Boost logo

Boost :

From: Carl Daniel (cpdaniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-28 10:51:30

From: "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> I've been working on the assumption that we want a private newsgroup, not a
> public usenet newsgroup.
> The rationale is that (1) we want tight control on who and what gets
> posted, not just to avoid spam, but also to avoid a lot of other unhelpful
> posts, (2) we would be better off to build experience with newsgroups which
> we control (and can change quickly at will) before going public (if indeed
> we ever want to go public), (3) we want to hold administrative work to a
> minimum, (4) a hope that spammers are less likely to harvest email
> addresses from a private, controlled membership, newgroup than a public
> one.
> I don't have any personal experience running a newsgroup, so the above is
> based a bit on speculation rather than experience.

I agree 110%. I think the only alternative would be a public moderated newsgroup, which obviously entails establishing
a moderation group, delays postings, and does nothing about email address harvesting.

One other reason I'd like to see a private newgroup: timeliness of posts. It's not uncommon for posts to public
newsgroups to take many hours (to several days) to show up on some news servers. In constrast, on a private NNTP server
they typically appear within seconds (a minute at most) of being posted. With the liveliness of discussion within this
group, I think a newgroup disseminated through the public NNTP network would be a huge hinderence to discussion.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at