Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1.chuqui 4/7/84; site nsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!nsc!chuqui
From: chuqui@nsc.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: net.music.classical discussion - my last words
Message-ID: <932@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 10-May-84 11:41:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: nsc.932
Posted: Thu May 10 11:41:47 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 12-May-84 13:02:28 EDT
References: <198@homxa.UUCP>
Organization: National Semiconductor, Sunnyvale
Lines: 26

I think the only real reason we don't create new groups as quickly as we
could is because once they exist it is practically impossible to get rid
of them again. If we had some way of putting a new topic on the system
and evaluating it AND deleting it if it didn't make the grade (whatever
the grade is defined to be) then I'd be a lot more willing to create 
new topics. As I've found out the hard way, no matter how useless or
empty a group is, once it is created it is set in stone, and it is 
there forever (or almost). My belief is that the vast number of topics
we already have is confusing to new users (and many not-so-new users) and
I don't want to increase the complexity of the net beyond what it is already.

My personal preference would be that for every new topic that is created
we delete an old one until the consensus of the net is that there aren't 
any topics worthy of deletion. Unfortunately, I seem to be in the minority
on this, so I am not pushing it. The amount of time, effort, and emotional
stability (to survive flamings) needed to get a topic zapped around here 
simply isn't worth it to me, so the only alternative is to be very careful
what is created.

chuq (don't Nuke Wobegon! See if I care!)
-- 
>From the closet of anxieties of:			Chuq Von Rospach
{amd70,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4}!nsc!chuqui			(408) 733-2600 x242

Half asleep I hear a voice; is it only in my mind?
Or is it someone calling me, someone I failed and left behind?