Re: c.o.l.answers, questions & help
From: Moe Trin (ibuprofin_at_painkiller.example.tld)
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 16:19:34 -0600
In article <email@example.com>,
>these groups are categorized as "low traffic" by google, and posts to
>those groups get bounced when going through google.
On the 15th of every month, there is an article posted to the newsgroups
news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and news.lists.misc titled "List of
Big Eight Newsgroups". This is the list of "approved" newsgroups, which
every news server _should_ carry. While c.o.l.answers is listed as a
comp.os.linux.answers FAQs, How-To's, READMEs, etc. about Linux. (Moderated)
neither c.o.l.questions or c.o.l.help are so listed. I don't think that
c.o.l.questions was ever an official newsgroup, and c.o.l.help was replaced
by comp.os.linux.misc back in 1994 (at the same time that c.o.l.admin was
replaced by comp.os.linux.setup).
>in fact, c.o.l.answers might've been abandoned by its moderator.
Looking at my newslog, I see there was a single article posted to that
group back on September 3, 2003, and I'm pretty sure it had forged approval
headers. The logs I have accessible only go back to January 2003. As noted
by the group description above, it was last used to post to post copies of
the HOWTOs at regular intervals. Given the availability of these documents
on many mirror sites (_every_ sunsite mirror has current versions), the
rational for the group has basically disappeared. Hmmm, found another log
that sorta indicates the group was inactive before 1998. I really don't
see much use for the group anyway.
>in a different vein: seperating these groups seems to be a distinction
>without difference. for example, how does c.o.l.answers differ from
In English, the word 'answer' does not ONLY mean "something spoken or
written in reply to a question". It also refers to "solution to a problem".
(Source: American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, and Webster's
New Dictionary of the English Language)
>c.o.l.help would also make sense
Yes, but help with what? The current comp.os.linux.* hierarchy consists
of seventeen different groups (advocacy, alpha, announce, answers,
development.apps, development.system, embedded, hardware, m68k, misc,
networking, portable, powerpc, security, setup, x, xbox) to reduce traffic
on any specific group by allowing questions to be targeted. If you read the
charters for these groups, you'd find they all have very specific uses. The
c.o.l.misc group (which replaced c.o.l.help) is meant for postings that are
about Linux, but not on topic for ANY of the other groups.
>is the low traffic related to changes in google groups?
No, many news servers do not carry such bogus groups as c.o.l.questions
or c.o.l.help (or any other "non-standard" group), and therefore neither
allow posting to them, OR PASS THEM ON TO PEERS. This is the same deal
with the unofficial groups in the anarchy^W'alt' hierarchy. Those groups
are carried solely at the whim of the news administrator of the
individual news servers. Now, there are news services that like to
advertise that they are uncensored, or are the biggest server in the
world, but they are carrying groups that may not circulate outside of their
own little world. So, which would you like to post to - a newsgroup that
is seen on virtually every news server, or one seen only on a few?