XPost: alt.config, alt.bbs.enthral   
   From: spot@tioat.net   
      
   pandora wrote:   
   > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 01:20:45 +0000, Kelb tal-Fenek wrote:   
   >   
   >> Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>> Kelb tal-Fenek  wrote:   
   >>>>Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>>>>Kelb tal-Fenek  wrote:   
   >>>>>>Peter J Ross wrote:   
   >>>>>>>Brian Mailman  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>>>>You sent two more newgroup messages, this time with correct syntax   
   >>>>>>>>>on the required headers.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>>>Our work here is done.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>>There might be a possibility of retro-chartering, if the proponent is   
   >>>>>>>still interested.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>>Whatever, stupid. The charter for that newsgroup shall be determined   
   >>>>>>by the active subscribers... and no one else. Period.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>Uh, no. The active posters (subscribers would include lurkers) deterine   
   >>>>>what's topical. The charter is the author's alone.   
   >>>   
   >>>>It's nice to know you have a sense of humor. So, yes, even lurkers own   
   >>>>the charter of a newsgroup they subscribe to. Or did I mistake ignorance   
   >>>>for humor? No, it must be humor. You know and should now acknowledge   
   >>>>that in the alt groups, which are not administered by bambies or   
   >>>>controlled by net.good-ol-boy, a newsgroup charter is a dynamic thing   
   >>>>and shall be determined by the active posters... and lurkers... to a   
   >>>>particular newsgroup... and no one else. Period.   
   >>>   
   >>> What you just wrote is completely stupid.   
   >>   
   >> You three wise men, Adam, Peter and Brian, need to let this go. The   
   >> control message for alt.bbs.enthral was sent and received by all usenet   
   >> servers. All that remains now is for the group to be added to servers and   
   >> become active.   
   >   
   > Indeed.  However, and please excuse me for butting in here, that will not   
   > happen automagically as you seem to believe it will.  Many NSPs do not add   
   > new groups to their list until asked by their own users to do so.   
      
   Yes, the important part is that the group needs to be requested by   
   users of the NSP. Not much point in sending random requests for a   
   newsgroup on a server you don't use.   
      
   >> The charter shall be   
   >> revised as needed by the active   
   >> subscribers to that newsgroup. So just leave them the fuck alone and   
   >> move on to something else.   
   >   
   > Once upon a time, NSPs added new groups from a sent control message but   
   > that is not the case anymore.  Now, it is up to the proponent(s) and/or   
   > potential users to ASK from their NSPs that it be added to their list of   
   > available newsgroups.  Without that, the newsgroup will not be propagated   
   > very well and many will not be able to access it.   
      
   The technical part of all this is good to know, but it all rests on   
   whether or not there is an interest in a topic. This newsgroup is   
   about a software system, so it basically all depends on the interest   
   in that which, of course, will depend on the developers.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)