Bionet FAQ sheet (was Re: Bionet hierarchy)
kristoff at GENBANK.BIO.NET
Wed Apr 22 16:44:16 EST 1992
> kristoff at genbank.bio.net (David Kristofferson) writes:
> > This means that people who subscribe to all of the newsgroups by e-mail
> > will get ***26*** copies of the FAQ sheet.
> I am not necessarially convinced that posting a general FAQ sheet
> to every single group is a good idea, but I certainly disagree with David's
> reasoning as to *why* it isn't.
> News is a far superior technology to email.
No quarrel here. As I mentioned previously we intend to phase out
> If crossposting means people who read bionet as email have to
> suffer (and network bandwidth is wasted to support those email readers), so
> be it.
Good thing that you aren't handling BIOSCI e-mail, Roy 8-).
> It is always a bad idea to cripple your use of a good technology to
> cater to people who use a poorer technology. Especially when you consider
> that the better technology is available for free for practically any
> software or hardware platform you can imagine.
While I have always believed that people should use news software and
have continually pushed for its adoption, I do not lose site of the
fact that our primary goal is not technology for its own sake, but to
foster communications. Because of this BIOSCI has utilized all kinds
of distribution mechanisms that would make some technological purists
vomit. My response is similar to yours above - "tough."
I agree completely with your statements in support of news, but not
with your attitude towards e-mail subscribers. Without our readers
the system is non-existent. News users are NOT inconvenienced by
having a bionet-wide FAQ posted only to bionet.announce. As you
mentioned, news software often suppresses crossposting attempts
anyway (this obviously shows that the people who wrote it agreed with
the position I'm taking). I have to get back to other items now.
kristoff at genbank.bio.net
More information about the Bioforum