Xref: utzoo news.groups:13508 rec.pets:8870 alt.aquaria:4326
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ginosko!uunet!inco!alembic!csu
From: csu@alembic.acs.com (Dave Mack)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.pets,alt.aquaria
Subject: Re: Formal propsal: "rec.aquarium" (not to be confused with "sci.aquaria")
Message-ID: <1989Oct22.055248.8635@alembic.acs.com>
Date: 22 Oct 89 05:52:48 GMT
References: <8219@cbmvax.UUCP> <21096@gryphon.COM>
Reply-To: csu@alembic.acs.com (Dave Mack)
Organization: Alembic Computer Services, McLean, VA
Lines: 16
UUCP-Path: uunet!inco!alembic!csu

In article <21096@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>In article <8219@cbmvax.UUCP> bryce@commodore.COM (Bryce Nesbitt) writes:
>>
>>I hereby formally propose a new newsgroup to be called "rec.aquarium".
>Now, will you all send Bryce a no vote and let's do this 
>properly.

Nope. I intend to vote "yes" for both sci.aquaria and rec.aquari{a,um}.
The people who are involved in the technical aspects of "experimental
marine ecosystems" deserve a place for their discussion. So do those
who keep fish purely as a hobby, and couldn't care less about the mutation
rate in Anemonidae. We need both groups. I would suggest, however, that
sci.aquaria be a moderated group, while rec.aquarium remains unmoderated.

Love and kisses,
Tiresias