Re: The Big 9?

From: Woodchuck Bill <bwr607(at)hotmail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The Big 9?
Date: 2004-11-08 21:50:50
Message-ID: Xns959B8CDD4FBB2bswr607h4@130.133.1.4
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Mike Cox <mikecoxlinux(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote in
news:2va7aaF2jfll7U2(at)uni-berlin(dot)de:

> Wouldn't a good solution to the "bogus" and rogue groups be a creation
> of a new domain in the big 8? Suppose there was a rogue.* domain.
> All the groups that were rogue would be placed there by the usenet
> providers. Therefore those customers who demanded certain rogue groups
> would have them, only they would be moved under rogue. Say someone
> sets up a rogue group like comp.muffins. All the usenet providers
> would then just move it to rogue.comp.muffins.
>
> That way their status is clear to all subscribers, the commercial
> usnet providers would have a well managed big 9, and would not be
> forced to choose between having a well managed hierarchy or doing
> carrying the groups customers demand.

You frighten me. ;-)

--
Bill

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oliver Jowett 2004-11-08 21:55:55 Re: [JDBC] Using Postgres with Latin1 (ISO8859-1)
Previous Message Woodchuck Bill 2004-11-08 21:46:42 Re: RFD: comp.databases.postgresql.general