Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!ncar!boulder!sunybcs!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!constance.rutgers.edu!webber From: webber@constance.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: Reflections on the creation of comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac Message-ID: Date: 15 May 88 09:32:12 GMT References: <442@white.gcm> <3880@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <1505@iscuva.ISCS.COM> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 42 In article <1505@iscuva.ISCS.COM>, davids@iscuva.ISCS.COM (David Schmidt) writes: > If Bob really feals that the creation of comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac > is worthwhile, and that everyone (except the backbones :-) will want You are wrong in your presumption that the backbone is 100% opposed to carrying the group. Just that there is a good deal of disinterest and a few noisy ones. >... > them add it to their systems. Have anyone that wants the group contact > you to find out where to get it. alt.* would be alot easier if I wanted to take that approach. However, I don't -- after all, creating a group that way is easier than taking a vote and so if that was an acceptable way to create a group, there would be no reason for anyone to bother with these newsgroup votes. >... > My *PERSONAL* opinion is that "Net Gods" have behaved properly. They > are ignoring a group that has not met the guidelines (no current > traffic, poor choice of name). Current traffic is not part of the guidelines at the time this group was voted on. Indeed, current traffic is only relevant when splitting an existing group on the basis of traffic. As a classic example of the difference between being a news group and being a mailing list, recall that the anime mailing list had died from disinterest at the time that rec.arts.anime was created (resulting in nearly 700 informative japanese animation related messages appearing in under a year). The audience one reaches by being a Usenet newsgroup is completely different from the audience one reaches from being a mailing list. The audience one reaches as an organized news group even differs significantly from the audience reached when discussion is spread over random newsgroups (e.g., see the recent comp.fonts versus earlier font discussions on the net). The name of the group was perfect and has recieved many complements. While comp.lang.cobol had certain historical connections, changing the name to that would have created too much confusion similar to the old net.columbia. But, if you feel strongly that comp.lang.cobol is the way to go, then collect your own 196+ yes votes -- don't try to steal mine. ---- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)