Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!uvaarpa!hudson!astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU!gsh7w
From: gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg S. Hennessy)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.aquaria vs. sci.aquaria
Message-ID: <2084@hudson.acc.virginia.edu>
Date: 9 Oct 89 15:54:54 GMT
References: <6402@ficc.uu.net> <798@pmafire.UUCP> <20568@gryphon.COM> <530@banyan.UUCP> <20766@gryphon.COM>
Sender: news@hudson.acc.virginia.edu
Reply-To: gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg S. Hennessy)
Organization: University of Virginia, Charlottesville
Lines: 19

In article <20766@gryphon.COM> oleg@gryphon.COM (Oleg Kiselev) writes:
#While, of course, the majority of the people who subscribe to sci.astro
#are the career astronomers?  

I would be willing to wager that both the number and percentage of
professional astronomers who read/post to sci.astro will be larger
than the number of professional fish breeders who will read/post to
[rec,sci].aquaria. 

If the argument is that sci.astro should be rec.astro, that arguments
may have some points, but a second inappropiate name should not be
added just because one is there.



-Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia
 USPS Mail:     Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA
 Internet:      gsh7w@virginia.edu  
 UUCP:		...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w