Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcsstat.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsstat!laura
From: laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: hoo boy! (never again) - (nf)
Message-ID: <1682@utcsstat.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 22-Jan-84 15:30:46 EST
Article-I.D.: utcsstat.1682
Posted: Sun Jan 22 15:30:46 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Jan-84 15:36:14 EST
References: <5023@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Organization: U. of Toronto, Canada
Lines: 26

<mike has missed my point (I think). Large traffic is not what makes a
subject annoying, it is merely one of the things that makes a subject annoying.
Thus if there is large traffic in some newsgroup on some sub-topic then it
may be time to make a new news group.

However, the reverse is not the case. If you mention the word "homosexual"
outside of net.motss and net.religion (I know, I just mentioned the word
in net.women) you get hate mail. Clearly the word is enough to drive some
people up the wall. So -- even if there are no articles in net.motss for
weeks or months, moving that discussion group back somewhere is not advised.

Moreover, while the group that gets "moved back" may not bother the people
in the "back" group -- given that there is almost no traffic (the proposed
reason to move a group back) this does not handle the case where the
subscribers to the moved group have decided not to subscribe to the
"back" group.

I can see it now. Where do we put net.rec.nude? Net.rec? LOUD SCREAM from
utcsstat!laura who has already unsubscribed to net.rec. Net.misc? LOUD
SCREAM from hundreds of people who find nudity disgusting. Net.general?
LOUD SCREAM from Steve Perelgut and Mark Horton, both of whom know what
net.general is not for... and so it goes ... kind of like the discussions
on what to cal a new news group...

Laura Creighton
utzoo!utcsstat!laura