Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site oddjob.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!gargoyle!oddjob!apak
From: apak@oddjob.UUCP (Adrian Kent)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian,net.philosophy,net.politics,net.religion,net.abortion,net.space,net.singles,net.women,net.music
Subject: Re: USENET costs--who's paying for what?
Message-ID: <1241@oddjob.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Mar-86 12:32:54 EST
Article-I.D.: oddjob.1241
Posted: Tue Mar 18 12:32:54 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Mar-86 05:38:18 EST
References: <5382@glacier.ARPA>
Reply-To: apak@oddjob.UUCP (Adrian Kent)
Organization: U. Chicago: Physics
Lines: 22
Xref: watmath net.religion.christian:3137 net.philosophy:4517 net.politics:14025 net.religion:9726 net.abortion:2946 net.space:6509 net.singles:11037 net.women:9785 net.music:12687

In article <5382@glacier.ARPA> reid@glacier.UUCP writes:
>
>I've been taking readership data for USENET lately. This data consists of
>summaries from 100 sites about the number of readers of various newsgroups.
>I then collect it all back at glacier, add the traffic data, and produce
>this result. I'm not proposing to do anything with this information, but other
>people might.
>TOP 40 NEWSGROUPS IN ORDER BY PER-READER COST
   lots of figures follow.
>	Brian Reid	decwrl!glacier!reid
>	Stanford	reid@SU-Glacier.ARPA
      Sorry for posting to all the groups the original went to. I just want to
point out two things:
(1) the figures quoted in this list are spuriously accurate (estimated world
audience to the nearest person, cost per person to the nearest cent.) In fact,
there's no indication how either the readership or the cost were estimated,
and so no reason to place any faith at all in the numbers.
(2) newsgroups have, in the past, been abolished for completely spurious 
reasons: history has been rewritten, 'votes' have been taken on the basis of
one pro-abolitionist's claim about the contents of his private mail - end of
group. 
                       adrian