Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!hellgate.utah.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!bbn!bbn.com!mesard
From: mesard@bbn.com (Wayne Mesard)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: The right way to run a trial hierarchy
Message-ID: <48130@bbn.COM>
Date: 13 Nov 89 16:28:06 GMT
References: <3923@sbcs.sunysb.edu>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: mesard@BBN.COM (Wayne Mesard)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 15

brnstnd@stealth.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>After a month, depending on how fish owners have used the groups, one or
>both proposers go to the Committee; and either sci.aquaria or rec.aquaria
>is created as the trial groups disappear.

Everyone would simply cross-post to both groups.  And a lot of the
volume would undoubtedly be meta-discussions about the name (among other
things).  Not that I don't think this would be an improvement over the
current system.  At least then the users of the group would be shaping
it instead of self-styled net.big-shots.

Maybe each trial group will need a trial.foo.d group, too.

-- 
void *Wayne_Mesard();         Mesard@BBN.COM         BBN, Cambridge, MA