Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site cae780.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!hao!kpno!amd70!cae780!chuqui
From: chuqui@cae780.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: a proposition
Message-ID: <170@cae780.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 28-Nov-83 12:14:44 EST
Article-I.D.: cae780.170
Posted: Mon Nov 28 12:14:44 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 2-Dec-83 07:11:27 EST
References: <729@hao.UUCP>
Organization: CAESystems, Inc. Sunnyvale
Lines: 41


    I just don't think this is the right approach.  The proliferation
    of newsgroups is not necessarily a bad thing -- it helps categorize
    and isolate discussions, making it easier for news readers to filter
    out what doesn't interest them.  If the news software can't handle
    it, then the fault lies in the software.  Future versions of news
    should place a heavy emphasis on making the news system's performance
    and operation relatively independent of the number of groups.  The
    current method of using a separate directory for each group is a definite
    step in the right direction.  The only real drawback is the limitation
    on the size of the group name (and of course, disk space -- but that
    will be a problem under any version).

In theory I tend to agree with Peter. Newsgroups are not a bad thing. In
reality, however, there tends to be a number of newsgroups that have
outlived their usefulness (my mind immediately wanders to net.wobegon and
net.games.pacman). What I am suggesting is a way to get people to look at
what the system has and decide what can be done away with while minimizing
the loss of usefulness of the system. Its always possible to have someone 
who administrates this thing (like Mark Horton or myself or some appointed
group) go through and occasionally clean up the out of date topics, but I 
prefer to allow the people to govern themselves and allow as many voices as
possible to help decide.

I am not trying to make up for software limitations or anything else. I am
just looking at ways to make sure that topics that are not being used are
(eventually) recycled. If a decision is made to limit things to (say) 100
topics, and a day comes that we have 100 good topics, the limit can always
be raised. I am not suggesting arbitrariness, just thought. If nothing
else, this might make people interested in a severely underused topic (such
as net.wobegon) realize that it exists and resurrect it. If it doesn't, do
we really need it anyway?

If someone has a better idea on how to get rid of anitquated newsgroups,
please speak up!



-- 
From the dungeons of the warlock:		{amd70 qubix}!cae780!chuqui
		Chuqui the Plaid		*pif*