• Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> Mar 06 2007
• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> Mar 07 2007
• Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> Mar 07 2007
• Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> Mar 07 2007
• Howard Berkey <howard well.com> Mar 07 2007
• Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> Mar 07 2007
• "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> Mar 07 2007
• Knud Soerensen <4tuu4k002 sneakemail.com> Mar 07 2007
• BCS <BCS pathlink.com> Mar 07 2007
• BCS <BCS pathlink.com> Mar 07 2007
• janderson <askme me.com> Mar 07 2007
• Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> Mar 08 2007
• Roberto Mariottini <rmariottini mail.com> Mar 08 2007
• janderson <askme me.com> Mar 08 2007
• Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> Mar 07 2007
• Knud Soerensen <4tuu4k002 sneakemail.com> Mar 07 2007
• Pragma <ericanderton yahoo.removeme.com> Mar 09 2007

Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:

It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being an 
announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for people 
who only want to track, uh, announcements.

Sigh,
Brad

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:

Brad Roberts wrote:

 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
 than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being an 
 announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for people 
 who only want to track, uh, announcements.


Guilty as charged. Maybe a mandatory Reply-To: over to d.D or D.gnu ?

--anders

Lionello Lunesu <lio lunesu.remove.com> writes:

Anders F Björklund wrote:
 Brad Roberts wrote:
 
 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
 than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being 
 an announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for 
 people who only want to track, uh, announcements.


 Guilty as charged. Maybe a mandatory Reply-To: over to d.D or D.gnu ?
 
 --anders


That seems like a good idea.. Every post to .announce should go to any 
of the other groups as well, and replies to the post in .announce should 
go only to that other group.

Is this possible?

L.

Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:

Lionello Lunesu Wrote:

<snip>
 That seems like a good idea..  Every post to .announce should 
 go to any of the other groups as well, and replies to the post 
 in .announce should go only to that other group.
 
 Is this possible?


In a newsreader - yes.
In the web interface - no.  It's yet another of its snags.

Stewart.

Howard Berkey <howard well.com> writes:

Anders F Bj�klund Wrote:

 Brad Roberts wrote:
 
 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
 than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being an 
 announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for people 
 who only want to track, uh, announcements.


 Guilty as charged. Maybe a mandatory Reply-To: over to d.D or D.gnu ?
 
 --anders



Guilty here too, mostly of "Thank you, FooBar is great!" replies that from now
on I will just email.

I like the idea of a required Followup-To: to digitalmars.D; seems like a good
choice.  

Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:

Howard Berkey wrote:
 Anders F Bj�klund Wrote:
 
 Brad Roberts wrote:

 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
 than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being an 
 announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for people 
 who only want to track, uh, announcements.



 --anders


 
 Guilty here too, mostly of "Thank you, FooBar is great!" replies that from now
on I will just email.
 
 I like the idea of a required Followup-To: to digitalmars.D; seems like a good
choice.  
 


I think such messages are harmless in D.announce. But I don't know if 
others think the same.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Bruno Medeiros" <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> wrote in message 
news:esn8r0$in6$1 digitalmars.com...
 I think such messages are harmless in D.announce. But I don't know if 
 others think the same.


I agree.  All the topics are announcing things; if there's discussion on the 
topic, well, I don't see any problem with that.  Forcing discussion to take 
place on another group than the one on which the original post was made for 
the sake of "appropriateness" just seems pedantic to me. 

Knud Soerensen <4tuu4k002 sneakemail.com> writes:

On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:34:38 -0800, Brad Roberts wrote:

 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
 than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being an 
 announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for people 
 who only want to track, uh, announcements.
 
 Sigh,
 Brad


Brad what are you talking about ??
Do you suggest that people shouldn't be allow to reply on announcement,
or are you say that you news read is incapable of showing a thread view ;-)

BCS <BCS pathlink.com> writes:

Knud Soerensen wrote:
 On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:34:38 -0800, Brad Roberts wrote:
 
 
It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being an 
announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for people 
who only want to track, uh, announcements.

Sigh,
Brad


 
 Brad what are you talking about ??
 Do you suggest that people shouldn't be allow to reply on announcement,
 or are you say that you news read is incapable of showing a thread view ;-)


my thought exactly

BCS <BCS pathlink.com> writes:

Brad Roberts wrote:
 
 
 The client I use is perfectly capable of threading, but that's not the 
 point.
 
 The point is that the announcement newsgroup isn't being used as an 
 announcement newsgroup.  The purpose of having one separate from a 
 general discussion newsgroup is to have a high signal low noise specific 
 place for real announcements.
 
 It's not a difficult concept.
 
 Later,
 Brad


How about adding a digitalmars.d.announce.moderated that gets the main 
posts and anything posted there get mirrored to announce where people 
can reply. It might be useful if it could be set up as unmoderated but 
so it wont accept replies.

OTOH

The only signal to noise ratio I care about it how many of the threads I 
care about. Lots of them, it's the replys that I find interesting. I 
guess I'm not seeing the benefit you are looking for.

janderson <askme me.com> writes:

Knud Soerensen wrote:
 On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 10:15:08 -0800, Brad Roberts wrote:
 
 BCS wrote:
 Knud Soerensen wrote:
 On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:34:38 -0800, Brad Roberts wrote:


 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much 
 more than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being 
 an announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for 
 people who only want to track, uh, announcements.

