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