Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think!mintaka!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!Teknowledge.COM!polya!crew From: crew@CS.Stanford.EDU (Roger Crew) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: *CALL FOR DISCUSSION - New group "rec.arts.uk.misc"* Message-ID: Date: 29 Nov 89 00:00:57 GMT References: <8911281706.AA06461@ncar.UCAR.EDU> Sender: news@polya.Stanford.EDU Followup-To: news.groups Organization: Stanford University Computer Science Dept. Lines: 18 In-reply-to: MATON%SASK.BITNET@EVANS.UCAR.EDU's message of 27 Nov 89 17:44:42 GMT In article <8911281706.AA06461@ncar.UCAR.EDU> MATON%SASK.BITNET@EVANS.UCAR.EDU writes: > > As there are many locations that do not get the '.soc' newsgroups > it would seem appropriate to have this group under the '.rec' > heading. > This by itself is enough to make me put in a NO vote. If it's a soc. group, then it's a soc. group. If we get large numbers of soc. groups masquerading as rec. groups all that will happen is that we'll get sites deciding not to carry the rec. groups either. -- Roger Crew OBEY MARRY AND REPRODUCE CONSUME STAY ASLEEP Usenet: {arpa gateways, decwrl, uunet, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!crew Internet: crew@CS.Stanford.EDU Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com