Xref: utzoo news.groups:17431 alt.drugs:2365
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!munnari.oz.au!uhccux!ames!sun-barr!newstop!sun!athena1!williamt
From: williamt@athena1.Sun.COM (William A. Turnbow)
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.drugs
Subject: soc vs talk (was Re: soc.drugs)
Message-ID: <131368@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 7 Feb 90 16:28:40 GMT
Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM
Reply-To: williamt@sun.UUCP (William A. Turnbow)
Lines: 25

In article <1990Feb7.030722.15380@eng.umd.edu> russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes:
>Good group, bad name.  This sounds like a perfect candidate for
>'talk.politics.drugs', with the other highly-charged political
>issues.
----------

    This brings up a question that I've been meaning to raise.

    What is the distinction between the soc and talk heirarchies?  From
their names, I would think that 'talk' is more for 'chatting' and 
conversations about topics, while 'soc' it would seem, would be more
for societal/social issues -- things that impact or are heavily
impacting our society.

    In addition to the placement of social-drug issues (perhaps 
talk.society.drugs?), I also was told by a few people that a
moderated group like t.r.pagan would have been better placed/proposed
as soc.religion.pagan.  I guess I missed the fine distinction, or was
it simply the fact that it was moderated?

    Thanks for comments...

-wat-

   --- An it harm none, do what you will.