Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watcgl!dmmartindale
From: dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale)
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: Re: Re: STARGATE (READ THIS!) - Let's he
Message-ID: <1087@watcgl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Jan-85 02:09:27 EST
Article-I.D.: watcgl.1087
Posted: Tue Jan 29 02:09:27 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 29-Jan-85 07:30:10 EST
References: <1038@opus.UUCP> <10300006@ccvaxa.UUCP>
Reply-To: dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 21

In article <10300006@ccvaxa.UUCP> preece@ccvaxa.UUCP writes:
>>		... How long can we expect our employers (or schools)
>>	will foot the bill for these non work (non academic) news
>>	groups?
>----------
>As long as the perceived benefit of the technical material is higher
>than the perceived cost of the non-technical material.

This is a pretty flimsy argument - it seems to assume that getting
USENET news is an "all or nothing" decision.

Since it is possible, with some work and the cooperation of your news
feed, to get only a certain set of groups, the benefit of the technical
material can be obtained without the cost of the non-technical material.
So how do you propose to justify this cost if asked?  "I can't be bothered
turning off the non-technical stuff" isn't likely to be accepted as a good
reason.

Something along the lines of "our users/employees value the non-technical
groups so let's do this as a favour to them" is, to me, a much better
justification.  And the only really valid one I can think of.