Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!stew.ssl.berkeley.edu!link
From: link@stew.ssl.berkeley.edu (Richard Link)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: sci.aquaria.birdfeed (was: Guppies)
Message-ID: <1990Feb17.051431.10115@agate.berkeley.edu>
Date: 17 Feb 90 05:14:31 GMT
References: <##701$@rpi.edu> <10804@saturn.ADS.COM> <1990Feb12.091942.9791@agate.berkeley.edu> <1990Feb13.044748.15122@umn-cs.cs.umn.edu> <BBC.90Feb13104006@libya.rice.edu> <3485@oolong.la.locus.com>
Sender: usenet@agate.berkeley.edu (USENET Administrator;;;;ZU44)
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 17

In article <3485@oolong.la.locus.com> oleg@electra.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev) writes:
>>a) Are *.aquaria cross-postings really _necessary_?  I say no.

>It costs the same to transmit as an article posted to one group
>only and is much more likely to deliver the article to the readers.

OK. But it costs *me* in toll charges when I have to by-pass cross-posted
articles. I readnews at home, since I don't have time at work.
Others obviously don't have this problem.

I don't see the necessity of having 3 newsgroups, when 2 would more than
suffice. Rec.aquaria for (relative) amateurs, and sci.aquaria for the more
advanced. Or even just Rec.aquaria, since the total traffic just doesn't
compare to things like Comp.sys.ibm.pc or Rec.music.misc.

Rick Link
link@ssl.berkeley.edu