Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site teddy.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!teddy!rdp
From: rdp@teddy.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Suitable subjects for net.physics
Message-ID: <991@teddy.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Jul-85 07:44:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: teddy.991
Posted: Wed Jul 24 07:44:57 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jul-85 03:00:37 EDT
Reply-To: rdp@teddy.UUCP (Richard D. Pierce)
Distribution: net.physics
Organization: GenRad, Inc., Concord, Mass.
Lines: 29

There seems to be a lot of dicussion lately about what is and is not
appropriate subject material for this news group. When I first subscribed
a month ago, the initial deluge of articles seemd to concern itself with
discussions of whether or not Uri Geller was a fraud or. Frankly, those of
us who viewed Geller et al as a source of entertainment only could have
cared less.

This and similar material may or may not be appropriate. But how do we
decide what is? Several people have made suggestions, and I, of course,
have mine.

If your are going to submit an article, first see if the subject matter
is covered in any reputable high-school or college physics text. If any
reasonable reference is made to the subject, then this is an appropriate
place to submit it. If not (in the case of parapsychology, PK, etc.), then
find another news group more appropriate. 

By first consulting such a text (mine is Ford's "Classical and Modern 
Physics") two things can be accomplished:

    1.	We now have a reasonable limit to what is submitted.

    2.	In the process of consulting such a reference, you might find
	the answer to the question you have, or modify your opinion of
	something after reading a (alledgedly) definitive source.

Having made the mistake once of saying that was not correct, and confusing
the issue by saying it in a confusing manner, I know make sure that what
I am saying has some ground.