Re: OffGnus

["St. Suika Fenderson Roberts" <wrobert2@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu>]

Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <larsi@ifi.uio.no> writes:
> Rich Pieri <rich.pieri@prescienttech.com> writes:
>> LMI> No -- nnagent will always download all the headers.  It's only the
>> LMI> article bodies that are interesting to decide whether should be
>> LMI> fetched or not.
>> 
>> You misunderstand.  If I score an article low based on how many lines it
>> contains, it will not appear in the summary buffer where I want it to

> I must be misunderstanding something basic here, because you and I
> seem to be saying the same things here.  Only we're disagreeing.  :-)

> 2) Uses a scoring scheme to say what articles to download, and
>    also downloads articles that have been manually marked for
>    download, no matter what their scores are.

The way I'm seeing this whole arguement is this:

Lars is saying that headers will be `scored' to determine if the article
will be auto-downloaded.

Rich is fearing that this means that the scoring to determine whether to
show an article in the summary will be affected by lowering the
auto-download score for articles that are too big, which could push
articles scores low enough that they are not displayed.

As long as the display scores affect the auto-download scores, and not
vice-versa, I don't see any problem with using scoring to determine
auto-downloadablity.  If the auto-download scores affect the summary
display scores one could well end up with problems . . .

hope this helps,
	Suika
--
		wrobert2@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu
      No matter how big a pair she's got, an enemy is an enemy.
      							--Moroboshi Ataru