On Mon, 13 Jul 2015, Bill Bogstad wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 2:53 PM, David Lang <da...@lang.hm> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jul 2015, Bill Bogstad wrote:
That's easy. Run separate servers, and if you share the groups, require
members of your NNTP trust circle to do the same. There are several
historical and extant examples.
It's not clear to me that you would want to do so, rather than
make it a public group and ask gwene to gateway it for people
who want web/archive access.
Usually LOPSA groups have a pretty good signal/noise ratio. My concern
would be that unmoderated, publicly distributed newsgroups which were
bidirectionally gatewayed to the mailing lists would be subject to the
"Eternal September" problem. As simply a way to access the archive
(or participate in a readonly) mode, it might be useful. Alternatively.
making it a moderated, public newsgroup on the USENET side would
alleviate my concerns.
Please explain a bit more. Why would the LOPSA NNTP feed have any worse a
signal-to-noise ratio?
I thought I covered that by the "Eternal September" comment. An open NNTP feed
without moderation would, in my opinion, be subject to flyby newbies
who have no clue
and have no desire to get one. Yes, some USENET groups did have good SNRs; but
it wasn't always easy to maintain. If we were to allow open
bidirectional NNTP feeds (as opposed to just
authenticated newsreaders), we would lose our ability to protect us from this.
I had no idea what "Eternal September" meant
I would actually run a separate server and do a outbound only link to the
USENET side (is USENET still around as a cohernet thing?)
So you see NNTP access as read-only, much like the archive? That
might bring LOPSA more
visibility; but would be annoying for members who also want to
participate. Or are you suggesting
a members only NNTP server (posting allowed); but a read-only feed to
the rest of the world.
this, members only NNTP server with posting allowed (and or posting only allowed
from userids that match registered users)
I haven't looked at NNTP clients in a long while and am not sure if
any of them work well in
a disconnected fashion. There is something called "leafnode" that
might help with that for the
technically inclined. :-) It even had a new release in 2013.
My understanding is that the advantage of NNTP over e-mail is the better support
for disconnected use.
The interesting thing is that to get a good mailing list <-> web forum
integration, every approach I know of ends up with a NNTP feed as a side
effect, so if we are going to have one, why not make it available for those
who want it?
Depending on how it is done, possible loss of control? If it is easy
to setup, I think
readonly NNTP is a no brainer. Posting via open NNTP is my concern.
Mailing lists
almost always have some kind of filter to avoid spam. Popular web
forums have voting
or moderators for similar reasons. What's the best way to do this for NNTP?
Baen's Bar (bar.baen.com) has this setup with all three interfaces available,
but without any direct gateway to USENET, just an indenpendent NNTP server. I
think it requires that the userid posting via NNTP be one that's registered (it
requires that mail users also be registered). It hasn't had any noticable
problems with spam and is far more active than the LOPSA lists are (except for
days like today :-)
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.lopsa.org
https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
http://lopsa.org/
