It is very apparent that you have not maintained mirrored archives before.
All sort of things happen from time to time, connectivity problems, rtfm
software problems, rtfm hardware problems, files on rtfm that cause mirror
software to hang... These have all occurred and have been discovered later.
You can bet that during that time, you posted your FAQ. You can bet the most
current version was not archived at the *.answer archive sites because we were
mirroring instead of archiving the newsgroups ourselves. Without trying, we
violated your distribution restrictions.
> No. But companies that takes FAQs from usenet can automatically make lists over
> all the 2100+ people that have created FAQs and mail a message to them, asking
> if they can add the FAQ to the CD-ROM.
If they do not alter them in any fashion, why is that different than a
distribution of *.answers ? I've distributed news in many different
fashion, UUCP, E-mail, NNTP, tape and even CD-ROM. Why is what they're
doing all that different ? It is just a slow *.answers newsfeed. They
are not changing the FAQs. They are intact, headers and all. Check for
yourself.
> So, you have a FAQ archive of usenet FAQs but don't automatically update them
> from news.answers?
No, I mirror rtfm. But mirroring has its problems at times. This is why I
do not like your "out-of-date" restriction message. What is out-of-date
to you is not to me. Your previously posted data cannot be so totally
worthless the day you post the next installment.
> Well, sometimes during a month a FAQ associated with a product can change quite
> heavily. New products come out and make some of the things I have written, yes,
> totally useless.
"A FAQ associated with a product" ???
If the FAQ becomes totally useless that quickly then what service is it really
providing ? NetNews propagation can delay articles very easily with the 245+
meg a day now being passed. Propagation is not speeding up, it is slowing down.
I really do not wish to waste my time reading something that the author
considers totally useless. That is not a supplying a service. If that is
truly the case then quit posting it. I *doubt* that is the case however.
I am sure that there are valuable pieces of your FAQ that are useful to the
reader the next month. They are probably still useful 6 months later.
The point is that ridiculous restrictions on FAQs will not be useful as
they will not be honored by most. It does a disservice to those who
place reasonable distribution restrictions on their works.
To the paranoid sites, there are more an more turning paranoid daily due to
the emerging "I'll sue you" attitude of the net, restrictions like the one
I commented on can have the negative effect that I described previously of
potentially reducing FAQ availability.
Physics applies here as well... For every action, there is an equal and
opposite reaction.
And nowhere have I seen any indication that WC says they own the data.
This conversation has not been about Ownership, it has been about Control
and Money. Control of distribution is extremely hard to do when you post
your articles to a world-wide newsgroup. You do so with the full expectation
that it will be copied hundreds of thousands of times by machines and means
you are unaware of and archived at sites you do not know of, by people and
automatic software tools you have never heard of.
-Kent+
-- Kent Landfield INTERNET: kent_landfield@sterling.com Sterling Software UUCP: uunet!kent || sparky!kent Phone: (402) 291-8300 FAX: (402) 291-4362 Please send comp.sources.misc-related mail to kent@uunet.uu.net.
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved