Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!midway!delphi!bob
From: bob@delphi.uchicago.edu (Robert S. Lewis, Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: REC.PETS, REC.BIRDS division.
Message-ID: <1990Aug10.183201.6865@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 10 Aug 90 18:32:01 GMT
References: <1873@lectroid.sw.stratus.com> <26487@nigel.udel.EDU> <43573@apple.Apple.COM> <1918@lectroid.sw.stratus.com> <43759@apple.Apple.COM> <1990Aug9.141910.3845@midway.uchicago.edu> <377@spam.ua.oz>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Reply-To: bob@delphi.UUCP (Robert S. Lewis, Jr.)
Organization: University of Chicago
Lines: 30

In article <377@spam.ua.oz> wvenable@spam.ua.oz (Bill Venables) writes:
>In article <1990Aug9.141910.3845@midway.uchicago.edu>
>bob@delphi.uchicago.edu (Robert S. Lewis, Jr.) writes:
>[..]

>>   Why not rec.birds.wild?  I don't think the sci.ornithology heading
>>   suggested earlier would be a good one, since I don't think we want to
>>   discourage amateur birders.
>
>The `sci.ornithology' suggestion was mine. `rec.birds.wild' is just fine by
>me, however I am rather surprised that you think `sci.ornithology' would
>scare off amateur birders.  It wouldn't frighten me, for instance :-)
>


Maybe you're right--most birders I know consider themselves amateur
ornithologists anyway--also, we don't necessarily want to restrict the
newsgroup to wild birds, if things said about captive birds have
general ornithological significance, do we?  Maybe sci.ornithology
isn't such a bad idea afterall.  I'd vote for it if it comes to
splitting up rec.birds.



Also, why must we preserve these rec, sci, talk, etc. prefixes?  They
don't seem to be very useful.  Why can't we just call our newsgroup
ornithology? Or birds?  


Rob Lewis