Xref: utzoo rec.birds:2639 news.groups:23095
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!wuarchive!mit-eddie!media-lab!geek
From: geek@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU (Chris Schmandt)
Newsgroups: rec.birds,news.groups
Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: REC.PETS, REC.BIRDS division.
Message-ID: <3177@media-lab.MEDIA.MIT.EDU>
Date: 17 Aug 90 22:46:24 GMT
References: <32320004@hprmokg.HP.COM> <90228.201718JAHAYES@MIAMIU.BITNET> <1990Aug17.115823.865@agate.berkeley.edu> <1990Aug17.173217.27746@nmt.edu> <1990Aug17.222601.27673@agate.berkeley.edu>
Reply-To: geek@media-lab.media.mit.edu (Chris Schmandt)
Organization: MIT Media Lab, Cambridge MA
Lines: 31

In article <1990Aug17.222601.27673@agate.berkeley.edu> boris@tornado.Berkeley.EDU (Boris Chen) writes:
>
>I read this at 2400 BAUD, and even at 1200 baud it isn't that much
>time to 'n' through a couple of articles. 2 minutes? 

It's not time, its the signal-to-noise ratio.  Personally, I am
interested in a news group about bird watching.  I've tracked this
group for 6 months or so(?), and during this time there is a
recurring theme of "INDOOR" vs. "OUTDOOR" and who's responsibility
it is to make sure their messages are killable by others, etc. etc.
That is not why I read this group.  Neither do I read it to hear about
pet birds.

There are certainly a number of people who share this opinion.  There
must have been enough votes to create the original rec.birds, so there
must be enough of us to make a birdwatching group.  But isn't all
this repeating the original vote?  

The way to proceed seems to create rec.birds.pets.  If a call for
votes happens, all the birdwatchers should vote "yes" which should
(if the above premise is true) result in enough votes for its 
creation.  Then we don't have to deal with this any more.

It's not a "right" or "wrong" issue.  Just a question of tastes.
Certainly one could read both groups.

For me, the SNR is low enough that if the split does not happen,
I'll probably unsubscribe.  Or read every couple of weeks, when its
easier to kill whole threads.

chris