Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!APEE.OGI.EDU!mehuld
From: mehuld@APEE.OGI.EDU (Mehul Dave)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: sci.philosophy.objectivism
Summary: The discussion is about a new newsgroup!
Keywords: Objectivism, Rand, newsgroup, philosophy
Message-ID: <9001170357.AA13773@apee.ogi.edu>
Date: 17 Jan 90 03:57:10 GMT
References: <9001162348.AA11695@apee.ogi.edu> <12987@phoenix.Princeton.EDU>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR
Lines: 64

In article <12987@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Greg Nowak writes:

>In article <9001162348.AA11695@apee.ogi.edu> mehuld@apee.ogi.edu (Mehul Dave) writes:
>}Greg Nowak suggests that objectivists should use sci.philosophy.meta
>}because it is unused right now and would be ideal instead of creating
>}sci.philosophy.objectivism.  The reason why it would not be proper to
>}use sci.philosophy.meta is because it is not exclusively for discussing
>}Objectivism. 
>
>THANK YOU. This is a perfect explanation of why objectivist postings
>don't belong in sci.philosophy.tech. Please explain this to R.W.
>Stubblefield; perhaps he will accept this coming from a fellow
>objectivist. As of now he has refused to discuss the issue, and has
>decided for himself that his postings are appropriate there.

Now, wait a minute.  The chronology of events is like this.  Mr.
Stubblefield posted to sci.philosophy.tech judging it to be the most
appropriate newsgroup for his postings relating to Objectivism because
he could not find any other newsgroup appropriate for it.  Then there
was the suggestion to start a new newsgroup for postings related to
Objectivism in sci.philosophy.tech.  The call for discussion was for
talk.philosophy.objectivism and I suggested that it should be
sci.philosophy.objectivism and then you suggested that objectivists
should post to sci.philosophy.meta and hence my post quoted above.  I
didn't say anything about where Mr. Stubblefield's postings should go
and that is not the issue being discussed.  The issue is creating SPO.
We are asking for SPO because there seems to be some support from it
even from people who oppose objectivism.  That has little to do with
whether Mr. Stubblefield should post on SPT right now or not.
Obviously, he will not post there if there was
sci.philosophy.objectivism.

>}A newsgroup for discussing Objectivism, the philsophy of
>}Ayn Rand, is what is needed.  Of course, if sci.philosophy.meta was to
>}be renamed to sci.philsophy.objectivism, it would be all right but then
>}there have been some discussions in sci.philosophy.meta and I doubt if
>}the posters there would be willing to lose that newsgroup.
>
>There is almost no activity there; the only articles I found in its
>spool directory were those in the widely-crossposted "proving programs
>correct" thread. Of course, the story you tell is exactly the case
>with sci.philosophy.tech, an active newsgroup which has been invaded
>by inappropriate objectivist postings, mainly coming from RW Stubblefield.

I have been reading that newsgroup for a while and there was a big
discussion about "I do not exist" (!!!???).  Then, suddenly, it
subsided and there were some postings off and on till the subject you
mention.  In any event, that is not relevant.  The discussion going on
here was about creating a new newsgroup called
sci.philosophy.objectivism.  Posting to sci.philosophy.meta is just a
temporary solution.  We would like a newsgroup to discuss Objectivism.
You also mentioned in your reply to Joe Harris that it would take six
weeks to establish sci.philosophy.objectivism.  Quite true.  But it
would establish a newsgroup for Objectivism and it would be a permanent
solution.  (BTW, Objectivism would prefer this latter solution because
it is long range as opposed to the pragmatic version of it :-) 

> Greg Nowak/Phoenix Gang/Princeton NJ 08540


-- 
--Mehul Dave--                          (INTERNET :- mehuld@apee.ogi.edu)

"To the banner of life, all could be given, even life itself" -- Ayn Rand