 Sigh,
 Brad


 Brad what are you talking about ??
 Do you suggest that people shouldn't be allow to reply on announcement,
 or are you say that you news read is incapable of showing a thread 
 view ;-)




 point.

 The point is that the announcement newsgroup isn't being used as an 
 announcement newsgroup.  The purpose of having one separate from a 
 general discussion newsgroup is to have a high signal low noise specific 
 place for real announcements.

 It's not a difficult concept.

 Later,
 Brad


 I get the concept but I don't understand your reason for the suggestion.
 Why don't you just read the first post in each tread ?? (or get your
 newsreader to filter everything else away.)
 
 I really like the announcement newsgroup as it is.
 
 Knud


Personally I don't mind announcements being replied to however they 
often they do go off track.  Things like feature start being discussed 
ect...  Also there have been a few announcements that I would not 
consider announcements.

Sometimes someone mentions something they posted a few days back and I 
don't have a clue.  It often turns up buried in the announce group.

I think a polite user-driven redirection email would suffice.  ie -> see 
answer in newsgroup.X.  Or perhaps a little message associated with each 
newsgroup on the Digitalmars webpage detailing what each is about would 
help (and a link to some wiki page for more details).

I'm however not to fussed about this issue either.

Walter Bright <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:

janderson wrote:
 Personally I don't mind announcements being replied to however they 
 often they do go off track.  Things like feature start being discussed 
 ect...  Also there have been a few announcements that I would not 
 consider announcements.


My main (and minor) issue is when, say, a new release of X comes out, 
then the thread diverges into something about Y. People interested in Y 
won't find it by looking at the thread titles, and google's search will 
probably bury it, too.

The newsgroup archives are a very valuable resource, and having an eye 
towards using a relevant thread subject line will help make them even 
more useful.

This isn't a big deal, it just helps.

The thank-you messages are fine and good, and help keep us motivated!

Roberto Mariottini <rmariottini mail.com> writes:

I think that the announce newsgroup shouldn't be cluttered with 
discussions about specific features.

Maybe cross-posting an announce to both digitalmars.D.announce and 
digitalmars.D and setting the followup-to field to digitalmars.D can be 
useful. Better if you specify explicitly in the posting "Follow-ups to 
digitalmars.D, not this newsgroup".

Ciao

janderson <askme me.com> writes:

Walter Bright wrote:
 janderson wrote:
 Personally I don't mind announcements being replied to however they 
 often they do go off track.  Things like feature start being discussed 
 ect...  Also there have been a few announcements that I would not 
 consider announcements.


 My main (and minor) issue is when, say, a new release of X comes out, 
 then the thread diverges into something about Y. People interested in Y 
 won't find it by looking at the thread titles, and google's search will 
 probably bury it, too.
 



Agreed.  I also have appreciated when people have (in particular you) 
start a new thread for insanely long threads.

-Joel

Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:

BCS wrote:
 Knud Soerensen wrote:
 On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:34:38 -0800, Brad Roberts wrote:


 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much 
 more than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being 
 an announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for 
 people who only want to track, uh, announcements.

 Sigh,
 Brad



 Brad what are you talking about ??
 Do you suggest that people shouldn't be allow to reply on announcement,
 or are you say that you news read is incapable of showing a thread 
 view ;-)


 my thought exactly


The client I use is perfectly capable of threading, but that's not the 
point.

The point is that the announcement newsgroup isn't being used as an 
announcement newsgroup.  The purpose of having one separate from a 
general discussion newsgroup is to have a high signal low noise specific 
place for real announcements.

It's not a difficult concept.

Later,
Brad

Knud Soerensen <4tuu4k002 sneakemail.com> writes:

On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 10:15:08 -0800, Brad Roberts wrote:

 BCS wrote:
 Knud Soerensen wrote:
 On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 23:34:38 -0800, Brad Roberts wrote:


 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much 
 more than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being 
 an announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for 
 people who only want to track, uh, announcements.

 Sigh,
 Brad



 Brad what are you talking about ??
 Do you suggest that people shouldn't be allow to reply on announcement,
 or are you say that you news read is incapable of showing a thread 
 view ;-)


 my thought exactly


 The client I use is perfectly capable of threading, but that's not the 
 point.
 
 The point is that the announcement newsgroup isn't being used as an 
 announcement newsgroup.  The purpose of having one separate from a 
 general discussion newsgroup is to have a high signal low noise specific 
 place for real announcements.
 
 It's not a difficult concept.
 
 Later,
 Brad


I get the concept but I don't understand your reason for the suggestion.
Why don't you just read the first post in each tread ?? (or get your
newsreader to filter everything else away.)

I really like the announcement newsgroup as it is.

Knud

Pragma <ericanderton yahoo.removeme.com> writes:

Brad Roberts wrote:
 It seems to me that the .announce newsgroup is being used as much more 
 than an announcement list.  It's essentially a second version of 
 digitalmars.D.  What would it take to change .announce back to being an 
 announcement only newsgroup?  It'd help keep the noise down for people 
 who only want to track, uh, announcements.
 
 Sigh,
 Brad


Personally, I only have a problem with this when I cruise the group in
"firehose mode" (list all by date).  I gave up 
doing things that way about a year ago.  IMO, any of the D newsgroups are
really only useful in threaded mode, since 
there's so much happening simultaneously these days.

But as far as making .announce being post-but-not-reply only?  That might be
kind of nice.

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo