Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think!ames!ncar!umigw!mthvax.cs.miami.edu!aem
From: aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (a.e.mossberg)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: FSFnet, Otherrealms, and other electronic magazines...
Message-ID: <1234@umigw.MIAMI.EDU>
Date: 6 Dec 89 22:10:11 GMT
References: <1989Dec6.100342.5982@sssab.se> <37044@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: news@umigw.MIAMI.EDU
Reply-To: aem@Mthvax.CS.Miami.Edu
Lines: 31

Here's the recently posted data on the groups.

265 11000   466   95%     7  104.3     0%  0.02    1.7%  rec.mag.otherrealms
399  5800   253   93%     4    5.4    25%  0.00    0.9%  rec.mag
480  1300    57   68%     1  123.9     0%  0.12    0.2%  rec.mag.fsfnet

1300 subscribers to rec.mag.fsfnet
1 message in the period.

Why can't it be deleted? Surely that one message could've gone to
rec.mag?

rec.mag itself averages about a message a week, since I stopped posting
magazine summaries/indices to it. (The last two days it's had alot
of traffic, 'cause my Greenpeace articles have been cross-posted to it).

rec.mag.otherrealms has a bit more traffic, and the moderator is still
alive. Certainly it has readership. But I didn't suggest that it be
deleted now, did I?

With the continuing growth of newsgroups on USENET, I suggest that there
has to be a mechanism for removing outdated groups. rec.mag.fsfnet
is an ideal candidate for removal.

aem


--
a.e.mossberg / aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu / aem@umiami.BITNET / Pahayokee Bioregion
I don't believe in the afterlife although I am bringing 
a change of underwear.		- Woody Allen