Re: comp.newprod, .simulation, .std.announce, and rec.photo.moderated restarted

On 2025-06-20, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
In comp.misc Ivan Shmakov wrote:

 >> I'm also cross-posting to news.misc because it seems more fitting,
 >> though it doesn't seem to have been active recently.

(Should've rather cross-posted to news.groups, which is both
a better fit /and/ active.)

 >> It's possible to submit articles by email, such as explained
 >> in http://www.big-8.org/wiki/Moderated_newsgroups
 >                                         ^
 >> #How_can_I_bypass_my_News_Service_Provider? (URI split for
 >> readability.)

 > Broken link - needs a capital 'N'.

Indeed, thanks.

 >> On a Unix-like system with appropriately configured mail delivery,
 >> the following example /usr/sbin/sendmail invocation can be used as
 >> a starting point:

 >> $ cat < newspost
 >> From: Alice <alice@nowhere.invalid>
 >> Reply-To: Alice <alice@example.net>
 >> Newsgroups: example.newsgroup.moderated
 >> Message-Id: <d_QiVQf-IZLLKJxlbxJPoPpVc6BkE5CY@example.invalid>

 > I'd suggest including how the unique part of the Message-Id can be
 > generated, or at least warning that this part must be generated for
 > each message.  Examples with unique IDs in them tempt people to
 > re-use that unique ID.

Fair enough.  I shouldn't have included either that or Date:
in the example at all, as the mail subsystem adds them if
missing anyway.  Though it makes sense to mention that the
harvesters can gather mail domains from Message-Id:s just as
well; if anything, they're right there in the overview,
alongside From:s and References:.

Also, pre-generating a Message-Id: might aid troubleshooting
should the message be lost in transit, though with the low
traffic I'm anticipating for these groups, knowing From: and
the day it was submitted would probably be sufficient.

 > I've subscribed to comp.newprod and rec.photo.moderated since I'm
 > interested in them, although I don't currently have cause to post
 > in either.

I'm the least hopeful about .newprod, and certainly don't
expect to have any reason to post there myself in the
foreseeable future (aside of a periodic pointer to guidelines
and such), but it sure would be nice to get it to work.

I can think of things to post to rec.photo.moderated (and
comp.simulation, FTM), though I'm not sure there's much reason
to prefer it to rec.photo.digital at this point.