Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!jove.rutgers.edu!amalthea.rutgers.edu!sliu From: sliu@amalthea.rutgers.edu (Steven C. Liu) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Call for discussion: soc.history Message-ID: Date: 20 Jan 90 08:50:40 GMT References: <2840561048@lewis.crd.ge.com> <2841149644@lewis.crd.ge.com> <1990Jan13.043754.15395@agate.berkeley.edu> <1382@scorn.sco.COM> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 34 In article <1382@scorn.sco.COM> davidbe@sco.COM (The Cat in the Hat) writes: > She said that he said that she said that gsmith@garnet.berkeley.edu (Gene W. Smith) said: > - > - I have long thought that a history group would be a good idea, > -but was too lazy to count votes for one. As to the name, it seems > -to me that misc.history makes more sense, but I don't feel like > -starting a war over it. But why soc? > > I agree. A history group could go in any number of groups; I wouldn't > complain if it were in sci. Misc seems like the best place for it, > offhand. I'd love to see a newsgroup related to history created. However, I feel it should be called "sci.history". History is a discipline just like mathematics and physics. People who "do history" or "study history" know that it takes lots of serious critical analysis. Merely memorizing dates, being well-informed, watching the 6 o'clock news or reading a couple of survey history texts hardly qualifies one as being serious about history. A "sci.history" newsgroup should be much like "sci.math" in that it should be for people with a real interest in the subject, not a place for senseless squabbling about things like "my culture is better than yours and here's my proof". Steve -- Steven C. Liu - Supercomputer Remote Access Center, Rutgers University uucp: {ames, att, harvard}!rutgers!jove.rutgers.edu!sliu internet: sliu@JOVE.RUTGERS.EDU bitnet: sliu@zodiac.bitnet Phone: (201) 932-2908