Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!utcsri!clarke
From: clarke@utcsri.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: What *are* the can.* groups?
Message-ID: <4852@utcsri.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 1-Jun-87 14:04:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcsri.4852
Posted: Mon Jun  1 14:04:43 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 2-Jun-87 01:29:54 EDT
References: <1421@ncc.UUCP> <2567@dalcs.UUCP>
Reply-To: clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke)
Distribution: can
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Lines: 20
Summary: 

In article <2567@dalcs.UUCP> thompson@dalcs.UUCP (Michael A. Thompson) writes:
> The traffic seems so minimal maybe we should just drop the can.* groups and
> use the can distribution.

This seems reasonable from the point of view of the level of traffic.  The
trouble is that there are occasional outbursts of discussion -- at a level
sometimes of 10 or so articles daily -- that are likely to be uninteresting
or even annoying to many readers.  Usually these can be canned in "can.
politics" after a while, so I think that group serves a useful purpose about
once a year.

I speak from somewhat embarrassing experience here, for I have not only been
annoyed but have myself caused annoyance.  I know I should show a little more
self-control, but one reason for subdividing newsgroups is to provide auto-
mated self-control, isn't it?
-- 

Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4
              (416) 978-4058
{allegra,cornell,decvax,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke