Gervase Markham wrote:
>>This is the first time anybody mentioned that there are "production
>>newsgroups". Ok, I can accept that (even as I was surprised by this).
>>
>
> Do you think we have 70 newsgroups just for chatting in? ;-) Work gets
> done here.
I said I accept that. So why argue?
> There seems to be a confusion here. People in bugs who say "move this
> discussion to the newsgroups" say so because otherwise bugs fill up with
> discussion which makes them hard to read, and people get spammed with
> bugmail. Those who move the discussion are supposed to pick an appropriate
> group - there is no need for them to choose n.p.m.general (and, in fact,
> most of the time that will be the wrong group.)
Yes there is a confusion here. I never said all discussion should be
moved to n.p.m.general. But as there are 70+ newsgroups and not
everybody in the discussion reads all of them if you don't direct the
discussion to one group you end up killing the discussion because most
people interested in the subject will not find it.
I suspect that at least some of the kick-away commando do that on
purpose. Of course I may be wrong - your mileage might vary.
However the other explanation: that they do that out of ignorance
(meaning they do not want actually to kill the discussion) asks for some
campaigning for more precise directing of such "movings". This is
exactly what I try to achieve with my postings.
Jacek
