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 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

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 ;-)

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.

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.

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.

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 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

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.

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.
>> 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.  
> 

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