Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!deimos!dino!mehl From: mehl@cs.iastate.edu (Mark M Mehl) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Creating arts.* tech.* sci.eng.* (was Re: micro.*???) Keywords: sci.* and new hierarchies and groups Message-ID: <511@dino.cs.iastate.edu> Date: 5 Feb 90 23:25:07 GMT References: <3284@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <3285@iitmax.IIT.EDU> <9442@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <7346@tank.uchicago.edu> <1990Feb1.005817.1786@everexn.uucp> <38268@apple.Apple.COM> Sender: usenet@dino.cs.iastate.edu Reply-To: mehl@atanasoff.cs.iastate.edu Lines: 24 peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: >Well, how about splitting off two new hierarchies? > arts.* Arts and Humanities. > tech.* Technology and Engineering (excluding computers). >Then we can mass-move some groups out of sci. We already have a rec.arts.* hierarchy. Do we really need another? Were you planning on dumping the rec.arts.* hierarchy if an arts.* hierarchy was started? On the other hand, a sci.eng.* or tech.* hierarchy maybe useful for engineering and "practical" physical-science concerns and applications that engineers and technologists deal with (rather than scientists). Maybe if we had a sci.eng.* hierarchy, then we could start a sci.eng.comp.* hierarchy so that hardware oriented groups like comp.arch would now become sci.eng.comp.arch. News groups would become organized like a library. -- /\ Mark M Mehl, alias Superticker (Supertickler to some) <><> Internet: mehl@atanasoff.cs.IAstate.edu \/ UUCP: {{mailrus,umix}!sharkey,hplabs!hp-lsd,uunet}!atanasoff!mehl Disclaimer: You got to be kidding; who would want to claim anything I said?