Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!ames!saturn!xanthian
From: xanthian@saturn.ADS.COM (Metafont Consultant Account)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Arguments for SCI.philosophy.objectivism
Message-ID: <10749@saturn.ADS.COM>
Date: 6 Feb 90 00:01:04 GMT
References: <7444@tank.uchicago.edu>
Organization: Advanced Decision Systems, Mt. View, CA (415) 960-7300
Lines: 34


Sigh!

Despite the tremendous cachet involved in having one's favorite group
accepted in the "sci" heirarchy, all arguments (mine included, at
length and ad nauseum) about whether objectivism is a science are
beside the point.

The only question of relevance is (following the information about
newsgroup subscription provided by Peter da Silva) whether sites which
subscribe to newsgroups by toplevel name to simplify the
communications software will be well served by having
*.philosophy.objectivism included in the "sci" heirarchy, a heirarchy
(however much since abused) established for the purpose of
incorporating in one easy-to-subscribe-to place those discussions
which could possibly be of value to an entity providing a host
computer in terms of economic benefit equal to the cost of
subscription.

I really doubt that a newsgroup, founded to allow a group of posters
unwelcome where they currently post a new home, and demonstrably (by
recent postings) unwilling to entertain unfriendly contrary opinions,
qualifies to meet this subscription criterion.  Could we get on with
the sci.philosophy.objectivism vote?  Had the net a version of
Robert's Rules of Order (highly desirable IMN-HO), this could be
considered a calling of the question.
--
Again, my opinions, not the account furnishers'.

xanthian@well.sf.ca.us (Kent Paul Dolan)
xanthian@ads.com - expiring soon; please use Well address for replies.
Kent, the (bionic) man from xanth, now available as a build-a-xanthian
kit at better toy stores near you.  Warning - some parts proven fragile.
-> METAFONT, TeX, graphics programming done on spec -- (415) 964-4486 <-