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 sdcc6.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!pesnta!amd!amdcad!decwrl!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcc6!ix312
From: ix312@sdcc6.UUCP (ix312)
Newsgroups: net.news.group,net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: "new group..."
Message-ID: <2467@sdcc6.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 19:19:56 EST
Article-I.D.: sdcc6.2467
Posted: Mon Mar 10 19:19:56 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Mar-86 23:06:11 EST
References: <417@excalibur.UUCP> <838@decuac.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U.C. San Diego, Academic Computer Center
Lines: 22
Xref: lsuc net.news.group:2502 net.sf-lovers:6252
Summary: new group sounds good to me

In article <838@decuac.UUCP>, avolio@decuac.UUCP writes:
> In article <417@excalibur.UUCP>, sword02@excalibur.UUCP writes:
> > ... a proposal for a new group!  At the moment there is only one NET.BOOKS.
> > I would like ... a NET.BOOKS for just fantasy, and science fiction lovers.
> 
> net.sf-lovers is more than 50% dicussions of f&sf books.  There is no need
> for another group.

I, too, feel that there is a need to separate books.sf/fantasy from
media science fiction.  The media group could then include the present
Dr. Who group.  This might then reduce the double coverage of many
articles in both the net.sf-lovers and net.tv, as well as some
duplication in net.books and net.sf-lovers.  

There is, in my opinion, enough difference between literary science
fiction and media science fiction to warrent this.


				       ME

 (Yes, I'd love to get and education, but it's too late; I already have
  my Ph.D.)