Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ucbvax!ucbarpa!fair
From: fair@ucbarpa.BERKELEY.EDU (Erik E. Fair)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: proposed new structure for `fa' groups
Message-ID: <10569@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 7-Oct-85 07:15:53 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.10569
Posted: Mon Oct  7 07:15:53 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 8-Oct-85 04:14:12 EDT
References: <10523@ucbvax.ARPA> <228@epicen.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.ARPA
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 97

In article <228@epicen.UUCP> jbuck@epicen.UUCP (Joe Buck) writes:
>
>The most serious thing that's wrong is the names. It's not just whether
>"computers" or "systems" must be used.
>
>1) The names are way too long.

What is `too long'?

The main thing that I am shooting for here is descriptive names. Names
that accurately reflect the content of the group. I consider this to
be of paramount importance because this network relys on education of
users, rather than on any central control. So few people read the
Official List of Newsgroups (which contains, among other things, a
breif description of the content of each newsgroup), as evidenced by
the number of postings you find in the wrong newsgroup(s). What I am
trying to do is make the name of a newsgroup sufficiently descriptive
that people will do the right thing. I am trying to make it EASIER for
everyone.

What, for example, can you infer from the name `sun-spots'?

Perhaps this is a mailing list for astronomers, interested in
the photosphere of the sun. (there is a net.astro, after all,
so this is not completely implausible).

Perhaps this is for people who use radios, who need announcements of
the sun-spot activity on the sun in order to schedule their radio
transmissions for periods free of the interference that they cause.
(of course, the sun-spot cycle is 11 years, so they might have to be
quiet for long periods of time...)

What can you infer from the name `mod.computers.sun'? (rhetorical question)

But that was an unfair example, I hear you cry. Well, how about
`INFO-VAX'? What can you infer from that name? If you didn't know
anything about the computer industry, you certainly would not know what
a VAX was, as much as DEC might wish otherwise. On the other hand,
`mod.computers.vax' clearly identifies what a VAX is, and therefore
what the topic of discussion in that newsgroup must be.

>2) People on ARPA and people on USENET will be using quite different names.

There are `net' several groups that are invisibly gatewayed to and from
an ARPANET equivalent, (e.g. INFO-C, net.lang.c). This has been in
operation over a period of years, and has not caused problems. The key
point here is that the people who read these groups are less interested
in a discussion of the group name or charter (except when it has been
violated), than they are interested in actually discussing the agreed
upon topic. So long as neither side degenerates into prolonged
meta-debate, there will be no problem with having different names.

>3) Either the USENET people must all learn the real names in a hurry, or
>  the alias files must get a lot bigger. Making the alias files bigger
>  will increase the number of CPU cycles required by news.

Quantify this, I dare you. The obvious response from my side is:

	1) the extra cost in CPU cycles is insignificant
	2) the cost is temporary (we can probably get rid of
		the extra aliases in three months, if it is really
		beating your poor system to death)

The other point that just occurred to me is that since all of these
postings emanate from a central point (i.e. ucbvax), nobody has to
change the aliases file at all. They have to add some names to the
moderators file (which, for the CPU conscious, is only examined when
someone tries to reply to an item), and they change their .newsrc (or
if their system is properly set up, their user-interface presents them
with the new newsgroup when it appears, and changes their .newsrc for
them).

So your point is bogus.

>I propose the following "radical" suggestion:
>
>JUST CHANGE "fa" to "mod"! PERIOD! No 30-character newsgroup names!
>Let's be kind to the users for once. If we are to gateway new ARPA groups,
>use the official names as desribed in the "List of lists" document, as
>nearly as possible (changing the names to lowercase).

I am being kind to the users, as I have explained. I am also, in a
single stroke, being kind to the whole network, an achievement seldom
realized these days.

It is gratifying to see that I was right: naming IS controversial.
It's also good to see that there are other people who care about such
issues, even if their care is limited to a shout for status quo. It is
high time that the network community pay attention to the names of
newsgroups, in order to REDUCE confusion, and other problems that
inappropriate names cause. Good naming makes the network a real
information resource. Bad naming will accelerate the degeneration of
the network.

	I await further responses with poised fingers,

	Erik E. Fair	ucbvax!fair	fair@ucbarpa.BERKELEY.EDU