Conference 7.286::classified_ads

>Moderating a conference where Internet users can't modify or delete their 
>own notes after they've written them is getting to be a big headache.  This 

I'd like to point out that while this may be a problem, I don't see how its
a problem.  Internet users can indeed post ads, provide a legitimate 
node::username, meet all other criteria, and still not be able to modify/delete
the ads.  If this really is the reason for the policy, then the policy should be 
that you can't post _from_ the internet, not that you must have a NODE::USERNAME 
address in the ad.

    Skip,
    We all appreciate your efforts over the years.  Thanks for
    a job well done.
    
    -Vin

    
     ooooh, I am sorry to hear this news.   Another "nice thing" going
    away?
    
    Dennis

> Moderating a conference where Internet users can't modify or delete their 
    
    I sort of see your point, but believe there could be alternatives.
    
    For example, it may be just fine to come up with a couple of 
    generic entry points similar (or equal!) to ZEKE::TMS_USER that
    internet users can all telnet into and then write notes from.
    Sure, they could then all delete one-an-others topics/replies,
    but that's no big problem imho.
    
    If indeed internet users can not delete their own topics, then that
    is really a bummer, but perhaps an other alternative is to (finally)
    relax the usage rules 'vmsmail address required' and indicate folks
    to follow up with a reply when items are not longer available / wanted.
    [If one can define / come up with a recognizable string ("SOLD"?
    "DELETE" ?) as the optional title of such reply then an automater task
    could clean out those replies and their topic (twice) daily.
    Sure, in its simplest form could mean that anyone can indicate 
    deletion for anyones topic but so what? It's just ads ?!
    [The deletion would probably be made to ignore topics < 20 ]
    
    fwiw,
    	Hein.
    
    
    

    How is the fact that Internet users cannot modify/delete their entries
    making your job of moderator any more complicated?  Are these people
    sending you mail asking to delete their entries?  As Hein suggestion,
    some agent could easily be whipped up.  I'd just say that anything
    older to "n" months is cleaned out (with an "exclude" mechanism
    for lower numbered topics, etc.) and run a cleaner on the 1st of
    each month.  No muss, no fuss.
    
    				-John (who is not going to Exchange and
    				       will have at least 2 OpenVMS
                                       machines in his office for the
    				       forseable future)
    
    

[Posted by WWW Notes gateway]

I don't note from a VMS account but I can delete my own entries.

Skip, you and others have done a great job moderating this conference 
[except for that ridiculous "No yard sales" rule 8^)] ... but I don't 
see HUMANE:: going away any time in the near future.

>    making your job of moderator any more complicated?  Are these people
>    sending you mail asking to delete their entries?  As Hein suggestion,

The amount of mail in this regard has quadrupled since late February.

>    some agent could easily be whipped up.  I'd just say that anything
>    older to "n" months is cleaned out (with an "exclude" mechanism
>    for lower numbered topics, etc.) and run a cleaner on the 1st of
>    each month.  No muss, no fuss.

Newsgroups work this way and if someone starts advertising their list of 
homes they have for sale through their part time real estate brokerage, the 
newsgroup will be shut down by CCS security.  There won't be any moderator 
sending the note back half a dozen times and finally write-locking the 
conference to get the individual to stop re-submitting it.

FWIW, the "cleanup" isn't the issue.  It's the noter that enters a note 
then can't stop the phone calls because the ad is there and there's someone 
in a position to delete it.

Porting CLASSIFIED_ADS to the Internet is not the answer.  Developing an 
Internet-based forum is the answer.  Anyone with the resources can start up 
the newsgroup.

With the newsgroups after 30 days (or whatever window the creator 
specifies) the entry vanishes automatically.

if the system gets abused, it gets shut down.

This (CLASSIFIED_ADS) forum is policed to prevent the abuse that could 
shut it down yet again.  

And then there are the people who post the same entry three times, 
twice in the wrong places, because they don't know how to use the WWW 
interface.

Not that I can think of any specific examples right now, though.

I am using a product called NetNotes to read, write, reply, etc to 
VAXnotes conferences.  I don't see the problem.  Anyone can install 
and use NetNotes.  In fact I kind of like it compared to the VAXnotes 
that I was using.  Nothing will change for me when we switch over to 
Exchange sometime later this year.

	Roger

How about Altavista Forum?

I am currently an exchange user and I access notes via NetNotes and I 
also have no problems reading/modifying/deleting notes. So, anyone
who's going to exchange could just as easily run NetNotes as well.

Dana

    Do   you have the address to NetNotes?

http://www-ccs.wro.dec.com/nt/Kits/Unsupported/NetNotes/


License key

0622-2800-3026-2003-8590-2015-2220

>< Note 16.7 by NASEAM::READIO "A Smith & Wesson beats four aces, Tow trucks beat Chapman Locks" >>>
>>
>>    making your job of moderator any more complicated?  
>>    sending you mail asking to delete their entries? 
>
>The amount of mail in this regard has quadrupled since late February.
    
    I have no doubt that the pain Skip and other moderators are 
    feelings is there. So I guess we should address that pain somehow.
    
