Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!cunyvm!maine.bitnet!tar From: TAR@MAINE.BITNET (Thom Rounds) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: rec.music.pfloyd Message-ID: Date: 5 Jan 90 19:57:50 GMT References: <9001031655.AA04473@snowmass.scd.ucar.EDU> <50425@bbn.COM> Lines: 51 In article <50457@bbn.COM>, rshapiro@bbn.com (Richard Shapiro) says: > >In article TAR@MAINE.BITNET (Thom Rounds) : >writes >> Alot of people say this. I want to ask a question to the net pertaining >to >>this subject. The question is this: If you wouldn't read a newsgroup, or are >>indifferent to it, or just plain don't care, why would you vote no, making it >>less likely for the people who *do* to read it? Why not just abstain? > > > >As explained before, I might vote 'no' if I think the community as a >whole would be better served by keeping the discussion in a place >where non-fanatics can see it. I would never subscribe to r.m.pfloyd >because 90+% of the articles wouldn't interest me. If I don't care >anything about Pink Floyd, that's fine. But if I enjoy the (very) >occasional posting on r.m.misc, I lose -- I'll never see such postings >because they won't be there anymore. By consolidating yourselves into >your own group, you leave behind all the people with casual interest. >This is the strong point of 'misc' groups -- exposure to things that >you're not already a great fan of. > I really don't see why the occaisional person wouldn't still post to r.m.misc with something pertaining to Pink Floyd. People tend to cross-post alot, and if there's a good discussion going on elsewhere, someone might mention it in r.m.misc, the mention of this subject in r.m.gdead is a good ex- ample of that analogy. > >>>Now if you could convince me that fans were discouraged from posting >>>to r.m.misc, whereas they would post to a new specialty group (this >>>was the r.m.dylan case), I would support the proposal. >>> >> Not r.m.misc specifically, but certainly in alt.r-n-roll there has been >>quite a bit of anti-Floyd people telling us we have no right to post >>there. > > > >I quit reading alt.r-n-r, so I can't comment. If the situation is as >you say it is, then a new group is the right solution, and we casual >fans lose. I would reluctantly support the creation of the group if >there's good reason to think that you can't use existing groups. Have >you tried r.m.misc? It has wider distribution than alt.r-n-r anyway. As I mentioned above, I like to avoid over-bloated newsgroups. R.m.misc fits into that description. I think alot of net.news.readers feel the same way I do. --Thom Rounds