Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucsfcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!arnold
From: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL)
Newsgroups: net.news.group
Subject: Re: time to remove net.bizarre
Message-ID: <645@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Sep-85 21:20:35 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucsfcgl.645
Posted: Thu Sep 19 21:20:35 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Sep-85 05:02:05 EDT
References: <1969@amdahl.UUCP> <688@cyb-eng.UUCP> <224@meccts.UUCP> <3275@nsc.UUCP>
Reply-To: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold)
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
Lines: 18

In article <3275@nsc.UUCP> chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuq Von Rospach) writes:
>.. what is really happening is that we are
>trying to find out if content (or lack of it) is as good a reason as volume
>(or lack of it) for deleting a group. Precedents need to be thought out
>VERY carefully (which is why I'm against net.peace, but that is another
>story) but if the net is to grow/improve they become neccessary. The time
>comes when doing it the way it was always done simply isn't good enough
>anymore, and net.bizarre has become the testbed to see if it is time to
>start considering WHAT is being said instead of just how much.

What you say here makes a good deal of sense, but I have failed,
throughout this discussion, to understand why net.bizarre is any worse
than net.jokes.  Humor to noise ratio seems worse there to me, and
probably others feel the opposite.  Maybe we should just tell the
net.bizarre people to move to net.jokes, and then they will not be
examined for appropriateness by the arbiters of what is bizarre, or
what is funny.
		Ken