Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ginosko!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!dkuug!iesd!iesd!fischer From: fischer@iesd.auc.dk (Lars P. Fischer) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Maybe a vote on rec.music.rock is in order... Message-ID: Date: 23 Oct 89 05:55:34 GMT References: <6532@ficc.uu.net> <177@scorn.sco.COM> <6574@ficc.uu.net> <1035@root44.co.uk> Sender: news@iesd.auc.dk (UseNet News) Organization: Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Aalborg Lines: 13 In-reply-to: pv@tut.fi's message of 22 Oct 89 21:35:55 GMT In article pv@tut.fi (Vuorimaa Petri Kalevi) writes: > What if we made some kind of recommendation for use >of keywords. For example, if I write something about Soul, I would >put that as one of the keywords. Take a look at comp.sys.mac. They can't even stick to specific Subject lines, making it next to impossible to use kill files. The idea is OK. It just wouldn't work. And anyway, if all that these keywords do is tell what type of *rock* is being discussed, then it still belongs in sci.music.rock (:-). -- Lars Fischer, fischer@iesd.auc.dk | Seek error on /dev/brain (core dumped). CS Dept., Univ. of Aalborg, DENMARK. | -- (null)