Re: Proposal - Reinstate alt.usenet.reposts

Jason Evans <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Fri, 02 Jul 2021 14:22:48 +0000, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

>. . . my server automatically added . . . 

Shh. You're not supposed to let the technical trolls know this!

I'm glad you did that, though.

>>. . . 

>The charter itself is not being touched. I think it's great the way it is. 
>However, the description talks about a dependent newsgroup that I have no 
>desire to recreate. Maybe that's bad form according to good newsgroup 
>housekeeping, but is it really that big of a deal when the desire is just 
>to get new activity on an otherwise defunct group?

Your motives are pure. I just don't think anyone who already created the
group is going to change the description.

I'm just noting that retrochartering was a problem at one time and it
shouldn't become a regular thing.

We used to try to emphasize to proponents how big a deal it was to get the
charter right in the initial newgroup message because it's not practical
to get a do-over of the errors.

>>group.name<tab>Brief description.

>>You SHOULD NOT substitute a series of spaces for the tab character.
>>However, INN will replace it with a tab character.

>I literally just copied and pasted it from the archive. It looks like the 
>text files in the isc archives use spaces instead of tabs.

Right. Some day, somebody will explain why so many text editors and
copy/paste make it difficult to enter a tab character.

Please check and double check that the group name is consistent with the
newgroup command and that the line is 79 characters or less without a
line break. That's the important bit on the syntax.

I apologize for sounding negative. I really appreciate the effort you
are making in getting an existing group working again, a far more
worthwhile effort than the vast majority of groups proposed in the last
decade.