Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!sunic!enea!sommar
From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Call for discussion:  soc.history
Message-ID: <630@enea.se>
Date: 13 Jan 90 00:16:04 GMT
References: <2840561048@lewis.crd.ge.com>
Organization: Enea Data AB, Sweden
Lines: 26

Richard Welty (welty@lewis.crd.ge.com) writes:
>the proposed soc.history shall be unmoderated (i saw little
>need for moderation in the trial period on soc.misc)
>...
>i can see a vague case for talk.history, but i think the case
>for soc.history is a bit stronger.

The group sounds interesting, but I doubt I'll get the time to read
it. However, I would propose that either group is to be moderated
or to be placed in talk. I haven't followed the trial period in
soc.misc, but that is somehow irrelevant to the issue.
  I've been trying reading talk.politics.misc (fun group if you
like "k" key) and it seems to be that some of the contributors to
that group are not people like you and me interested in politics,
but rather representants for various more or less obscure organizations
and who use the net for cheaply stating their view. Their newsgroups lines
does often mention a bunch of group and they could surely make a case
for including a history group too. I.e. once you get the group ruling
for real, you will get the garbage.
  So if you call it soc.history, moderate it or let ie be unmoderated
and call it talk.history.

(Besides, soc seems out of place to me. Soc for me is singles/men/couples/
etc and the culture groups. History doesn't belong there.)
-- 
Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
Unix is a virus.