    I do get the impression though, and this might be all wrong, that
    it is somewhat self inflicted. I've read the 'this is VAXnotes so 
    use a VAXmail address' notes, but feel this is no longer acceptable.
    The argument that some notes readers might not be able to reply to
    an internet / excahnge style address can no longer be uphelt IMHO.
    If a reader truly can not send to such address, then said reader
    can no longer function in the current business environemnt, has
    commited technical suicide, and ought to be let go soonest.
    
    I saw an ad with xxx@mail.dec.com address just after it was posted
    and sure enough it dissappeared and came back later with yyy::xxx
    address. Apparently this was done after a mail based exchange!
    So I can not help but wonder what purpose was server by that.
    As much as I like / prefer VAXmail & VMS, it is IMHO time to move 
    on and no longe muss and fuss about tiny details like mail address.
    
    The HOME workers supposedly can make a similar argument against
    the 'required' DTN number. Also no longer appropriate IMHO.
    
    [let's not forget that a note poster _wants_ to be contacted and
     will strive to indicate the best access path]
    
    The delete argument, well, I moderate a few conference myself, and
    well before the TCP days, when all users nicelt came in as XXX::YYY
    there was already a ton of folks out there not knowing they could
    delete their own note and send me mail asking to clean up.
    If it is indeed true that NETnotes users can delete/modify their
    own entries (have not yet tried) then that is no problem no more either!
    
    Lighten up!
    
    Thanks for listening,
    			Hein.
                                                  
    
    
    

    You tell them!!  I agree!!

    
        Hey, what about people who do not have access to the Net from our
        VMS accounts?  
    
                Terry

re .17:

You don't have to have TCP/IP access to get to the usenet from your VMS
machine.  As long as you're on Easynet, you shouldn't have a problem.

Lets not get confused here.

What Skip requires is a NODE::USERNAME in the ad.  Nowhere does it say that 
you can't post from the internet (See note 2.23).

Then, when asked, the closest he can come to a legitimate reason for this 
ridiculous rule is that people are having trouble deleting their notes.

Well, thats a bunch of hogwash, because presence of node::username _in_ the
ad doesn't have the least affect on your ability to delete the note.  If 
deleting the note is the problem, change the rule appropriatly (ie. no posting
from internet accounts).  But as previous noters have stated, even deleting 
notes can be done from the internet.  Noting from a VMS node, I don't have
first hand knowledge.

I just find it to be really strange that out of the hundreds of notes
conferences that exist in this company, this is the only one with such a 
requirement, and such a feeling of approaching demise.

What bothers me the most is that this is a great conference, very well 
run/moderated.  For that I am really grateful.  Its just a shame that this
internet cloud lingers over it and as long as it remains, the conference will
indeed die soon.

  Since I'm the one that created the "no yard sale" rule I should probably
  put in my 2 cents worth.

  This has never been an easy conference to keep tabs on.  You can get in
  trouble doing so in many, many ways.  You can probably imagine some of them
  so I won't enumerate.  Skip and company have done a great job at keeping
  things going.

  having all of the requirements for data in each ad has a lot to do with
  verifying that the ad is for a DIGITAL employee or family member defined
  in the Orange book of rules and the Use of the DIGITAL Business Network. 
  It has nothing really to do with being able to delete, move, or reply to an
  ad.

  In theory, as long as you can access the conference, and depending on the
  software you are [forced] to use to access it, you should be able to at
  least enter an ad.  With automatic delete-after-30-day programs whether
  they can delete their ads shouldn't matter.

  Perhaps it is time to look at updating the rules.  I'm sure big brother
  will be watching but that shouldn't stop us.

  	Mike Phipps
  	Digital Semiconductor (TM)
  	A Digital Equipment Corporation business

OK, Mike, so if a have a mail address of labounty@mail.dec.com and 
supply a DTN, isn't it pretty obvious that I am a Digital employee?

>OK, Mike, so if a have a mail address of labounty@mail.dec.com and 
>supply a DTN, isn't it pretty obvious that I am a Digital employee?

 Looks good to me.  16.127.16.106 looks good to me these days but I'm easy.

	mikeP 8^)

RE .21
 
 > having all of the requirements for data in each ad has a lot to do with
 > verifying that the ad is for a DIGITAL employee or family member defined
 > in the Orange book of rules and the Use of the DIGITAL Business Network. 
 > It has nothing really to do with being able to delete, move, or reply to an
 > ad.

You think so huh?  Well look at these notes posted by Skip:

From 2.21:

>>NODE::YOU
>>
>>	or
>>
>>US2RMC::"you@mumbly.mumbly.dec.com." 
>>
>>("US2RMC::" works most of the time.  Others may not)
>
>
>This isn't working.  Too many people are complaining that they can't reach 
>PC users.

From 2.23:

>If you want to include your Internet address, fine.  ...BUT IT MUST BE IN 
>ADDITION TO YOUR VMS NODE::USERNAME.
>
>Too many internet mail messages are being returned as undeliverable.

From 16.0:

>Moderating a conference where Internet users can't modify or delete their 
>own notes after they've written them is getting to be a big headache.  This 

From 16.7:

>FWIW, the "cleanup" isn't the issue.  It's the noter that enters a note 
>then can't stop the phone calls because the ad is there and there's someone 
>in a position to delete it.


So we went from people complaining to Skip because they couldn't reach noters, to
the noters complaining because too many people are reaching them and they can't
stop it, and somewhere along the line, there was a problem with the moderators
reaching the noters.  

