Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!stl!dww
From: dww@stl.stc.co.uk (David Wright)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: You want one that fits in 25 lines?
Summary: Trial newsgroups considered harmful
Message-ID: <2420@stl.stc.co.uk>
Date: 18 Nov 89 11:06:15 GMT
References: <45326@looking.on.ca> <41800006@inmet> <46614@looking.on.ca>
Sender: news@stl.stc.co.uk
Reply-To: "David Wright" <dww@stl.stc.co.uk>
Organization: STC Technology Limited, London Road, Harlow, Essex, UK
Lines: 23

In article <46614@looking.on.ca> brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton) writes:
#How to rename a trial group into mainstream USENET?  I would be surprised
#if, in 99% of all cases, an independent experienced netter couldn't come
#up with a good descriptive name for the move.

The problem with the trail newsgroup scheme is that, unless you have some
sort of voting scheme first :-), the initial group gets the name the
originator first thought of.   Thus we might have had  trial.sci.aquaria.
Then come the decision to move the group to the main net, there will be a
strong view of "we've got that name now, lets keep it, we'll move to
sci.aquaria".   Especially as the people discussing things *in the trial
group* will be quite understandably more concerned with the needs of their
particular group than of the net in general.

I used to think that a trial group was a good idea, as it would show whether
there was enough volume to justify the subject.  But the real problem is not
low-use groups (which don't really matter much), but badly named ones, which
make more work for the system admins, and (much more important) make it hard
for the users to find where to post things.

Regards,        "None shall be enslaved by poverty, ignorance or conformity"
        David Wright           STL, London Road, Harlow, Essex  CM17 9NA, UK
dww@stl.stc.co.uk <or> ...uunet!mcvax!ukc!stl!dww <or> PSI%234237100122::DWW