Total 1757 postings
Newsgroups Postings Percentage Cumulative %
1 5 0.3% 100.0%
2 65 3.7 99.7
3 901 51.2 96.0
4 263 15.0 44.7
5 229 13.0 29.8
6 93 5.3 16.7
7 69 3.9 11.4
8 44 2.5 7.5
9 32 1.8 5.0
10 24 1.4 3.2
11 15 0.9 1.8
12 4 0.2 1.0
13 3 0.2
14 2 0.1
15 2 0.1
16 1 0.1
17 1 0.1
19 2 0.1
20 1 0.1
26 1 0.1
Thus schemes which reject articles with 6 or more newsgroups lose more
than one approved FAQ in six; in order to get even 90% of them, one
has to allow 7 newsgroups.
As a side note, most FAQs which are in the LoPIP but not approved for
*.answers are also entirely valid, worthwhile articles whose
maintainers just didn't feel like dealing with the guidelines or
approval process.
Kent asked:
> What we need to do is first to decide what our goal is. Is it to
> gather information ? Is it to convince them they need to change ?
> Is it informational for them as how they can help us at their
> location without interferring with anti-spamming measures currently
> in place ?
I would suggest phrasing the letter as a request for information,
while briefly mentioning that exempting *.answers-approved articles
from restrictions would be mutually beneficial and a service to their
customers.
Since I seem to be the most vocal representative of the moderators,
I'd be glad to put my name and moderatorship on such a letter.
However, I'm not much of an "insider" in the world of Usenet, abuse,
or ISPs, so don't count on me to know exactly what to say or whom to
send it to. I also wouldn't want to be the one to summarize the
results.
- Pam Greene
one of the *.answers moderators
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved