> > mozilla.bugs.*; trying to post to these gets a reply pointing to the FAQ
> > on how to search Bugzilla and file bug reports (as drafted by Andreas.) So
> > no posts ever make it through at all. This is rather hacky, but I think it
> > might well be effective.
>
> I thought the proposal was to require perusal of a FAQ before posting,
> not to make dummy groups. Maybe I misunderstood.
Well, the point is that bug reports should be in Bugzilla, not a
newsgroup. If we provide a postable-to newsgroup, people will think
they've reported a bug and complain when nothing is done. And also,
kind-hearted people will have to take it on themselves to transplant bug
reports into Bugzilla.
> Anyhow, I don't know whether an empty newsgroup will provide the
> distraction you seek. 0 message headers looks suspicious, no?
Hmm... perhaps we could put some dummy posts in ;-)
> > Pro: It diverts user-discussion away from the dev newsgroups
> > Con: It makes it seem as if mozilla.org is "supporting" users by providing
> > facilities for them.
>
> Note that providing users groups does not commit mozilla.org to active
> support.
<snip> OK, fair enough. mozilla.org's charter does commit it to providing
methods of communication for "users". It all depends on how you define
"users" (as we have found out recently.) :-)
Obviously, a lack of charter commitment to supporting individual end-users
doesn't mean that we shouldn't.
> Any particular reason why .wishlist is in the users group?
> Web-developers might want features, too, and the posts are directed
> to developers. It doesn't really fit in any single subhierarchy.
> Unless there are any objections, I suggest moving it back up
> to mozilla.wishlist.
Hmmm... OK.
> > They are unmoderated, but wishlist has a regularly-posted FAQ URL.
>
> Andreas brought up the idea of appending a FAQ URL to every post.
> Why not do that instead? Less spam.
Yeah, that was the plan, wasn't it? :-)
Gerv
