Subject:
|
Re: 1 new or 3?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:24:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
230 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Geoffrey Hyde writes:
> Umm ... Mate, what was the original question for then? ;-)
To see if we can get the erroneous report of 3 "new" posts to a low traffic
group corrected to only be one "new" post. The other two are not "new" they are
just an artifact of the filtering being applied.
>
> My thinking is that it is probably better for the lugnet server not to
> bother with low traffic newsgroups at all. It would mean that the server
> doesn't have to worry about tracking them.
That would be bad. IMHO.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 1 new or 3?
|
| Umm ... Mate, what was the original question for then? ;-) My thinking is that it is probably better for the lugnet server not to bother with low traffic newsgroups at all. It would mean that the server doesn't have to worry about tracking them. -- (...) (24 years ago, 5-Jun-00, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
