constructed with keywords indentifying CPU requirements,
>>|name of the archived program, parts count, and short summary (additional
>>|hardware and software requirements will take precedence over short
>>|summary).  Postings will be encoded using newest versions of ShrinkIT
>>|and BinSCII, until such (unforseen at this writing) time that they are
>>|usurped in preference.

>Just looked again, one more item. Why the requirement for the latest
>version of Shrinkit. Older versions can be used without difficulty.
>This seems to be an unecessary restriction, and for net-readers who
>do not have the latest Shrinkit, posts would be unusable. I see no
>advantages to this restriction, and potential disadvantages. How
>about changing the wording to just 'packed with Shrinkit'?

Whenever the latest version of ShrinkIT is posted, it will be set with a
long expiry date.  Now typically the latest version is slight bug fixes
or interface changes, but when the newest version becomes available, it
will be available to all.

But .BSQ encryption is not a requirement for submissions.

>>|There will be 3 BinSCII parts per post.

>One more point, if you have GSCii, it is easy to post in the correct
>format. For those with a non-GS using BINSCII, it can be a problem
>putting large files in this format. Is there any need to require 3
>segments per post?

Let's see, BinSCII parts are 260 lines, right?  260*3 is 780, but 260*4
is 1040, which goes beyond the recommended 1000-line limit on posts
through old links, which could get truncated.  Myself, I'd like 2 parts
per post, as that would fit nicely in the ProTERM 45K copy buffer.

Still, that would be the output form, not required in input.  That's why
I didn't mention it in the first paragraph, which mainly describes input
requirements.

>>|Articles will have unique, sequential article-IDs, with Reference:
>>|headers set accordingly for threaded newsreaders' (like trn) benefit.
>>|The series of posts that make up a complete archive will be posted
>>|together, and will be delayed until all parts have been received.
>>|Submissions not checked for 5 days after receipt will be automatically
>>|posted as-is; it is recommended, but not required, that submitters send
>>|postings in in the same format as the approved postings are sent out.
>>|Repeat postings will not be posted if the posting in question has been
>>|posted within 6 months time; this does not apply to newer versions of
>>|the same program.  Postings will be forwarded to the APPLE2-L mailing
>>|list as approved, as well as archived on an anonymously accessible FTP
>>|site.  Old postings will also be available on request from the
>>|moderator(s).
>>|
>>|If an article is found to be inappropriate, the article will be
>>|cancelled.  In the case of articles with forged approval, the article
>>|will then be treated as if it had just been submitted by the poster.

>Also, I am curious. If the post is a valid post to the binaries group,
>what does a forged approval matter? Should we not concentrate on the
>posts, not the posters? Strange things have happened, and not all of
>them are nefarious plots to destroy the world. I remember the fun I
>had when I discovered the telnet ports.

I'm not going to put text in the charter which encourages posting
articles with forged approval.  Such articles have no virus detection
run on them.  Indeed, any posting that was made with forged approval
should have the suspicion that it may be infectious, else the poster
would have gone through the proper channels.  Also such articles violate
the concept of a canonical archive of articles, and wouldn't be
automatically forwarded to the APPLE2-L newsgroup.  Those steps fall
under the moderator approving step of the process.

>My idea was not to spell out all appropriate items, only those items 
>specifically dis-allowed. This leaves things open-ended.	

Exception proving the rule?  I think I worded it in a way that gave a
clear indication as to what was allowed and what was not.  More of the
rule implicitly describing the exeptions.

And it is not guaranteed that a new category would still be appropriate
to the group.

>Tero had answered several posts I had made to one of the proposed moderators,
>and as I had not been watching names closely, I missed the change.

Tero was approached once, and he declined.  His name never appeared in
an official list of moderators.

>Rich
>payner@netcom.com

-- gberigan@cse.unl.edu (Life...)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.motorcycles