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