Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ginosko!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!apple!chuq
From: chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: While we're talking about global changes in newsgroups...
Message-ID: <35660@apple.Apple.COM>
Date: 15 Oct 89 05:47:24 GMT
References: <6532@ficc.uu.net> <1989Oct15.020043.12669@rpi.edu>
Organization: Life is just a Fantasy novel played for keeps
Lines: 25

>A proposal was brought up a few months ago to create news.software and
>rmgroup news.software.b.  Everytime I post a message to news.software.b
>I still think it is a good idea.  Not even a .misc group, just a
>vanilla news.software.   Are there any strong arguments against this?

Actually, the whole idea of the *.misc groups was to get the traffic out of
the base name, the idea being that all of the subgroups should be at the
same level in the heirarchy. I don't remember who brought it up, but I've
always felt it was overkill, except at the top level (you don't want someone
posting to comp, you want them posting to comp.misc). 

It's never really been enforced or dealt with consistently -- if it were, we
should have rmgrouped comp.sys.mac long ago for comp.sys.mac.misc. my
feeling is that *.misc is overkill and you might as well leave it in the
parent group (i.e. news.software as opposed to news.software.misc). A clean
name space is good (adopt that one for your mantra, folks...), but there's
such a thing as pushing the theory to the detriment of reality.

-- 

Chuq Von Rospach <+> Editor,OtherRealms <+> Member SFWA/ASFA
chuq@apple.com <+> CI$: 73317,635 <+> [This is myself speaking]

Anyone who thinks that the argument over {sci,rec}.fishies is about
group names doesn't understand the system.