On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 05:28:57PM +, Woodchuck Bill wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Marc G. Fournier") wrote in
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > Unless its spam, it goes through ... I don't (nor have I ever) refused a
> > post based on content other then spam ... even if its anti-PostgreSQL
>
Polarhound <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:kM2dnd_0xq99yw3cRVn-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> (BTW, since the person responsible for setting up the rogue groups
>> appears to be aware of the discussion to legitimize the groups, why
>> isn't he taking part in it?)
>>
>
> That's my whole point.. He's re
Andrew - Supernews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> Marc, please stop removing news.groups from your replies.
>
> He's posting to the mailing list; he probably can't avoid dropping the
> crosspost.
>
He can make a nominal effort and post *something* to news.groups.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Marc G. Fournier") wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Unless its spam, it goes through ... I don't (nor have I ever) refused a
> post based on content other then spam ... even if its anti-PostgreSQL
> *shrug*
The problem with the system is that the spam *all* gets posted to
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 17:29:28 -0400 (AST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Marc
G. Fournier") wrote:
>On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
>
>> The groups aren't listed as moderated. Anyone who wants to post is
>> able to. Those not on the mailing list don't go through. That's the
>> problem.
>
>As long
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Andrew - Supernews wrote:
On 2004-11-08, Woodchuck Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Marc G. Fournier") wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Unless its spam, it goes through ... I don't (nor have I ever) refused a
post based on content other then spam ... even if i
On 2004-11-08, Woodchuck Bill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Marc G. Fournier") wrote in
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
>> Unless its spam, it goes through ... I don't (nor have I ever) refused a
>> post based on content other then spam ... even if its anti-PostgreSQL
>> *shrug*
>
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
It receives those posted to USENet just as it would any other group.
That's why those gated don't make it to databasix.com for days after
they're actually posted. So each appears twice. Once as the original
USENet post and once as a post forwarded by
At 11:48 AM 11/8/2004, you wrote:
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
At 11:01 PM 11/7/2004, you wrote:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
User makes a comment in USENet. Post gets seen on usenet servers around
the world. Moderator chooses not to approve.
Unless ist Spam, moderator
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
DataBasix carries it even though it wasn't an officially created group
because some of our users requested it and they read it.
To improve speed, do you want to setup an inter-connect between our news
server and yours?
Then I've noticed some notes here
At 10:20 PM 11/7/2004, you wrote:
Andy wrote:
> Someone posted this official proposal to create
> comp.databases.postgresql.general again. He wrote his own charter. As
> far as I know, he did not consult any of the postgresql groups first.
> There may be an upcoming vote on this, so please stay inf
On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Kenneth Downs wrote:
Then I've noticed some notes here and there that you are supposed to send
some emails to a list-server if you post, to avoid messing up the mailing
list? Is that right? Why would I be worried about a listserv?
There are no such requirements that I'm aware
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
At 04:29 PM 11/7/2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
The groups aren't listed as moderated. Anyone who wants to post is
able to. Those not on the mailing list don't go through. That's the
problem.
As long as the postin
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
User makes a comment in USENet. Post gets seen on usenet servers around
the world. Moderator chooses not to approve.
Unless ist Spam, moderator always approves ... I know, cause its me ...
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http
On 4 Nov 2004 17:17:20 GMT, "Andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Someone posted this official proposal to create
>comp.databases.postgresql.general again. He wrote his own charter. As
>far as I know, he did not consult any of the postgresql groups first.
>There may be an upcoming vote on this, so pl
On 4 Nov 2004 17:17:20 GMT, "Andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote to
news.groups:
>Someone posted this official proposal to create
>comp.databases.postgresql.general again.
As the name says, this is a Request for Discussion, not an "official
proposal" (whatever that may be). Discussion about this is
Andy wrote:
> Someone posted this official proposal to create
> comp.databases.postgresql.general again. He wrote his own charter. As
> far as I know, he did not consult any of the postgresql groups first.
> There may be an upcoming vote on this, so please stay informed and read
> news.newgroups.a
On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:16:05 GMT, Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Gary L. Burnore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:26:42 GMT, Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>"Robert G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Mike. A number of us from the mailing lis
At 04:29 PM 11/7/2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
The groups aren't listed as moderated. Anyone who wants to post is
able to. Those not on the mailing list don't go through. That's the
problem.
As long as the posting gets to the gateway, it gets put into the
Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> No that is not what I'm proposing. Each group MUST go through the
>> RFD and CFV seperately. I started off with the most popular group
>> first. After It was done, I would have started on the rest.
>
> Not true. It is actually rat
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
The groups aren't listed as moderated. Anyone who wants to post is
able to. Those not on the mailing list don't go through. That's the
problem.
As long as the posting gets to the gateway, it gets put into the
moderator (me) queue for approval ...
M
On 7 Nov 2004 20:01:51 GMT, "Andy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Stephan Szabo" wrote:
>
>(politely snipped)
>
>Hi Stephan. As Robert tried to explain, this Mike Cox character
Hi Stephen, this "Andy" character isn't using a real name or address.
>is
>proposing that only the general list become a
On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:26:42 GMT, Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"Robert G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Mike Cox wrote:
>>> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
>>> unmoderated group comp.databases.postgresql.general
>>>
>>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the cre
Andy wrote:
> "Stephan Szabo" wrote:
>
> (politely snipped)
>
> Hi Stephan. As Robert tried to explain, this Mike Cox character is
> proposing that only the general list become an official Big-8
> newsgroup.
No that is not what I'm proposing. Each group MUST go through the RFD and
CFV seperat
On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Gary L. Burnore wrote:
This talk of opening up the list to the Big Eight and making a 2-way
gateway would have a devastating effect on the way the list currently
functions.
Then get the gateway removed. One way causes grief. Someone reads a
post, replies and bad stuff happens.
[posted and mailed to the list]
On 6 Nov 2004 01:44:34 -0800, "Robert G" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Mike Cox wrote:
>> REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
>> unmoderated group comp.databases.postgresql.general
>>
>> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the creation of
>> a world
26 matches
Mail list logo
