In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Garth Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Henri Sivonen wrote: > > Still, it is misleading to call them public if you don't want > > non-developers to post. (The php.*, gnu.* etc. newsgroups don't seem to > > need "public" to indicate that they are accessible by anyone.) > > It's a netscape.* hierarchy convention. I think it's silly too, but > there you have it. It would make more sense to fix it than to try to explain it. > > Indeed. But the failure to implement the reorg is still the problem and > > it is not the fault of the well-intentioned end users who typed > > "*mozilla*" in Googles group search field and got back > > netscape.public.mozilla.general as the only relevant group. > > No, it's not their fault, but they're still doing the wrong thing. It's > called a "mistake". So if you put a welcome sign at a door but in the back yard have instructions that one should not enter through the door but climb through a side window, the people who naively walk through the door are making a mistake. > You can use secnews.netscape.com without changing your ISP. I don't know > why you think you can't... It is slower than using the ISP NNTP server and in many cases it requires a different client or a different client configuration. > > But it's quite counter-productive to fragment the end user discussion by > > insisting that Netscape users go to one place, Beonex users to another, > > Debian users to a third, Red Hat users to a fourth, etc. > > Where did I say that? You didn't say so, but it is a common suggestiong that tends to occur when this discussion is reiterated. -- Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hut.fi/u/hsivonen/
