Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Let's clean up Canada!
Message-ID: <4908@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 12-Jan-85 19:04:29 EST
Article-I.D.: utzoo.4908
Posted: Sat Jan 12 19:04:29 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Jan-85 19:04:29 EST
References: <285@lsuc.UUCP>, <340@utai.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 22

> can.ai admittedly doesn't have much traffic, but it is there for discussions
> of A.I. in Canada, and is only likely to grow as A.I. takes off in Canada.
> CSCSI is the Canadian A.I. society -- hence can.ai.cscsi.  These groups
> should be kept for the time being.

Alternatively, they could always be re-created if traffic develops.
By any realistic standard, these groups are dead.  The criterion for
a group preferably should not be that it "deserves to exist", but that
it is genuinely useful.  Barring the possibility that traffic in these
groups is seasonal -- an idea I see no justification for -- then I would
say that can.ai and can.ai.cscsi are of no use to anyone right now.
They conform perfectly to the well-known "flash-in-the-pan newsgroup"
pattern:  everyone agrees it's a great idea, but after a brief startup
period, nobody ever submits anything to them.  Regardless of how many
people think they are a great idea, nobody is interested enough to
submit articles.  So what good are they?

If you disagree with me, don't flame at me:  start some activity in
can.ai and can.ai.cscsi!
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry