rees@ddcom.co.jp (Joel) wrote in news:20041201102418.F4DC.REES@ddcom.co.jp:
(crosspost added to news.groups)
> As long as the web page maintainers are going to the trouble of taking a
> survey, might I (at the risk of being tarred and feathered :-p) suggest
> a more thorough survey?
>
> Suggested questions:
>
> (1) If there were a USENET newsfeed, under comp.databases.postgresql.*,
> of one or more of the current postgresql mailing lists, I would
>
> (a) use USENET primarily,
> (b) use both USENET and the mailing lists,
> (c) use the mailing lists primarily,
> (d) unsubsribe from the mailing lists and use neither, or
> (e) not sure at this time.
That is not likely to happen. The proponent has already submitted a new
proposal for a single standalone comp.* group (comp.databases.postgresql),
with no gating to any of the lists.
> (2) If there were a separate USENET comp.databases.postgresql newsgroup
> created, I would
>
> (a) use the separate USENET newsgroup primarily,
> (b) use both the separate USENET newsgroup and the mailing lists,
> (c) use the mailing lists primarily,
> (d) unsubsribe from the mailing lists and use neither, or
> (e) not sure at this time.
>
> (3) Concerning USENET, I would prefer
>
> (a) that the mailing lists be gated to USENET,
> (b) that the mailing lists and USENET be kept seperate,
> (c) that USENET go take a leap <;-/, or
> (d) not sure at this time.
>
> (4) If the mailing lists are gated to USENET, I would prefer
>
> (a) that the current SPAM moderation policy apply to both,
> (b) that no moderation occur on either USENET or the lists,
> (c) that kooks who post to USENET be tarred and feathered 8-*, or
> (d) not sure at this time.
I like "C". ;-)
> Please not that this is not an attempt at a survey, see 3c and 4c. It is
> only a suggestion.
