Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cadre.dsl.pitt.edu!pitt!unix.cis.pitt.edu!obie.cis.pitt.edu!cmf
From: cmf@obie.cis.pitt.edu (Carl M. Fongheiser)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *real* change won't happen
Keywords: *.aquaria alt rec sci
Message-ID: <20172@unix.cis.pitt.edu>
Date: 23 Oct 89 18:31:58 GMT
References: <1989Oct19.003117.809@everexn.uucp> <35808@apple.Apple.COM> <2563@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>
Sender: news@unix.cis.pitt.edu
Reply-To: cmf@obie.cis.pitt.edu (Carl M. Fongheiser)
Organization: University of Pittsburgh, Computing and Information Services
Lines: 29

In article <2563@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> laura@jarthur.claremont.edu (Laura Kirk) writes:
>My question:  if being in alt didn't hurt it, why would rec?  Surely alt.*
>has a much larger reputation for garbage than rec, and if it came out of
>alt with such high caliber postings, it should be able to stay in rec 
>with equally high caliber postings.

No, "alt" is a number of things.  You have your "junk" caliber newsgroups,
like alt.weemba.sheep, and then you have the high quality newsgroups,
like alt.gourmand and alt.aquaria.  Alt.gourmand's quality (although it
doesn't really exist anymore) came from moderation; alt.aquaria comes from
a certain level of respect and discipline on the part of the posters.

"Rec" on the other hand, almost by design seems to encourage high-volume
repetitive discussions, with occasional outbursts of flamage that are
difficult to suppress.

Who could say what the fate of a "rec.aquaria" would be?  My crystal ball
blew a fuse :-)

					Carl Fongheiser
					cmf@unix.cis.pitt.edu
>
>			laura
>
>-- 
>laura kirk                  %___________________________________%
>uunet!jarthur!laura          %   Reality is a optical illusion   %
>laura@jarthur.claremont.edu   %    that happens all of the time   %
>laura@ymir.bitnet              %___________________________________%