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)