Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!brolga!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!marlin.jcu.edu.au!cppds
From: cppds@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Peter Stephenson)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: More discussion on fate of comp.graphics?
Message-ID: <1991May10.022230.22527@marlin.jcu.edu.au>
Date: 10 May 91 02:22:30 GMT
References: <940.282722bf@vger.nsu.edu> <4741@sahara.megatek.uucp> <1991May9.140834.3564@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Organization: James Cook University of North Queensland
Lines: 37

In regards to the discussion for the comp.research, which I fully support,
I think more debate is needed.  Like others I don't want to see the discussion
explode into a fury of name proposals but I think more thought is needed.

The question I ask is will comp.graphics.research solve the problems
with comp.graphics?  I think not.  

You can distribute all the net-ettique
documents you like but you can't make people follow them.  People will
still post rogue/gif format requests to comp.graphics.research just as they
do in comp.graphics.visualisation.  Another prime example is rec.humor.d,
who ever uses it.  People reply directly to rec.humor making the 
newsgroup totally pointless and annoying to read.

I believe what has a better chance of working is the splitting of 
comp.graphics to a set of news.groups.  Most articles to comp.graphics
seem to have subject matter from the following groups:

	requests for formats
	requests for general graphics information
	general research discussion (# of which has dwindled greatly)
	announcements (ftp, book, software)
	other topics

So why not dis-band the general newsgroup and set up several specialised
news groups.  If the names are chosen wisely this may limit the number
of thoughtless postings.

Although comp.graphics.research definitely has my vote and I would like
to see discussion limited to if it is a solution, I have my doubts.

Peter Stephenson
James Cook University of North Queensland
(Up top on the brighter side of Australia)

PS. I'm a late entry to the debate.  I apologise if I have repeated
    previous points.