Xref: utzoo news.groups:12408 news.misc:3634
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!udel!rochester!rit!ultb!lmb7421
From: lmb7421@ultb.UUCP (L.M. Barstow)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.misc
Subject: Re: Report Card on the success of the group creation guidelines
Message-ID: <1264@ultb.UUCP>
Date: 21 Sep 89 06:28:22 GMT
References: <17735@looking.on.ca>
Reply-To: lmb7421@ultb.UUCP (L.M. Barstow)
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Wandering Damage, Cosmo Police, Psi division
Lines: 26

After debating what to say about the article Brad just posted (I'm not
going to post any of it again...the readable part has already been
re-posted numerous times, and the other part isn't worth it)
I decided that I'd simply say one (okay, maybe two) things:

one: The stats were great, Brad.  However, it would be nice if you took
     into consideration the importance of the groups you listed in
     addition to the number of people who use it, the fact that those
     stats are probably wildly off (I know our machine certainly proves
     them wrong), and the fact that, despite the "low" number of users,
     thre are still more than enough readers to justify a newsgroup.
two: The newsgroups that passed, passed.  This means that a poll of the
     net came up with enough support and not enough objection that the
     group was created...Like it or not, people wanted these groups.

What's your beef against the creation policy, Brad?  Someone had to make
up something...What we've got is likely to be the best we'll have for a
while.  Your suggestions (the ones I've seen to date) aren't the
solution.  Live with it...don't rip away your supports unless and until
you have a new support built to take the load.

-- 
Les Barstow                   |Bitnet: LMB7421@RITVAX                           
"What about the R.O.U.S's?"   |UUCP: ...rutgers!rochester!ritcv!ultb!lmb7421
"The Rodents Of Unusual Size? |ARPA: lmb7421@ultb.isc.rit.edu
I don't believe they exist!" - Buttercup and Wesley, _The Princess Bride_