Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ut-ngp.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!werner From: werner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) Newsgroups: net.news.group Subject: Re: On Proposing New Groups Message-ID: <313@ut-ngp.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-Feb-84 17:57:36 EST Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.313 Posted: Tue Feb 21 17:57:36 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 26-Feb-84 01:28:44 EST References: <2612@alice.UUCP> Organization: Comp. Center, Univ. of Texas at Austin Lines: 24 RRRrrraaaaiiiiidddddd ..... (anyone seen the dead bug yet??? ) I disagree that there should be a number of articles on a new topic before creating a new newsgroup for it, because it might be impossible to reach the potential participant by any other way than by creating a new group, thus condemning the poposal from the start. Why???? Easy, take the case of "net.nutrition", for example: Where would you like the topic to be raised? net.misc and net.cooks might seem obvious, but the problem is that you cannot assume that a person interested in nutrition reads any of those groups (I don't). In general, it is often not possible to address the potential audience of a new group by finding an existing group to address the topic. So, what's all the paranoia about having a news-group with little or no activity anyway? Gives all the Monday evening quarterbacks another chance to boost their ego by saying "I told you so, but you did not want to listen"!!! A cooky for everyone, or death ..... werner @ ut-ngp {.UUCP or .ARPA} (sometimes)