home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.sources.d:1424 news.groups:22590 alt.sources.d:1439 news.misc:1881
- Newsgroups: comp.sources.d,news.groups,alt.sources.d,news.misc
- Path: sparky!kent
- From: kent@sparky.imd.sterling.com (Kent Landfield)
- Subject: Re: Should SHAREWARE be posted in comp.sources.misc
- Message-ID: <1992Nov20.211653.8730@sparky.imd.sterling.com>
- Keywords: Vote, shareware, sources.misc
- Organization: Sterling Software
- References: <1992Nov20.171751.25602@sparky.imd.sterling.com> <1ejd2mINN2uv@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
- Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 21:16:53 GMT
- Lines: 65
- X-Md4-Signature: f4361834b86a43daf1b316d325fc6c71
-
- In article <1ejd2mINN2uv@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU> randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall) writes:
- >I've got a whole lot of problems with this message.
-
- >To aid us in our decision, could you inform those who do not read the "sources"
- >group what the charter of that group says about appropriate posts? (I real-
- >ize that a resourceful man like myself should be able to find the charter on
- >his own, but perhaps there are others who are less resourceful out there.)
-
- Back in the days of net.sources, charters came real loose. As far as I
- am concerned, this is the charter:
-
- Comp.sources.misc is sort of a "catch-all" sources group. The group is
- run in a generally informal manner. *Any* program source code will be
- accepted. Discussion and "sources wanted" requests will be discarded
- with a message back to the sender advising then to post to the correct
- newsgroup.
-
- See the Introduction to comp.sources.misc for more information.
-
- >>I am running a vote to once and for all decide whether of not
- >>SHAREWARE should be posted to comp.sources.misc. If you feel
- >>that SHAREWARE is (un)acceptable then let me know via a vote.
- >
- >This is fine, but calling this is CFV is *not* OK! For one thing, I haven't
- >seen *any* discussion of this on news.groups, let alone a formal RFD.
-
- Say what ? This is *not* a call for votes for a _new_ newsgroup. This is a
- community vote for newsgroup/moderator direction. There are no guidelines
- that need be followed here. :-) :-) And last I heard, CFV was not
- trademarked. :-)
-
- >So, in summary:
- >(1) Post the charter
-
- Ok. Done above.
-
- >(2) Ask for discussion, and then hold a formal RFD
-
- No. It has been discussed to death everytime shareware is posted.
-
- >(3) If there is interest, post a CFV which follows the guidelines.
-
- Already done according to the moderator direction guidelines... ;-)
-
- >A thought occurs to me. Perhaps all these guidelines are merely ways for
- >we "elitist" users to hide behind a bureaucracy? (Gag!) Maybe what the
- >UseNet needs is *more* anarchy, not less? In the case of this "vote", I
- >think it is important that a quick decision be reached, more important than
- >that the decision be an "official" one.
-
- I was asked by multiple people to make the net more aware of the in-progress
- directional vote. Thanks for your assistance... :-) I don't think speed is
- all that important since this practice has been going on since 1987. The
- moderator needs to know where the community wants comp.sources.misc to stand
- on the issue of shareware. Although this may signal a net-wide sentiment,
- the vote and its results only apply to comp.sources.misc.
-
- -Kent+
- ---
- Kent Landfield INTERNET: kent@IMD.Sterling.COM
- Sterling Software, IMD UUCP: uunet!sparky!kent
- Phone: (402) 291-8300 FAX: (402) 291-4362
- Please send comp.sources.misc-related mail to kent@uunet.uu.net.
-
-
-