Xref: utzoo news.groups:8496 news.admin:5293
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bionet!ames!ucsd!rutgers!att!ulysses!andante!alice!jj
From: jj@alice.UUCP (alice!jj)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin
Subject: Re: Proposed OFFICIAL Newsgroup Creation/Deletion Guidelines
Message-ID: <9111@alice.UUCP>
Date: 27 Mar 89 16:55:41 GMT
References: <1634@ncar.ucar.edu> <3726@phri.UUCP>
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (alice!jj)
Organization: ATT-BL, Murray Hill, Signal Processing Research Department
Lines: 36


I don't agree at all with the proposed newsgroup deletion
rules.  

I'd suggest the following rules:

1) Newsgroups with no traffic at any major gateway for three months
can bite the dust with an announcement to the group, and a two
week wait for complaints, given complaints, hold a vote as
in 2).

2) Call for a vote, have the two week obligatory discussion period,
and THEN remove the group, after a 30 day vote, if 100 more people
vote NO than YES, rather than the other way around.


Any group may be voted on only ONCE per year for removal.

I think any easier sort of voting procedure will lead to
"newsgroup wars"  the likes of which we've never seen before.

I further vote NO for Greg's holding the official list. I've
seen his voice strongly stated on one side or the other of
too many debates to accept him.

The keeper of the list must be a neutral, or close to one.


I'm also opposed, but in a lesser way,  to the strictures Greg
would have us put on group proposals.  They seem to me to be
nothing but a set of excuses not to create a given newsgroup.
-- 
It's a Small World, After All! *Mail to jj@alice.att.com  or alice!jj
We're Not Satisfied,  At  All! *HASA, Athiest Curmudgeon Division
Gonna Build One  Not So  Small *Copyright alice!jj 1989, all rights reserved, except
As  This  Small, Small, World! *transmission by USENET and like free facilities granted.