Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Denver Mods 4/2/84) 6/24/83; site drutx.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!drutx!khw
From: khw@drutx.UUCP (WilliamsonK)
Newsgroups: net.wobegon
Subject: Re: On "wobegon" as a folk-music area...
Message-ID: <1328@drutx.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 20-Oct-84 19:45:11 EDT
Article-I.D.: drutx.1328
Posted: Sat Oct 20 19:45:11 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Oct-84 15:20:38 EDT
References: <601@teddy.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 31

I disagree about expanding net.wobegon.  It is more efficient
for me to get my newsgroups down to as specific areas as possible,
so that it is easier for me to separate the wheat from the chaff
of the things I am interested in.
Thus I would prefer a net.auto.honda (since I have a honda), which
I would subscribe to, but could unsubscribe to, say, net.auto.corvette,
(Of course I would want to keep a net.auto or a net.auto.general
for articles that apply to autos in general, and I can't see having
a net.auto.brakes vs. a net.auto.transmissions, or some other
compartmentalization.)

Now I realize that this splitting up of groups into tiny areas 
is not likely to happen in the near term, but I don't support
any effort to go the other way, and generalize a news group
beyond what it is already.

Here we have a nice specific news group, with very little traffic.
I can confidently subscribe to this and want to read most every
article, and know that I won't be deluged with lots of irrelevancies.

I can see having general folk music discussions on the net, but
lets do it with a group made for the purpose, instead of trying
to twist the definition of an already existing group.

Remember the dictum, "Use the right tool for the job"?  Well, I
think it applies to news groups as well.

		Karl Williamson
		ATT ISL Denver
		..druky!khw
		303-538-4583