And regardless of the reason dujour, we still have not seen one that stands on
its own merits.  Its time to change the rule or tell us why you won't.

>> having all of the requirements for data in each ad has a lot to do with

>You think so huh?  Well look at these notes posted by Skip:

O.K.  I should have said "...data in each ad HAD a lot to do with...".  That
was back when there was only one way to get into the conference.  I'm saying I
agree that it is time to change the rules a bit.

>So we went from people complaining to Skip because they couldn't reach noters,
>to the noters complaining because too many people are reaching them and they
>can't stop it, and somewhere along the line, there was a problem with the
>moderators reaching the noters.

O.K.  No phone calls to the Moderators.  If you can't reach the person in the
ad look them up (whatever way you can) and tell them about it. You put the ad
in and  know the risks.  Take the extra calls and hope the automatic delete
program kicks in soon.  If you can delete your note fine.  If you can't, don't
worry about it and don't worry the Moderators.  If the noter has violated a
posting rule  like advertising something forbidden, delete the note.  You don't
have to tell anyone. Another part of knowing the risks.

The whole point I (used to) try and make is that this is not a company function
preq, or is it perc maybe perk, or benefit.  Some nice people are spending
their time so you can get rid of some of the stuff you have laying around the
house.  O.K. so it is the  house you want to get rid of.

>And regardless of the reason dujour, we still have not seen one that stands on
>its own merits.  Its time to change the rule or tell us why you won't.

I agree there needs to be a change.  I would say the Moderators have to look at
all the  aspects and proceed carefully.  Classified_Ads is nice to have around.

	mikeP

Or if you can't delete the note, post a reply that says the item[s] 
has/have been sold, and again wait for the delete program to kick 
in.

It's not a difficult concept.

Or change the rules and add a DELETE keyword to note.  A batch job wipes 
out notes with DELETE keywords on them... nope nevermind, anyone could
add keywords to any note....

bjm

You can restrict keyword creation, but not addition.

There are a host of problems involving Internet access, the worst are:

1. Many users enter ads from terminals with temporary DHCP addresses and 
nobody can reach them.

2. Noters entering notes from a host of entry points cannot delete their 
notes  ....and we have to do it for them.  Some folks are computer literate 
and have managed to ask enough questions in the DIGITAL notes conference 
and have FINALLY been able to get around the conference access problem.  
....and you know who you are.  most users haven't gone to that extent to 
use notes, however.

3. contractors are on generic accounts with no permanent DIGITAL internet 
address (We have a bunch in this building)

the list goes on and on.

    Skip,
    We're still waiting to see a reason for not allowing Exchange mail
    addresses on notes posted via the www notes gateway.  Let us know
    when you come up with something valid, ok?
    Regards,
    Kratz

 We have only one classified notes conference, and there are very few
 folks that are willing to spend the time that a conference needs to keep
 running (technical and political). Non-work conferences, 
 employee interest, are even more difficult to find time for.

 Skip, thank you for all your time and effort.!!

 Bruce

> We have only one classified notes conference, and there are very few
> folks that are willing to spend the time that a conference needs to keep
> running (technical and political). Non-work conferences, 
> employee interest, are even more difficult to find time for.

What about SSDEVO::COLORADO_CLASSIFIEDS and VMSZOO::NH_WANTADS?  A bit of a
drive for some of us but still there last time I checked.  Just about every
conference on a particular topic has one note for classified ads.

It is much better to have a central resource though.

> Skip, thank you for all your time and effort.!!

I agree but did he officially resign as Moderator?

	mikeP

>    We're still waiting to see a reason for not allowing Exchange mail
>    addresses on notes posted via the www notes gateway.  Let us know
>    when you come up with something valid, ok?


....because I'm the moderator and I am getting tired of trying to verify 
noter's employment status on this VMS system when they use internet 
addresses.

This and the NH and CO C_A conferences are the only conferences that provide 
ready access to non employees to get free advertising.

What shut down the conference a couple of weeks ago was an Internet user 
trying to sell a home.  The trouble was that the seller was NOT an employee.  
It was a realtor with no connection to Digital.

The Noter was a contractor and refused to stop posting the note.  If we 
allowed the situation to continue, the conference would get shut down 
permanently.  Mr Phipps can tell us what that's like as I believe he was at 
the helm when it got nailed by Corporate a few years ago for a similar 
situation.

This conference, and it's sister conferences, are not in keeping with the 
traditional VAXNOTES (or engineering notes if you want to go back before 
Notes-11) concept.  Notes is an archive of data.  C_A is a 30 day window 
that requires constant moderation.  C_A will be better suited to a 
newsgroup format.  ....even in the VMS mode.  The notes are throw-aways.  
Newsgroup entries are throw-aways when they reach a system-specified age.  
It's automatic.  It's user friendly, it's a no-brainer.  If it gets abused, 
it, too will go away.

>....because I'm the moderator and I am getting tired of trying to verify 
>noter's employment status on this VMS system when they use internet 
>addresses.

Well I'll be... We finally get a reason for the rule.  Was that all that 
difficult to share with us?

>What shut down the conference a couple of weeks ago was an Internet user 
>trying to sell a home.  The trouble was that the seller was NOT an employee.  
>It was a realtor with no connection to Digital.
>The Noter was a contractor and refused to stop posting the note.  If we 
>allowed the situation to continue, the conference would get shut down 
>permanently.

OK, thats a bummer, sorry you have to deal with that nonsense, but I do have 
a question:

Plenty of contractors have node::username's.  If this contractor had included
a node::username in his note (which he posted from the internet I presume),
how would the situation have been any easier for you to manage.  The situation
I'm describing is identical to the one you had, except, there is now a 
node::username in the ad but it is still posted from the WWW gateway.  How does 
the node::username make life easier?

And just to re-iterate:  Although I have been outspoken about this rule, it 
doesn't affect me. I'm just trying to understand the rationale.

And as I have stated before, I am very grateful for the moderator's efforts
in keeping this conference up and running.

I am not up on all this internet stuff...

But I just noticed that the address I posted .-1
from was patrlr.lkg.dec.com::mccusker

Hmmm... thats strange.  A note posted last week
was from 12680::mccusker.

If I put patrlr.lkg.dec.com in my ad as my mail
address, will the note be bounced?

I know this node as PATRLR::MCCUSKER.  I do 
realize I'm in lkg but will my notes start
to be a headache becuase of that address?
I sure hope not, cause I am posting from a VMS node.

I'm getting a headache thinking about this stuff ;^)

That's a DECNET address, isn't it?

If so, I'm not sure that someone could send mail to that address even 
if they tried.

I am sorry to hear that this notes file is going to go away.

If my understanding of news groups is correct it is more difficult to 
police them than notes files...  I understand that once an entry has 
been placed into the news group system it is very difficult to remove.  
On the other hand the mailbox naming conventions used within Exchange  
make it very easy to identify a contractor [all contractor addresses are 
suffixed with the string "(Contractor)"]. - Some good news and some bad.

My feelings (FWIW) are to keep the notes file alive, if necessary move 
it from the OpenVMS server where it is now to a Windows-NT server.

    I use MS Internet Explorer's News messaging software to read and write
    to newsgroups.  Once an ad or message is posted there is a "cancel"
    option available.  I have canceled ads in the past.  You click on your
    ad to highlight it, then right click and choose "cancel".  This option
    does not work on someone elses ad. 
    
    All good things must come to an end.  I will miss this NOTEs
    conference.  I have sold and bought a lot in here in the past 10 years.
    I also want to thank Skip and all the other moderators for their
    work and efforts!
    
    It was always good to deal with "DEC" employees and contractors only
    via this conference.
    
    Mark

>If my understanding of news groups is correct it is more difficult to 
>police them than notes files...  I understand that once an entry has 
>been placed into the news group system it is very difficult to remove.  

Yes, but now the offender is there for everyone to see.  It no longer 
requires a moderator to keep track of who is and who is not violating 
corporate computer-use rules.  If someone abuses the system, security or 
personnel can deal with it instead of a moderator.  There's a lot more 
clout when you get an e-mail from personnel telling you that your actions 
constitute grounds for termination than when a moderator sends the same 
message.   ....and when the offender can't delete the entry, it's a lot 
easier to prove, whereas, right now we're embroiled in situations where we 
spend a LOT of time with a few individuals only to have them delete their 
messages after we go to personnel.  The human involvement in a number of 
issues is getting out of hand and is interfering with real work.

Getting in touch with these people is getting more and more difficult, let 
CCS do it from now on.

>On the other hand the mailbox naming conventions used within Exchange  
>make it very easy to identify a contractor [all contractor addresses are 
>suffixed with the string "(Contractor)"]. - Some good news and some bad.

....not when the contractor is in a "pool" of PCs with depertment account 
names like we have in this building.  The "user" is a number on a group of 
PCs that are shared by three shifts of call handlers.

>allowed the situation to continue, the conference would get shut down 
>permanently.  Mr Phipps can tell us what that's like as I believe he was at 
>the helm when it got nailed by Corporate a few years ago for a similar 
>situation.

It was playoff tickets for 3x box office price or something like that. 

Security found my office and just switched off my MicroVAX II.  Told me that
the company equipment cannot be used for the purpose of scalping.  That's when
the no tickets rule went into effect.  Admittedly it was easier and took less
time than investigating every case.

Took me a day to get the real work back to where I was before the shutdown.

	mikeP

    I think this notesfiles is great, and I hate to see it go.
    While I wouldn't presume to know all the issues the moderator,
    who does a great job, has to deal with, it seems to me a few
    rule changes might help a lot. My suggestions:
    
    1) Your name not in ELF, you're out! 
    
    2) Moderator has COMPLETE and FINAL say over any note.
       If note breaks the rules, he just deletes it. No more
       write-lock-during-negotiations stuff. Just follow 
       the rules or deletion of note. See 2.* ! 
    
    3) No calling the moderator for any reason. You can't get hold
       of the author, what you calling the mod for? He doesn't know
       them! You can't delete the note? Then email a request to the
       mod and once a day he can kill them. 
    
    I'm sure I must be oversimplifying, but wouldn't these rules make the
    job of the mod to be: log in, delete bad notes, log out.
    Now the rest of us can enjoy our notesfile.
    
    Thanks for listening.
    

>   1) Your name not in ELF, you're out! 

Who spends their break time running all these names through ELF?

>   Thanks for listening.
    
You're welcome 8^)

    Which ELF?
    
    As a moderator of some other conferences, should I also be verifying
    that everybody who posts are also Digital employees or is this
    something that is unique here?
    
    				-John

    
>   2) Moderator has COMPLETE and FINAL say over any note.
>       If note breaks the rules, he just deletes it. No more
>       write-lock-during-negotiations stuff. Just follow 
>       the rules or deletion of note. See 2.* ! 

the problem was that the author kept re-submitting the ad as soon as it was 
deleted so the conference had to be taken off line for a while.

    
>    As a moderator of some other conferences, should I also be verifying
>    that everybody who posts are also Digital employees or is this
>    something that is unique here?


Because this is an advertising medium, we have to make sure that what's 
being advertised is for Digital employees or their immediate families (as 
defined by Digital policies and procedures  -- the orangebook)

If they're not, they're getting free advertising on a restricted network.

Digital does not have a mechanism for billing third parties for computer 
time.  This being the case, third parties are forbidden from making use of 
Digital's computer network(s).

The moderators try not to leave any questionable note around for 
unsuspecting newcomers to view as a valid sample.  If it's got a problem, 
it goes back to the author for correction(s) and is immediately deleted.

It's pretty simple when you come down to it.  You don't bother to read the 
conference guidelines and barge right in and submit a vague ad, you get it 
back with a form letter attached.

If the mail bounces, you start complaining.  It isn't my job to go looking 
up the correct mail address for your improper ad simply because you didn't 
bother the RTFM.

I posted an ad from NetNotes, identified myself with a name, DTN and 
Exchange address, and it got sent back to me.

The key here is that it got sent back to me ... so if you can reach 
me to tell me I can't post the ad because people might not be able to 
reach me, what's the point in not allowing the ad as originally 
typed, since it's obvious that I can be reached using only the 
available information?

I believe this was mentioned earlier in this string.

The fact that I provide a valid VMS address in the ad does not 
improve the ability of people to reach me, nor does it make my 
entries any easier for me to delete.

>I posted an ad from NetNotes, identified myself with a name, DTN and 
>Exchange address, and it got sent back to me.
>
>The key here is that it got sent back to me ... so if you can reach 
>me to tell me I can't post the ad because people might not be able to 
>reach me, what's the point in not allowing the ad as originally 
>typed, since it's obvious that I can be reached using only the 
>available information?
>

YOU DIDN'T READ.  IF YOUR NOTE GETS LEFT IN THE CONFERENCE IT SETS AN 
EXAMPLE FOR OTHERS TO USE.  Just because YOU have a valid address, that 
doesn't mean the next author who looks at your "sample" note is going to 
have a findable address.


>I believe this was mentioned earlier in this string.
>
>The fact that I provide a valid VMS address in the ad does not 
>improve the ability of people to reach me, nor does it make my 
>entries any easier for me to delete.

No, it provides an address that THIS captive VMS account can find and send 
mail to.

I asked this back in .34. it was never answered, so I'll ask again.  And please
remember, I'm only trying to understand.

>Plenty of contractors have node::username's.  If this contractor had included
>a node::username in his note (which he posted from the internet I presume),
>how would the situation have been any easier for you to manage.  The situation
>I'm describing is identical to the one you had, except, there is now a 
>node::username in the ad but it is still posted from the WWW gateway.  How does 
>the node::username make life easier?

And remember, in .33 you wrote:

>....because I'm the moderator and I am getting tired of trying to verify 
>noter's employment status on this VMS system when they use internet 
>addresses.

So the issue is not reaching these internet users, its verifying employment.

I might suggest re-reading .33 & .34 to understand the context if its not clear.

Thanks 

Brad

Well, if your only point is that "it sets a bad example" if I post a 
valid Digital internal non-VMS address, then it's a waste of time to 
continue to pursue this line of "reasoning" of yours.

I even posted my Exchange address with the internet router added to 
it, so anyone could either cut/paste or type it word-for-word into a 
"To" field ... so you could reach me from VMS.

Wouldn't it be easier to just come out and say "I like VMS and hate 
Exchange and the rules say you need a valid VMS address and I just 
don't feel like changing it to say 'valid Digital internal address'"?

Geez, I don't even want to tell you how easy it is to post an ad for 
a non-Digital employee who's not related to me, while still following  
the rules to the letter.  Not that I've ever done that, of course, 
nor would I even consider doing it.

    RE: if your name is not in ELF, you're out as a rule, please remember
    that a large number of people who now work at DIGITAL -- and sometimes
    purchase from Classified -- are contractors, and therefore not in ELF.

>Wouldn't it be easier to just come out and say "I like VMS and hate 
>Exchange and the rules say you need a valid VMS address and I just 
>Zdon't feel like changing it to say 'valid Digital internal address'"?

Shaun (Shawn?) nailed it right on the nose.
    K

Its really kind of humorous (in a sad way) if you look through the notes on 
this subject and see all of the different reason's Skip has come up with
for this rule.  Shawn is right, its Skip's football, play by his rules or
he's going to go home with it.

I must actually give credit to an unnamed noter for pointing that 
out, so it wasn't actually me that came to that conclusion.  I just 
added a bit to the idea.

