Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!bunker!wtm
From: moth@dartmouth.edu (Tom Leathrum)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: Can we break up this group?
Message-ID: <10442@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 28 Feb 90 05:59:36 GMT
Sender: news@bunker.UUCP
Reply-To: moth@dartmouth.edu (Tom Leathrum)
Distribution: misc
Lines: 37
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP
Fidonet: None

Index Number: 6997

rocker@eve.wright.edu (Ronnie Peugh) writes:

 RP> I believe that it would be easier for people to gain information from
 RP> this news group if it were broken up into something like...
 RP> 
 RP>         misc.handicap.hearing-impared
 RP>                      .visually-impared
 RP>                      .mobilily-impared
 RP>                      .legeal-developments
 RP>                      .mics
 RP>                      .cronic-pain
 RP>                      .newprod
 RP> 
 RP> There are probably better names and some that I have missed and some
 RP> that aren't needed.  I know that there is always the 'k' key, but
 RP> sometimes the subject really doesn't say the type of handicap it is
 RP> about... and a kill file it not much help either.

The only ones of these suggestions I support are the .legal-developments and
the .newprod subgroups.  (My views on product announcements in the group are
fairly well-known by now, so I won't repeat them here.  Suffice it to say, if
that were a new subgroup, I would ignore it myself and advise most newcomers
to avoid it until they have already seen a review in the main group.  On the 
other hand, if I knew where I will be next year, I'd volunteer to moderate it, 
just to clear up the clutter on the main group.  No offense, Bill, you're still
doing a great job, but you saw the discussion after my last note on this topic.)
I think the .legal subgroup would provide a lively new arena of discussion, and 
I would watch it closely myself.

Now for my soapbox speech:  segmenting the group on the basis of particular
handicap is *NOT* a good idea.  The important and enlightening thing for me 
about this group is that it allows people to post and get feedback *without*
being labeled or otherwise categorized on the basis of their particular
handicap(s).  I think segmenting the group this way would stifle this sort of
discussion.