Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu
From: dmark@acsu.buffalo.edu (David Mark)
Newsgroups: rec.birds
Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: REC.PETS, REC.BIRDS division.
Message-ID: <33213@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 20 Aug 90 21:54:05 GMT
References: <1010.26c5a329@desire.wright.edu> <383@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> <1990Aug13.145520.14169@granite.cr.bull.com>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Organization: SUNY Buffalo
Lines: 32
Nntp-Posting-Host: autarch.acsu.buffalo.edu

In article <1990Aug13.145520.14169@granite.cr.bull.com> horvath@granite.cr.bull.com (John Horvath) writes:
>
>That's why I think something like rec.wildlife would help to point 
>out the philosphy of the target group. 
> 

This should be done carefully, too.  "Wildlife" seems mostly to mean
consumptive use, in the form of hunting and fishing.  I think you would find
that most organizations with "wildlife" in their names are hunters'
organizations.  For non-consumptive users, "natural history" or just plain
"nature" conjures up a much better image.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

And while I'm on the net:

I think that if this group does have to be renamed in order to better
stick to its original purpose, I would prefer

rec.birding

or

rec.nature.briding

And if too many of the bird-keepers don't consider their birds to be "pets",
how about "rec.aviculture"?  Otherwise, "rec.pets.birds" would seem like
a good idea.


David Mark
dmark@acsu.buffalo.edu