Xref: utzoo news.groups:15996 rec.arts.movies:27938
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!bbn!bbn.com!rshapiro
From: rshapiro@bbn.com (Richard Shapiro)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: preliminary call for disussion: rec.arts.movies subgroups
Message-ID: <50208@bbn.COM>
Date: 29 Dec 89 23:48:04 GMT
References: <49987@bbn.COM> <10213@zodiac.ADS.COM>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: rshapiro@BBN.COM (Richard Shapiro)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 31


OK, it looks to me as if a clear consensus is forming around the idea
of a "serious" discussion group which would cover all movies. I hereby
drop the rec.arts.movies.classic(al) idea. 

As usual, there's some contention about the name. I think we should
bite the bullet and go for something long and inelegant, but clear
and, from the net hierrarchy point of view, conherent and consistent.
It really should be under rec.arts.movies, so how about:

  rec.arts.movies.serious

?

Anyway, let's forget the "classical" idea and the more general idea of
fragmenting r.a.m and focus instead on discussing the merits of this
proposal: a moderated group for serious/scholarly discussion of any
and all movies. Moderation is essential here, I think, otherwise it
will be no different from r.a.m. There are probably a few things we
should exclude from the start: any kind of lists, contests, trivia,
movie or actor identification, etc. On the other hand, we should NEVER
exclude articles solely because of the movies they discuss: if someone
has something serious to say about Mothra movies, fine.

If interested people agree that the group should be moderated, we need
a moderator. Volunteers? I'm willing though not anxious (and possibly
not able -- see below). Anyone else?

[NB: I'm about to change jobs and I may not have Usenet access when
the time comes for calling a vote. Will someone else volunteer to
conduct the vote in that event?]