Xref: utzoo talk.religion.newage:5011 news.groups:15100
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!athena1!williamt
From: williamt@athena1.Sun.COM (William A. Turnbow)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage,news.groups
Subject: Re: talk.religion.pagan, etc -- call for non-binding votes
Message-ID: <128398@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 27 Nov 89 16:23:53 GMT
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Reply-To: williamt@sun.UUCP (William A. Turnbow)
Lines: 28

In article <9075@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes:
>Look, let's settle this thing.  The results of the existing poll were
>too indecisive to serve as a basis for action, and as has been pointed
>out, some people want a new group rather than a renaming.
-----------

    I have seen NO ONE ask for or want a renaming, so why does it
keep coming up as a (non-) issue?

    As for enough traffic to support it, there seems to be quite a bit
of non-pagan, newage traffic.  Certainly alot more than several newsgroups
on my newsrc list that only get traffic once or twice a month.

    As for whether or not it is fair -- what is fair?  We have a group of
people that would like to discuss such matters separate from other
topics.  You could argue that alot of groups are unfair to some other
group of people.  Like, lets see, ANY religious group, any group for a
particular vendor's computers, any group for a particular vendor's OS,
etc.  The list could go on for quite a bit.  So this also is rather a
non-issue (or at least should be).

    The main point should be whether or not there is a group of people
that would benefit from the creation of a separate group.

-wat-


   --- An it harm none, do what you will.