From: utzoo!decvax!microsof!pyuxjj!mhuxm!mhuxv!mhuxi!mhuxj!mhuxt!eagle!harpo!npoiv!npois!houxm!houxa!houxi!houxz!hocda!spanky!ka
Newsgroups: net.philosophy net.news.group
Title: New group net.philosophy
Article-I.D.: spanky.198
Posted: Wed Feb  9 17:46:40 1983
Received: Tue Mar  8 07:57:55 1983

The vote for net.philosophy is now 16 for and 2	against, which is
not much out of	8000 netnews readers, but it seems like	enough to
justify	giving the group a chance.  The	vote on	the name is tied
2 for net.philsosphy and 2 for net.philos, and it seems	easier to
remain with net.philosophy.

This group is for the discussion of philosophical issues:  both
moral questions	and speculations on life, the universe,	and
everything.  It	is *not* intended to replace net.flame.	 Ideally,
articles in this group should encourage	people to think	about the
subject, and flames generate more heat than light.  This implies
that a reasonable amount of thought should go into articles writ-
ten for	this group.  The name "net.philosophy" is not designed to
scare people off; only to encourage them to organise their
thoughts before	posting.  From Emily Post for Usenet:  "Be sure
you have something new to say.	Frequently a discussion	starts
with one or two	carefully prepared "position papers" and then de-
generates into repetitive claims.  Before reacting to an item
read all the followups that have reached your machine."

Religious topics should	be discussed in	net.religion rather than
net.philosophy,	but can	be moved here if net.religion is deleted.
The discussion on the morality of abortion should be moved here
if there is anything left to be	said on	that topic.  Discussion
of whether abortion should be legal really belongs in
net.politics, but it is	probably better	to discuss this	in
net.philosophy than to split the abortion discussion between two
newgroups.