Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!crdgw1!lewis.crd.ge.com!welty From: welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Call for discussion: soc.history Message-ID: <2841167783@lewis.crd.ge.com> Date: 12 Jan 90 21:16:24 GMT References: <2840561048@lewis.crd.ge.com> <11372@venera.isi.edu> Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com Reply-To: welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) Followup-To: news.groups Organization: New York State Institute for Sebastian Cabot Studies Lines: 34 In article <11372@venera.isi.edu>, Craig E. Ward writes: *My one worry would be that a few would try to turn the group into a flaming *talk-style group, pouring forth a flood of politically slanted, demagogic *garbage. i've been suprised at the relative lack of this sort of stuff in the soc.misc trial period; idealogical rhetoric has been rare, and its outbursts have been short-lived (requesting citations, sources, etc. has been a remarkably effective tactic.) * To prevent this, we might try sending a monthly posting analogous to *the "Most Frequently Asked Questions" articles in some of the technical *groups. i have software to support a monthly posting; it's already in use in rec.autos.* moreover, i also have an archive server which allows useful articles to be stored at a central site, and requested via email; it too is successfully supporting rec.autos.*. i see no problems with adding soc.history (or whatever) to the list. *In addition to discussions of the events of the past, we could have reviews of *new history books posted, discussions of the relevance to our world of *history as a discipline and lament the sorry state of history education in *the primary grades (K-12). there are already book reviews showing up in the soc.misc trial run; as for meta-discussion about history, those would for obvious reasons be allowable as well. richard -- richard welty 518-387-6346, GE R&D, K1-5C39, Niskayuna, New York ..!crdgw1!lewis.crd.ge.com!welty welty@lewis.crd.ge.com ``air holes!? nobody said anything to me about air holes''