 This is not the only conference in the corporation that requires addresses
 to be in DECnet form.  I am a moderator of a restricted conference, and
 we also require decnet addresses.  The VAX notes conference system has
 been around awhile, and there are tools to manage the conferences and
 the membership, all written to be compatable with decnet addresses and
 VMS; internet addresses and exchange addresses break the tools.

 Yes, new tools could be designed and written, but that is neither my
 avocation nor vocation.  I would suspect that the moderators of this
 conference have a similar issue.  Moderators are doing the community
 a service.

 Some one or more of the exchange address proponents could do the
 community a real service by bringing up a non-notes based classified
 replacement, perhaps news group based.  When the corporation is successful
 in migrating most of the employees away from VMS, there will not
 be enough VMS machines left to service an employee interest conference
 such as classifieds.  It would be good if there were a replacement service
 in place before then.

Bruce, are any of those tools relevant to a non-members-only conference
such as this?

> replacement, perhaps news group based.  When the corporation is successful
> in migrating most of the employees away from VMS, there will not
> be enough VMS machines left to service an employee interest conference
> such as classifieds.  It would be good if there were a replacement service
> in place before then.


But these complainers can't see that coming.  They want to hold onto this 
VMS based tool until it's too late.  When the time comes for them to 
migrate, they'll all be in dummy mode and will be wishing they took the 
time to gradually get into the swing of things instead of being dumped into 
the thing unprepared.

All these folks that are whining about our rules should step back and look 
in the mirror.  We're heading in one direction and they're still trying to 
hold onto the past.

this old Model T will still have it's 4 cylinder engine.  We're not about 
to upgrade it to an ECM controlled V-6 just so they can see how fast it'll 
go on it's spindly wooden wheels.

If they're so all fired Internet-literate, why aren't they helping solve 
the problem instead of complicating the issue?

> But these complainers can't see that coming.  They want to hold onto this 
> VMS based tool until it's too late.  When the time comes for them to 
> migrate, they'll all be in dummy mode and will be wishing they took the 
> time to gradually get into the swing of things instead of being dumped into 
> the thing unprepared.

Yes, and I switched from VAXNOTES to NetNotes for health reasons.  8^)

Why do you think I made the switch?  Because there's always a chance that 
MY VMS system will go away without warning, and this gives me time to get 
used to it.

I loaded Exchange onto this laptop about a month before I was upgraded at 
work, so I had time to get used to it before I was forced off of VMSMAIL.  Right 
now I can't receive VMSMAIL ... only send it.  CS set an auto-forward to my 
Exchange address, so everything goes there.

VMS will not go away completely for quite a while ... there are still valid, 
non-NOTES reasons to keep it around.  The only REAL VMS migration that is 
corporate-mandated at the moment is the mail utility ... everything else will 
follow, eventually.  But, like I said, not for awhile.

re .56>

Well, well, isn't Skip the martyr?  Doing the whole damn company this big favor.

Excuse me Skip, _YOU_ look in the mirror!  People are migrating to the internet,
and they are working from the internet NOW.  It is _you_ who will not embrace
the technology.  This is the only notes conference that is locking out 
internet users, and to date, the only reason they are locked out is because
_you_ insist upon it.

Don't tell those who are questioning the rule that they need to become
part of the solution.  If you read back through these notes, for each lame
'justification' for the rule you have provided, people have provided you 
with good work arounds.  It is you who flatly refuses to try to work with
the new technology.

And further more, don't call those who are questioning the rule complainers.
There is a problem here, with very workable solutions.  People are just trying 
to resolve the problem (with the exception, I guess, of you).

>All these folks that are whining about our rules should step back and look 
>in the mirror.  We're heading in one direction and they're still trying to 
>hold onto the past.

What direction are you headed in?  The rest of the comapny is headed towards
the internet.  It is _you_ who won't embrace them.  It is you who won't 
attempt to work with them.  It is you who has locked them out of this note
conference, the only conference to do so.  As far as trying to hold onto
the past, I look at it as trying to keep a good thing going.  By locking out
the internet users, you are killing off the user base, and with it the 
conference.  There is no need to kill the conference.


>this old Model T will still have it's 4 cylinder engine.  We're not about 
>to upgrade it to an ECM controlled V-6 just so they can see how fast it'll 
>go on it's spindly wooden wheels.

What does this little tale have to do with anything?  Are you saying that 
allowing interent users into the conference is going to bring down the node?
Thats a new one, why don't you save that for next weeks excuse?

I wish you would stop insulting our intelligence and just come out and say
the rule exists because you said so and you have no interest in hearing 
workable solutions.  That way, maybe the conference can die quickly and someone
else can step in and revive it.

Workaround is a poor excuse for weaning folks onto an alternative.  

CREATE THE NEW SYSTEM, USE BOTH BUT USE EACH IN THE WAY IT WAS INTENDED TO 
BE USED.  STOP TRYING TO FORCE YOUR WORKAROUNDS ON THE OLD SYSTEM.  USE THE 
NEW SYSTEM AND IT'LL SIMPLY OVERTAKE THE OLD SYSTEM.




>And further more, don't call those who are questioning the rule complainers.
>There is a problem here, with very workable solutions.  People are just trying 
>to resolve the problem (with the exception, I guess, of you).

YES, THERE'S A VERY WORKABLE SOLUTION AND IT'S CALLED DEVELOP A SYSTEM THAT 
FITS THE NEW TECHNOLOGY, NOT KLUGE UP A SYSTEM ORIGINALLY DESIGNED TO RUN 
ON A PDP-11


>What direction are you headed in?  The rest of the comapny is headed towards
>the internet.  It is _you_ who won't embrace them.  It is you who won't 
>attempt to work with them.  It is you who has locked them out of this note
>conference, the only conference to do so.  As far as trying to hold onto
>the past, I look at it as trying to keep a good thing going.  By locking out
>the internet users, you are killing off the user base, and with it the 
>conference.  There is no need to kill the conference.

YOU JUST DON'T GET IT, DO YOU.  SOMETIME SOON EVERYONE'S GOING TO BE LOCKED 
                                              ==========
OUT WHEN THE THING GOES AWAY BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE MODERATED.


>What does this little tale have to do with anything?  Are you saying that 
>allowing interent users into the conference is going to bring down the node?
>Thats a new one, why don't you save that for next weeks excuse?

WE'RE NOT GOING TO KLUGE THIS AGAIN.  IT WAS DONE ONCE ALREADY IN THE 
MIGRATION FROM NOTES-11 TO VAXNOTES.

>I wish you would stop insulting our intelligence and just come out and say
>the rule exists because you said so and you have no interest in hearing 
>workable solutions.  That way, maybe the conference can die quickly and someone
>else can step in and revive it.

ACTUALLY, THE RULE EXISTED YEARS BEFORE I BECAME A MODERATOR.

    	I *REALLY* like this conference and would hate to see it go. I'm a
    bargain hunter from the word GO ;-) I also understand what a royal PITA 
    this must be to moderate and add my name to the list that commend Skip for 
    the work he's done on this and other notes files.
    
    	I'm not sure that I understand all of the problems fully, but I'd
    like to offer something for consideration. Using command files, one can
    automatically extract the unseen notes, extract the noters name from
    the note (if a strict adherence to format is followed), run it through 
    ELF, and perform some automatic function based on whether it finds the 
    name in ELF or not.
    
    	I have a VERY crude working prototype (which I'll post in the
    following note) as an example of what can be done and how. If this 
    will address the problems, I'd be willing to finish it as time permits.
    I just don't want to sink any more time into it if there's other
    problems that just can't be addressed. 
    
    	One good thing about this is that it can run automatically as a
    batch job, and code could be added to automatically delete some jerk
    that wants to disregard the rules and keep reposting. It DOES NOT
    eliminate the need for moderators to continue to read each note. It
    just automates some of the grunt work.
    
    	Ray

$!
$! Open notes file, get unseen notes, put them in a text file (x.txt)
$!
$ no cla 
dir/unseen/out=x.txt 
$!
$! Open the above text file, get the new note numbers, place them in a
$! seperate file (y.txt) and delete x.txt
$!
$!
$ open/read infile x.txt
$ open/write outfile y.txt
$ cnt = 0
$!
$ header_loop:	! Read past header info
$ read/end=end infile inline
$ cnt = cnt + 1
$ if cnt .ne. 6 then goto header_loop
$! 
$! 
$! 
$ read_loop:
$ read/end=end_read infile inline
$ note_num = f$element(2," ",inline)
$ write outfile note_num
$ write sys$output note_num
$ goto read_loop
$!
$ end_read:
$ close infile
$ close outfile
$!
$! Open y.txt and read a new note # from it, extract the note as a text file
$! (note.txt), open note.txt, get the authors name from it and write it to
$! a file (name.txt)
$!
$! open/read num_file y.txt
$!
$ note_check_loop:
$ read/end=end_note num_file note_num
$ write sys$output note_num
$ no cla 'note_num'
extract/nohead note.txt
$!
$ open/read in_note note.txt
$ open/write out_name name.txt
$ read in_note note_line
$ emp_name = f$extract(0,20,note_line)
$ write out_name emp_name
$ delete note.txt;*
$ goto note_check_loop
$!
$ end_note:
$ close num_file
$ close in_note
$ close out_name
$!
$!
$! Open name.txt and see if the name appears in ELF
$!
$ open/read in_name name.txt
$!
$ read/end=end_name in_name emp_name
$ define/user sys$output name_chk.txt
$ elf 'emp_name'
$ open/read in_check name_chk.txt
$ read in_check elf_chk
$ read in_check elf_chk
$ read in_check elf_chk
$ chk = f$extract(0,14,elf_chk)
$ if chk .eqs. "Could not find" 
$	then write sys$output "Check failed"
$	else write sys$output "Check passed"
$ endif
$ write sys$output chk
$!
$ end_name:
$ close in_name
$ close in_check
$ exit
    

> $ header_loop:  ! Read past header info
> $ read/end=end infile inline
> $ cnt = cnt + 1
> $ if cnt .ne. 6 then goto header_loop


If the conference doesn't have a conference notice, you need to 
change this loop to 5 instead of 6.

RE: .59

Hey, Skip, why don't you upgrade from that VT52 so you can use small 
AND large letters when you type?

8^)

    re:62 and possibly others
    
    	Before people start picking my code apart, it is admittedly somewhat 
    crude and definetely incomplete. For example, a DIR/UNSEEN *.* is
    really needed, and the "Check passed/failed" message would be a series
    of other things, like delete the note and send it back to the author
    with a form letter. It would also be more modular rather than monolithic, 
    but it was sufficient for me to see that it is feasible and for what I was 
    trying to show.
    
    	Ray

RE: .64

Yes, I realize that, but I just wanted to point that out to anyone 
who wants to attempt to use it in a conference in which the condition 
does exist.

It's not readily apparent if you aren't looking for it, and if you 
don't notice it it will always strip the first non-header record from 
the output file.

    RE: .59
    
    What part was designed to run on a PDP-11?
    
    				-John

Vaxnotes, as we know it, was originally Engineering Notes or Notes-11, for 
those of us who were around in the late seventies.

The tool was originally developed for use on the pdp-11 family. and 
modified to work on VAX systems.

See http://www.ezines.com/wwwboard/wwwboard.html

Would this be a reasonable alternative to Notes? I happen to like the
way information is presented here, maybe even better than in Notes.

Pete

 Good point Pete,

 I took a look and the web page, and while it might not be my first
 choice, it is a good suggestion for a direction that a replacement for
 the tired `Engineering Notes', that used to run on the `Engineering
 Network', could take.

   
 So, is someone willing to bring  up a prototype replacement for
 classifieds so that the replacement may run side by side with
 the old classifieds for awhile?

    re: .67
    
    You don't know your VAX Notes (now DEC Notes) history very well.  
    The VAX Notes that you use today is a completely new piece of code
    written by Benn Schreiber and Peter Gilbert back in 1985.  Check
    out the VAXNOTES conferences for a history and legacy of Notes.
    
    				-John

    
    	RE: 5.571
    
    	What a riot ... people are being forced to post a VMS address
    	that doesn't even exist any more.  8^)
    

    Whatever it takes...
    

    I don't know about the rest of the people reading this thread, but in
    my opinion, I believe it's about run its course... enough is enough.
    Especially since I read the 'SKIP::GETALIFE' comment.  I think the
    moderators have done a great job thus far.  I realize that Digital is
    moving towards Exchange but thats not the moderator's fault.  Since
    they are donating their time, if moderating takes 1 second longer
    because they need to deal with Exchange addresses and they don't
    want to give the extra second, that is their right.  If you don't
    like the rules, step up and do something about it... volunteer to move
    the conference to your node and moderate it.  Create a newsgroup for
    it if you want.  Constructive criticism is one thing but some people
    in here have begun to shoot personal attacks and are flogging a dead
    horse anyways.  I wouldn't blame the moderators if they just shut down 
    this conference and walked away today.
    
    Just my 2 cents worth.  

Yes, the personal attacks are inappropriate.

Yes, we are all very appreciative of what the moderators have done.

Constructive criticism abounds in this string.  Real workable solutions
to a problem that affects all notes files have been presented.

Unfortunatly, in this case, the moderator is not open to criticism or even
real, workable suggestions.  Heck, he won't even answer questions that
should bolster his case.

I find this to be frustrating, and sometime the tone of frustration does not
sound nice.  And I could give a rats butt if people can note from ip addresses
or not.  I have a VMS node and will as long as I work here.  I started out
just trying to understand the situation.

And for the record, I have volunteered to help moderate this conference, 
under the condition that the NODENAME::USERNAME _in_ _the_ _body_ _of_  _the_
_ad_ rule is corrected.  I have never even recieved a "thanks but nothanks" 
for the offer.

Now this is what we have to contend with.

The author obviously has a VMS account (look at where the note was entered 
from) but he says it's gone.



<<< Note 5.571 by ICS::POMEROY "Swallowing Colors of the Sound I Hear" >>>
-< 79 Chevy K-200 4 Sale >-

    Kevin Pomeroy
    ics::pomeroy (do not send mail account is gone)
    pomeroy@mail.dec.com (internet)
    Kevin Pomeroy (exchange)
    223-1134 (Please do not call)
    508-597-5907 (after 6:00)
    

Perhaps what he is saying is, he no longer reads mail recieved at
that address...

Regardless, it meets the criteria, and I'll bet, is no easier for you to
manage than had he left that line ("ics::pomeroy (do not send mail account is
gone)") out of the body of the ad.  

I'm still wondering how that one line ("ics::pomeroy...") makes the moderator's
life easier than if it wasn't there.

It meets the criteria NOW only because I sent it back to ICS::Pomeroy a few 
times.  I know he got it because he kept complaining.

><<< Note 16.76 by 12680::MCCUSKER "Take time out to smile a while b'fore ya let it go" >>>
>
>Perhaps what he is saying is, he no longer reads mail recieved at
>that address...
>
>Regardless, it meets the criteria, and I'll bet, is no easier for you to
>manage than had he left that line ("ics::pomeroy (do not send mail account is
>gone)") out of the body of the ad.  
>>
>I'm still wondering how that one line ("ics::pomeroy...") makes the moderator's
>life easier than if it wasn't there.

I double-click on it if send/author doesn't work  (i.e. for Internet 
addresses most of the time.

    
    	So when I used
    
    	us6rmc::"labounty@mail.dec.com"
    
    	as my address and you double-clicked on that, what was the prob-
    	lem?
    
    	Did it overload your copy buffer?  8^)
    

    
    	So, are we required to display a VMS node::name and DTN when we put
    	an ad in dec.classified-ads?
    
    	8^)