From: rossi@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de (Oliver Rosenkranz)
Subject: Re: comp.sys.atari.8bit.archive
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Organization: Techn. University of Berlin, Germany
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 14:42:20 GMT

aa700@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael Current) writes:


>In a previous article, rossi@opal.cs.tu-berlin.de (Oliver Rosenkranz) says:
>
>>I read comp.sys.atari.8bit regularly (nearly every day) and everytime I
>>come up there are at least 10 articles posted here. Not everyone has the time
>>to read everything. If you read here once a week lots of articles would be
>>deleted without reading them first. An .archive newsgroup wouldn't be
>>as 'overcrowded' because there wouldn't be as much articles.
>Do you read newsgroups other than comp.sys.atari.8bit?  I mean,
>comp.sys.atari.st sees around 75-100 postings a day, rec.games.video more
>than that.  I can't say I've heard c.s.atari.8bit described as
>'overcrowded' before.  (I agree, 10 message/day sounds about right for this
>group.)
I read other newsgroups, too. But if there are 10 articles each day posted,
it will be 70 a week and more than 300 a month. If you want to look for a
special article, these are a lot of articles to be looked after.

>>There is really no reason for not sending them to the archive site. The
>>newsgroup moderator shall do exactly this to give new aspects to this site.
>>But a newsgroup has several advantages :
>>1. Readers can respond and send follow-ups (published coordinated by the
>>   moderator).
>>2. You don't have to ftp to a site, not knowing if there is anything new
>>   there.
>>3. You read newsgroups more often than you ftp to the archive.
>>4. ftp site capacity is limited. This is not a good argument but it is one.
>>5. Seeing articles automatically could be more creative and motivating to
>>   people.
>>6. You publish it to people all over the world. The AC mag is mostly selled
>>   in the US (isn't it ?).
>>   Maybe combinating all three solutions of the problem (and there is one)
>>   would be the best solution at all.
>
>These are all basically valid for postings to comp.sys.atari.8bit.
No. c.s.a.8bit is not moderated, so there noone to coordinate knowledge and
follow-ups or corrections. This is the rason because unmoderated newsgroups
are not interesting for readers reading it not frequently. They don't get
the theme of a follow-up series so they don't post their opinion to the
group. If all this is linked into one article (without all the double lines)
all persons are able to get the whole thing.
Also, there is NO reason against a 2nd 8bit-newsgroup.
So just say YES and we will see, if there are 100 people standing for it.

>Jeff will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe AC is striving to be a
>worldwide forum for 8-bit Atari users.
Okay, you're right, but I guess, most subscribers/readers live in the
US and Canada, don't they ?

>Another consideration is that a small but significant number of
>participants of this discussion group do not have Usenet access, reading
>the Info-Atari8 Digest.  These people would not have access to another
>newsgroup.
That's correct. Why don't we handle this like with this newsgroup?
All articles in the 2nd ng will go to the Digest, too.

>And again, the point is probably moot, because if we can not produce 100
>Yes votes we simply cannot create another newsgroup.
Please Michael, don't be as negative as you are.
JUST SAY 
           YES
               and you're the 2nd of only 100.

We'll see how much people there will be...

--==rossi==--